other allies, as well as our enemies-Germany and Japan and Italy-have been operating under a policy of controlled enterprise and conscripted labor.

Great Britain in 1943 and 1944 had an absenteeism of workers of 10 percent. In the United States our absenteeism for 1943 and 1944 was between 6 percent and 7 percent. In Great Britain in 1944, loss of time by strikes was 16 percent greater than strike losses in the United States in man-days lost. This statement

is taken from reports of the British Ministry of Labor.

British employers report that labor is unwilling because it is drafted and that only a minority of the conscripts are satisfactory laborers.

The American worker, I agree, even though in hazardous occupations, does not suffer all the hardships and the extreme dangers as do the boys at the front. But nevertheless, these workers at home. face hazards resulting in disability and I quote now from the United States Labor Press Service released February 5 this year, which shows what is happening at home:

FIFTY-SIX THOUSAND WORKERS DISABLED IN MONTH

Approximately 56,000 workers were disabled by work injuries in manufacturing plants during September, Secretary of Labor reports. A direct loss of about 1,120,000 man-days of production effort resulted from the injuries. This September record was even better than that for the immediately preceding month of August.

In the answers to questions appearing in the Evening Star as to how many men in the armed forces have been killed in the United States, the answer reads:

Actual deaths of military personnel in the United States totaled 11,500 in 1943, The 1943 injury total was about 700,000. Figures for 1944 are not available. The War Department says that casualty figures for the present war do not include nonbattle deaths in continental United States.

Now, I ask that this committee consider the difference in benefits provided for cause of disability as between the worker at home and the servicemen. Whatever is provided for the servicemen is not too great and you cannot make it enough, but I call your attention to the disability benefits so that the home worker is not to be ignored, especially when men in the Selective Service in swivel chairs right here in Washington make speeches throughout the country belittling the American worker because of his large income and palatial comforts as compared with that of the servicemen but never pointing to the hardships also endured by the workers at home.

These same experts would serve to a greater advantage to the war effort if they were equally as serious in learning the truth about the manpower situation. I am listing some very recent figures of reduction in forces by various industries throughout the country.

The California Shipbuilding Corporation laid off 5,200 workers during January because of completion of contracts for Navy transport vessels (from Labor, January 13 and Los Angeles Times, January 5, 1945). The New England Shipbuilding Corporation, Portland, Maine, reports that 8,000 of its 17,000 workers will be dismissed before May (from New York Times, February 3, 1945). Three thousand workers reported laid off in the week of January 29 to February 3 at Portland, Oreg., and union officials stated that one firm told them, "More people were going to be terminated every week" (from Washington Post, February 4, 1945). Approximately 6,000 workers in machine-gun production laid off around January 1 with a cut in Army machine-gun production. Plants affected are

Kelsey-Hayes Wheel, Plymouth, Mich.; Brown-Lipe-Chapin (General Motors), Syracuse, N. Y.; Savage Arms, Utica, N. Y.; Colt's Patent Fire Arms Co., Hartford, Conn.; Buffalo Arms, Buffalo, N. Y.; (from U. A. W. Servicemens' Edition, January 15, 1945). Nash-Kelvinator Co. last week ordered by War Manpower Commission to cut its employees by 10 percent as part of Government's drive to steer workers to the Kenosha Brass Co. War Manpower Commission expects to go through the Simmons Co. to determine if employees for the brass company can be obtained there (from Kenosha Labor, January 18, 1945).

I want to give you quite a number of examples of the shortages that are claimed and then show what the facts are.

Demanding workers at a greater rate than they can be absorbed. The Camden naval ordnance in Arkansas: Workers presented themselves for employment in the construction of the Camden naval ordnance plant in such large numbers that at the end of a 2- or 3week period, recruitment had proceeded in excess of the contractor's ability to absorb additional labor. The principal problem was a housing shortage, so serious that tents had to be flown into the area to take care of the overflow from the barracks. Workers reported in such large numbers that the Navy canceled its orders for 1,000 soldiers that the Army had agreed to furlough.

Radford and New River explosives:

Senator MAYBANK. May I ask where is that?

Mr. LUHRSEN. I think that is up somewhere in the New England States.

Senator HILL. I think that is right.

Mr. LUHRSEN. I am not familiar with that. This is from the reports the labor unions get out in the field.

Senator MAYBANK. I am very much interested as to that Arkansas situation as it coincides with what I have said for 2 years. The War Production Board has been mistaken in that they put these plants in congested areas where there are no workers and do not put them in places such as Arkansas and the Carolinas.

We have had heavy unemployment among the A. F. of L. trades, and so on, in the upper part of my State at times with abundant electricity and yet there has not been a war plant placed in that entire area. I saw Mr. Nelson time after time but he would not do a thing about it. They had abundant electricity, they even hauled the electricity across the mountains and sold it to the T. V. A.

I believe that is one point that you brought out that has a lot to do with this shortage of labor. They put these plants where there is no labor. I do not know what it is and I cannot put my finger on it but there is something peculiar about that. Since this war started the only plant we have gotten anywhere near our section was a bomber plant they placed sometime ago in Georgia.

Senator HILL. And that is way down near Atlanta, Ga.

Senator MAYBANK. I had Mr. McNutt make an investigation. Mr. McNutt made an investigation and stated there was a tremendous surplus of war manpower and Mr. McNutt has said so and it has been put in the Congressional Record but from that day on to this nothing has been done, they have not lifted a finger to do anything as to that section of the country.

Mr. LUHRSEN. There are mysteries of many kinds that I have not been able to figure out.

Senator MAYBANK. The people of my State are, very frankly, for this bill because of the sentimental value of morale, but the people of my State will never understand how in this war the Federal Government totally ignored all this useful pool of technical workers and other people in South Carolina and North Carolina-bankers, businessmen, and everyone else.

Mr. LUHRSEN. In connection with this Camden naval ordnance plant in Arkansas, I have another report which is just awful and it substantiates that question of overflow.

This is what a man said who was right there out in the field, on the ground:

Difficulty has been and still is being experienced in getting these men reclassified to the higher pay jobs; in some cases as much as 6 weeks have elapsed and still they have not received the higher rate of pay. Several men have left the job for this reason. No classification has been set up for the 6- and 8-yard capacity agitator trucks and some difficulty is being experienced in obtaining experienced drivers for these huge trucks. Two men have been killed because of inexperience on this particular job. The truck drivers also complain that no dispatcher's classification has been established for their men on the truck pools. The guard force on this project is most inadequate and incompetent. In the opinion of the unions contacted, a military guard force is necessary on this job. Liquor is being taken on the job and into the barracks on the reservation at will, gambling and drinking is apparently wide open, not only in the towns, but on the reservation as well. Several knife fights have occurred on the project as a result, and several men have been hospitalized. Commander White will not allow the guards to bear side arms and only part of the men are allowed to carry nightsticks. This situation is getting worse and immediate relief is necessary if the men are to be retained on the job. They cannot work all day and be kept awake all night by others who do not want to work but drink and gamble in the barracks at night.

I cannot stress too strongly the need for immediate action on this particular subject. The present wage rate for guards is only 65 cents. Competent men cannot be hired for this wage. All of the above complaints have been discussed with Commander White by your representative but no immediate action was promised on the guard problem. Commander White stated that he did not have the authority to establish a military guard force, which in my opinion is the only way in which the present situation will be brought under control.

About one-half mile east of Camden is a very narrow bridge which will only allow one-way traffic. At shift change times it takes, in many instances, an hour to get across this bridge. I also took this matter up with Commander White. He informed me that application had been made to the State highway commission to have the bridge widened. Upon investigation, I found that the highway commission expired and went out of office with the retiring governor, and that at the time there was no highway commission in existence until the present governor appointed one.

Commander Whige made the statement that no relief could be expected for at least 6 months. I called on Governor Laney in regard to this bridge and asked him to make it the No. 1 job for the new highway commission, when appointed, to handle.

Senator MAYBANK. Where is that, in Camden?

Mr. LUHRSEN. The Camden, Ark., plant. Those are just some of the things that go on that drive labor frantic and they blame us for these things. Ye gods, they have no housing for these workers, they have single-pass bridges, you stand an hour to get across it, and it is a terrible situation.

The War Manpower Commission reported January 12 that 1,496 "must" establishments needed 132,329 workers. More than one-half of this number were for shipbuilding, 34,734, and aircraft 34,471, industries in which thousands of workers have been laid off as a result of cut-backs in November and December and in which larger numbers will be displaced in coming months, according to scheduled cut-backs.

As to aircraft, the inaccuracy of the aircraft requirements is illustrated in the Pratt & Whitney Aircraft figures. The War Manpower Commission reports current employment of 20,207 and current need for 1,900 additional workers. However, Army Air Force schedules indicate that employment will decline to 20,100 workers in February. Now, I am getting to your State, Senator Maybank, cotton duck. The War Manpower Commission reported that 62 duck mills need immediately 3,543 additional workers for "must" programs. But these mills currently employ 17,000 workers who are not working on any "must" program. Why not transfer a portion of the workers from less essential fabrics to duck looms?

Senator MAYBANK. How many did you say? I did not get that. Mr. LUHRSEN. They claimed they needed immediately 3,543 additional workers for "must" programs; we will say that is duck. But, these mills currently employ 17,000 workers who are not working on any "must" program. Why not transfer them to duck?

Senator MAYBANK. Well, they have no law to make them do that. Mr. LUHRSEN. No; that is right.

Senator MAYBANK. I am one who believes they will not have to draft labor. I believe this law will work with the amendment that was introduced as to the Director of War Mobilization. We have got 200,000 textile workers in one section alone and I doubt if there are 50,000 working on duck. They do not have the power to transfer them, do they?

Mr. LUHRSEN. I should think that they could if they would use their powers properly.

Senator MAYBANK. You run into management there. They are making so much money on these fancy cloths they sell to you fellows they are not going to change over unless you have a law.

Mr. LUHRSEN. That is exactly what I was going to refer to.

Senator MAYBANK. You see, the profits from women's dresses and fancy goods are so great that the textile mills are not going to give up those profits and go into duck without a law.

Mr. LUHRSEN. I happen to be, unfortunately, I will put it that way, a member of the Office of Price Administration's Labor Policy Committee. I have been there since Henderson was the first man, then Brown, and now Bowles. I want to put in a good word for Mr. Bowles. I think that man is trying to do a splendid job and I think he is absolutely honest in his endeavor. I say that not because of any friendship but because that is what I really think he is doing.

We have had his textile question up there time and time again. We have endeavored in every conceivable way to get these mills into a position where they would be forced to produce some of this low end goods.

Senator MAYBANK. That is correct, for the working people.

Mr. LUHRSEN. Yes; for the working people, gloves, work clothes, and diapers for children.

Senator MAYBANK. And overalls.

Mr. LUHRSEN. You cannot get them. They manufacture these high-priced goods, just as you have stated, because of the bigger profit involved.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Luhrsen, aren't you in reality actually arguing for this law in this testimony you are giving now?

Mr. LUHRSEN. Well, I hope I am not.

I think the Manpower Commission and the War Production Board, the two of them working jointly, if the War Production Board says this is what it needs and the price should be held at a certain point, then the War Production Board should say either you produce that or we will not give you material for the rest.

The CHAIRMAN. Yesterday in another witness' testimony it was suggested that the War Manpower Commissioner be given statutory authority so that he can direct these things, that the voluntary method be broken down. The suggestion was that the enforcement be put upon the employer rather than upon the employee.

Mr. LUHRSEN. The fault has not been with the employee. I say it has been with the employer.

If I am giving testimony in favor of compulsory legislation, then I sure want to cancel everything I have said right now, because I am opposed to it.

The CHAIRMAN. I merely asked so that I could get your logic to work. You know an ill and the ill is not being corrected by a voluntary method and the soldier is suffering as a result. You have given as an illustration the duck and the dress comparison. Now, what you need is the duck and you suggested that these people ought to be transferred so that we may get that. Now, it just is not working today and the thought of the advocates of this bill is that it will work if someone is given authority to say to those people, "You must make duck."

Mr. LUHRSEN. Then put it on the employer but not on the employee, that is what I want to get straight.

Senator MAYBANK. I am going to say that these particular textile workers in South Carolina would rather make duck at the same wage, believing they are doing something in the interest of the war effort. You understand, I know what the working people in South Carolina want to do but if they are put on making dresses or put on making fancy goods, they have no choice.

Mr. LUHRSEN. That is the reason I say I think the employer should be compelled to transfer those men from the looms where the worker is making the high priced goods to the duck loom in the same mill. It would not mean a transfer of men to another city. There is evidence galore showing the yardage, as to how much they are producing, that information can be gotten from various sources. We get our information from our own men.

Senator MAYBANK. You have got to make them do it.

I have tried for 2 years because of this over-all shortage and because of these O. P. A. regulations, in the Senate and on the Banking and Currency Committee, to figure out how we could make them do it.

Senator REVERCOMB. Can't you do it by price control? You have that power.

Senator MAYBANK. He has been on the O. P. A. and he has tried it as to price control and he knows what happens as to that.

Mr. LUHRSEN. We have been trying for a year and a half to get the production of low end goods but the manufacturer goes on with his high-priced goods.

Senator REVERCOMB. He will not do that if he will make as much profit out of low-priced goods as he does out of the higher priced goods. Mr. LUHRSEN. Well, it is not a matter of raising the price of the