Page images
PDF
EPUB

of the Officers and members of this International Union, I urge passage of S. 1991.

This Organization stresses the need for uniform federal standards for the amount of weekly benefits and for the duration of weekly benefits plus a minimum of 26 weeks of extended federal Unemployment Compensation benefits. We urge your support as this would be of great benefit to our members all over the United States.

Please print this letter in the record of Committee hearings.
With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,

CDA/adh

CHARLES D. AQUADRO,

International President.

AMERICAN NEWSPAPER GUILD,
Washington, D.C., July 19, 1966.

Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR CHAIRMAN LONG: We should like to take this opportunity to inform the Committee of our endorsement of unemployment compensation reform as set forth in the McCarthy bill (S. 1991) presently before the Committee for hearings.

Higher and more uniform benefits for those unfortunate enough to be without a job are long overdue. And since the unemployment compensation system was created by the taxing power of the Congress, not the individual states, when it passed the Social Security Act of 1935, why should there not be a uniform, federally established basis for these benefits? Both for the amount and duration.

We also should like to endorse a minimum provision for 26 weeks of extended federal benefits. This would be especially helpful to those whose jobs disappear through automation, plant transfer or merger.

And when we speak of the difficulties of workers experienced through mergers, we speak from solidly based experience, representing, as we do, workers in what must be the most merger-prone industry in the nation in recent years. The broader coverage proposed-approximately 5 million workers, including some farm workers-is also endorsed, as is the establishment of uniform disqualification penalties and modernized financing. We find it shocking that the taxable wage base has not been raised since 1939.

We are attaching a copy of a resolution supporting the McCarthy bill which will be taken up by the delegates to our 1966 International Convention here in Washington July 25-29, and request that our letter and the copy of the resolution be entered in the record of the Finance Committee's hearings on S. 1991.

Sincerely yours,

CHARLES A. PERLIK, Jr.,
Secretary-Treasurer.

Whereas :

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION REFORM (S. 1991)

1. The U.S. Senate has before it a bill calling for the reform and improvement of unemployment compensation across the nation (S. 1991), and, 2. The present procedures under which the states individually establish criteria for coverage, benefits and eligibility for unemployment compensation within their individual borders has resulted in a hodge-podge with the maximum weekly benefit in every state being smaller relative to wages than it was in 1939, and,

3. One of the most basic provisions of the bill is the establishment of more realistic and uniform weekly benefits, in both amount and duration, and

4. Another of the most vital provisions of the bill calls for 26 weeks of compensation from a special federal fund for workers with records of firm attachment to the work force who are unable to gain employment during the period of state benefits, and,

5. The bill would further provide some measure of uniform disqualification penalties, and,

6. The bill proposes to revise the federally established procedures for financing state unemployment compensation funds, including upward re vision of the taxable wage base, which base has not been changed since 1939, and,

7. The bill would bring an additional five million workers, including for the first time some farm workers, under unemployment compensation; Therefore, be it resolved that the 1966 convention of the American Newspaper Guild, AFL-CIO, CLC, urges and calls upon :

1. The Finance Committee of the U.S. Senate to resist any and all efforts to weaken the unemployment compensation reforms embodied in S. 1991 and to favorably report the bill to the Senate without delay, and,

2. The U.S. Senate to vote favorably upon the bill immediately upon its receipt from the Finance Committee, and,

3. Guild locals and members in the United States to inform their senators of their endorsement of the reforms embodied in S. 1991.

MASSACHUSETTS STATE LABOR COUNCIL, AFL-CIO.

Re unemployment compensation.
Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Boston, Mass., July 20, 1966.

DEAR SENATOR LONG: On behalf of the Massachusetts State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, we wish to advise you of our support of reform in the unemployment compensation laws along the lines of the McCarthy bill, S. 1991.

For your information, here in Massachusetts for the week ending July 9, 1966, the unemployment compensation total claim load was 56,450 representing an increase of almost 10,000 over the preceding week. There were 39,105 continued claims with 17,345 initial claims.

At the same time in Massachusetts there are many groups which are not covered by the unemployment compensation law including workers in non-profit institutions such as hospitals, foundations, and universities, as well as employees of large farms.

In addition, although the average weekly wage in Massachusetts in industry is approximately $100., the maximum weekly unemployment compensation benefit is only $50 which is considerably less than the two-thirds concept to which the federal bill gradually raises the maximum benefits. Furthermore, many workers in Massachusetts especially among the unskilled have run out of benefits, are without necessary funds and are not covered for long term unemploy ment which would be covered by the proposed McCarthy bill; some of these workers have been displaced from their jobs by automation and plant transfers especially in the textile industry and have exhausted their unemployment compensation benefits under the state law.

Our experience rating formula in Massachusetts competes with the experience rating methods of other states and helps to undermine the financial base of the unemployment insurance system as a result of state competition for industry. The declining reserves from insufficient financing in many states is only adding to the pressure to keep unemployment compensation benefits at lower levels not only in other states but indirectly here in Massachusetts due to competition.

In brief, we strongly support federal standards along the lines of the McCarthy Bill, S. 1991 to help eliminate limitations in the present program such as coverage, benefits, and eligibility. Only by such basic reforms as found in this bill can we put jobless benefits again into the forefront as our first line of defense against current unemployment and future recession. We urge you and your Committee to give favorable approval to the unemployment reform bill along the lines of the McCarthy Bill, S. 1991.

Sincerely yours,

JAMES P. LOUGHLIN,
Secretary-Treasurer.

Senator RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

MARYLAND STATE AND D.C. AFL-CIO,
Baltimore, Md., July 20, 1966.

DEAR SENATOR LONG: The Maryland State and D.C., AFL-CIO strongly supports H.R. 8282-the Unemployment Insurance Bill now before your committee. Unless you have been on the unemployment rolls or have worked closely with those who are unemployed, you cannot really understand the problems of the people who, for one reason or another, through no fault of their own, find themselves among the unemployed.

The disqualifications and obstacles that are thrown in the way of the unemployed person only creates that many more hardships for the individual and his family to endure.

We believe that the bill before your committee will do a great deal toward eliminating many of these problems by

standardizing the disqualifications

establishing uniform Federal standards for the unemployment benefit structure

establishing a minimum of twenty-six weeks of extended Federal unemployment compensation benefits

There are other features in the bill which are just as important as those enumerated above. However, we believe that we must recognize the problems facing the person, 45 to 60 years of age, who has been displaced by automation or technological developments displaced by a piece of machinery and unable to get a job because of age or lack of skills.

We urge you and your committee to act favorably on H.R. 8282 and to fight for its passage in Congress so that those who are unemployed can get a little better break out of life.

We would like to have this letter printed in the record of the committee hearings.

Cordially yours,

CHARLES A. DELLA, President.

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA, July 20, 1966.

Senator RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:

Alaska State Federation of Labor AFL-CIO urges U.S. Senate beef up House Unemployment Compensation Act by adoption of McCarthy bill S. 1991. Uniform Federal standards weekly benefit amounts. Duration plus minimum of 26 weeks extended Federal unemployment compensation benefits badly needed as the best bulwark against business recession or undermining of living standards conceived in original principle of job insurance. Minimum Federal standards Nation's Unemployment system should be No. 1 goal of Congress to stabilize economy in preparation for attainment of world peace and indication to world neighbors our concern for little people. State legislatures reluctant to improve standards because they believe standards should be set by Congress. Please insert in committee record.

HENRY HEDBERG,

Legislative Representative, Alaska State Federation Labor, AFL-CIO.

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO., July 21, 1966.

Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:

The democratic concept of concern and protection for the American worker and his family has been manifested by the International Typographical Union throughout its 114-year history. Never as today has our Nation in this transitional period of automation and movement of industry been confronted with so serious a task of shoring up its responsibility toward the welfare of the American family.

It is in this vein that the protection of the worker and his family necessitate reforms which would require minimum Federal standards in the Nation's unemployment compensation system.

The International Typographical Union endorses Senate bill 1991 as filling this need and respectfully requests the committee's consideration and concr rence with the provisions thereof and further respectfully requests that this statement be printed in the record of committee hearings.

ELMER BROWN.

President, International Typographical Union.

Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:

LOS ANGELES, CALIF., July 20, 1966.

The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor urges you and your committee to support the McCarthy bill S. 1991.

It is our opinion that this legislation is seriously needed to bolster the economy and to stabilize the unemployment compensation program nationally, thereby extending vitally needed support to persons who are unemployed through no reason of their own.

W. J. BASSETT, Secretary Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO.

INTERNATIONAL MOLDERS AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION,
Cincinnati, Ohio, July 19, 1966.

Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,

Chairman. Committee on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR LONG: I am writing to you in behalf of the International Molders' and Allied Workers' Union to express our concern regarding unemployment compensation reform.

The inadequacies of our present system of unemployment compensation are most glaringly visible, and exist, because of a lack of uniform federal standards. In order to protect workers-irregardless of the particular state they might live in-benefits must be standardized throughout all of our fifty states. These benefits should vary as the average weekly wages vary in the different states but benefits should meet federal standards relating benefits to wage levels. Thus the unemployment compensation an unemployed worker in Ohio would receive would be relatively (referenced to wage levels) equal to the unemployment compensation available to workers in Texas or any other state in the union. The McCarthy bill. S. 1991, which warrants our support erases the above deficiency. The McCarthy bill succeeds in avoiding any distortion of a state's economy because it relates maximum benefits to the average wage levels in each state. The effect of the McCarthy bill would be to insure that the majority of the workers covered would receive benefits amounting to one-half of their earnings when unemployed. It is thereby consistent with the aim of unemployment compensation-which is to replace the loss of income.

With the onrushing advent of automation many workers find themselves unemployed for months after they have exhausted their state benefits. The Me Carthy bill goes a step in the right direction by providing federal benefits for 26 weeks after state benefits have been exhausted. Of course this only applies to workers who have a definite attachment to the labor force. But it does acknowledge the general responsibility of society to combat long-term unemploy ment by providing the extended benefits. Training, especially for the hard-core unemployed, should not result in a decrease of withdrawal of benefits. No one should be penalized when attempting to once again become a productive member of our society, and therefore no penalty should be invoked because one is technically "not available for work". The President's Commission on Technology, Automation and Economic Progress reported that, “In the long run, unemploy ment insurance funds would probably be saved by offering a monetary incentive (over and above unemployment insurance benefits) for training to be at least

equal to the added clothing, meals, transportation and tuition costs involved", and we agree.

The price of meeting the additional costs are met, under the McCarthy bill, by modernizing unemployment insurance financing. The present financing, literally born in the depression, does not meet the needs of our society. The federal government's responsibility is met when it matches, from general revenue, the funds raised by the small-15/100ths of 1 per cent-increase in the tax rate.

It is the hope of the International Molders' and Allied Workers' Union that the Senate Finance Committee will report out a bill, along the lines of the McCarthy bill, which will bring unemployment compensation into the 1960's where it can complement programs of the Great Society.

We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the record of the Senate Finance Committee hearings.

Sincerely,

WM. A. LAZZERINI, President.

STATEMENT OF THE TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, SUBMITTED BY WILLIAM POLLOCK, GENERAL PRESIDENT, IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AMENDMENTS OF 1965 (S. 1991)

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Existing provisions for protecting workers against the hazards of unemployment are inadequate and inequitable. The workers in states which have the most need of higher benefits actually reecive the least protection. Their weekly benefits are far too low to meet their needs. The duration of their benefits is so limited that more than a million workers exhaust their benefits each year and are compelled to rely on the charity of friends and families or public relief. The reserves of states suffering from heavy unemployment are depleted.

Federal action is imperative. The unemployment insurance system must be restored to its original purpose-to provide American workers with benefits adequate to preserve their dignity and self-respect during periods of unemployment. A federal system of grants-in-aid must be applied to give reality to the principle of insuring the risks of unemployment.

Long-term adjustment benefits are essential to meet the needs of workers who are unable to find a job within the limited periods provided by state laws. Textile workers are in particular need of this program because of the difficulties they encounter when mills in one-industry towns are liquidated or curtailed.

DETAILED STATEMENT

The proposed Employment Security Amendments of 1965 (S. 1991) represents a significant forward step in making our unemployment insurance system responsive to the needs of the times.

Federal action to establish minimum standard's for the amount of unemployment benefits and to provide long-term adjustment benefits with sound financing of the entire program is vital to modernize the laws, to equalize competition, and to meet the nature of the new unemployment problems generated by our economy in this age of automation.

The unemployment problem in the textile industry has been of such a grave nature that the shortcomings of the present state standards and the difficulties of securing improvements are most sharply projected among the workers associated with this industry and in the area where textile workers reside and work. The long-term trend of contraction in the textile industry, the displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers and the continued distress in textile areas in the New England, Middle Atlantic and Southern states have all conspired to make the present provisions inadequate. The benefits are too low to meet the original intent of the law and to keep up with the rising costs of living and wage standards in the United States. The duration of the benefits is too short to meet the needs of people faced with long term unemployment. The present laws make no provision for applying the insurance principle outside of the individual state. By breaking up the program into separate state funds, the sharing of risks is effected within but not among the states. It is vital therefore that insurance be applied on a national basis.

The failure of the repeated efforts by the federal government to secure adequate general improvements in the provisions for unemployment insurance by

« PreviousContinue »