Employment and unemployment TABLE 6.-TEUC claimants by number of months with employment during last About 73 percent of all claimants, 77 percent of the men and 65 percent of the women, had employment in at least 18 of the 36 months, and most of these in at least 24 of the last 36 months. Relatively few had as much as 30 or more months with employment, again reflecting the substantial recent unemployment of these caimants. When they were employed, 73 percent of the claimants always worked full time and another 23 percent worked primarily full time. Only 4 percent worked zimarily or entirely part time. TABLE 7.-TEUC claimants in the labor force during all 36 months by number of months with unemployment [Percent] All TEUC claimants, with few exceptions, experienced some unemployment during at least 6 months of the 3-year period studied. Of those in the labor force throughout the entire 36-month period, nearly two-thirds had unemployment in from 6 to 17 months of this period. Much of this reflects the long recent unemployment of "backlog" claimants. However, all of the unemployment reported was not necessarily continuous unemployment; many had several spells of unemployment during these years. Moreover, some months in which a claimant experienced unemployment would also be months in which he had some employment. This would be especially true for months in which layoff occurred or a job began again. Thus, the same month could be counted under both employment and unemployment. TELEGRAM REGARDING EMPLOYMENT SECURITY PROGRAM Senator HILL. Senator Cotton, do you have any questions? Thank you for your statement. Senator HILL. I have a telegram dated February 20, 11:52 p.m., 1962, in Montgomery, Ala., which reads as follows: We in Alabama know of your interest in the employment security program and Want to bring to your attention the following developments: 1. The AFL-CIO Resolution No. 179 recommended the federalization of the U.S. Employment Service and the establishment of national employment service with control centralized in Washington and complete separation of the Employ ment Service from unemployment insurance claims functions. A copy of sai resolution is en route to you. 2. Secretary of Labor Arthur Goldberg recently ordered reorganization of th Bureau of Employment Security and completely separated the Employmer Service and unemployment insurance responsibilities at Washington level. 3. Attachment, page 1 of Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment Sec rity general administration letter No. 616, statement of program emphasis for th State agencies sets our "important administrative and organizational goals d signed to improve operations are the separation of the Employment Service fro the unemployment insurance function in metropolitan areas of 200,000 or mo population" and "the establishment of separate full-time management and supe vision or employment service and unemployment insurance operations." These steps appear to be part of a plan to federalize the entire Employmen Service and remove direction and control from the State government in accordanc with the AFL-CIO resolution. Such a move contravenes intent and purpose. the law which created the employment security program as a Federal-Sta operation. We urgently request that you consider these facts in propounding question during appropriation hearings for Labor Department to disclose the intentions the Secretary. RALPH R. WILLIAMS, Director, Alabama Department of Industrial Relations. Senator HILL. Will you comment on that? I did not have this telegram at the time the Secretary was befor the committee or I would have addressed it to him. Since he ha for the time being, concluded his testimony, I thought you might giv us some light on this telegram. Mr. GOODWIN. I will be glad to comment on the telegram, Mi Chairman. There are some parts of it on which you may want to ge the Secretary's views direct. You will recall, however, that this question of federalization cam up last year when the Secretary was before your committee. Senator HILL. It did. Mr. GOODWIN. He gave complete and absolute assurance that h had no such objective and that this would not be done while he wa in office. There is nothing that he has done or said yet which changes tha in the slightest, insofar as I know. I am sure that you can have ful confidence that those represent his views. SEPARATION OF ACTIVITIES Now, the telegram mentions the separation of the unemployment insurance and the employment services. I would like to explain what we have in mind here. We do very: definitely have in mind a certain degree of separation of unemploy ment insurance from Employment Service activities. We told this to the committee last year when we appeared before you. Our reason for this is that we are convinced, out of studies of our problems of operation, that we are not getting good results in many places, particularly in the large cities, because of the close integration of the unemployment insurance and the Employment Service. A classical example of the problem is indicated in what happens when you get in the city of Detroit, for instance, when there is a layoff of automobile workers and they all come in at the same time to the local office. The offices get so crowded that it is not possible to carry out an efficient and well-ordered Employment Service function. We also feel that the Employment Service and unemployment insurance have separate and distinct interests and that when you have the same person, the same field supervisor, for instance, going into these larger metropolitan centers, responsible for supervising both functions, that you sometimes do not get a good job on either one, ether the Employment Service or unemployment insurance. I might comment on the statement in there on the reorganization thin the Bureau of Employment Security. We are not having a mplete separation of unemployment insurance and employment vice in the Bureau of Employment Security. We are attempting put within the Employment Service and within unemployment nsurance all of the functions that are needed to do the complete job for each of those and we have, for instance, transferred research activities that used to be in a separate unit for both within the Bureau, We are now transferring those to unemployment insurance and to the Employment Service. This is simply because we think that it will make it possible for us to get a better result, better organization for these two functions. I would like very much to talk these things through with Mr. Williams. I think somewhere along the line he has gotten the wrong idea about what we are trying to do. I think we can solve those problems. I am sure that his worst fears have no basis at all in fact or in anyone's intentions and that we are not trying to federalize in any sense. Senator HILL. Mr. Goodwin, would not Congress have to act if you are going to have federalization of employment service? Mr. GOODWIN. That is true. Senator HILL. Would that not require an amendment to the law as the law is today? Mr. GOODWIN. That is true, the Congress would have to act. Senator HILL. In other words, the Department in and of itself would not have the authority. Mr. GOODWIN. That is right Senator HILL. Without action by Congress, is that right? Mr. GOODWIN. That is correct. Senator HILL. Senator Cotton, do you have any questions? Senator COTTON. No, thank you. Senator HILL. Now, Mr. Goodwin, I believe you have one or two more items here. Mr. GOODWIN. We have four other items, sir. Senator HILL. We will stand in recess until 10 a.m., Friday morning. (Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., Wednesday, February 21, 1962, the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Friday, February 23, 1962.) LABOR AND HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1963 FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1962 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 1318, New Senate Office Building, Hon. Lister Hill (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Hill and Byrd. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BUREAU OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY STATEMENTS OF ROBERT C. GOODWIN, ADMINISTRATOR; W. R. CURTIS, DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICE; LOUIS LEVINE, DIRECTOR, U.S. EMPLOYMENT SERVICE; WILLIAM W. NORWOOD, JR., DIRECTOR, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE SERVICE; FOREST L. MILLER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE SERVICE; FRANK E. JOHNSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR FARM LABOR SERVICE; EDWARD L. OMOHUNDRO, CHIEF, VETERANS' EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT SERVICE; H. DANIEL DARLING, DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR PROGRAM REPORTS AND ACTIVITY ANALYSIS; EUGENE LOVE, CHIEF, DIVISION OF BUDGETS AND FISCAL OPERATIONS; AND HERBERT A. MEYER, CHIEF, ESTIMATES AND EXPENDITURES BRANCH APPROPRIATION ESTIMATE "UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND EX-SERVICEMEN "For payments to unemployed Federal employees and ex-servicemen, either directly or through payments to States, as authorized by title XV of the Social Security Act, as amended, [$147,000,000] $131,000,000. "Unemployment compensation for Federal employees and ex-servicemen, next succeeding fiscal year: For making, after May 31 of the current fiscal year, payments to States, as authorized by title XV of the Social Security Act, as amended, such amounts as may be required for payment to unemployed Federal employees and ex-servicemen for the first quarter of the next succeeding fiscal year, and the obligations and expenditures thereunder shall be charged to the appropriation therefor for that fiscal year: Provided, That the payments made pursuant to this paragraph shall not exceed the amount paid to the States for the first quarter of the current fiscal year." |