ganization concurrently with the changing of the Manpower Administration by the Secretary of Labor. I think it is important to point out that the term "Manpower Administration" is no longer an official designation in the Department of Labor. It is now referred to as the Employment and Training Administration and moreover, in the CETA reauthorization legislation that was passed by the 95th Congress in October, the term "National Manpower Commission" was also changed to "National Commission for Employment Policy" to reflect the broader employment and training concepts.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, the Bureau has the prime responsibility for formulating policies and programs to advance the status of women wage earners in the United States. We are particularly concerned about reaching out to certain groups of women who have not been able to enter the economic mainstream because they experience difficulties in obtaining training or jobs or in advancing in their present employment. You have asked me today to present an overview of the jurisdiction of Federal agencies with respect to midlife women. You have also asked me to address problems which affect midlife women as seen from the Federal vantage point, and to give you any recommendations that I am in a position to state with respect to major policy issues such as those the 29 experts presented in the subcommittee's scholarly compendium, "Women in Midlife-Security and Fulfillment."

In my full statement I discuss several of the major Federal provisions that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex or age, as well as other major legislation that directly affects midlife women, such titles II and IV of the Social Security Act and the so-called pension reform law. I also discuss major administration initiatives to benefit women in entrepreneurships and in the mortgage and homeownership market sponsored by HUD and also, in greater detail which I will not go into in the interest of time, the Bureau's focus on displaced homemakers as provided for by the 1978 amendments to the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, (CETA).

The list of legal provisions, programs and jurisdictional agencies is so extensive that it would make one wonder why midlife women have major problems and why it is necessary for this subcommittee to focus attention on them today. And yet, when one considers the profile of the midlife woman today, I must unhappily agree with those experts who note that a relative lack of attention has been given this group in the past by researchers and policymakers. The mean earnings of those women aged 45 to 64 who were full-time, year-round earners in 1976 were $8,900, in contrast to $16,600 for men in that same age group. Indeed, of all black women in this age group, 28 percent of them live in poverty. Not only are women in their midlives predominantly in low-paid jobs as service workers, operatives and clerical workers, but when they are employed in other types of jobs they rarely receive promotions to higher levels and raises that men receive. In addition, because of economic necessity, many of these women are reentrants into the job market and find employers unwilling to credit their previous work experience or their activities during the period that they were out of the work force as evidence of future potential. Consequently, they settle for jobs with limited opportunity for upward mobility. I would like to point out that for many midlife women not only in the present time of struggle, but the future is also a bleak

one; for women age 65 years and over constitute only 16 percent of the female population, but they represent 22 percent of those living in poverty.

Aside from the obvious concerns expressed in the data for midlife women I would call your attention briefly to a few problem areas.

The first one we must recognize is that, despite legal prohibitions, job discrimination against women-and particularly against women over age 40-still exists. Persistent practices in the labor market deny women-except in token numbers-access to a wide variety of profitable jobs, and maintain low pay in jobs where women predominate, even when those jobs have comparable skills. Age limits also for beginning apprenticeships bar reentry women from well-paying jobs. A second major problem faced by many midlife women who wish to enter or reenter the labor force is that they lack the skills sought by today's employers. And also, widowed or divorced women, often referred to as displaced homemakers, now in their upper middle years present the most poignant problems because they have never expected to need to support themselves or their dependents. A major problem faced by midlife women is the lack of recognition of the contributions that they have made as homemakers. This is manifested by such injustices as the omission under title II of the Social Security Act of disability protection in their own right for women whose work is in the home. Another example is found in the private pension system, where the contributions are deemed to be the "property" of the participants overwhelmingly men.

I will not discuss the special health needs and recognitions that have already been discussed by Dr. Brothers and by Ellie Smeal, but I would point out that the age discrimination study of 1977, by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, gave ample evidence to the fact that Federal grants and federally funded programs, in general, have not been designed to meet the needs of midlife women.

As to my recommendations, I want to stress that efforts to formulate public policy that can fill the needs of midlife women must have many phases. I would call your attention not only to the recommendations by the previous witnesses, but also the need for overcoming the sexual stereotyping of young girls so that when they reach middle age they will have adequate preparation to insist on equal opportunity. Women of every age group should have access to educational programs adapted to their needs for economic security, no matter what their marital status may be.

For midlife women who cannot find work because they lack skills, linkages within local communities need to be established to overcome these barriers. A good start has already been made with the new initiatives in the Voc Ed amendments and the CETA reauthorization legislation, where the special educational and training needs of displaced homemakers are taken into account. We provide a fuller example of this program in an attachment to my full statement.

Several programs in the educational field have an increasing impact on midlife women today and I'm certain that you will also find the recommendations of the advisory council of women's education. program helpful.

I also call your attention to the recent excellent statement and testimony of Dr. Mary E. Berry, Assistant Secretary for Education, before the Senate Human Relations Committee. She stressed the need

for focusing attention on better planning, coordination and cooperation among existing programs, enforcement of equity/antidiscrimination provisions and dissemination of models, innovative approaches to ending occupational segregation.

With respect to the recognition of the value of work in the home, the need to eliminate sex discrimination under the social security program is primary. The choices that women in midlife make will be greatly influenced by whatever new system is developed to assure equity to homemakers and dual career women after retirement. Secretary of HEW Califano recently transmitted a report to Congress on this subject and I believe that the complex problems discussed therein merit your serious consideration. We're very pleased that Representative Oakar is chairing that task force.

I would also like to point out that the Labor Department is working to expand protection for women homemakers. Recently, we participated as a friend of the court in two cases involving the question of whether divorced women/mothers could receive part of their former spouses' pension payments. In both cases the Department argued that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 does not prevent those women from receiving a part of their former spouses' pension payments. Meanwhile, the Department is also supporting those sections of S. 209, which increase protection for surviving spouses of pension plan participants and which make it clear that ERISA generally does not prevent "tapping" pensions for Stateordered child support or alimony payments.

I would also underscore at this point, of course, the need for the passage of the ERA as a step toward improving the conditions of women in their midlives particularly with respect to property and inheritance rights.

In conclusion, I would only say that as a final point I would return to my earlier comments that programs of virtually all Federal agencies do have an impact on women in their midlives. Particularly when there are Federal grants or Federal financial assistance programs, these programs should be designed with the full knowledge of the special needs of particular groups who are entitled to participate or receive benefits, certainly recognizing that by improving the human conditions of one segment of our society we necessarily improve human conditions for all.

I thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns about the needs of midlife women who are bearing the brunt of changing expectations in this decade and the next. I look forward to working with this committee. Thank you.

Ms. OAKAR [presiding]. Thank you, Madame Director. I would like to thank you for your testimony. It's very comprehensive, both your testimony for the record in addition to the overall remarks. We appreciate all the work that went into this. I wanted to also ask you or to indicate to you that we will be inviting you to testify in the near future concerning the task force on social security and unemployment compensation. I know the Women's Bureau will provide valuable insights for us. So, if you haven't received invitation, you will be.

There are up to 3 million displaced homemakers and am I correct in understanding that the administration has allocated $5 million for the purpose of training them for reentry into the labor force? That's less than $2 per displaced homemaker. What can we do to at least

make the country realize that we are really serious about this problem? It seems to me that we make it a national priority when we can get funds allocated for displaced homemakers.

Ms. HERMAN. I think one thing we have done, Representative Oakar, which we are hopeful will help to increase the level of funding, is to take the $5 million and to offer a matching formula to prime sponsors where the bulk of the money for CETA, in particular, is located, of course. Particularly in title II and title VI where we're talking about nearly $9 billion in the total appropriation. What we have done in developing the guidelines for the $5 million for the displaced homemaker is to attempt to offer matching formulas so that we can leverage other dollars for displaced homemaker activities through the local prime sponsor communities as a regular part of title II and title VI provisions. Also, we have included in the regulations of the CETA program language to target programs under II and under VI. If you will note, $5 million was earmarked only out of title III funds in the Department and there was no language necessarily earmarking funds in other areas and we are hoping that this is one way to leverage additional funds.

MS. OAKAR. The best CETA program in my district. In Cleveland the "Skills Available" program has the least administrative costs of all CETA programs and it is a program that attempts to get employment for midlife individuals. They always have to walk on a tightrope to get funded and compete with all the programs that have high administrative costs. It is difficult to get the money without a struggle. Are you aware of that situation? And that, I understand, is a national problem with respect to the CETA program. Are you aware of this problem? That those programs designed specifically to help the individual male and female with respect to midlife difficulties in terms of employment have a hard time getting funded, and yet, have the best record in terms of job placement?

Ms. HERMAN. Yes, we are. As a matter of fact, the Displaced Homemaker Network has completed a survey for us on existing displaced homemaker projects throughout the country and the specific problems that they have encountered with relationship to funding or refunding, and we are hopeful that for the first time by including displaced homemaker programs as a viable approach in CETA as something that prime sponsors are encouraged to do, this is one way that we will ease the funding problem. We, ourselves, are planning to conduct extensive training internally of our prime sponsors just to make them aware of special needs, the special concerns of displaced homemakers. We also plan to engage in a promotional effort with the Displaced Homemaker Network throughout the country to do a general educational campaign so that we can bring awareness to local communities, as well, to raise the issue of displaced homemakers as a part of the local funding mechanism.

MS. OAKAR. I really would like the Department of Labor to do a better job in monitoring where those funds are used because that is the problem with CETA. The program is so necessary but because of the groups who do not use it well and the priorities that are not viable priorities, it has a bad reputation. Yet, it is a very necessary kind of program.

MS. HERMAN. I would also add to that we funded a study by the National Association of Commissions for Women was to look at

the representation of women who are now serving on planning councils at the State and local level. While that participation was very minimal to date, we are hoping again by the changes in the regulations that mandates that agencies serving women and organizations who generally are interested in women's issues have a voice in planning councils, that they also will have something to say about how the CETA dollars are allocated in the local communities.

Ms. OAKAR. Ellie Smeal represented in detail a woman's Bill of Rights for homemakers. How would you see the Department of Labor implementing that program?

MS. HERMAN. Well, I do not have all of what Ellie was proposing but, certainly, I think in terms of the employment side in terms of homemakers that we have a long way to go, in terms of our own counseling, educational programs that we currently offer. I think that some of the things that we are talking about doing in terms of peer counseling as a part of our displaced homemaker effort could serve as a model approach for some of the things that Ellie has raised. Ms. OAKAR. Could you see that Department of Labor supporting the program and endorsing it?

MS. HERMAN. Well, I can't go on record as saying we would support it but I certainly know that we would do all that we could to see where we could work together on some form of support for it.

MS. OAKAR. Mr. Grassley.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Thank you, Madame Chairman. I would like to make reference to some goals that you said you were hoping to accomplish. These references are from your Confirmation Committee hearings. You said you would like to see a reinvolvement of the Bureau in direct policy and program formulations as they would relate to women. Your statement, and I quote: "I would like to see closer alliances and line relationships developed with specific departments internally, such as OSHA, to work on questions of women in the workplace, such as the Solicitor's office, as we consider what you refer to as the Gilbert Decision, to work closer with OPER and EPA, et cetera." Since March of 1977 and your involvement with the Department, what alliances have been formed among Department, particularly as they might relate to the problems of midlife women. Have any interdepartment agreements actually been signed? MS. HERMAN. Yes. I think as a first step toward that goal Secretary Marshall on January 1 of 1978, elevated the Bureau back to his office where it was historically in the 1920's, so that the Bureau could have a free hand in overall policy formulation and policy development within the Department. As a result of that, we have been very active in working with other agencies such as ETA, the Employment and Training Administration. On this program of displaced homemakers we have been discussing, the Bureau has been the principal lead agency on this effort. We have taken the leadership role on most of the guidelines that have been developed to date. In addition to that, we have been the lead agency trying to forge the interagency linkages to have varied programs for displaced homemakers throughout the Federal sector. In my larger testimony, I attach models of the programs that we are attempting to do jointly with HEW in this area. Also, last year the Department promulgated regulations for women, both in the construction industry and in apprenticeship, mandating an affirmative action program for women in both of these areas for the first time.