(c) Providing funds so the Bureau of Labor Statistics could distinguish more clearly and in greater detail the various types of unemployment within the overall total. Much progress has been made in recent years in measuring and reporting the characteristics of the unemployed. With our current knowledge of measurement, it should be possible to develop data on repeaters, the severity and impact of unemployment on families and individuals in terms of earnings, living standards, and other qualitative factors. (d) Encouraging the Bureau of Labor Statistics to develop meaningful measures of our unused supply of labor, including the reservoir of unutilized labor outside the labor force, the conditions under which these persons enter the labor force, and the wasted manpower already in the labor force but not employed full time for economic reasons or employed below the educational skill or income potential of the individual. (e) Improving the significant economic statistics for those whose unemployment results from special conditions, such as declines in certain industries, areas, or occupations. Information on this subject generally cannot be derived from a national survey because the groups are too small to be represented adequately in a small sample. A most important current weakness is the lack of geographical information, especially concerning distressed areas. (f) Increasing the quantity and quality of information about the factors determining mobility among the unemployed. It is further recommended that the Bureau of Labor Statistics revise its monthly survey to designate more accurately as "unemployed" those who are now counted as having left the labor force because they have given up their futile search for work. (g) The program of guidance and counseling in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare should be encouraged to expand. (h) Businessmen should be encouraged to cooperate with the Department of Labor in the development of a reporting system so systematic information on present or anticipated technological changes can be made available to the public in the same way that census of manufacturers and National Science Foundation information is now received. Experience with these reporting services has shown that individual companies' secrets can be safely protected and that business managements have welcomed the information and made great use of it. Fourth, emphasis should be given to greater labor mobility. In some instances permanently unemployed or technologically displaced workers and their families should be encouraged to move to areas in which job opportunities exist. It is often cheaper and sounder economically for workers to move to where the jobs are than for factories to move to where the surplus laborers are. This would result in workers being gainfully employed in production rather than rusting in idleness and wasting our most valuable resource the labor power of our people. ELMER J. HOLLAND. NEAL SMITH. CHARLES S. JOELSON. CHARLES E. GOODELL. PETER A. GARLAND. MINORITY VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE DONALD C. BRUCE ON THE REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE IMPACT OF AUTOMATION I do not believe that the hearings conducted developed any pattern of scientifically acceptable evidence concerning the actual impact of automation upon the total employment force. I believe the witnesses presented varying patterns of opinions. Witness after witness, including Secretary of Labor Goldberg, admitted the lack of accurate figures upon which valid conclusions could be based. I do not believe sound legislation should, or can, be enacted as a result of information presented before this subcommittee. At best the hearings established a need for new and thorough investigation into the present operation of the U.S. Employment Service. I believe the majority report is dealing primarily with the total unemployment picture in its recommendations rather than with the specific jurisdiction of the subcommittee, which is unemployment and the impact of automation. I respectfully suggest that a free economy offers the best solution to the problems of unemployment. For too long we have been erroneously assuming that massive Federal programs provide a cure for all our economic ills. I believe the opposite to be true. Is it not possible that our current economic problems are the result of Government interference and regimentation? If the Government continues to indulge in deficit spending, with its resulting inflationary tendencies, does this not have a direct effect upon our economic health and lessen job opportunities? If we confiscate an ever-increasing percentage of reinvestment funds from private enterprise, through the Federal tax structure, are we not siphoning off the very funds required for business expansion and the providing of more employment? If we debauch the currency, is there not a resulting pressure upon the lower income groups within our society? If we expand Federal participation and control over the entire economy do we not create a greater feeling of dependency upon Government for livelihood, thereby eroding our traditional sense of responsibility and initiative? I reject the philosophy that embraces the Federal Government as the provider of all good things. If we consolidate more and more power and control in the hands of the Federal Government we automatically siphon off more and more of the material resources of the American people to be disbursed by the bureaucratic social planners. In my opinion, if adopted, the recommendations embodied in the majority report and the implications of expanding Federal activities, will only serve to further complicate our economic illnesses and will ultimately harm rather than help. I respectfully suggest that a total realinement of our tax structure to encourage individuals and corporations, that a lessening of Federal interference and control in our total economic structure, provide the hope for real economic growth and a strengthening of the fibers of freedom. |