to be corrected by gentlemen more familiar than I am with that if I am worng.

That concludes my prepared statement.

Senator KEM. Congressman, are you in accord with the policy heretofore adopted by the Congress to decentralize the Employment service and put it back in the States?

Representative ANDERSON. Yes; I voted for that.

Senator KEM. Do you see any reason why exception should be made in the case of farm labor?

Representative ANDERSON. I think the Department of Agriculture can do a far better job of placing farm labor than can the Employment Service.

This system worked well during the war and you know how many of these migrant workers visit various States. It seems to me that if it is done individually, without coordination by the Government, you are going to have difficulty in disseminating information between States that have an oversupply and those that are desperately short of labor.

Senator KEM. Is there any reason why we cannot have an interstate compact like the State of California has entered into with Mexico? The State officials cooperate in many fields.

Representative ANDERSON. That is right.

Senator KEM. Is there any reason why they cannot here?

Representative ANDERSON. I think they can. Please do not misunderstand me. I voted for the decentralization of the Employment Service to the States.

Here is a field where the Federal Government has a responsibility. It is either going to be done by the USES or by the Department of Agriculture and the money is going to be spent. It is not a question of money being spent; it is going to be spent in one place or another and it seems to me that it will be done more effectively if done in this way.

Senator KEM. There will be a duplication of effort, duplication of offices, lists, and so on.

Representative ANDERSON. I do not think that is so. I think the USES could be reduced in the agricultural areas if such a thing is taken over.

Do you not think that we have a far more sympathetic understanding from the Department of Agriculture than we would have from the Employment Service?

Senator STEWART. How would that be?

Representative ANDERSON. Prior to the war, under the old system there were some 22 or 23 services trying to work this out and there certainly was overlapping and waste. So, during the war we set up this function and it worked beautifully. I know it did in my State and I presume it did in other States.

That is why I, as a farmer, appear before you in favor of this proposal.

Senator KEM. Of course, the farm labor bill has been under attack as being a subsidy bill and as costing the Government money. The Members of Congress who voted for it did so because they thought it was a plan to liquidate it and not to continue it.

Representative ANDERSON. That is correct, and as I understand this bill there is no provision for emergency importation of foreign workers at Federal expense; that cost will be taken over by the farmers. In other words, if I want to import some Mexican nationals because of a shortage of workers, I have to go to the border and pay their costs in and pay for their housing and their subsistence and everything that goes with it. I think that is the way it should be handled now that the emergency is over and past, although not officially terminated yet.

Senator STEWART. If the State unemployment services should be charged with this responsibility, the unemployment service in each State, regardless of whether it is under State control or Government,. I see no difference, but if they are charged with the responsibility of supplying farm workers at this point or that or the other, this migratory labor, do you not think they can do a good job?

Representative ANDERSON. I do not think they can do as good a job as under this set up.

Senator STEWART. With the same authority?

Representative ANDERSON. With the same authority. I do not think they have the knowledge that the Department of Agriculture has. Senator STEWART. What kind of knowledge do you mean, whether à man is qualified to do farm work?

Representative ANDERSON. That is correct, in one instance.

Senator STEWART. They would be required to maintain a list of farm laborers who are qualified to do different kinds of work. I simply do not know how an agricultural man can determine that a man is qualified to pick strawberries or cotton or pick pears. The gentleman from the Tennessee State commission testified a moment ago that he had misgivings as to the authority down there.

Representative ANDERSON. I heard his statement.

Senator STEWART. If that is clarified I do not see any obstacle; that is my thinking.

Representative ANDERSON. It is my belief that we should not go back to the overlapping and duplication that we had before the war. Senator STEWART. Everybody had it.

Representative ANDERSON. About 22 or 23 agencies.

If that is all, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning.

The CHAIRMAN. It was a very interesting statement, sir.

I believe the next gentleman is Mr. Ralph Bunje.

STATEMENT OF RALPH B. BUNJE, MANAGER, AGRICULTURAL LABOR BUREAU, SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, CALIF.

Mr. BUNJE. My name is Ralph Bunje. I am the manager of the agricultural labor bureau of the San Joaquin Valley in California; a nonprofit cooperative farm association formed in 1926 with a thousand farmer members and some 88 allied members made up of farmer cooperatives and other commodity groups.

The 21 years of experinece of my organization in dealing with farm labor in California causes us to give consideration to the views not only of the farmer employer but the worker as well.

The producer requires farm workers in accordance with the development of his crops, which development is controlled by nature as to time. The producer inevitably has too much labor at the wrong time and not enough labor at the right time. Therefore, the flow and procurement of farm labor for his operations constitutes an important phase of his operations. Added to this is the matter of efficiency of production, experience in the job at hand, physical ability to perform, the number of dependents accompanying the farm worker, and the character of the individual, whether he is industrious, careless, sickly, and his personal habits and the general problem of social adjustment in the area of employment.

It is important to the agricultural worker, himself, for he must many times depend on rumors for information as to the availability of work, housing accommodations, wage rates, and those considerations which cause him to migrate from one area to another. He is faced with the problem of transporting himself and his family from job to job on the basis of what information is available to him.

Many of us have been working toward the end that a more satisfactory service could be rendered to both the farm worker and the farmer. Until the wartime program of the extension service was placed into action there has never been a farm-labor program satisfactory to both agriculture and the farm worker.

I think it is well to analyze farm labor, in itself. The people who constitute our farm labor force may be divided into two broad categories: (1) The professional farm worker, and (2) the involuntary farm worker.

The first mentioned are people who have chosen farm work as their principal livelihood. Contact with these people reveals there are many factors which influence them to pursue this type of work as a living. Some of them are nomadic by nature, others enjoy sense of movement, and many have developed skills which have enabled them to earn very satisfactory incomes. They like their work. This class of people have never presented a major problem. The producer appreciates the skill of these workers. They are not only reliable and understand their relations with the community, their employer, and their fellow workers, but they are a valued and highly respected segment of our farming economy. Without them farming would be almost impossible.

The involuntary farm worker is generally a person who goes into farm work because he is unable to adjust himself to any other type of work. He is often on the longest rung of the economic ladder. It is most unfortunate that because of these people farmers have had to bear many unfair criticisms for purported evils connected with the migratory farm labor work force. I think that it is high time that the people in America recognize the difference between the types of farm workers, and they no longer blame employers for all the social problems arising from the employment of this unfortunate group of people, the involuntary farm workers.

Nor is it fair that all farm labor should be painted with the same brush, because certainly the majority of our farm workers should enjoy a standing in our Nation far above that which has been accorded them.

If it were possible to separate the professional migrant from the involuntary member of this work force we would have no social problem in farm labor. There have been many solutions offered but evidently none of them have been successful.

Now, for the first time, as a result of lessons learned during the war, the employer is attempting to provide a means of overcoming some of these difficulties that attend the problem of migrant labor. We further believe that the bill under consideration marks a long stride in the right direction toward the solution of this problem of migrant labor.

There are certain principles which we believe must be incorporated in any attempted solution. These are as follows

One. That there must be an agency thoroughly familiar with the problem, which is charged with the responsibility for carrying out a program for the collection and dissemination of accurate and timely information with respect to the supply of, the need for, and the effective use of agricultural workers.

Two. That such agency charged with this responsibility must be thoroughly acquainted with agriculture and rural affairs.

Three. That the administrative agency must be national in its scope for it must deal with workers who are moving among several States; but the matter of handling such a program within the States must be as far as possible brought to a State level to direct the flow of migrant workers.

Four. Such an agency must be also charged with the responsibility for certifying for the need of foreign workers on the basis of actual facts and conditions in the field.

Five. This agency should also be prepared to render service to both agricultural workers and farmers by introducing educational and demonstration methods designed to improve work methods and harvest techniques.

Placing and referring workers to jobs is not an office matter. It requires field operations carried out by people who are thoroughly familiar with the needs of employers as well as the supply of workers who have an intimate association with both farmer and worker. To be successful such a program must be of benefit to both the worker and the employer. It should be the aim of this agency to bring about as far as possible year-round employment for the worker and to be so well informed of the needs for the workers in the ever-changing agricultural economy of the various regions that the workers can be properly directed to the employers to meet their needs.

The matter of meeting the problem of supply and demand in farm labor is but one of the basic responsibilities that will be placed on such an agency, for there still remain the social evils brought about by the involuntary members of the agricultural work force.

Here, we feel, this agency can do it most constructive work, for these people must be educated and trained in harvest techniques. They must be furnished with proper information and be made to realize that they have a responsibility as agricultural workers equal to that of industrial workers. We feel that if these involuntary workers are properly trained, many will rapidly become a part of the army of professional harvest workers. Those who do not enter into this phase of the work can then be definitely labeled and turned over to the

social agencies properly prepared and equipped to deal with their difficulties. These people should not be thrust upon the farm any more than they should be thrust upon industry.

In the San Joaquin Valley we are now faced with a typical example of the involuntary worker who has no place else to go other than the farm. This group of people were drafted in other States for war industries and brought to California to work. Industry has now released many of these people and now they become the problem of agriculture and agricultural communities to which many have moved. We, in the valley, have had varied experience in dealing with this new group of people as agricultural workers. They were handed to us, and now they are agriculture's problem. So far, our experience has been that many of these people have shown excellent ability in the harvest of some crops but, with other crops requiring certain harvest skills, they have been unsatisfactory for the most part. The workers are discouraged, the employer dissatisfied with them, and they find it more difficult to secure gainful employment. This involuntary group of people needed training, accurate information as to job opportunities.

The Agricultural Extension Service in California quickly recognized the problem, and so training schools were established and fieldmen were sent out to advise these folks of employment opportunities. Gradually they are making the adjustments necessary to become a permanent part of the regular migrant work force. We have seen the success of this approach. Thus we hope it will continue to be employed at attempting to solve the problem.

In the thirties, the vast migration of Dust Bowl farmers to California would have been properly handled had an agency charged with the responsibility of disseminating information and directing the flow of workers been in operation.

We feel that it is as much the responsibility of this agency to avoid the migration of workers into areas of comparative employment as it is to direct workers into areas of employment. Never again do the farmers in the San Joaquin Valley want to experience the Dust Bowl migration catastrophe of the thirties.

We have seen the suffering, the unhappiness, and the intolerable conditions brought about through the introduction of twice as many workers as there are jobs. We have learned to recognize the migratory worker has a rightful place in our society. We want him to have a break.

We feel that the county agent and the Agricultural Extension Service are eminently well qualified to direct such a program for they are better informed as to labor needs and working conditions than any other group. They will never be guilty of attempting to force upon the employers practices arrived at through some vague theory concocted in an office. They know better.

The background, the character, the method of work, and working conditions of the agricultural workers are completely different than they are for other workers in the United States. This difference has made it difficult to find a proper solution to our problem. This bill recognizes this, for it creates facilities which are geared to the problems of the farm worker and the employer.