STATEMENT OF JACK HOWARD, ON BEHALF OF AMERICAN LEARNING SYSTEMS, INC., ACCOMPANIED BY MORTIMER GERBER, NEW YORK, N.Y.

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Chairman, my name is Jack Howard, and this is Mr. Mortimer Gerber, an associate of mine, and I ask that we be together.

Senator NELSON. Is either of you part of the company?

Mr. HOWARD. I am an officer of the parent company, which is Educational Sciences Programs, Inc.

Senator NELSON. And American Learning System is a subsidiary then?

Mr. HOWARD. Yes.

Denator NELSON. Mr. Hope could not be here?

Mr. HOWARD. He had operational requirements in the New York area, and therefore it was thought, because I have a broader experience with the entire company, including operations in Washington, D.C., that perhaps I could be helpful to the subcommittee.

Senator NELSON. Do you have a prepared statement?

Mr. HOWARD. Yes, sir.

Senator JAVITS. Could we find out what the connections are here? Senator NELSON. Yes.

Senator JAVITS. Would you give us some picture of what the relationships are between the parent company and the subsidiary now? Mr. HOWARD. American Learning Systems was created in August of 1968, financed by the parent corporation. It is a wholly owned subsidiary.

Senator JAVITS. Is the parent corporation a public corporation?
Mr. HOWARD. Yes, sir.

It is incorporated in the State of Delaware. Its seat of business is

New York City.

Senator JAVITS. Does it have public stockholdings?

Mr. HOWARD. Yes. It is listed over the counter.

Senator JAVITS. How many shares does it have?

Mr. GERBER. 1,100,000.

Senator JAVITS. How many shares are in the hands of the public? Mr. GERBER. About 150,000.

Senator JAVITS. Who controls the company?

Mr. GERBER. It is controlled by a gentleman named Thomas Souran.

Senator JAVITS. How much stock does he own?

Mr. GERBER. Approximately 160,000 shares.

Senator JAVITS. Is he an officer of the company?

Mr. GERBER. He is chairman of the board of the parent company. Senator JAVITS. Is this the biggest subsidiary, or the only one?

Mr. GERBER. It is one of our three subsidiaries.

Senator JAVITS. In size, what relationship does it have to the aggregate asset character of the company?

Mr. GERBER. I would characterize the sales as being insignificant compared to the sales of the parent company.

Senator JAVITS. What is the realtionship in terms of aggregate sales last year of the parent company?

Mr. GERBER. I would say American Learning contracted for less than half a million dollars in sales, and the parent company probably $312 to $4 million,

Senator JAVITs. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GERBER. By the parent company, I mean on a consolidated basis with the subsidiaries.

Senator JAVITS. Isn't Mr. Hope the principal officer of American Learning Systems?

Mr. HOWARD. He is vice president. John H. Douglas, president, is the chief officer.

Senator JAVITS. He is not here?

Mr. HOWARD. NO.

Senator JAVITS. Who is the principal executive officer?
Mr. HOWARD. John H. Douglas.

Senator JAVITS. The same gentleman. But you are fully informed!
Mr. HOWARD. I believe I can be helpful to the subcommittee I

Statement of Jack Howard,
representing American Learning Systems,
before the Senate Subcommittee
on Employment, Manpower and Poverty

May 6, 1970

On behalf of American Learning Systems I wish to express appreciation for the opportunity to lay before the Subcommittee some of our experiences with the JOBS program, and to suggest program changes that will help to achieve the goal of the program.

At the outset I should note that certain of our activities, and of an employer we serve, have been discussed in the staff study released last week, and in a staff report released April 28. I will expect to comment on these reports more fully later on in my testimony, but first I would like to outline our activities and our experiences.

The role of a learning company is to assist erployers in carrying out the objectives of the particular program under which government help is sought. In some cases, this help consists of initial design of the program, explanation of it to employers and supervisors, and guidance through the negotiation process. In many cases, employers come to a learning company after NAB and the Department of Labor have already completed the earlier work of explanation and design. Often larger employers will establish their own staffs to carry out a training program. Characteristically, smaller employers will seek out a learning company, and for efficiency and economy smaller companies are often brought together in a consortium so that training costs can be shared.

Once the program is approved the training company faces a variety of challenges. In some cases recruitment--whether specified in the contract or not--becomes a training company responsibility. Traditionally the program begins with an orientation conducted by teacher/counselors with a program input from the employers. Training companies provide facilities for such orientation sessions near the place of employment, or, in the case of a consortium, in a centrally-located place. Orientation can include a host of mundane activities the average worker takes for granted: explanation about social security, description of job application forms, how to cash a check, how to use the bus or subway system, the significance of coming to work on time. We include pre-vocational training in several activities, designed in close coordination with the employer, to help workers make the leap from unemployment to the pressures of the job.

Then workers are placed on the job and the real test of the program begins. Now the employer and the training company must work in intimate cooperation and coordination, and I suggest it is in this phase that most of the difficulty arises. The worker newly on the job must have the support necessary to help him achieve an understanding of being a regular employee, and not just a temporary coming in to earn a few dollars for the rent or some other immediate need. Supervisors on the job are critical in this activity, and so sensitivity and other forms of training are provided to them. Special counselling is also provided to trainees during this period in order

40-9630-70-pt., 4-10

to discover and deal with problems before they become either firing offenses or causes for quitting. Meanwhile, the employer is obligated to provide on-the-job training and he is specifically prohibited from contracting out that activity.

Once the transition is accomplished, job related education is scheduled. This can be arranged in a variety of ways, and is almost always shaped in large part by the demands of the job. In some cases a fixed period of time during each work day is set aside for job related education and counselling; in others overtime is authorized to the employee called in on a day when production is not scheduled. And this again requires intimate coordination and cooperation between training company and employer, because the purposes of the program are frustrated if production is interrupted or mangled because of training activities, just as the intent of the program is thwarted if the trainee does not receive the services he is supposed to.

It is during the combination on-the-job and job related education phase that some of the most significant and inventive counselling activities take place. We have learned in years of manpower experimentation the degree to which supportive counselling must be written into programs dealing with persons without extensive employment history. I recall the experience of one of the first experimental programs under the Manpower Development and Training Act conducted by Hampton Univercity in Virginia. There counselors spent most of their time trying to get shoes for poor workers, meeting them at home at night to deal with personal and financial problems, and performing a host of services that until ton had not been considered part of an occupational training program.

De

The situation has not changed; if anything, it is more acute. are dealing in the New York area with many recent arrivals who speak little or no English. Most of our counselors are bilingual or trilingal, since we have many French-speaking workers as well as a near majority of Spanish-speaking. The easing of these people into an employment syster and culture dominated by the English language is no mean task. Remedial education cannot even be undertaken until a program of English as a Second Language is undertaken with these workers. You can also well imagine the input from an on-the-job training experience if the trainor or supervisor cannot speak Spanish or French. Thus the support provided by counselors goes far beyond the counseling room and the work site; it reaches the home in many cases.

worker to approve the client's moving up in life to the tune of $1.75 a month. "Spoke to case worker...wouldn't allow (let's call her Mary) to move. No reason given. Action:"

The counselor began a series of calls to the case worker and his supervisor, to the Welfare Rights Organization, the director of the Welfare office, and finally got approval for the move.

On November 10 the counselor went with the worker to the welfare office for the official OK. They spent the entire day waiting there, but by the end of the day the move was approved.

On November 1l a new case worker was assigned and he disapproved the move. That started a whole new series of action.

On November 12 the counselor reached the case worker's supervisor and found that a two-year lease was required for approval. That night at 8 p.m. the counselor went to the landlord to explain all this because short-term leases and rent increases for renewals are the pattern in New York City.

Finally, on November 17, the worker moved into her new apartment. About two weeks later the counselor wrote that quite a change had come over "Mary". She was even more punctual in her attendance and in her interest in job related education classes, and her attitude about employment had changed for the better. She was well on her way to becoming a valuable employee.

I would now like to address myself to some of the points raised in the staff study and in the staff report dealing with one of our employers, Merit Enterprises. At the outset let me focus my remarks on the area for which we have responsibility--provision of the supportive services. I share with the staff study the extreme disappointment that I also know the Merit management feels in the economic conditions which forced the layoff of all employees, both trainees and permanent staff. But I shall remark further on this in my recommendations for improvement of the program.

The program of supportive services for employees of Merit Enterprises not only met the provisions of the contract but in my estimation met the best expecations of the trainees and the employer. We met with the fullest cooperation from management. At not inconsiderable expense a training center was established in the vicinity of the plant, experienced teachercounselors hired, and a vocational training expert retained to establish pre-vocational training. Merit management arranged for the daily release on a scheduled basis of all trainees, who were transported to and from the training center by bus. Counselors had free access to the plant, and were able to meet with workers, discuss their problems, and often solve them with careful and guided intervention with supervisors and management.

At the training center employees needing English as a Second Language worked with teachers skilled in bilingual instruction. Those whose native tongue was English moved into remedial reading and remedial arithmetic.