Senator NELSON. Thank you very much. (The prepared statement of Mr. Hutton follows :) PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM R. HUTTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to testify before this distinguished body on manpower training programs including the administration's proposed manpower training act, S. 2838, and on the urgent need to provide federally funded job opportunities for millions of low-income elderly across the nation. It is my privilege to speak on behalf of the 2,500,000 members of the National Council of Senior Citizens. They have a special concern with manpower training programs. They want to make sure manpower legislation includes the many low-income elderly seeking gainful employment. Also, I speak as the administrator of a highly successful demonstration program operated by the National Council of Senior Citizens with antipoverty funds provided by the U.S. Labor Department. It is the senior aids program conducted by the national council in 21 communities across the Nation. It employs 1,150 men and women age 55 or over in a wide variety of community service jobs. I am glad there is no upper age limit on manpower training activities proposed under the administration bill but, when the members of the subcommittee consider it, seniors would welcome an affirmative assertion of the right of the elderly unemployed and low-income retirees wishing to return to the labor force to share in the benefits of the proposed legislation on a basis of equality with workers in other age brackets. A great many elderly are physically able and ready to be gainfully employed if training and job opportunities could be made available to them. Despite the 15 percent Social Security increase that became payable in April, close to 7,000,000 men and women age 65 or over live at or below the poverty line, according to U.S. Labor Department data. Not all these men and women are able to work for wages but undoubtedly many could be gainfully employed if training and job opportunities were opened up for them. However, until very recently, State Employment Services have, I am sorry to say, directed their efforts largely to placement of younger job seekers, being influenced undoubtedly by the conscious and unconscious feelings of discrimination against elderly job applicants. Fortunately, the members of the Senate and House of Representatives recognize the great contribution older Americans can make and are making, many of them right here in Congress. The law forbidding age discrimination in employment which was enacted in 1967 is fine as far as it goes, but I think you will agree we should provide the elderly a more positive guarantee of their right to live in retirement or, if they prefer, to work full time or part time, for wages or as volunteers, in community service. Right here, I would like to say that the National Council of Senior Citizens deeply regrets the Administration's decision not to set up the proposed Retired Service Volunteer program (RSVP) even though Congress had authorized $5,000,000 for the program. Much of this money would have gone to reimburse elderly volunteers for transportation and other out-of-pocket expenses they might incur under the program. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I trust that the manpower legislation being discussed here will help clear obstacles to placement of elderly job seekers by modifying policies and practices keeping substantial number literally millions of elderly out of the competitive labor force. Middle-aged and older persons who are unemployed require manpower services ranging through counselling, training and placement in part-time or fulltime employment. Availability of such services has been extremely limited despite the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Older Americans Act, the Manpower Development and Training Act, the Economic Opportunity Act, the Labor Department's Mainstream and Concentrated Employment Programs 40-9630-70-pt.4-21 and the greater emphasis by the U.S. Employment Service on jobs for the elderly in recent years. Members of the National Council of Senior Citizens are concerned about reports that Administration spokesmen oppose categorical benefit programs and, for that reason, object to setting up new programs for the elderly. For over a year, there has been no Special Assistant for programs for older Americans in the Labor Department. During the Eisenhower years, the office of the Special Assistant for Older Workers was in the office of the Secretary of Labor and reported to the Under Secretary of Labor. Since then, the program potential and funds available have grown substantially through various programs authorized under the Manpower Development and Training Act and Title 1-b of the Economic Opportunity Act. Nevertheless, the Office of Special Assistant to the Secretary of Labor for Older Workers has been downgraded to lower echelons of the Manpower Administration with the result it cannot serve the best interests of the elderly. In fact it seems to have disappeared entirely. Other special groups-women, the minorities, the handicapped and military veterans are much more substantially represented in the Labor Department's hierarchy. Yet older workers represent 40 percent of the labor force and middle aged and older men and women are a majority of the adult population. This situation is dramatically highlighted by a special analysis of the U.S. budget showing that, among individuals participating in manpower programs in 1968, approximately 64 percent were age 21 or less and 4 percent were age 55 or over-even though both age groups are the same proportion of the work force and those age 55 or over represent a large proportion of the adult population. Recently, the Office of Economic Opportunity installed an assistant for programs to meet the problems of the elderly but confusion that has engulfed OEO's programs for the elderly can only be described as abysmal. The Department of Health, Education and Welfare has the Administration on Aging but this has been subsumed under HEW's Social and Rehabilitation Service and has a low position on HEW's organizational totem pole. Whenever non-categorical programs are started, it is the usual thing for the elderly to be by-passed. I remind the distinguished subcommittee members that the Veterans Administration, the Women's Bureau, the many programs for the handicapped are categorical programs. Why should there be such resistance to categorical programs that recognize the special problems of the elderly. And, I ask, isn't it unrealistic in the extreme to deny the elderly-men and women from age 40 upward-reasonable consideration when they ask for jobs? I suggest that the manpower shortages that plagued the 1960's and are likely to be repeated in this decade cry out for Congress to pay new attention to employment of middle aged job seekers and retirees willing and able to work. It is just incredible that we have permitted our society to become so youthoriented that the job market starts to close afer a person reaches age 40. We have believed one myth after another to justify age discrimination in employment. One such myth is that a young labor force guarantees greater production and less overhead. This, possibly, is true in the case of a man operating a jackhammer on public construction but there are all kinds of occupations where the elderly are just as productive or more so than their juniors. Another such myth is the supposed cost burden involved in hiring the elderly. A Department of Labor study shows that putting an older worker on the payroll, including all fringe benefits cost an average of just 5 cents an hour more than it would for a younger person. We have heard that older workers are absent from the job more than younger workers. The very opposite is true. Unbiased studies show that attendance of the elderly is as good as, sometimes better than, that of their juniors It has been variously estimated that 1% to 2 million men and women age 65 or over are capable of accepting part-time or full-time employment if training and employment were available to them. Time magazine has estimated the cost of age discrimination in employment, involving workers age 45 or older, at $4 billion a year. When I speak of the need for an affirmative assertion of the right of the elderly to gainful employment, I have in mind a program sought by Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and under similar bills in the House of Representatives to make available in every community the kind of employment opportunities available under the National Council's Senior AIDES Program. Launched in June, 1968, the Senior AIDES Program has won enthusiastic approval and support in each of the 21 communities it serves. Applicants for employment under the Senior AIDES programs must be age Senior AIDES earn an average of $2 an hour for 20 hour's work a week. The warm welcome the Senior AIDES program has received certainly suggests there are low-income elderly persons and retirees just about anywhere you go who are willing and able to perform useful services for community agencies. Making use of their skills, knowledge and experience greatly benefits both the elderly who seek jobs and the general public the Senior AIDES program indicates. AIDES in Senior AIDES means Alert, Industrious, Dedicated Energetic Service. Jobs available under the Senior AIDES program range from helping with preparation and service of low-cost meals for the elderly to sub-professional and clerical work. Senior Aides work in outreach programs to bring the disengaged elderly back into the mainstream of community life. They work in institutions performing light but important tasks as well as serving as key aides to social workers and psychiatric specialists in hospitals and mental institutions. More than half of the Senior Aides are ages 55-64, and the rest are 65 years of age and older. Senior Aides range from individuals with doctor of philosophy degrees to those who have had no formal education. Under the program, Federal anti-poverty funds pay 90 percent and local sponsoring groups (public or non-profit, private community agencies) bear the remaining cost. No part of the Federal funds goes into salaries for the local Project Directors. What I say about the Senior AIDES program is borne out by independent evaluations of the program. Graduate students of the San Diego California State College School of Social Work made an evaluation of the Senior AIDES project at San Diego. The survey report states: "It appears that the Senior AIDES have performed exceptionally well and are capable of participating competitively in the labor market. "Beyond this bald statement, the researchers are willing to risk the prediction that the program itself is likely to experience considerable success nationally. "The Senior AIDES by virtue of their particular qualities and expectations, seem well suited to agency placement and eventual employment." The report is signed by Earl C. Brennen, who holds a doctor's degree in social work, Mrs. Miriam Levens and Mrs. Sigrid J. Morris. Mr. Chairman and distinguished subcommittee members, gainful employment offers the only immediate possibility for large numbers of elderly to lift themselves out of the poverty that engulfs them. In behalf of the 2,500,000 members of the National Council of Senior Citizens, I appeal to you to insist that manpower legislation when it emerges from Congress assures adequate recognition of the millions of low income elderly across the nation. L 4 1 STATEMENT OF BERNARD NASH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS AND NATIONAL RETIRED TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D.C. Senator NELSON. Did you have a statement, Mr. Nash? Mr. NASH. Yes, sir, I am Bernard Nash, the executive director of the National Retired Persons and of the National Retired Teachers Organization. These organizations have a membership of over 2 million, and are going to grow at a rate of approximately 5,000 per week, sir, so that gives you some idea of the interest of the older person in America today. In addition to some 16 internal operating programs that the association sponsors for our members, we are operating three demonstration programs in 11 communities in cooperation with the Federal Government and local agencies. Our experiences that I want to relate are based upon this, and also I will draw you prior personal experience. I served as the deputy comissioner of the Administration on Aging, and earlier service when I just came to Washington to develop the basis for the foster grandparents program. These experiences will form the basis for the statement I am making today. Mr. Chairman, there are many reasons for recognizing aging today as one of the priority concerns of the Nation. It is not receiving the recognition that it should. This is the problem that we all should be concerned with, since we are all individuals growing older. Every year, nearly one third of a million people are added to the over 65 age group, and the total is increasing rapidly. I give you just a few figures to really dramatize this. The first person to set foot in this country, I believe, was about 1613. Up to 1900, the country had accumulated some 3.3 million persons over the age of 65. That is, in 300 years. From 1900 to 1930, we went from 3.3 to 6.7 million. In other words, we doubled the number in just 30 years. From 1930 to 1960, the persons in this age group went from 6.7 to 16.7 million, and from 1960 to 1970, now, just a 10-year period, we have increased from 16.7 to over 20 million. The 3.3 in this age group that this took us 300 years to accumulate, we have doubled in the past 10 years. Now, the Administration on Aging in the Federal Government is predicting that the growth rate is such that by the year 2000 there will be that is now another 30-year segment-that the growth rate will reach the point that there will be 33 million persons over the age of 65. Now Dr. Phillip Hauser, of the University of Chicago says this is too conservative. He says it is advances in medical science in the communicable diseases have led to the increase in the older population today. Now, the attention of medical science is being focused on the degenerative diseases of the older person, and, by the year 2011, we will have 55 million persons in this age group. That is just 41 years from now. Why does he choose 2011 instead of 20001 If you subtract 65 years from 2000 you get 1935, which is a low-birth rate year. If you subtract from 2011, you get 1946, the postwar baby boom era. He says that is the planning stage we must look forward to. Whether the predictions of Dr. Hauser and the Administration on Aging prove extreme or illogical, it is obvious that older persons already constitute a large part of our population. These are impressive statistics as to the present number of older persons in our society, but they are critical statistics for planning purposes, in the future. This becomes a priority area of concern when we realize that technological advances are requiring that ever-earlier retirement of persons take place. We are already seeing encouragement of retirement in industry at age 62, rather than 65. We have others talking about various plans reducing the workweek, work hours, and work year. I want to commend this committee in undertaking the hearings on the manpower problems of older people. Our organizations are concerned with the 55 plus. They are not just the 65. So you have to add an additional 19 million persons even today to the group that I have been talking about. The economic plight of the elderly has already been highlighted in many ways, including hearings on the economics of aging, recently held by the Senate Special Committee on Aging. From every side we hear about the harsh reality of the income level of the age average retiree, and a myriad of proposals which would provide the older persons with adequate income has been suggested. But most proposals fail to include a concern for the individual desire for dignity and status as a productive contributing member of the community. Just as Mr. Hutton has said, the thing that becomes significant to all of us operating these programs is the fact that it is not just a matter of dollars, it is that one is making a contribution to himself, his family, his community that becomes exceedingly meaningful and which has to be taken into account when we make cost-benefit studies as to the expense of such programs. Mr. Chairman, there are many issues which we could address ourselves to today in this whole area, but I would like to focus on three subjects. One is meaningful employment; two, cooperation between the private and public sector; and three, the elimination of age discrimination. To expand upon these, the American Medical Association conducted a series of studies which showed that extending a vigorous lifespan calls for more than medication. A sense of purpose is as vital as adequate nutrition as one grows older. Studies done at the medical school, University of Urah, and by other researchers around the country in the foster grandparents program, indicate that after 2 or 3 years of employment, these individuals were in fact sleeping better, eating better, and were healthier in all respects. From an annual physical examination, it was found that by working they were healthier. The New York City Department of Public Welfare today funds approximately 57 senior center programs, |