$3 and it is a dead end. At least it is a job. I say that I don't agree with the findings, because you have to define what is a poor job, and we don't think that has been done.

Sure, there are going to be some jobs that are dead end, there are bound to be in a program like this-but there are going to be a majority that are meaningful jobs, and I would say a majority or 95 percent of them, are meaningful jobs.

That is our best observation.

Senator CRANSTON. Do you have data to back up the periodic moving forward from $1.60 to $2?

Mr. WILSON. I got it from my own experience, being opposite Mr. Siemiller. Many contracts move upon the basis that you start at so much and the first 6 months you get an increase and so forth.

There are many, many contracts of that nature. Isn't that correct, Roy?

Mr. SIEMILLER. That would be true in collective bargaining agreements that you would find it there, most of them. Some jobs have no bidding rights over and above certain classifications.

You would have to take the individual agreement and analyze it to determine just which one we are talking about, and where it is going.

Senator CRANSTON. Another of the staff recommendations was that contracts which do not offer reasonable wage levels upon completion of training should be seriously questioned.

Would you feel that sort should be deemphasized in favor of those that would offer a reasonable wage level upon completion of training?

Mr. WILSON. I don't think that we can necessarily comment on that, because that is the Department of Labor function, really.

I don't have any recommendations on that, really.

Senator CRANSTON. Another recommendation was that members of minority groups should, where possible, be involved in the negotiating process.

Do you think that could and should be done?

Mr. WILSON. In each city it differs. They do this on the basis that their primary job is to secure positions for these people.

We work with the various community action groups. We have advisory committees in many cities that meet concerning the matter of finding people for the jobs, and each city has a different type of method of doing it.

I don't think I should pass on that particular subject, because I think that as far as each community is concerned some of them do it different, depending on the type of community action group there is.

Yes, we use them, and we work with them.

Mr. SIEMILLER. Senator, I have an opinion on that, if I might. If you are going to negotiate an agreement, you can't bring in additional groups to participate in the actual negotiations between the Department of Labor and the employer.

If you do I have had quite a bit of experience in negotiations and I know you would never get it done. The alternative to that is to set certain criteria that must be included in any agreement between the Department of Labor and the employer.

Senator CRANSTON. Would you recommend that such criteria be developed?

Mr. SIEMILLER. Yes. In my opinion it should be.

Senator CRANSTON. What sort of criteria would you have in mind? Mr. SIEMILLER. As to the objective of the program you would have. If you do not want to pay for a training period for someone to become a janitor with nothing above the janitor, then you would write the criteria in there as to what the opportunity would be that the job should have.

It depends on what is the objective of those involved.

If you are interested in finding jobs for janitors, and you feel it is necessary to teach someone what a broom is, you would have to have some training, and believe you me, I have seen some that might need an hour or two of training to teach them what a broom is, or that you have to get up in the morning to go to work.

Maybe the job should provide that as soon as you hire one of these trainees we furnish them with an alarm clock.

There are several things in that category.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Several of the NAB offices in cities have instituted programs that do provide an in-house type of check on what they call quality jobs, which I think is consistent with the spirit of the NAB program, and we hope that type of effort-New York is one example that is where that has been done, and there are others we hope that type of effort continues.

We should not get hung up on the $1.60 as being per se a bad job. If the $1.60 goes up to $2.60 or $3.60 over the period of training, that is not per se a bad job; or if it leads to promotional opportunities, that also is not a bad job.

While we can't say we do it nationwide, the emphasis has been on aiming at good jobs.

Senator CRANSTON. Are you familiar with the report that was prepared for NAB by William J. Kaufman, director of the NAB/ JOBS program in New York City?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

(See report, page 3131.)

Senator CRANSTON. There is a comment in there. It says another basic objective of the JOBS program is to move people out of the unemployed and underemployment categories into permanent productive employment at a decent wage.

He goes on to say that some of the companies were unable to provide jobs. Unless the jobs being trained for lead to a reasonable wage, or develop a marketable skill, the objectives of the JOBS program have not been met.

Do you have any comment on that?

Mr. WILSON. I go back to this basis that we have a big program and there are different ideas on objectives. We are trying to give a meaningful job with a reasonable wage, because the type of people we are dealing with are people who don't have jobs, who have been unemployed, that are certified as being on welfare, and we have got maybe what you might say the toughest element to deal with.

Now our feeling is that they get a job, and they get a meaningful job, and that they go into a mainstream of life and perhaps they can become dignified citizens and go from there.

If we are going to say you have to get all quality jobs, and they have to be the superintendent the first week, then we are talking a different language; yes.

But as far as I am concerned, we will give them the best quality job we can, and also, throughout this whole program if it is going to be successful, we can't take quality jobs and say there is going to be nothing but a quality job.

Senator CRANSTON. Of course, nobody is suggesting that they become supervisors at the end of the first week or on the first day, but even if they are paid $2 an hour, that is roughly $4,000 a year, which is the poverty level, roughly, and that is $100 more than one would get under the welfare program proposed by President Nixon.

The objective would be, presumably, to move them up to earning substantially above the poverty level.

Mr. WILSON. You are absolutely correct. We are pushing to get meaningful jobs, and when I say meaningful jobs, that is a good wage and an opportunity to progress as they go along.

That is our objective. I can't say, and I would be less than candid if I did, that this happens 100 percent of the time. But I do say that for the majority that is our goal, and that is what we are trying to do, and I think we are successful at these.

Senator CRANSTON. With the Government picking up 80 cents or half of that original $1.60 an hour, there seemingly is an opportunity for employers-if the trainees are able to learn anything and be productive for employers to have people rendering services useful to the company with the Federal Government picking up half the

bill.

Mr. WILSON. I don't think there is a question, as I said before. that we have people who will take advantage of the situation just like in every other category, profession, or anything else.

I can't say that is not so, but that is not our object, and that is not what we are trying to do. They do, and they take advantage of it, then I think it ought to be exposed, but I don't think there are many of them, and I think most employers are sincere in trying. Sure, there is going to be some of this in a program of this size.

Some of them don't even understand that at times, and you remember, also, that this is a new program, really. When you think of the expansion of this program and the time that we have had to do it, it is remarkable, and as we go along we are getting more sophisticated and we are learning something about it, and I can only answer you by saying that we ought to have as our goal, and do have as our goal, to give these people meaningful jobs that give then an opportunity in life. That is our object.

Now it does not always work out that way, no; but this is wha we want, this is what we are trying for, and I think for the mos part we are successful at this program.

Senator CRANSTON. I would like to ask you about a couple of other staff recommendations. One was close supervision to see that supportive services were required.

I guess that means by the Department of Labor.

Mr. WILSON. Yes. I think Mr. Cunningham mentioned that.

Senator CRANSTON. Would you think that such supervision is in order by the Labor Department?

Mr. WILSON. Yes. I don't think this can run loose in any manner. You ought to have a monitoring system.

Senator CRANSTON. It was also recommended that particular care be taken to assure that on-the-job training was provided.

Mr. Wilson. I think that is important. Let me also say that if your employer is sincere, and in looking at this sometimes I feel like I am on the defensive, which I refuse to be, because this is a request for us, and if anybody thinks that taking some of these kids on, and when I am speaking of some of these kids as I have, that this is child's play, it is not; because if you could see it when they first go on the job and some of the things you do, it is quite a disruptive element at times.

I mean, just take a typical-people where you have to go get him in the morning, he does not show up, and he gets into an argument with his supervisor, and some of the disruption that comes aboutthis is a difficult program, and then you have the rest saying, he does not come in the morning, why should I come in the morning?

So this whole program is a program that has certain unique features in connection with it.

Senator CRANSTON. I would like to say that I don't think you should feel on the defensive one bit. The leadership offered by the NAB is obviously most welcome and most important.

It is the problem, this is the program itself that we have under consideration. What can be done to improve it, and since NAB quite properly feels it should not be supervising, what larger supervision should there be by the Government to assure that the program works more effectively?

Mr. WILSON. I think it should be 100 percent with the Labor Department. They ought to have the tools to do it, and this should be a sincere monitoring of the program.

Senator CRANSTON. What I am asking you is for recommendations as to government supervision, not your supervision. You have some feelings, I would presume, as to where the greatest problems might lie, and where supervision would be most helpful here.

For example, your own reports from Kaufman in New York, and the Labor Committee staff do agree that special scrutiny should be given to the activity of subcontractors. A number of firms have expressed real dissatisfaction with the subcontractor's roles.

I see by your head nodding that you agree.

Mr. WILSON. I could not agree more. The only reason I gave the long-winded speech is that I probably have to get it out of my system, because sometimes I think that we think this is wonderful, and somebody thinks business is making a profit out of it, that it is, like DOD contract.

If you don't think for a minute we-when a businessman takes one of the young people on, they want to make something out of them, because they spend a lot of money on them; and they want them to be successful, because it costs money in turnover.

The minute he leaves, you have lost.

Senator CRANSTON. Mr. Chairman, I have other questions, but Senator Javits should be given an opportunity to ask some. So I yield to Senator Javits for the moment, or to you.

Senator NELSON. Senator Javits?

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Wilson, what effect has this report had on your activities?

Mr. WILSON. Well, I can only say that the report-you mean the subcommittee report?

Senator JAVITS. The staff report.

Mr. WILSON. I would think it has caused us quite a bit of concern, and the reason I say that is that we are getting calls from our offices which say, "What has happened to the NAB program? Isn't it any good, or should we continue?"

I am honestly telling you that we are getting calls from our offices, and we are about to issue a report, and the thing that I objected seriously to in the subcommittee report is that I felt it looked like a partisan byplay, and that we were getting cut by flying glass, and I felt very sincerely that I hated to see a programwhich I think is developing and is coming along well over a period of time was getting hurt.

Senator JAVITS. You called this a subcommittee report. Is it?

Mr. WILSON. I don't know what kind of report it is.

Senator JAVITS. Would you look at it?

Mr. WILSON. It is a staff report.

Senator JAVITS. Is that the report that hurt you?

Mr. WILSON. Yes.

Senator JAVITS. Don't you think you should have the subcommittee report? If you are going to get hurt, you ought to be hurt by experts and those in authority.

Mr. WILSON. I am green at this.

Senator JAVITS. Why would businessmen take alarm at a staff report?

Mr. WILSON. I don't how everything works, but all of a sudden we get newspaper articles that come out and have just a few horrible examples that come out from some place, and we don't know how bad this thing is.

Senator JAVITS. So what hurt you was the newspaper report, is that right?

Mr. WILSON. Maybe it is the newspaper report, but it had a little bit of true semblance of what came out of the staff report. It was based on the staff report, and where they got it, I don't know but it bothered me that it comes out prematurely, and we get or the defensive, and I don't propose to get on the defensive, Senator Senator JAVITS. Did the staff interview you or your staff to tel you what they were going to write in this report, by way of con clusions and recommendations?

Mr. WILSON. They didn't interview me.

Senator JAVITS. What about the rest of your staff?

Mr. WILSON. Yes.

Senator JAVITS. Did the NAB have an opportunity to give it conclusions and recommendations on the information published i this report?