Page images
PDF
EPUB

those without technical skills and simultaneously providing greatly needed health and welfare services.

Mr. Chairman, as I indicated earlier, I have a supplementary report with more detailed information on Washington area employment problems and on the work done by the Health and Welfare Council's "New Careers" enrollees. I request that this statement be included in the record at the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. BALL. My name is Markham Ball. I am accompanied today by Mr. Markley Roberts, who is a member of the Committee on Federal Legislation of the Health and Welfare Council of the National Capital Area.

I chair that committee. On my right is Mr. Harry E. Freeman, who is a member of the staff of the Health and Wefare Council. He is responsible for coordinating the new careers program administered by the HWC.

To identify the council for you, HWC is the central agency for developing and coordinating the support of the private sector for health, welfare, and related community services in the Greater Metropolitan Washington area.

It is a nonprofit organization financed chiefly by the United Givers Fund and is responsible for the allocation of UGF funds to eligible private voluntary agencies.

The council is a citizen-led organization representative of all segments of the metropolitan area.

We are very happy to be able to respond to the subcommittee's invitation to appear today and to report on the employment situation in our area. I am talking about only the Washington metropolitan area today, but I think many of our findings will prove typical of situations in other metropolitan areas.

In the District a severe problem of underemployment and unemploy ment exists. The official unemployment rate in the metropolitan area is something like 2 percent, which sounds very good, and in the District of Columbia the rate is about four and a half percent. But these figures. as I am sure you are aware, do not include people who have removable barriers to employment, but who have just stopped looking for work. These official figures do not count people working part time. They do not recognize that some people are working for less than a poverty

wage.

When you take these people into account, you find a quite different situation here.

There is a subemployment rate of about 25 percent. That is, about 100,000 people in the District of Columbia have severe problems of unemployment or underemployment.

Looking at the situation here, this seems to be a problem which will not solve itself.

The Mayor's Economic Development Committee last year projected that there will be a job gap, a need for jobs, of about 50,000 in the District in 1978, and that assessment was based on the assumption that there will be a normal growth of the economy in the next decade. Furthermore, in this area, and I suspect elsewhere, the growth of new jobs tends not to be in the inner city, but in the suburbs. In this area, jobs in Maryland and Virginia are increasing at a rate of three times as fast as those in the District.

bs tend to be highly skilled jobs. Again that compounds the

written statement we suggest three possibilities for dealing job gap, a gap that is going to occur unless something is done the situation.

we suggest that the private sector can do more under proported programs of employment and training, and in our we list some principles that we think must be recognized rograms. Let me mention one or two.

t seems very important to us is that training programs proing, where possible, for specific jobs. The best programs we in operation in this area are those that operate on the hireiple, such as the JOBS program.

less slippage, less discouragement, and in the long run more nt and fewer drop outs, if the man is hired first and trained

ly in this area, transportation is terribly important. We the transportation system that will get the unemployed to

ing services and counseling also are very important.

as this committee is well aware, coordination and consolidaograms must be accomplished. The Mayor's committee last ed 13 major manpower programs in the District. There solidation and coordination.

ond possibility for curing the job gap, especially in this ethe Federal and local governments are the major emthe additional employment of the poor in existing govern

grams.

e there are two obstacles to overcome. One is civil service s. Especially at the Federal level, efforts are being made nge civil service requirements so that the poor are not more matically excluded.

practical problem is the problem of ceilings. There are isters adopted by some of the Federal agencies operating rict of Columbia for counselors. These jobs do not require academic training. These jobs could be filled by the poor, oyed, but employment ceilings do not permit it. There are

6.

our paper discusses the possibility of a new Federal problic service employment. The mayor's committee estimated vill be a need for about 35,000 public service jobs, new jobs, he job gap I talked about is to be filled.

had some experience at the Health and Welfare Council might be called a prototype of this kind of program, the program.

our third year now of coordinating the new careers prois area, we have placed the unemployed and poor in 30 gencies that are members of our council.

ort that it is a successful program. There is good training and in academic institutions. The trainees, of course, are ersonal benefits in having the satisfaction and remunerathwhile jobs. The agencies themselves, I think, are bene

-70-pt. 2-25

fiting because, by employing the previously poor, they are learning a lot more about the people that they serve, the poor of this area. These people are doing jobs that need doing, and they are advancing from the job category of aide to quite responsible jobs in a relatively short period of time.

On the other hand, I have to report that the program is very, very small compared to the needs we have here. In 3 years, there are 1 enrollees.

Now this program could be multiplied many times. I am sure th more could be done in the voluntary agencies. But it is inconceivabl that the voluntary agencies themselves in this program could mak more than an insignificant dent in the total job need in this area.

I think our New Careers should be studied, because it is a prototyj» of what can be done, but to do the whole job, as we see it, will require a governmental involvement in programs, new programs sponsore by the Government.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I must emphasize that I am not really here as a manpower authority. I did want to share with the committe the experience that our agencies have had, and I wanted to expres the concern that our agencies, and the volunteers who support them. feel for the problem of unemployment in our area.

It is one of the root problems behind many of the ills in or community.

I hope this statement has been helpful to the committee, and I hop that eventually, with this committee's good work, we can look forward to the day when a decent job is a realistic possibility for each of the members of our community and our Nation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GAYDOS. Thank you, Mr. Ball.

Mr. Hathaway?

(The documents referred to follow :)

REPORT ON EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE WASHINGTON, D.C., METROPOLITAN AREA

AREA STUDIED

The Washington, D.C. standard metropolitan statistical area includes Moutgomery County and Prince Georges County in Maryland, the four Virginia connties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudon, and Prince William, and three independent Virginia cities of Alexandria, Falls Church, and Fairfax. The SMSA population by mid-1971 will be about 3.2 million and the labor force will be about 1.5 million This projection assumes inclusion of Charles County, Md., into the SMSA after the 1970 census.

PRESENT EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

The recent growth of industry, population, labor force, new job opportunities, and employment in the area has come primarily in the suburbs of Washington Employment grew three times as much in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs as in the District of Columbia from 1962 to 1966.

However, the growth of job opportunities has been primarily in highly skilled, professional, and technical occupations. The expansion of the area's economy has not opened up the types of jobs that are needed by most of the unemployed and underemployed people in the area who lack the education and skills and transportation to compete successfully for available jobs.

Federal, state, and local governments in the Washington area in 1968 employed more than 35 percent of the work force in 407,000 jobs, of which 312,000 were Federal jobs. The second biggest source of employment, with 19 percent of

was services with 216,000 jobs. Retail trade with 14 percent-165,000— third largest source of employment. In other metropolitan areas iring employment opportunities for semi-skilled and relatively unrkers account for about 30 percent of total employment. In the Washea the manufacturing sector accounted for only 3.7 percent of the er major employment sectors in the Washington area were construct 5 percent; transportation, communication, and utilities, 5 percent; e, insurance, and real estate, about 5 percent.

18,000 or some 55 percent of the area's jobs in March 1968 were in ct of Columbia, about 276,000 or some 25 percent were in the Maryrbs, and about 255,000 or 20 percent were in the Virginia suburbs. study by the U.S. Employment Service for the District of Columbia ncreasing needs for workers of virtually all types; nevertheless, the al needs in this area continue to be for the more highly educated or led workers." Similarly, the 1968 report by Hammer, Greene, Siler AsLabor Force Supply and Demand in Metropolitan Washington, states lirection of skill requirements changes is clearly toward higher skilled sional occupations in the short run."

UNEMPLOYMENT AND UNDEREMPLOYMENT

S-DC report indicates that unemployment in the Washington area is between 20,000 and 30,000 a month, with the bulk of the unemployed ons in the process of changing jobs. "At any one time during the rest r, therefore, there are less than 10,000 job seekers available to fill mands for workers," the USES-DC report stated. "Most of these job ve limited qualifications, and cannot be matched against the demands ployers for qualified workers." The USES-DC report went on to say: ht labor supply situation was well corroborated by an analysis made 5,000 job seekers registered for employment at the U.S. Employment D.C., during the survey in 1966. The analysis indicated that one-half icants were not fully qualified in the occupations in which they were rk. Almost half of the unqualified applicants were in the 22 to 44 age age group generally most acceptable to employers. The remainder was ally between the under 22 and over 44 age groups. About one-third of ats indicated limited availability as to hours, earning or other condiit 22 percent had poor work histories; and an equal proportion had cation. Other problems involving as much as ten percent of this group ere lack of specific occupational qualifications, poor appearance and bits, physical and mental handicaps, lack of experience, and police ese problem areas were not treated as being mutually exclusive in s, therefore, many of the underqualified were inhibited in the job cess because they fell into two or more of the above categories.” S-DC report states that "the probable number of underemployed percity of Washington indicates that the number may be as much as he number of unemployed," with about 55 percent of the underemg persons working at jobs paying less than subsistence wages or rt-time when they would like to work full-time.

mer-Greene-Siler report makes a similar point after surveying metroa unemployment data: "The plain truth is that existing official data a partial picture of unemployment as it relates to the area's serious ic problems and are a faulty basis for any policy or program formulaarea's 1968 unemployment rate was 2.2 percent, indicating that area ent is mainly seasonal and frictional. The HGS report points out unemployment data cover only those who report and claim unemenefits while those who do not claim unemployment benefits or who covered" jobs such as self-employed persons and domestics are left ficial unemployment statistics.

or "covered" unemployment in Washington's Maryland suburban Montgomery and Prince Georges was 157 persons in 1967 and in the urbs was 170 persons in 1967. In the District of Columbia, however, mployment was 16,306, with 30 percent of these in the unskilled catecent in the "clerical & sales" category, and 21 percent in the service Occupation. However, the Hammer-Greene-Siler report projects WashSA nonwhite underemployment in 1970 at about 160,000-18,000 in

the Maryland suburbs, 16,000 in the Virginia suburbs and 126,000 in the District of Columbia. Even if the inadequacies of available unemployment data are an cepted, it is clear that the unemployment problems of the Washington Metr politan Area focus on the District of Columbia.

A sub-employment index for Washington, D.C. was developed by the Manpower Administration for the District of Columbia using data for December 1968. Toreport issued on this data showed one out of four members of the "adjuste! labor force" posing a serious employment problem.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

In the categories above, "part time" means persons involuntarily working parttime because full-time work is not available; "non participants" are persons not working and not looking for work but who would probably enter the labor force if they were provided the proper assistance, "underutilized” represents a total of unemployment, part-time, and non-participants-persons with removable bar riers to full and useful employment; “adjusted labor force" adds to the employed and unemployed those who are so discouraged that they have given up looking for work; "under utilization rate" shows the under-utilized as percent of the adjusted labor force; "under $3,000" represents heads of households and unre lated individuals who are employed full-time but have annual net income below the poverty level; "sub employment" shows the total of unemployment, parttime, non-participants, and "under $3,000", and the "sub employment rate" shows sub employment as a percent of the adjusted labor force.

The sub-employment index report shows that in December 1968-the same month when 16,905 persons in the District were unemployed, 45,642 persons were under utilized, and 90,259 persons were in a sub-employment category-the U.S. Employment Service for the District of Columbia had only 3,532 unfilled job openings and 1,940 of these, more than half, were in professional, technical, and managerial occupations.

THE GOAL-FULL EMPLOYMENT

In June 1969 the Mayor's Economic Development Committee issued a summary "Overall Economic Development Program for Washington, D.C." calling for action to achieve the city's full employment potential. MELCO's full employment goals were as follows:

• Reduce unemployment in the "optimum potential" labor force to 2.5% This means bringing into the labor force many unutilized but potentially employable people who have customarily not been counted in it.

• Increase by 96,500 the number of jobs available for District residents and particularly for the low-income population. These jobs should come from 194,000 additional jobs "budgeted" for 1978.

There are three reasons for these ambitious but realistic job goals: (a) they are the most desirable way to produce more income for low-income people, (b) we can all benefit by the increased output which sustained full employment yields, and (c) we can unite unused manpower with the servic ing of unmet public needs.

« PreviousContinue »