tional staff with the cumulative impact of the program to date and the 2-year obligational authority of funds. This staff is required to provide adequate financial accountability. Activity 4, "Executive direction," will require an additional 14 positions and $213,000 in 1967. The Manpower Administrator will promote and direct an expanded program to insure compliance in Department of Labor programs with title VI of the Civil Rights Act. A sharp increase in the number and rate of complaints charging discrimination in programs financed through the Department has been experienced during the last calendar year. Over 130 complaints of discrimination were received in the last 6 months of 1965. An estimated 600 complaints will be received in 1967. Each complaint will be fully investigated and the complainant informed of the results of the investigation. A program of on-site investigation of facilities will also be planned and directed in 1967. Activity 4 provides for the Manpower Administrator to supply executive direction, supervision, and coordination to a growing number of large and complex programs operated in 54 jurisdictions, including all 50 States, and in cooperation with a wide variety of State and local governmental agencies, private nonprofit organizations, universities, corporations, employers, unions and trade associations. Growing attention is being given to the program of manpower services provided to the disadvantaged poor and unemployed residing in the central core of our major urban centers. In order to meet the need for increased communication and utilization of facilities both within the Manpower Administration and with agencies involved in manpower programs, the Manpower Administrator will require additional professional staff to serve as program integrators. These staff positions would be assigned to assure integration of manpower programs in the major metropolitan areas. The primary mission of these new positions is to plan, integrate, and expedite manpower activities that will increase the impact of the variety of training programs and resources in helping to resolve the employment and related problems in these cities. Finally, eight positions and $102,600 are requested in activity 5, "Trade adjustment assistance" to provide for the overall program direction and coordination by the Department of Labor of the employment services to be provided by the State employment security agencies as part of the worker adjustment assistance program directed by the Automotive Products Trade Act of 1965. This estimate also provides for Secretariat staff services to be provided by the Department to the Automotive Act Adjustment Assistance Board, established by the President in Executive Order No. 11254 to carry out his responsibilities to determine worker eligibility for adjustment assistance. This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I shall be happy to answer any questions. BUDGET REQUEST FOR MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING Mr. RUTTENBERG. With regard to the manpower development and training program, there is a request for $400,044,000, roughly the same overall dollar figure as fiscal year 1966. The estimated number of trainees will be 250,000 evenly divided between institutional training and on-the-job training. For those who will be in the on-the-job training program, all but about 20,000 will have some supplemental and related training that will be provided through the vocational education training system. The important change in the program for this coming year relates to the decline in unemployment and the concentration, therefore, on the hard core, disadvantaged unemployed which will be harder to get at as unemployment becomes lower. Conversely, the other side of the skill spectrum are the skilled workers where shortages will develop, so that the program in 1967 is designed to hit on the two extremes of the skilled spectrum. Sixty-five percent of the total trainees will be disadvantaged, including the 25 percent for youth and 50 percent for adult disadvantaged. Thirty-five percent of the total trainees will be directed to the skill shortage categories. DEFINITION OF "DISADVANTAGED" Mr. FOGARTY. What is your definition of "disadvantaged"? Mr. RUTTENBERG. In this case we are talking about minorities; we are talking about those with less than eighth-grade education; we are talking about those long-term unemployed and those with low levels of training. The income level is also involved, but we are basically talking not about the $3,000 poverty level as such, but we are using as criteria the minority category, the long-term unemployed, and those with less than eighth-grade education. Sixteen percent of the total unemployed have less than an eighth-grade education; 25 percent of the unemployed are 45 years of age or older and when they become unemployed they tend to be unemployed longer. These categories would be included in the disadvantaged group. EXPANDED EMPLOYMENT SERVICES As we then move into the program of both disadvantaged and skilled, one of the most important aspects of handling, of developing the program, will be to expand the operations of the Employment Service in finding and searching out the disadvantaged, unemployed workers. Many of them do not as such voluntarily come into the Employment Service looking for jobs or for training and if these people are going to be helped and assisted, they have to be found; they have to be motivated and stimulated and need to be counseled and referred to the proper kind of training which would start with basic education and move from there forward. Regarding the problem of the disadvantaged, once they are located and brought in, motivated and stimulated, a considerable amount of counseling effort will have to be provided, because if they were dropouts from school, they will be dropouts from training and dropouts from jobs and therefore they have to be worked with carefully over some period of time. As a result, the major increase in cost involved in the program is an increase of almost $16 million-$15.9 million-for funds for State employment security agencies in order to provide these expanded services. This is the only large change in the program from last year and because of this increase for expanded employment service, the total trainees, instead of being 275,000 as we estimated for fiscal year 1966, will be reduced to 250,000 in fiscal year 1967. I think, Mr. Chairman, that summarizes the statement on the manpower development and training activities. BUDGET REQUEST FOR OFFICE OF MANPOWER ADMINISTRATOR Now we go to the other budget, which is the Office of Manpower Administrator, "Salaries and expenses." Here the request is for 455 positions at $39,162,000, which is an increase of 63 positions and $3,783,200 over 1966. When the mandatory changes are taken care of, the working capital fund decrease and the full-year cost of financing the new positions that were authorized in fiscal 1966, the total program increase becomes $3,614,300. This is broken down by activity. In the first activity of the budget; namely, experimental, demonstration, and research pro grams. The increase is $2,790,000 for expanding the manpower research program through grants for research projects and doctoral dissertations and for grants for manpower research at colleges and universities. These new activities have been started this year. The increase for manpower institutional grants is $1.7 million of the $2.7 million total and $1,090,000 is for small grant programs and for the doctoral dissertation support program. The rest of the increase, $824,000, is for additional staff of 27 positions in the planning, research, and evaluation activity and 16 additional positions in financial and management services, which is directly related to the increase in OJT contracts and therefore an increase in the contracting and auditing workload. The third staff increase is for 14 positions in the Office of the Manpower Administrator, 8 of which relate to title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the enforcement of that program. In the last 6 months we have received 130 complaints under title VI and we estimate that there will be 600 complaints in fiscal 1967. Two of the eight positions that are being asked for are for the Solicitor's Office and will provide necessary legal services. Then there are six additional positions in the Office of the Manpower Administrator, to integrate manpower programs in major metropolitan areas. This is a tremendously, I think, exciting activity which was begun this year on a partial experimental basis to try to go into some of the key metropolitan areas and integrate the various. manpower programs that run all the way from apprenticeship on the one hand to on-the-job training to institutional training programs to activities of the youth opportunity centers and activities in neighborhood youth corps and trying, in the local metropolitan area, to coordinate all manpower programs. What we are asking for here are three professional positions and three nonprofessionals to help in the integration of major metropolitan area manpower programs. TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Then the last activity is one of eight positions in relation to the trade adjustment assistance program which grows out of the Canadian-United States Auto Agreement which was enacted this past year by the Congress and for which the first case was just filed yesterday by the Ford Motor Co. We don't really know how sensitive the assistance program will be, but we estimate that in fiscal year 1966, the rest of this year, something like 2.000 workers will be given assistance under the program and in fiscal 1967 it might go to as high as 3,000 workers. Mr. FOGARTY. This has been a little controversial. I voted for the bill, but what is the real opposition as you understand it? Mr. RUTTENBERG. I followed this program closely and carefully and sat through all the executive committee sessions of the Ways and Means Committee as the bill was being developed. The real problem related to the fact that under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 there was an adjustment assistance provision for workmen and under that provision some 16 cases had been filed between 1962 and 1965 with the Tariff Commission. All 16 cases for worker assistance had been denied by the Tariff Commission. The real problem then became, in the auto legislation, if the auto agreement between the United States and Canada were to go into effect-there were those who said, "Well, let the Tariff Commission operate exactly the same as it operated under the Trade Expansion Act," and there were those who said if that happened you would never get any cases approved and therefore you had to take a different approach in handling the specific cases in the auto industry. Thus, the approach that was taken was the appointment of a board. It was really a delegation to the President to make the final decisions on each case and the President indicated that he would have these decisions made by a board to whom he would delegate the authority. That board would be made up of the Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of Labor would be the chairman of the board and would be asked to provide the staff for the board. It is, therefore, in connection with developing that staff and the processing of the cases within the Department of Labor itself where we are asking for eight positions to be developed. FUNDING THE TRADE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Mr. FOGARTY. There was no money appropriated for this, was there? Mr. RUTTENBERG. There was no money appropriated. Mr. FOGARTY. Are you asking for a supplemental? Mr. RUTTENBERG. We are asking for a supplemental of $10 million but to be transferred from the UCFEX appropriation Mr. FOGARTY. What appropriation? Mr. RUTTENBERG. The unemployment compensation for Federal employees and ex-servicemen. This money would be available for the adjustment assistance allowances until expended. For the rest of this fiscal year, we estimate, $1.4 million will be required. Next year's cost we estimate to be and this is, you know, very rough because nobody knows what the experience is going to beestimated at $6.8 million and that would leave about $1.8 million of the $10 million which would be left unexpended. But we are not asking in fiscal 1967 as such, for any appropriation. We are, however, asking for eight positions for staff for the Department and the Presidential Board to implement the program. Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Chairman, what is happening is this: We have surplus 1966 benefit-payment money for ex-servicemen and Federal workers. We hope to use this money by appropriation transfer, making it available until expended for most of this year and for next year. In effect, it is a reappropriation of unused money from the current fiscal year. Mr. FOGARTY. We cut your request quite a bit last year. Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir. The money was cut because of the improvement in the employment situation and, subsequently, there has been less and less demand even on the money appropriated with the resulting surplus funds. Mr. FLOOD. I can't imagine disagreeing with Goodwin, but we didn't cut it deep enough, Mr. Chairman. Mr. FOGARTY. We cut it a fairly substantial amount. Mr. GOODWIN. It was $10 million. Mr. RUTTENBERG. That concludes my summary. COMPARISON OF 1967 ESTIMATE WITH 1966 APPROPRIATION Mr. FOGARTY. The appropriation for 1966 is $399,570,000. The request for 1967 is $400,044,000, an increase of $474,000. You have a carryover of funds from 1965 to 1966 of $1,383,727. Mr. RUTTENBERG. That is right, sir. Mr. FOGARTY. You probably will not have any from 1966 to 1967. Mr. FOGARTY. So this budget represents a cutback of almost $1 million. Mr. RUTTENBERG. It represents a cutback if you take into consideration the funds carried over from fiscal 1965 of almost a million, $934,727. AUTHORIZED APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1967 Mr. FOGARTY. What is the authorization for 1967? Mr. RUTTENBERG. Whatever funds are deemed to be necessary. The authorization of the dollar amount was only 1 year in the amendments of 1965. It provided for an authorization for fiscal 1966 and then through fiscal 1969, which is the termination date of the program, whatever moneys the Congress chooses to appropriate. DEMAND UNDER APPROVABLE PROJECTS Mr. FOGARTY. Just what is the demand now? How much do you think it would take to finance all good approvable projects in 1967? Mr. RUTTENBERG. I think, Mr. Chairman, it was our estimate that 325,000 trainees could be trained in fiscal year 1967 at a cost of $512,900,000, which was what our request was to the Bureau of the Budget. That request was then reduced to the $400 million level here, and 250,000 trainees. Mr. FOGARTY. You let the budget cut you over $100 million? Mr. RUTTENBERG. Yes, it shows on the table here. From $513 million. Mr. FOGARTY. $112 million they cut you. Do you still think you could use that $112 million? Mr. RUTTENBERG. I am convinced, sir, that we could, if we had it. REDUCTION OF 25,000 TRAINEES Mr. FOGARTY. In the first activity, "training and allowance payments," there is a cutback of $18,384,000. On page 6 of the justifications you say that this will mean a reduction of 25,000 trainees from the 1966 level. Was it your idea to cut this back? Mr. RUTTENBERG. The reduction of 25,000 trainees as indicated here, Mr. Chairman, is a reduction from the 275,000 level in fiscal 1966 to 250,000. This will result from the increase in concentration on the disadvantaged. It will require the use of more funds. Some $16 million for the State employment security agencies to help find and locate the individuals, motivate, stimulate, counsel, and work with them. In order to get at the disadvantaged, our decision was to use |