THE

MIGRATORY-CASUAL

WORKER

WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION

DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH

SAM FRANCISCO HISTORY CENTER m

STACKS

SAN FRANCISCO

PUBLIC LIBRARY

REFERENCE

BOOK

Nol Id be taken from I lie Library

WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION

DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH

THE MIGRATORY- CASUAL

WORKER

By

JOHN N. WEBB

Coordinator of Urban Research

Research Monograph VII

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1937
Works Progress Administration

Harry L. Hopkins, Administrator

Corrington Gill, Assistant Administrator

Howard B. Myers, Director

Division of Social Research
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Works Progress Administration,

Washington, D. C, April 0, 1937.

Sir: I have the honor to transmit a report on the economic and

personal characteristics of migratory-casual workers in agriculture

and industry. The information presented is derived from a study

conducted by the Federal Emergency Relief Administration during

the operation of the Transient Relief Program. This report is one

of a series of investigations being conducted by agencies of the

Government to assist in fulfilling the provisions of Senate Resolution

298, 74th Congress, 2d Session, which directs the Secretary of Labor

a

to study, survey, and investigate the social and economic needs of

laborers migrating across State lines."

This study was made by the Division of Social Research, under

the direction of Howard B. Myers, Director of the Division. The

collection and tabulation of the data were supervised by John N.

Webb, Coordinator of Urban Research, with the assistance of

Katherine Gordon and Howard R. Ogburn.

The report was prepared by John N. Webb and edited by Malcolm J. Brown and Orin C. Cassmore. Special acknowledgment

is made of the assistance rendered by Greta E. Mueller and Awilda

Shorter in the preparation of the field schedule and in the development of the interviewing procedures. Acknowledgment is also made

to the supervisors in the several cities in which this survey was made,

and to many others who cooperated in the Avork of preparing this

report.

Respectfully submitted.

CORRINGTON GlLL,

Assistant Adm inistrator.

Hon. Harry L. Hopkins,

Works Progress Administrator.

in

CONTENTS

Page

Introduction ix Summary : xv

Chapter I. The migratory-casual worker: A general description .. 1 II. Extent of migration 23

Numerical statement 23 Graphic statement 27

Agricultural workers as a group 30

Industrial workers as a group 31 Workers in specific crops and processes 34

State of principal employment 45

III. The characteristics of migratory-casual employment 53 Duration of jobs 53 Number of jobs 55

Seasonality of employment 57 Month of obtaining jobs 59

Length of migratory period and off-season . 60 Employment and unemployment during the migratory

period 63

Yearly earnings 67

IV. Types of migratory-casual employment 71 Amount of employment in specific crops and processes 71 Agricultural workers 71

Industrial workers 75 Combination workers 76

Seasonality of employment in specific crops and processes. _ 77

Agricultural workers '_ 78

Industrial workers 80 Combination workers 80

1934 changes in specific crops and processes 83

V. Some personal characteristics 85 Years spent in migratory-casual labor 85

Age 87

Color and nativity 88

Personal histories 90 Wanderlust 90

ccupational and physical deterioration 93

Attitude toward relief 97

Political attitudes 99

VI. Conclusions 103 Appendix. Supplementary tables 111 Index 119 TEXT TABLES

Table 1. Number of State-line crossings of 500 migratory-casual workers,

1933-34 24

2. Number of States in which employment was obtained during

migration by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 26

v
\ i Contents

TEXT TABLES—Continued Page

3. Number of States designated as place of principal employment,

and proportion of workers included in the five States most

frequently designated, 1933-34 47

4. Duration of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_ 55

5. Number of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_ 56

ti. Duration of migratory period of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 62

7. Median net yearly income and employment period of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 70

8. Years spent in migratory casual work by 500 workers 86

9. Age of 500 migratory-casual workers 87

10. Color and nativity of 500 migratory-casual workers 89

FIGURES

Figure 1. Routes of travel during employment, 100 migratory-casual

workers in agriculture, 1933 and 1934 28

2. Routes of travel during employment, 63 migratory-casual

workers in industry, 1933 and 1934 29

3. Routes of travel during employment, 37 migratory-casual

workers in industry, 1933 and 1934 32

4. Routes of travel during employment, 43 migratory-casual

workers in cotton crops, 1933 and 1934 33

5. Routes of travel during employment, 47 migratory-casual

workers in grain crops, 1933 and 1934 35

6. Routes of travel during employment, 47 migratory-casual

workers in fruit crops, 1933 and 1934 36

7. Routes of travel during employment, 67 migratory-casual

workers in beet and berry crops, 1933 and 1934 38

8. Routes of travel during employment, 35 migratory-casual

workers in oil and gas, 1933 and 1934 40

9. Routes of travel during employment, 44 migratory-casual

workers in railroad maintenance, 1933 and 1934 41

10. Routes of travel during employment, 42 migratory-casual

workers in road construction, 1933 and 1934 43

11. Routes of travel during employment, 39 migratory-casual

workers in dam and levee construction, 1933 and 1934 44

12. Routes of travel during employment, 41 migratory-casual

workers in logging, 1933 and 1934 46

13. State of principal employment for 500 migratory-casual workers

during 1933 and 1934 48

14. State of principal employment for 200 migratory-casual workers

in agriculture, during 1933 and 1934 49

15. State of principal employment for 100 migratory-casual workers

in industry during 1933 and 1934 50

16. State of principal employment for 200 migratory-casual workers

combining agriculture and industry during 1933 and 1934 — 51

17. Average duration of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers,

1933-34 54

18. Seasonal fluctuation in the activity of 500 migratory-casual

workers, 1933-34 58

19. Months of obtaining jobs in 1933 and 1934, 500 migratory-casual

workers -- 61
Contents vn FIGURES—Continued Page

20. Average duration of jobs secured by 500 migratory-casual

workers, by quarters, 1933-34 62

21. Average migratory, employment, and off-season periods; 500

migratory-casual workers; 1933-34 64

22. Net yearly earnings of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34. _ 68

23. Number of jobs, and man-weeks of work of 500 migratorycasual workers; 1933-34 combined 73

24. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits,

200 agricultural workers 1933-34 79

25. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits, 100 industrial workers, 1933-34 81

26. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits,

200 combination workers, 1933-34 82 SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES

(Appendix)

Table 1. Number of migratory-casual workers in 13 study-cities 111

2. State of principal employment of 500 migratory-casual workers,

1933-34 111

3. Month of obtaining jobs, 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34. 112

4. Duration of off-season of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 _ 113

5. Time spent in employment during migratory period by 500

migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 113

6. Net yearly earnings of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34 114

7. Man-weeks of employment and number of jobs of 500 migratorycasual workers, classified by type of worker and by specific crops and processes, 1933-34 114

8. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected

pursuits, 200 agricultural workers, 1933-34 115

9. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected

pursuits, 100 industrial workers, 1933-34 116

10. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected

pursuits, 200 combination workers, 1933-34 116

INTRODUCTION

This report on the migratory-casual worker is a byproduct of the

studies of the transient unemployed conducted by the research

section of the Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance,

Federal Emergency Relief Administration, during 1934 and 1935.1 In the process of determining the characteristics of unattached

individuals and family groups receiving aid from the Transient

Relief Program, it was found that a fairly clear line could be drawn

between those for whom migration was an expedient of a few

months, and those for whom migration was a customary way of

obtaining a living. The distinction—which was fully established

in the report on the transient unemployed—was between a group

of depression transients composed of temporary migrants, and a permanent supply of mobile workmen made up of habitual migrants.

Because the depression transient represented by far the more

important problem from the point of view of relief administration,

a report on his characteristics became the first objective of the

study conducted by the research section. When this task was completed, however, there was time for, and interest in, a supplementary

report on the unattached migratory-casual worker. Although much

more limited in scope than the preceding report, it is believed that

this account of the migratory-casual worker will contribute to the

increasing body of knowledge about the more mobile portion of our working population.

When the Transient Relief Program was initiated in 1933, the

composition of the mobile "army of unemployed" was unknown. The

grave national emergency existing at that time did not permit delay

until the nature and needs of the nonresident unemployed could be

studied. It was common knowledge that migratory-casual workers were poorly paid and underemployed during the best of times ; and

it was natural to expect that they comprised a substantial portion

of the needy nonresidents in 1933. But in initiating a relief program

for nonresidents the Federal Emergency Relief Administration felt that there were valid reasons for making a distinction between

"bona fide transients" and "seasonal migratory workers." It was

1 See Webb, John N., The Transient Unemployed. Research Monograph III. Division of

Social Research, Works Progress Administration, Washington, D. C, 1936. A second

report, dealing more extensively with migrant family groups, is in process of preparation.
\ Introduction

believed that failure to make this distinction would provide a subsidy to those industries that existed and benefited in some degree

because of the cheap labor supply furnished by migratory-casual

workers. In September 1983, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration sent to the State Emergency Relief Administrations a memorandum (No. A-l) which stated, in part:

Federal funds now available to the several States for the care of

transients require that the utmost vigilance be employed in assuring

that these funds be applied to the treatment of bona fide transients. A number of States have, in the past, encouraged the employment of seasonal migratory workers in various industrialized types of agricul- ture * * *. The funds available for transients are * * * not intended for this type of nonresident. As it turned out, this distinction was unnecessary in the first place,

and impossible of strict enforcement in the second place. As soon

as the Transient Relief Program had been in operation long enough

to permit some study of the migrant population it was discovered

tli at the depression transient,2 rather than the migratory-casual

worker, made up the great bulk of applicants for nonresident relief. But even if this had not been the case it is difficult to see how the

distinction between the "migratory worker" and the "transient"

would have been enforced in practice. Certainly there was little in

outward appearance, mode of travel, and nature of needs to distinguish one type of migrant from the other. In fact, unless the

migratory-casual worker voluntarily identified himself as such, there was no way, at the time he applied for relief, by which transient

bureau officials could be certain that they were following the provisions of memorandum A-l. At least one-half of all unattached

transients given relief remained under care less than 1 week, and a considerable proportion, only 1 night. Careful investigation of an

applicant's claims for relief was impossible unless he remained at the

bureau for 1 week or more, and in practice, an investigation was not

attempted for the more mobile (short-stay) transients. Therefore,

the migratory-casual worker had little difficulty in obtaining aid from

the transient program when there was no other alternative.

The surprising—and instructive—fact is that only a small proportion of the habitual migratory-casual labor supply made use of

this alternative. The migratory-casual worker is on the margin

of subsistence most of the time and, when in need, is even more,

clearly a nonresident in the local poor law sense of the term than was

the depression transient. Nevertheless, the real migratory-casual

2 Those eligible for assistance under the transient program were defined as "all persons

in need of relief who have not resided within the boundaries of a State for 12 consecutive months."
Introduction xi

worker made up only a small fraction of the total transient relief

population.3 The explanation of this fact is partly economic and partly personal. A substantial portion of the occupations followed by the

migratory-casual worker continued to provide some employment

throughout the depression. The experienced migrant knew where

and when he was most likely to find a job in the grain and fruit

harvests, logging operations, shipping, road construction and maintenance, and other seasonal activities; and he continued to migrate

to those places even though he knew the pay would be less than in

previous years. This knowledge, plus a strong personal antipathy

to being found in "soup lines", helps to explain why the confirmed

migratory-casual worker kept out of transient bureaus except for

occasional overnight stops or an unusually bad run of luck in finding

employment.

The fact that the confirmed migratory-casual worker did obtain

assistance from the Transient Relief Program makes this report

possible. The IS cities 4 which served as the sources of information

for the study of the transient unemployed included the country's

most important centers for migratory-casual workers. During the

first half of 1935, careful records were made of the work histories

and itineraries of migratory-casual workers registered for relief in

the transient bureaus of these 13 cities. Some of the records taken were unsuited for study because the worker either could not, or would

not, give a complete account of his employment and itinerary during

1933 and 1934. Other records were excluded because the worker

supplying the information was on the margin between the temporary

and the habitual migrant. Still a third type of record could not

be used because the worker had obviously either deliberately misstated his history—a not uncommon occurrence in the experience of

the Transient Relief Program—or had drawn too freely upon his

imagination.

After a careful weeding-out process there were available 500

records suitable for study. All of the 13 cities in the transient relief

survey were represented, but nearly three-fifths of the histories came

from 4 of the cities—Seattle, Denver, Memphis, and Minneapolis.

The number and type of workers interviewed in each of the 13

cities may be found in appendix table 1. The 500 individuals whose records are used in this report do not

represent a sample of migratory-casual workers in a strict statistical sense. Indeed, it is difficult to see how such a sample could be

3 See The Transient Unemployed, op. cit., pp. 66-67.

4 Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Denver. Jacksonville (Fla.), Kansas City (Mo.), Los Angeles, Memphis, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Thoenix, Pittsburgh, and Seattle.
\n Introduction

obtained. The total number of migratory-casual workers is un- known; the membership of (his mobile labor supply changes from

month to month; and the individuals that make up this group are on the move so much of the time that they provide none of the

opportunities common among stable populations for selecting a demonstrably representative group. Only when the migratorycasual worker comes within the range of some fact-finding agency,

such as existed during the survey of the transient unemployed, can

his characteristics be observed without a great deal of difficulty.

No purpose would be served by assuming that the 500 individuals

contributing factual evidence for this report were completely representative of the hundreds of thousands of migratory-casual workers

who, each year, are employed in seasonal activities. But at the same

time there is no good reason for believing that the characteristics

of these 500 workers were so peculiar that an account of their work

histories and itineraries would lead to markedly erroneous conclusions. It is true that these workers were receiving relief at the

time the records were taken. But their employment histories provide convincing evidence that their relief was largely incidental. It

is also true that the several cities in which records were taken are unequally represented in the study, and this circumstance has a

definite effect on the work patterns discussed in chapter II. But

the fact that more satisfactory records could be obtained in, say, Seattle than in Boston can hardly be considered a disqualifying

bias since Seattle is a well-known concentration point for migratorycasual workers and Boston is not. The point of this discussion is simply to issue a warning against

accepting the conclusions of the study uncritically. Those responsible for this report are keenly aware of the limitations imposed by

the small number of cases and the methods by which these cases were selected. As far as the records are concerned, they are unusually good. The field work was done by a staff of interviewers

that had a wide experience with, and a real understanding of, the

man on the road. Therefore, it can be said with confidence that

the 500 records are accurate; and, as the second part of this report

will show, these records present information not available from

other sources. The plan of this report needs some comment. Chapter I presents

a general and nonstatistical description of the migratory-casual

worker and his place in the labor supply. The remaining chapters

are devoted to a statistical description of the 500 workers whose

histories were selected for study. Specifically, the statistical section

of this report is arranged as follows: The extent of migration and

the work patterns of the 500 workers are presented and discussed in
Introduction xni

chapter II ; the next chapter is devoted to a discussion of such characteristics as amount, duration, and seasonality of migratorycasual employment, and net yearly earnings; chapter IV carries this

description farther by presenting detailed information on specific

types of work done ; chapter V deals with some of the personal characteristics of the 500 workers; and the final chapter presents the

major conclusions of the study. For those readers who would like to obtain a brief statement of the content of this report, a short

summary of the principal findings follows.

SUMMARY

This study of the migratory-casual worker grew out of a survey

of the transient unemployed made during the operation of the

Transient Relief Program of the Federal Emergency Relief

Administration. In the process of determining the characteristics

of individuals receiving aid from the Transient Relief Program, it was found that a clear distinction could be made between those for

whom migration was an expedient of a few months and those for

whom migration was an established way of obtaining a living.

The distinction was not based upon outward appearance, for in

this respect there was little to distinguish one type of migrant

depression transient, tramp, or migratory-casual worker—from the

other. Instead, the distinction was made principally on the basis

of two characteristics: (1) the type of work done and (2) the work

habit or pattern. Considered jointly, these two characteristics made

it possible to distinguish the migratory-casual worker from the

mobile nonworker, or tramp; and from the temporarily mobile job-

^seeker, or transient unemployed of the depression period.

The true migratory-casual worker travels regularly over a rela- tively large area and is dependent for a living on work that is distinctly seasonal or intermittent, and, for the most part, casual in nature. In brief, it is the combination of habitual migration with

short-time employment that distinguishes the migratory-casual

worker from all other types of workers in the labor supply. Where

ever the local labor supply is inadequate or unwilling to harvest the

grain, the fruit, and the vegetable crops, build and repair the highways and the railroads, repair the levees and build the dams for

flood control, fell the logs for lumber, and work the mines and

quarries—in all these pursuits and in others the migratory-casual

worker provides a supply of cheap and mobile labor upon which

these industries are dependent in part, but for which they accept

little or no responsibility.

This study shows that the habitual migratory-casual worker is the

result of a complex of factors. Both economic and personal motivations are involved, and the two are closely interrelated. On the

economic side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of (1) the

progression of the seasons, which provides an irregular sequence of

employment over a large area, and (2) the pool of unemployment,

which rises and falls with business conditions, but which is never
wi Summary

completely drained. This combination of circumstances creates the

mobility that breaks the stabilizing ties of industrial and community

attachment, and at the same time creates a chaotic labor market

characterized by substandard wages and working conditions.

On the, personal side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of

Factors that are known but are difficult of precise statement because

of their intangibility and because of the wide variety of workertypes represented. Among migratory-casual workers is to be found

i he militant worker who believes that his position in the labor supply

is the result of a failure of the economic system—and particularly of

employers—to accept responsibility for the way in which the productive process operates. There is also the apathetic worker to whom

the gradual transition from regular employment in industry to a haphazard search for such employment, and finally to a regular pattern of migration, has brought a lessening of ambition and a lack

of interest in the future. Perhaps it can only be said that, in general, it is essential to the migratory-casual worker that he move,

that no one environment claim him long, that scenes be new and

persons different. These desires, expressed or only vaguely felt, are the core of his existence and the governor of his activity.

Analysis of 500 work histories for the years 1933 and 1934 has provided information on several important aspects of the mobility and

employment characteristics of the migratory-casual worker. The

more important items of information may be summarized as follows

:

Interstate migration was the rule among the 500 workers ; in each of

the 2 years—1933 and 1934—about two-thirds of them crossed at least

1 State line, and one-fourth crossed at least 6 State lines. Migratory-casual workers following agricultural employment ex- clusively were less mobile than were workers employed principally at industrial pursuits or those combining in about equal proportions

agricultural and industrial employment.

The number of State-line crossings reported by the 500 workers in

each year was in sharp contrast to the number of States in which they

actually obtained employment. Somewhat over one-half of the 500

workers found jobs in only 1 State and an additional one-fourth

found employment in only 2 States; whereas, about one-half of the

workers had crossed 1 to 10 State lines and 11 to 15 percent had

crossed 11 to 25 State lines. Maps of the itineraries of these workers show that compactness and

regularity of work patterns were distinctly more pronounced among

agricultural than among industrial workers. This appears to be the

result of the regular and predictable recurrence of agricultural work

opportunities in the same area. The average duration of jobs was about 2 months (including holidays and time lost during employment) in both 1933 and 1934. More
Summary xvu

jobs lasted 1 to 2 months than any other time interval ; about one-half

of all jobs lasted from 1 to 3 months; jobs in agriculture were shortest

and jobs in industry longest in duration.

The average duration of jobs becomes more significant when con- sidered in view of the number of jobs held. Well over three-fourths

of the 500 workers held only 1, 2, or 3 jobs in each of the years 1933

and 1934, and less than one-fifth held more than 3 jobs.

Although there is some demand for migratory-casual workers in

each month of the year, the demand is highly seasonal. At the low

point in the seasonal decline of activity, reached early in the Avinter,

the 500 workers reported less than 600 man-weeks of employment per

month ; but at the top of the summertime peak, reached in July, activity had more than doubled, and these workers reported approximately

1,200 man-weeks of employment per month. Despite this increase in

activity, however, during the busiest month of either year, only one- half of the potential labor power of the 500 workers was utilized. It is a common practice among migratory-casual workers to spend

part of each year on the road, working or seeking work, and then to withdraw from the labor market during the period, usually in the

winter months, when the chances of finding work are small. This

practice was followed by a majority of the 500 workers in the study.

The median length of the migratory period was 41 weeks. Workers in

agriculture had the longest off-season period—averaging 13 weeks;

and the combination workers, the shortest—averaging 7 weeks in

1933, and only 4 weeks in 1934.

Necessarily, the migratory-casual worker wastes much time and

motion during his migratory period both because of a scarcity of

jobs and also because of the lack of proper direction to such jobs as are available. Among the 500 workers, the portion of the migratory

period spent in employment averaged 24 weeks in 1933 and 21 weeks

in 1934.

In exchange for his labor the migratory-casual worker obtains a meager income at best. When the earnings of the 500 workers were

reduced to net yearly income to exclude the uncertain value of perquisites, it was found that although the range was from maintenance

to $1,350 a year the most frequent earning was between maintenance

and $250 yearly. The agricultural worker had the lowest yearly net earning, averaging $110 in 1933 and $124 in 1934. Industrial workers averaged $257 in 1933 and $272 in 1934. Workers combining

agricultural and industrial employment earned on the average $223

net in 1933 and $203 in 1934.

An indication of the relative importance of various crops and processes in providing employment for migratory-casual workers was

obtained from employment histories of the 500 workers. The cotton

130766°—37 2
win Summary

nop was the Largest single source of employment among agricultural

workers. Next in importance to cotton was fruit; and sugar beets,

grain, general farm work, vegetables, and berries followed in the

order named. Among industrial workers, logging, gas and oil, and

railroad maintenance were the most important sources of industrial

employment. Migratory-casual workers dividing their employment

almost equally between agriculture and industry found the major

part of their employment in general agriculture, road construction,

logging, shipping, and grain, in the order of their importance.

The difficulty of reducing the amount of working time lost by

migratory-casual workers during migration by dovetailing jobs in

various short-time operations can be seen from the fact that the sea- sonal peaks of activity in these pursuits tend to occur together.

Many, in fact, reach their peak within the same month, and the peak

activity of the majority occurred, between the months of May and

September.

The 500 workers were veterans of the road ; nearly one-half of them

had spent 10 years or more in migratory-casual work, and nearly onetifth, 20 years or more. Most of these workers were between the

ages of 20 and 45 years. Somewhat over three-quarters of them were

native white; slightly less than one-tenth were Mexicans; and the

balance was made up of foreign white—8 percent, Negroes—5 percent, and others—1 percent.

These statistical descriptions of personal characteristics are supplemented by a series of personal history abstracts and autobiographical accounts of some of the 500 workers. The cases presented in this manner were chosen to represent distinct traits found among migratory-casual workers. The more striking of these are examples of the

peculiar urge called wanderlust, the physical and occupational deterioration, a strong antipathy to relief, and the puzzled concern of

the workers over the forces to which their economic misfortunes may

be attributed.

The evidence of this report points clearly to the conclusion that the

migratory-casual worker, despite his independent attitude and his

pride in his ability to "get by" on the road, is in fact an underemployed and poorly paid worker who easily and frequently becomes a charge on society. Directly or indirectly, State and local governments are forced to accept some responsibility for individuals in this

group. Hospitalization, emergency relief, border patrols, and the

policing of jungles and scenes of labor disputes are examples of costs that are borne directly by the public. There is another cost which

cannot be assessed in dollars: the existence of a group whose low

earnings necessitate a standard of living far below the level of decency and comfort. The presence of such a group in any com-
Summary xix

munity, even though for a short time each year, cannot fail to affect adversely the wage level of resident workers who are engaged in the same or similar pursuits.

The solutions most commonly suggested for the problem represented

by the migratory-casual worker are (1) assisting the worker to establish employment sequences through directed migrations to employments differing as to time of peak operations and (2) stabilizing

the migrant worker through provision of off-season employment in

the communities where his principal migratory-casual employment is obtained. The shortcomings of these proposals are that they overlook

the fact that the problem of the migratory-casual worker is one aspect

of the general problem of unemployment and economic insecurity.

The direction of workers to jobs, although it may be of assistance in

eliminating some of the needless travel entailed in migratory-casual

work, cannot provide jobs when they do not exist. As for the second

of the proposals mentioned, it is impossible in most cases to find off- season operations to complement the principal seasonal employment

of migratory-casual workers; and although conceivably it would be

possible to devise employment to occupy the workers during the off- season, the experience of the past has been that this procedure has

led to even more than ordinary exploitation.

It is a conclusion of this study that the most promising means of

reducing the intensity of the problem is employment office direction of

migratory-casual workers, supplemented, during periods of depressions, by public works projects to absorb the surplus. It also seems

likely that unemployment insurance will benefit the migratory-casual

worker indirectly by reducing the pressure of resident workmen on

the labor market served by the migrant. Aside from these means,

there does not appear to be any possibility of full or partial solution

short of those eventual and unhurried changes in population patterns

that promise to eliminate the economic function of the migratorycasual worker.

Chapter I THE MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKER

A GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The migratory-casual workman is a familiar figure in this

country. He is seen along the highways and railroads, in the

camp cars of construction gangs, in the tar-papered shacks on

the sites of dam and levee projects, in open camps along streams and

irrigation ditches. At work, the mobile workman is frequently in- distinguishable from the resident workman; en route, he is fre- quently confused with the confirmed tramp.

During the depression years this confusion was increased by the

presence of another migrant group—the transient unemployed. In

appearance there was little to distinguish one type of migrant from

the other; they rode the freight trains together, hitch-hiked along

the highways, and kept to themselves except when according to their

standards or needs they applied for work, relief, or "help to get a cup of coffee." Because in most cases tramps, transients, and migratory-casual workers wT ere indistinguishable, the public attitude was

one of hostility toward all migrants. The burden of caring for the

resident unemployed left communities with little patience and no

funds for the needy nonresident, to whom, worker and nonworker

alike, the epithet "bum" was freely applied.

The attitude of hostility toward unattached migrants during the

depression was natural; but it was based upon a confusion of migrant types that must be viewed separately in order to be understood

correctly. The transient was distinctly a depression aspect of widespread unemployment; the tramp is an ever-present result of

personal maladjustment to social and economic processes; and the

migratory-casual worker is a necessary adjunct to those highly sea- sonal or intermittent industries that cannot, or will not, support a resident labor force. It is the unattached migratory-casual worker that is the subject

of this report: the mobile worker as distinct from the mobile nonworker, or tramp ; the habitual migratory worker at casual, or shorttime, jobs in seasonal industries as distinct from the temporarily

mobile jobseeker, or transient unemployed, of the depression years. The distinction in a particular case may be difficult to make; fre- quently the depression transient was in the process of becoming an

habitual migratory-casual worker; the migratory-casual worker may

become a tramp when he can no longer compete for employment with

younger men; and the tramp occasionally works side by side with

1
2 The Migratory-Casual Worker

the migratory-casual when wages are attractive or needs are pressing. But these distinctions, for all their vagueness in the particular

case, are known and applied after a fashion by employers, and

occasionally by public officials. For purposes of description and discussion, the migratory-casual

worker needs to be defined as clearly as possible to avoid the confusion arising out of the indiscriminate use of the terms "tramp",

"hobo", "migratory", and "transient" to describe the man on the

load. Care should be taken to avoid the subjectivity which ordinarily

creeps into the use of these terms. There is a popular habit of

calling persons "workers" when they are needed to harvest a ripened

crop, and of referring to them as "bums" during the slack season

that follows.1 A kindred confusion, befogging much of the thinking of persons who have studied the migratory worker more carefully, arises out of an attempt to distinguish between the various

mobile workers on the basis of a difference in moral fiber. The

essence of the moralistic distinction is that the "good" migrants work

because of their preference, but that the "lower group" works in spite

of its preference. For example

:

The distinction between the two types is * * * one seeks employ- ment and pursues chances to work, the other travels and works as

little as possible.2 Despite appearances, this sort of definition is largely or altogether

subjective, and makes for more confusion than clarity.

Objectively, the migratory-casual worker can be identified by two

characteristics: (1) the type of work he does and (2) his work

habit or pattern. Neither characteristic is, in itself, sufficient identification. The term "casual employment" 3 is generally used to describe unskilled jobs for which the principal qualifications are bodily vigor and the presence of the worker at the time of hiring.

1 See, for example, the Los Angeles Times' comment, Mar. 13, 1936, on the action of the

city of Los Angeles in sending municipal police to the State line to turn hack needy

persons. The Times, in commending the action, says : "If a labor shortage should de- velop later on, it would be easy to modify the regulations so that seasonal workers might

be admitted * * *." Meanwhile, the Times favors "ridding the State of indigent transients." [Italics supplied.] On this same theme the San Diego Sun, Mar. 23, 1936, comments sardonically : "The only time a bum is expected to come to California is when we need him as a harvest hand. What right has he to come between seasons ?"

2 Lescohier, Don D., The Labor Market, The Macmillan Co., New York, 1919, p. 270. See also Shields, Louise F., Problem of the Automobile "Floater", Monthly Labor

Review, vol. XXI, no. 4, October 1925, p. 14, who distinguishes "between the migratory

workers, who are an economic necessity for harvesting our crops and who deserve the

respect and gratitude of the communities they serve, and the automobile tramps who work

only long enough to keep from starving and that still lower group—the professional wandering beggars." Persons who know the migratory-casual well feel that there is no such sharp distinction between the categories of those who are "an economic necessity" and

those who "work only long enough to keep from starving."

3 "The phrase [casual employment] implies, no doubt, primarily shortness of engage- ment, and, secondarily, engagement of first comers." Beveridge, Sir W. H., Unemployment, Longmans, Green & Co., New York, 1930, p. 98.
A General Description 3

The best examples of casual, as distinguished from migratory-casual,

workers are found in large industrial and transportation centers

:

longshoremen on the docks, freight handlers in the railroad yards

and warehouses, truck and transfer helpers, common labor on building and street construction, women day workers, and odd-job men. Although there is constant shifting from employer to employer when

work is to be had, the movement is confined to one city, or even more

frequently to a particular section of one city. Such workers may

conveniently be thought of as resident-casuals.

In contrast, the migratory-casual moves from place to place over

a relatively large area in search of work that is distinctly casual in nature. In this case it is the habitual migratory-work pattern, taken

in conjunction with the casual nature of the employment, that is the

distinguishing characteristic of the worker. A migratory-work pat- tern in itself is not enough; for skilled construction workers, sales- men, accountants, actors, and many others are frequently or persistently migratory in their work habits without becoming part of the

migratory-casual labor supply. In brief, it is the combination of

habitual migration with casual employment that distinguishes the

migratory-casual worker from all other types of workers in the labor

supply.

Despite the difficulty of precise definition, the migratory-casual

worker exists as an objective fact that can be observed wherever the

local labor supply is inadequate or unwilling to harvest the grain,

the fruit, and the vegetables, to build and repair the highways and

railroads, to repair the levees and build the dams for flood control, to fell the logs for lumber, to work the mines and quarries, and

generally to provide the pool of cheap and mobile labor upon which

many basic industries are dependent in part, but for which these

industries accept little or no responsibility.

Perhaps the best definition of a migratory-casual worker is to be

found in a worker's own account of his migration and employment.

The migratory-casual worker in agriculture, the largest employer of

mobile labor, is clearly defined in the following work history

:

July-October 1932. Picked figs at Fresno, Calif., and vicinity. Wages, 10

cents a box, average 50-pound box. Picked about 15 boxes a day to earn

$1.50; about $40 a month.

October-December 1932. Cut Malaga and muscat (table and wine) grapes near Fresno. Wages, 25 cent& an hour. Average 6-hour day, earning

$1.50; about $40 a month.

December 1932. Left for Imperial Valley, Calif. February 1933. Picked peas, Imperial Valley. Wages, 1 cent a pound.

Average 125 pounds a day. Earned $30 for season. Also worked as wagon-man in lettuce field on contract. Contract price, 5 cents a crate repack out of packing house; not field pack. This work paid 60 cents

to $1 a day. On account of weather, was fortunate to break even at

finish of season. Was paying 50 cents a day room and board.
I The Migratory-Casual Worker

March April 1038. Left for Chicago. Stayed a couple of weeks. Returned

to California 2 months later. May 1933. Odd-jobs on lawns, radios, and victrolas at Fresno. Also worked

as porter and handy man.

June 1933. Returned to picking figs near Fresno. Wages, 10 cents a box. Averaged $1.50 a day, and earned $50 in 2 months.

August 1933. Cut Thompson's seedless grapes near Fresno for 7 days at 1%

cents a tray. Earned $11. Picked cotton 1 day, 115 pounds; earned $1.

September-November 1933. Cut Malaga and muscat grapes near Fresno. Wages, 25 cents an hour. Made $30 for season. December 1933. Picked oranges and lemons in Tulare County, Calif. (Earnings not reported.)

January 1934. Picked oranges at 5 cents per box for small jobs and 25

cents per box for large jobs, Redlands, Calif. Earned $30. Picked lemons

at 25 cents an hour. January 1934. Went to Brawley, Calif. Picked peas at 1 cent a pound.

Picked 125-150 pounds a day for 15-day season. February 1934. Picked grapefruit at 25 cents an hour, Koehler, Calif. Worked 8 hours a day on three jobs for a total of 22 days. Also hauled

fertilizer at 25 cents an hour. March 1934. Worked as helper on fertilizer truck at $2 a day for 20 days,

Brawley, Calif. June 1934. Worked as circus hand with Al G. Barnes Circus for 4 weeks at $4.60 a week and board, Seattle to Wallace, Idaho. July 1934. Tree shaker at 25 cents an hour, averaged $2 a day for 25 days, near Fresno. August—October 1934. Picked oranges and lemons at 25 cents an hour, working an average of 6 hours a day, for 60 days, near Fresno. December 1934. Houseman in hotel, Fresno. Received 50 cents a day and

board for 1 month, and 25 cents a day and board for 2 months.

The migratory-casual worker following industrial, as distinct from

agricultural, employment is equally well defined by the work history

presented below

:

June-August 1932. Jackhammer operator, railroad construction, Liberty,

Mo. Wages $4.80 a day.

September 1932. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Hays, Kans. Wages $3.20 a

day.

October 1932. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Cheyenne, Wyo. Wages $4.50 a day.

February-March 1933. Laborer, pipe-line construction, Topeka, Kans. Wages $3 a day.

April-October 1933. Watchman, building construction, Kansas City, Mo.

Wages $1.25 a day.

February-May 1934. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Wamsutter, Wyo. Wages

$2 a day.

June-September 1934. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Topeka, Kans. Wages

$2.80 a day.

The elements essential to an adequate definition of the migratorycasual worker are explicit or implicit in these two work histories. There is high mobility, in the case of the agricultural worker,
A General Description 5

amounting to at least 6,000 miles of travel in a single year. There is a preponderance of seasonal jobs requiring little or no skill—jobs

that last at best only a few months, but form a recurring work pattern. Earnings are small, even under the most favorable circumstances the total yearly income of these workers amounts to no more

than is needed for subsistence. And there is implied in these records

another characteristic of the migratory-casual worker which, for

want of a better word, must be designated as wanderlust.4 Still another characteristic of the migratory-casual worker is illus- trated by these work histories. The jobs were confined to a small

number of crops and processes. The agricultural worker was primarily a fruit and vegetable worker, despite occasional odd jobs at other pursuits; and the industrial worker was employed exclusively on construction and railroad maintenance jobs. Although in general

the migratory-casual worker follows a wider range of employments

than those reported above, still there is a distinct concentration of

principal activities within a comparatively few productive processes.

It may be instructive to identify the most important of these

processes. The Wheat Harvest.

From central Texas to the Canadian border and west to the

Pacific coast, wheat was once the most important crop requiring a marked addition to the local labor supply during the harvest season. The widespread use of harvesting machinery in recent years has

greatly reduced but has not eliminated the use of migratory-casual

workers in the wheat harvest, which, at one time, employed 250,000

of these workers.

Fruit Picking and Packing.

The fruit harvest—apples in Washington and Oregon, citrus

fruits in the Southwest and to a lesser extent in Florida, soft fruits

(prunes, peaches, etc.) along the Pacific coast, and berries in the

Mississippi Valley and on Puget Sound—requires large numbers of

migratory-casual workers for short periods of time. Speed, long

hours, and some skill are necessary to prevent the loss of these

perishable products. 5 Vegetables.

Large-scale production of lettuce, peas, beans, melons, spinach,

onions, and similar truck crops in the Southwest, in Washington, and

4 The migratory-casual worker would describe this characteristic inelegantly, but much more aptly, as an "itching foot."

5 For an interesting account of the "fruit tramp" see "The Endless Trek" in Migratory Labor in California, State Relief Administration, Division of Special Surveys and Studies, San Francisco, 1936, p. 173 ff.
6 The Miyratory-Casual Worker

along (In1 eastern seaboard requires migratory-casual workers for

cultivating, harvesting, and packing operations.

Sugar Iiccts. In the Large sugar-beet areas (e. g., Colorado, California, Montana,

Michigan) the greater part of the planting, cultivating, and harvesting operations arc performed by migratory-casual workers.6

Cotton.

In the Southwest—Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and California

migratory-casual workers make up an important part of the labor

supply necessary in the harvesting of this basic crop. The extension

of large-scale cotton cultivation into these areas is, compared with the

Eastern Cotton Belt, a relatively recent development. The large land

holdings and the undersupply of seasonal labor in the Southwest are

in sharp contrast to the innumerable small farms and the oversupply

of low-cost labor that exists upon these small holdings between cot- ton seasons in the Old South. Until a mechanical cotton-picker is perfected, cotton cultivation in the Southwest seems likely to remain

dependent upon a mobile supply of cheap labor.

Railroad Right-of-Way Maintenance and Construction.

Railroad construction, next to agriculture, is one of the best examples of the need for a mobile labor supply. The construction of

railroads through sparsely settled or unpopulated areas was possible

only by the employment of men who were willing to live and work

in isolated places. The transcontinental railroads were built by

migratory-casual workers, and, except in the Old South, the extra gangs of the maintenance-of-way departments continue to depend

upon migratory-casual workers to a large extent. Construction of Levees, Roads, Tunnels, and Power and Pipe

Lines.

Projects of this type, like the railroad construction of former years, must have a mobile labor supply willing to live on the job and to move with it. Frequently seasonal, and almost always intermittent,

construction of this kind cannot depend upon local labor.

Oil and Gas.

Because the peculiar nature of oil and gas deposits operate as an

incentive to immediate exploitation, almost every new strike becomes

6 Although this report is concerned only with the unattached migratory-casual worker,

it should be noted that the migratory family groups are an important element in the migratory-casual labor supply of agriculture. Sugar-beet production is a case in point.
A General Description 7

a boom demanding large numbers of workers in areas frequently

remote from population centers. Once the activity of opening a

field is over, "these emergency workers are free to seek work in another

of the fields from Texas to Montana. It is only natural, then,

that many oil and gas field workers should be migratory-casuals.

Additional employment for migratory-casual workers in the oil fields is provided by the construction of oil pipe lines, and by maintenance work upon them. The approximately 94,000 miles of oil pipe

line,7 stretching largely through sparsely settled areas, require the

services of an extensive body of workers who are willing to keep

constantly on the move. Logging.

Logging is a traditional pursuit of the migratory-casual worker.

Like much of the work on railroads, levees, and dams, it depends

upon workers who are willing to live together in isolated places

without the conveniences of life which resident workmen enjoy.

The decline in logging operations in recent years and the employers'

policy of bettering the conditions of their camps in order to reduce

labor turnover have combined to reduce considerably the number of

migratory-casual workers employed.8 This list of agricultural and industrial operations dependent to an

important extent upon migratory-casual workers is by no means

complete. Nevertheless, this list shows that operations requiring a mobile labor supply have in common one or more of the following

characteristics

:

1. A large demand for unskilled or semiskilled labor.

2. Marked seasonality or irregularity of operations.

3. Location remote from population centers.

1. Most of the work done by migratory-casual workers is of an

unskilled or semiskilled nature; and the principal requirements for

employment are presence at, or just before, the time of peak operations, and the stamina needed for long hours of manual labor under

all kinds of weather and working conditions. Skill in the form of

manual dexterity rather than that resulting from apprenticeship and

training is required for some types of employment (e. g., fruit packing) but, on the whole, migratory-casual jobs consist of unskilled

manual work. This fact is reflected in the low earnings of the group

7 See The Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1935, p. 709.

8 This policy of bettering conditions, originally the result of aggressive labor organization in the industry, has proved to be profitable enough in terms of reduced labor turn- over to persist after the decline in the strength of organized labor in this industry. The

policy of making camp life attractive enough in some instances to induce workers to bring

their families has also been profitable both through the operation of company-owned

houses and stores and through the stabilizing effect on the worker of family and com- munity life.
<X The Migratory-Casual Worker

and in the ease with which recruits are drawn from among the

unskilled and inexperienced workers in the resident population.9 2. A second basic characteristic shared by these processes is pronounced seasonality or irregularity of operation. Employment in

agriculture is characterized by seasonality, rather than irregularity,

of labor demand and each year a variety of crops requires a large

labor force for short periods of intense activity. Formerly, sharp

seasonal peaks in employment were caused by the harvesting, and

to some extent by the planting, of staples. Although in recent years

mechanization (e. g., use of the combine, tractor, etc.) has reduced

the fluctuations in the labor demand of staples, a widespread and. persistent demand for short-time agricultural labor has arisen as a

result of the increase in intensive cultivation of specialty crops. When such crops as vegetables, fruits, and berries are grown on a large scale, and particularly when they must be harvested and

marketed quickly because of price fluctuation and perishability,

there must be available sufficient workers to carry on peak operations.

Industrial operations using migratory-casual workers are both

seasonal and intermittent in nature. The construction of highways,

railroads, dams, and levees is affected both by weather conditions and

the public's attitude toward construction projects. Excavations and

fills must be made before the rainy season, cement must be poured

before cold weather, and grading must be finished before snow falls. Hut the activity and the labor demand of these processes may also

be influenced by public interest or indifference. Bond issues for

construction projects—roads, dams, drainage canals—are frequently

dependent upon the crystallization of public opinion. In some of

the industries employing migratory-casual workers, notably lumbering, operating fluctuations resulting from changes in the price of

the finished product are as great as those resulting from weather

conditions.

Some of these industrial processes require a labor force the year

around (e. g., railroad maintenance) to which additions are made at times of the year when weather or other conditions permit or require

work to be done. Others (e. g., packing and preserving fruits and

vegetables) operate for a part of the year with a large labor force,

which is disbanded completely between seasons of activity. Still other processes (e. g., construction) are nonrecurrent; the labor

demand begins and ends with the initiation and the completion of

the project.

9 The depression transient found a considerable proportion of his employment during

migration at jobs regularly followed by the habitual migratory-casual worker. For fur- ther discussion of this point, see Webb, John N., The Transient Unemployed, Research Monograph III, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, Washington,

D. C, 1936, p. 54.
A General Description 9

3. Most of the agricultural and industrial processes that depend

upon a mobile labor supply are extractive operations, and, almost

of necessity, they are located in areas of low population density.

Such of the construction projects as are not extractive are essential

links between the extraction and the fabrication of raw material,

and, therefore, are more likely to be found in areas of low than in areas of high population* density. The separation of economic functions geographically has determined to a large extent the present

population pattern, and consequently the distribution of the labor

supply. The result has been that natural and economic forces have

worked together in such a way that many extractive processes are located in areas sufficiently removed from population centers to make

a mobile labor supply essential to those having seasonal or intermittent peaks of activity.

These characteristics help to explain why certain agricultural and

industrial processes need migratory-casual workers. Because of the

marked seasonality or irregularity of their operations, none of these

processes provides enough continuing employment to support an

adequate resident labor force, or enough earnings to allow the workers to live on accumulated wages between seasons. Although fre- quently a portion of the workers needed during peak operations is drawn from the local labor supply, this source is uncertain.10 Obviously, a surplus labor force several times the size of that regularly employed cannot exist in the sparsely settled areas, where so many of these processes are located, for the sake of a few months'

seasonal employment even though the wage for seasonal work may at times exceed that for permanent employment.11 Efforts to overcome this difficulty through stabilization of the

mobile labor reserve needed only during peak operations within a

fairly restricted area have failed, and of necessity must fail, in most

10 A study of farm labor in the Yakima Valley, Wash., shows that resident labor

could—but does not—meet all the labor demands of the valley during the whole year, excepting only the months of September and October, the peak months of the hop and

apple harvests. But, during October, the local labor supply is altogether insufficient. During the third week of October 1935, resident workers performed less than one-half of the total work done in the fruit crops. See Landis, Paul H., and Brooks, Melvin S., Farm Labor in the Yakima Valley, Wash., Rural Sociology Series in Farm Labor, no. 1, Washington State College, Pullman, Wash., 1936.

11 Employers requiring a marked increase in the working force for seasonal operations

are sometimes agreed that it would be desirable to hold these workers in the locality by finding off-season employment for them. This is particularly true of seasonal opera- tions of longer duration, and of those in which there is likelihood that workers will not

be available when needed. For example, a large sugar-beet refinery sent a letter to growers and beet workers in which it was stated that : "This company has been, and is, interested in the welfare of beet workers employed by growers who sell beets to it, not

only during the period when field work is being done, but also during other parts of the

year. In particular, in the past, this company has on several occasions secured work

during part of the period between the end of the harvest and the beginning of thinning, on railroads and elsewhere, for beet workers." Through the Leaves, published by the Great Western Sugar Co., Denver, Colo., December 1929, vol. XVII, p. 548.
to The Migratory-Casual Worker

instances. Unless an area has a diversity of productive processes

with seasonal peak labor demands occurring in sequence, there will

not be enough employment to maintain the worker throughout the

year." A sequence of this kind within an area so restricted in size

as to allow the worker to maintain permanent residence is rare among extractive processes, if it occurs at all. Therefore, it seems evident that as long as resident workers do

not provide the necessary labor reserve, and stabilization of mobile

workers within restricted areas lacks the economic support of adequate employment sequences, seasonal and intermittent processes in

agriculture and industry must employ migratory-casual workers.

This raises the basic question of why these processes can continue

to benefit from a large and mobile labor supply for which their

responsibility is limited to a few weeks or months of employment during the year. Or, to state the same question from the point of view

of the worker, why a mobile labor reserve continues to exist for the

operation of these processes. From the discussion up to this point,

it is plain that the answer to the question is complex. Clearly,

both economic and personal factors are involved, and, although the

two are closely interrelated, they must be discussed separately if their significance is to be assessed accurately.

On the economic side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of

(1) the progression of the seasons which provides an irregular se- quence of employment over a large area, and (2) the pool of unemployment that rises and falls with business conditions, but which is never completely drained.

The great expanse of the country, with its variety of climates and

its low population density in widely separated areas of production,

is a primary factor in an explanation of the continued existence of

the migratory-casual worker. The size and the geography of the

United States produce different climates, and, consequently, different seasons for the maturing of crops and the operation of subsidiary

seasonal industries (e. g., canning), and for the initiation of construction and maintenance work.13 Thus, over a large area there

is a fairly continuous demand for workers to fill short-time jobs, each

of which is inadequate to maintain a resident worker. The result is obvious. Migratory-casual workers move into these areas to supplement the local labor supply during the peak of operations, and then move on, frequently across one or more States, to find their next

employment.

12 See ch. IV for illustrations of pronounced overlapping of peak activities in the

principal processes employing migratory-casual workers.

13 In the Southwest, for example, construction often stops because of summertime

heat ; but in the rest of the country summer is the most important building season.
A General Description 11

Important as this factor is, it provides an incomplete explanation

for the existence of the migratory-casual worker. Account must

also be taken of the irregularity of employment provided by industry to the urban worker, of the low wages and small opportunity

offered by agriculture to the rural worker ; in short, of the insecurity

of life that besets the wage earner at the unskilled and semiskilled

levels. Carleton Parker described the economic conditions creating

the migratory-casual worker in the following words

:

The irregularity of industrial employment is as important an

element as the height of the wage scale * * *. The combination

of low wages, the unskilled nature of the work and its great irregularity, tends to break the habit and desire for stable industry among the workers. Millions drift into migrating from one industrial center

to another in search of work * * *• The worker slides down the

scale and out of his industry and joins the millions of unskilled or

lost-skilled who float back and forth from Pennsylvania to Missouri

and from the lumber camps to the Gulf States and California.14 Clearly, the way in which industry is organized and the way in

which it operates have a pronounced effect on the stability of the

working population. Our modern economy, by freeing the majority

of the working population from attachment to the soil has, through

territorial specialization, brought about great concentrations of population in the cities to perform the function of fabricating and dis- tributing goods for consumption and production use. The growth

of the working population in one of the great industrial centers may be used to illustrate this point. The United States Census of

Population shows that in 1930 the number of gainful workers in

the total United States was approximately one and two-thirds times

as large as in 1900; but, during the same period, the number of

gainful workers in Detroit had increased fivefold.

In this somewhat extreme case of labor concentration, it was a

single industry—automobile manufacturing—which caused a marked

migration of resident workmen because it offered greater opportunity

to the worker. But the employment that caused this migration was, and is, notoriously insecure of tenure. The worker of slender means who was attracted by the high wages of the automobile factories

during good times must move again w

T hen work is slack. In this

constant attempt at adjustment of labor supply to demand it is not

surprising that a body of habitual migrants is created. This process was succinctly described by a witness during hearings before the

Commission on Industrial Relations in 1914:

14 Parker, Carleton, The Casual Laborer and Other Essays, Harcourt, Brace & Co., New

York, 1920, p. 119.
12 The Migratory-Casual Worker

.Mr. Page [a lumber mil] owner]: "I think the more a man roves, the more be wants to rove. And I do not think it is the seasonal work

thai causes the roving * * *. I think that the cause is that you

have got 15 j<>i>s and 16 men.""

It is this failure to achieve a balance of workers and jobs that

creates the labor surplus, or pool of unemployment, which has be- come a permanent feature of modern economic organization. It might seem that recognition of the social loss resulting from the

surplus would have led to a search for remedial action. Such has

not been the case in the past, and for good reason. A surplus labor

supply is profitable to the employer, and particularly to the employer

whose labor force must be materially augmented because of recurring

or intermittent peak operations.

An oversupply of migratory-casual workers keeps the wage rate low, permits some selection of the working force, provides immediate

replacements for those who leave before the work is done, and

operates as a check on the organization of workers to improve working conditions.

16 Not only do employers favor the existence of a surplus labor force but frequently they also assist in creating this

surplus through advertisements for workers, broadcast in the newspapers of their own and neighboring States. Attempts have been

made, and are now being made, to reduce the oversupply of workers

through proper direction of the existing labor force into areas of

demand. But, as the following excerpt suggests, such attempts meet w

T ith difficulties: The Oregon Department of Labor has estimated that we have enough

workers now resident in the State to harvest all our crops, if these workers were properly mobilized in the direction where needed * * *• But it is a slow process to persuade some of our agricultural employers that they do not need a large surplus of floating labor in order to establish a reasonable wage scale. 1T In the interest of maintaining a plentiful supply of migratorycasual worker for seasonal employment, immigrant labor, particularly Oriental and Mexican, has been extensively imported. The

superficial advantages of these auxiliaries are obvious. The ob15 Report of the Commission on Industrial Relations, S. Doc. No. 415, 64th Cong., Washington, D. C, 1916, vol. V, p. 4252.

16 Working and living conditions are generally poor even where a State inspection sys- tem is maintained. For instance : Only 20 percent of the labor camps inspected in California during 1933-34 were rated "good" by the Supervisor of Camp Inspection. Over a period of 20 years less than 30 percent were rated "good." Migratory Labor in California, op. cit., p. 78. Where no inspection or supervision is maintained, the only force operating to improve

poor conditions is the refusal of workers to accept employment, resulting in unusually

high labor turnover.

17 See Problem of the Automobile "Floater", op. cit., p. 13.
A General Description IS

jective in each case was a cheap, industrious, and tractable labor

supply as a supplement to the more expensive and incalculable white

worker. First the Chinese, then the Japanese, and finally the Mexican laborer has been recruited for work in the mines, on the rail- roads, in the orchards, and in the fields. A discussion of the relative

merits of Chinese and Japanese workers during a convention of

employers was the occasion for the following statement

:

The Chinese when they were here were ideal. They were patient,

plodding, and uncomplaining in the performance of the most menial

service. They submitted to anything, never violating a contract. The

exclusion acts drove them out. The Japanese now [1907] coming

in are a tricky and cunning lot, who break contracts and become

quite independent. They are not organized into unions, but their clannishness seems to operate as a union would. One trick is to contract work at a certain price and then in the rush of the harvest, threaten to strike unless wages are raised.18 When immigration restrictions stopped the influx of Oriental

workers, the Mexican, free from such restrictions, began to consti- tute an increasingly important element in the labor forces of rail- road construction and maintenance, mining, and agriculture; in

fact, in precisely those industries that depend upon a plentiful supply of mobile workers for unskilled jobs. If Mexican labor proved

to be less industrious than Chinese or Japanese, it was easy to handle,

cheap, and plentiful in supply. During the hearings on a bill in

Congress to restrict immigration from Mexico, a representative from

the Fresno, Calif., Chamber of Commerce testified

:

The Mexican is not aggressive * * *. He does not take the Chinese and Japanese attitude. He is a fellow easy to handle

* * * a man who gives us no trouble at all * * *. He takes

his orders and follows them * * *.

19 It should be apparent that the employer's interest in a plentiful

labor supply is twofold: He desires a mobile labor reserve large

enough to handle peak operations and a labor supply that must

accept low wages, long hours, and poor working conditions without

effective protest. These interests have been furthered by the importation of cheap foreign labor. The pressure on the labor market

exerted by the availability of this low-standard labor supply is probably much in excess of the actual numbers competing with the

native migratory-casual worker; but the desired effect is achieved,

18 California Fruit Growers' Convention Proceedings, 1907, quoted in Migratory Labor

in California, op. cit., p. 22.

19 Testimony of Frisselle, S. Parker, "Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico", Hearings Before tbe Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 69th Cong., 1st sess., Washington, D. C, 1926. 130766°—37 3
/'/ The Migratory-Casual Worker

and when occasion demands, labor recruiting offices are ready to supply (he cheap labor necessary to the maintenance of a low wage

level. The strong economic bias in the employer's attitude toward

i he source of a Low-wage labor supply is shown by the repeated

statement of preference for white migratory-casual workers qualified

by I he complaint that the white worker, and especially the native

white, is [independable as a worker and intractable as a person.20 The advantages (hat the employer derives from a large and mobile

labor supply are frequently more apparent than real. Against them

must be set a number of serious disadvantages, some of which are

restricted in effect to employers, while others are felt by entire communities. Irregular employment and low earnings leave the mi^

L

r ra(ory-casual worker with small reserves to carry him through

periods of unemployment that even in good years covers a consid^

erable portion of his working year. The result is an expenditure

for relief that in effect represents a public and private subsidy to

seasonal and intermittent industries. The lower the wage level,

the higher the public cost. For instance, a field report on migratorycasual clam diggers in the vicinity of Gray's Harbor, Washington,

states in part:

The supervisors of the relief agencies in Aberdeen and Hoquiam,

Wash., were distressed over the chaotic condition of this industry

(clam canneries), both from the client's point of view and from their own, in the problem of administering relief fairly. In Aberdeen the experienced clam diggers had been told in advance that their relief cases would be closed while they were digging. Figures taken from

the books of one of the canneries showed that a majority of the dig- gers earned between $15 and $30 per month. Most of the diggers were, of course, relief recipients, and, therefore, relief grants amount

to a subsidization of the industry. No pressure could be brought on

this point, because clam digging is not "full time" employment, be- cause clam diggers can work only during minus tides.

21 Another disadvantage of maintaining a large labor surplus is the

cost of recruiting workers willing to accept the wages and working

conditions offered. On this point the Mexican migratory-casual

worker offers the only case from which definite evidence of recruiting costs can be drawn. The average cost of recruiting and shipping

a worker was, according to a study of Mexican labor, $28 in 1920,

20 "White cotton pickers were generally and frankly not wanted in Nueces County,

Tex. [typical cotton region]. Farmers stated: 'People here don't want white pickers. They prefer Mexicans ; they are content with whatever you give them. The whites want

more water, etc., and are trouble makers. If there is a labor shortage they want

exorbitant prices * * * you can handle the Mexicans better ; they're more sub- servient * * *.' " Taylor, Paul S., An American Mexican Frontier, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N. C, 1934, p. 130.

21 Excerpt from a field report of one of the interviewers on the study of migratorycasual workers.
A General Description 15

of which "about 15 percent was spent in soliciting * * * and

85 percent was used for railroad fares and food [en route]." 22 More important than these, in some respects, are two basic disadvantages which are inherent in a migratory-casual labor supply

that is both too large and has little or no direction: (1) The labor

turnover is extremely high, even on jobs of short duration; and

(2) there is frequent strife between worker and employer that

promises to increase rather than decrease in bitterness^

Without an actual or potential oversupply of workers, the low

earnings, long hours, and poor working conditions of the migratorycasual worker could not be maintained. As long as these conditions

exist, there is no incentive for the worker to remain on one job longer

than his immediate needs require. By leaving the job in accordance

with such personal dictates as the amount of his earnings, the diffi- culty of the work, or his plans for the immediate future, the migratory-casual worker has gained a reputation for instability and unreliability that is not fully merited. Quitting a job before it is completed is the only peaceful protest that the worker has, and this type

of protest makes a large contribution to the high labor turnover

that is characteristic of industries dependent upon a migratorycasual labor force. At times, and with growing frequency in recent years, the protest

of the migratory-casual workers against wages and working conditions has led to open violence. Unfortunately, these outbreaks have

been the only means of focusing public attention on the position of

the migratory-casual worker in the economic order. The Wheatland

(Calif.) riots 23 of 1914, dramatized by Carleton Parker in his study

of the casual laborer, w

Tere the forerunner of the bitter conflicts that

have occurred throughout the regions of intensive crop cultivation

in the United States, especially in the San Joaquin, Imperial, and

Salinas Valleys 24 in recent years. Concerted action by the workers

is met by armed and deputized citizenry, with the issue changing

gradually from spontaneous protest over substandard wages, poor

22 Taylor, Paul S., Mexican Labor in the United States, Valley of the South Platte, Colorado, University of California Publication in Economics, Berkeley, Calif., 1930, vol. I, no. 2, p. 133.

2a The Wheatland riots were a result of the vicious policy of recruiting unneeded

workers to keep wages down, mentioned on p. 12. "The Commission of Immigration and Housing went to Wheatland and studied the situation. It brought to light thb following conditions: overcongestion of the camps, due to the owner's (a certain Mr.

Durst) advertising for and obtaining twice as many people for his hop harvest than

he needed, so as to be able to depress wages * * * women and children sleeping in the fields for lack of accommodations * * * insufficient toilets (9 for 2,800 people) *»#.»' Migratory Labor in California, op. cit., p. 56.

zi George P. West, writing of the background of the strike of the lettuce packers in Salinas, Calif., in the New York Times of Sept. 20, 1936, states : "The capitalists * * * from the Imperial Valley [who started large-scale lettuce raising in Salinas] brought with them an attitude toward labor developed by the handling of Mexican peons." For an excellent summary of these conflicts, see Taylor, Paul S., and Kerr, Clark, Uprisings on the Farms, Survey Graphic, January 1935.
//; The Migratory-Casual Worker

working conditions, and unsanitary Living quarters, to the right to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining.25 An excess of workers beyond actual need may be expected as long

as employers of migratory-casual workers continue to hold that the

advantages of an oversupply of labor outweigh the disadvantages

of high labor turnover, uncertain quality of work, and occasional

stri fe. In the past, at least, this attitude has been maintained without arousing an effective protest from the worker. The only practicable method by which the migratory-casual worker can control

the supply and improve his position in the labor market appears to be organization—and organization of the migratory-casual worker

lias made slow progress for obvious reasons. The migratory-casual worker is an individualist and is inclined

to be impatient of the slow process of organization and negotiation

that has characterized successful union policy in this country.

Moreover, the migratory-casual worker lacks the basic qualifications

for either the craft or the industrial type of organization because

he can claim neither skilled trade nor an attachment to a particular

industry. The high mobility of the migratory-casual worker makes

the unification and expression of group opinion extremely difficult; and low yearly earnings make the collection of dues 26 and the

building of a war chest a difficult matter. It is indicative of the

nature of the migratory-casual worker and of his position in the

labor market that the "one big union" type of organization, exemplified in this country by the I.W.W., has, until recent years, provided

the only important evidence of susceptibility to organization. The

militancy of the I.W.W., its loose organization, and its insistence

upon the common cause of labor as against the narrower craft union

concept appealed to the migratory-casual worker where other types

of union activity failed.

25 In California in 1933 there were 37 agricultural strikes, involving 47,575 workers, and

affecting nearly every major crop. The strikes were chiefly against the low prevailing wage of 15 cents per hour, but other demands were pressed for recognition of the

unions, and for abolition of the contract system and other unsatisfactory working conditions. See Hearings Before the Committee on Labor, House of Representatives, on

H. R. 6288, 74th Cong., 1st sess., Washington, D. C, 1935, p. 342 ff. For an interesting historical account of labor disturbences in California involving

migratory-casual workers, see Migratory Labor in California, op. cit., ch. V.

26 The difficulty of dues collection from migratory workers is probably one of the chief reasons why they have never been organized by old-line labor leaders. Migratory Labor

in California (op. cit., p. 69) quotes Paul Scharrenberg, former secretary of the California State Federation of Labor as saying : "The California Federation of Labor has proved

* * * to its own satisfaction that they could organize the migratory. The problem

has not been to organize him but to keep him organized. * * * It is due * * * to the inability of the migratory to furnish his own funds for his organization. * * * Another problem * * * is * * * that being so underpaid and being so ignorant he falls an easy prey to radicals that have in the past defamed the A. F. of L. and kept

alive a distrust for the A. F. of L. Any money invested in union dues with the A. F. of

L., the migratory was told, was a bad investment. The migratory has often believed

this." The study comments : "This analysis by Mr. Scharrenberg omits to state that the California Federation of Labor kept never more than two organizers in the field, and

since the end of the war, none."
A General Description 17

Up to this point, the discussion of reasons for the existence of

a mobile labor supply has been almost entirely in terms of the

economic factors—irregularity of employment, sharp seasonal peaks

in the demand for unskilled and semiskilled labor, an unorganized

and highly competitive labor market. Although economic factors are undoubtedly of primary importance, purely personal factors,

such as a predilection for new scenes, new faces, short-time employment, and freedom from the restraints of community life play an

important role in the creation and in the continued existence of

the migratory-casual labor supply. Perhaps this point may be

sharpened by a single consideration. If the economic factors are considered alone, and the personal aspects of the migratory workers

assumed to be those of the average workmen, there is provided at best only a partial explanation of the migratory-casual worker.

Low wages, irregular employment, and an overcrowded labor market

are more nearly the rule than the exception for millions of urban

and rural workers at unskilled and semiskilled pursuits, without at any time causing them to become migratory-casual workers. Something in addition to adverse economic conditions is needed to create a migratory population; and here the experience of the past few

years is instructive. During the depression period the insecurity

of urban workers and the insecurity plus the lack of opportunity

among rural workers created a problem of unemployment relief

that was essentially resident, rather than nonresident in nature. 27 Despite the pressure of economic circumstances, only a small portion

of the needy unemployed turned to migration for a solution of their

problem. Thus, there was a highly selective factor at work that

determined who should migrate and who should not. In this respect,

there is a close analogy between the temporary transient of the

depression period and the habitual migratory-casual worker who

is found on the road in good times and bad.

This selective factor resides in the individual and in his relationship to society. It is the result of mental processes and emotional

reactions that do not lend themselves to ready description, but the

net result is a distinguishing characteristic of the migratory-casual

worker that can be observed and is known to those in close contact

with this part of the labor supply. Almost of necessity, the employer

knows these purely personal traits, and it is of interest to see the

migratory-casual worker from the employer's point of view.

27 The peak in resident relief occurred in January 1935 when something over 20,000,000

persons received some public assistance. The peak in transient relief occurred in February 1935 when the midmonthly census reported 300,460 persons under care. See

the Monthly Report, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, Washington, D. C, De- cember 1935, p. 79.
IS The Migratory-Casual Worker

In tin* Wenatchee Valley, Wash., the migratory-casual worker is a well-known figure and an essential supplement to the local labor

supply when the principal crop—apples—is harvested. An observing employer has provided this description of the migratory-casual

worker:

The wanderers around Wenatchee are a jumble. Many are newcomers <>n the scene. Many have swung around a wide circle of scenes, occupations, and climes so many times that they have completely lost the count. Jake Williams, from Indiana, was picking apples with me

2 years ago. He was then on either the third or fourth lap of a fairly

uniform circuit—and last year he was back for another lap of the same. As the apple-picking season would close he would head for Phoenix, Ariz., riding the box cars and figuring out his schedules with

the precision of Vincent Astor or Henry Ford. "I like Phoenix", he

said—"clothes are such a small problem there. And do you know", he

casually observed, "we have now developed to the point where we can

call up almost any yardmaster in the country and learn with precision,

almost to the minute, when the next through drag [freight] will be

going our way."

Jake stayed at Phoenix awhile and then he moved on East, varying

his route more or less for change of scene and companionship. He had

a sister in Chicago and so he dropped in at her home for awhile. He

had another sister in Brooklyn and he always had to see her on his rounds. He roamed over a wide country, simply drifting along. He

had nothing especially in view except to move along. The railroads carried him free, so why stop very long? Presently a bright and

annual thought came to him very suddenly—why, hell, apple picking

will come on at Wenatchee next month, so why stay in the East? The

red apples are beckoning to him 2,000 miles or so away, but their beckoning is strong, he needs a change of exercise and food, and he

needs to complete his circuit, and so here he comes again and again.

Jake may have worked a little in the wheat fields and with the

oranges, but, so far as I could learn, he mostly roamed, picked apples,

and roamed again. I would not be sure (nor would he), but I think he was unmarried.28 This worker may seem, from the employer's description, a little too

carefree, irresponsible, and lacking in a definite social attitude toward

the work he does and the men he works for. The same employer,

with a nice sense of contrast, reports on "New York Harry" : He claimed to have come from Syracuse, N. Y., in the Finger Lakes

district, where many apples are raised. He had roamed widely and came to us fresh from the Yakima, Wash., hop fields, where I am

sure he played many tricks and weighed in much dirt. [Note.—Hop

picking is paid by the pound.] His philosophy was summed up in one

advisory statement : "The * * * won't pay you anything for what

you do, and the only chance to get anywhere is to pick (hops, apples,

etc.) 'em dirty, limbs and all." 28

28 Excerpts from a letter in the files of the Division of Social Research, Works Progress

Administration, Washington, D. C.
A General Description 19

Where one employer is able to understand something of the personal

factor in the migratory-casual worker, there are many more who do

not understand. To this large group, migratory-casual workers are "a disparate group of misfits, bitten by wanderlust." The employer

disapproves of the migratory-casual worker's independence both for

economic reasons and because it seems to be an open contradiction of

the adage that independence is earned by thrift and industry. The

employer resents the thinly-veiled hostility of the worker and, more

often than not, fails utterly to understand the reason for the constant

and profitless roving about the country. For that matter, it is doubtful if the migratory-casual worker himself knows just what it is that

drives him on. A study of the labor supply in the wheat belt found that the

migratory-casual worker was inclined to be vague about the reasons

for his way of life

:

Asked why he has come to the harvest, the seasoned "floater" probably will answer that "the harvest is a habit", [sic] that he swears each

year he will never come again, but cannot seem to resist when the time

comes. It fascinates him with its multitudes, its unknown possibilities,

its chance that "something may turn up."

*" Occasionally, a migratory-casual worker has both the urge and the

ability to write for publication what he believes to be the reasons for

his continued wandering. Unfortunately, when the migratory-casual

worker becomes literate, he usually becomes romantic.

With each experience, the fascination of fruit tramping increases, for

it includes travel, change, new scenes, fresh faces, different food, and

good money. Mickey [his wife] and I have become typical. We hate

the small-town idea of doing the average thing, and we do not want a house and lot. I don't believe anyone really does. It's just something

real-estate men sell to you.

30 The romanticized interpretation of the personal factors in the making of a migratory-casual worker is easily and frequently overdone

by observers as well as by the worker himself. And yet this interpretation cannot be dismissed as having no claim for attention. The

hard and objective facts of irregular employment before migration,

of a gradual shift from haphazard search for steady employment to a regular pattern of migration, of a lessening of ambition and a lack

of interest in saving for the future—all these fail to explain the personal factor adequately. Something else is needed to make the ex- planation complete. Perhaps it can only be said that it is essential to the migratory-casual worker that he move, that no one environ29 Lescohier, Don D., Harvest Labor Problems in the Wheat Belt, Bulletin 1020, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C, 1922, p. 18.

s0 Whitaker, P. W., "Fruit Tramps", Century Magazine, March 1929.
20 The Migratory^Casual Worker

iiu'iii claim him for long, thai scenes be new and persons different.

These desires, expressed or only vaguely felt, are the core of his

existence, and the governor of his activity. The work he does is a means to this end; the industries dependent upon his labor are conveniently dispersed. In an economic sense these industries make his

existence possible and influence his social attitudes, but in a personal

sense he holds himself to be independent of them.

Ii is this real or fancied independence that has done much to make

a romanl ic figure of the migratory-casual worker. For many of those

who have felt the urge to break the routine of monotonous tasks, to throw aside the cautions of thrift and industry, and to take to the

road in order to prove to themselves and to the world that they are in

fact free agents, the migratory-casual worker is an attractive figure.

lie is admired but not entirely approved; and he is known not as he

is but as he is reported in fiction and legend. The migratory-casual

worker in the character of the lumberjack is the hero of the woods,

and his great deeds have been the theme of folklore and story of

which "the legend of Paul Bunyan is certainly the greatest of these

creations; for it embodies the souls of the millions of American camp

men who have alwa}^s done the hard and perilous pioneer labor of this

country." 31 Another well-known legend of the migratory-casual worker is even more authentic folklore than the Bunyan legend. Strangely

enough, it is the legend of the Negro migratory-casual worker—the

roustabout, the cotton picker, the levee worker, and the railroad and

tunnel construction laborer. It is the legend of the Negro John

Henry, who was "six feet tall, didn't know his own stren'th", but

could carry three bales of cotton, one on his head and one on either

shoulder. He was "big and black and mean and his feet didn't

touch de ground—and his home wasn't hyar. His foots was always

itcliin' !" 32 The hold that these and similar legends have upon the imagination of a restless nation is no accident. These legends grew up

around the "deacon's seat" in the bunkhouses of the logging camps,

around the campfires in the fields, in the mining camps, and along

the railroad right-of-way. The stories were told by migratorycasual workers to dramatize their lives, and these stories are often

remarkably accurate portrayals of the inward urge to be ever on

the move.

31 Stevens, James, Paul Bunyan, Alfred A., Knopf, Inc., New York, 1925. See also Shephard, Esther, Paul Bunyan (revised edition), Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York, 1925. ^Bradford, Roark, John Henry, Harper & Bros., New York, 1931. One of the legends

not included in the Bradford account, but widely held to be the original, is that John Henry was a tunnel worker on the B. & O. Railroad.
A General Description 21

But there is another, and darker, side to the life of the migratorycasual worker. Old age has little but trouble in store for him.

When younger, he was a better and more dependable workman;

age dulls his skill and sharpens his individualistic and, frequently,

his antisocial tendencies. He has no prospects for the future, and

by the time he has reached middle age has most likely ceased to worry about them. In most cases, long before he is 60, age will

have permanently removed him from the labor market. Disease

or the hardships of his life will have taken their toll of his strength.

He will then almost certainly become a permanent charge on some

community, as a "park bum-', as an inmate of a hospital, asylum, or

jail, or as a panhandler on the street for money to buy cheap liquor

and a little food.

At this point the discussion quits the general approach and turns

to an analysis of the 500 work histories that have been assembled.

The concern of the discussion hereafter shall be to examine some of

the measurable attributes of migratory-casual workers reported for

the 500 workers and to clarify, in terms of their concrete manifestations, the general forces that have been described. Succeeding chapters, for example, will describe numerically such aspects as seasonal

fluctuation in employment, duration of individual jobs, the labor

demand of the crops and processes in which the workers were employed, time spent yearly in employment, and the amount of earnings. Chapter II, beginning this description with an account of

the geography of the migrations of the 500 workers, deals with the

distances they traveled, the paths beaten by their migrations, and

the States in which they obtained the most work.

Chapter II

EXTENT OF MIGRATION

In

the course of a, year a migratory-casual worker may cross the continent and return, or he may remain within the limits

of a few contiguous counties in one State. The extent of his

migration during any year depends upon the migratory-work pattern

that he has developed, the employment conditions in the industry or

industries that make this employment sequence possible, and his

disposition toward work and travel. In measuring and portraying the extent of migration, two methods

have been employed: (1) a quantitative statement of the number

of State-line crossings during the migratory period in each of 2

years—1933 and 1934; and (2) a graphic statement in the form of a

series of maps showing the itineraries of a number of migratorycasual workers during the 2 years combined. The purpose of the

maps is to supplement and illustrate the tabular data on extent of migration and to show the migratory-work patterns that are

peculiar to several important productive processes. NUMERICAL STATEMENT

Interstate migration was the rule among the 500 workers included

in this study (see table 1). By using the device of counting Stateline crossings reported in the actual employment records of these

workers, it was found that in each of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934,

about two-thirds of them crossed at least one State line and one- fourth crossed at least six State lines. In weighing the value of this

information as a measure of extent of migration, it must be remembered that the data, represent the crossing of State lines rather than

State areas. Although a substantial majority of the 500 migratory-casual

workers crossed 1 or more State lines during each of the 2 years, there were enough workers who remained within the borders of 1 State to deserve comment. The 1933 work histories showed that

somewhat less than one-third of the workers had not been outside the

borders of one State, and the 1934 work histories showed this to be

true of about one-fifth of the workers (see table 1). The nature

of these strictly intrastate migratory-work patterns is clearly evident in the vicinity of Seattle, Minneapolis, and Memphis on the illus- trative maps to be discussed later (see figs. 1, 2, and 3). 23
24 The Migratory-Casual Worker

Table 1. Number <>i State-Line Crossings of 500 Migratory-Casual

Workers, 1933-34

1933 1934 Number <>f State-line oroaiiiga Total

Type of worker

Total Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination l Agricultural Industrial Combination '

All workers . 500 200 100 200 500 200 100 200

Percent distribution

10029

715

7

7

4

136

4

11

(

2 ) 6

100

316

13

7

66

12

8

52

1

(

2) 3

100

31

7168

9

1 13

46

10027

717

6

8

412

5

2

1

10020

8

12

78

518

113

1

(

2)

100

27

6

10

68

519

12

32

(

2

)

100

19

1115

3

6

420

15

12

100 No State line 15

1 State line . . - -

.

8

2 >t:ito lines .. 12 .m lines 9

i State lines 7

G State lines 6

6 to 10 State lines. . 15

11 to 15 State lines. .. 9

16 to 20 State lines .. 5

21 to 25 State lines (

2 ) 26 to 30 State lines

31 to 35 State lines.

4 11 7 2 4 14

' Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

2 Less than 0.5 percent. In contrast to the restricted movements of intrastate migrants was the extensive movement of 11 to 15 percent of the 500 workers

whose employment histories show that they crossed 11 to 25 State

lines. Between these 2 extremes—no State-line crossings and 11 or more—are to be found over one-half of the 500 workers. Thus, inter- state migration appears to be a clearly defined characteristic of the

migratory-casual worker.

In 1933 the three types of workers 1—agricultural, principally

industrial, and combination agricultural and industrial—were, in

terms of State-line crossings, about equally mobile (see table 1). A

similar examination for the year 1934 shows that agricultural workers were somewhat less mobile in terms of State-line crossings than were the other two types. On this point the evidence is clearer on the

maps showing the itineraries of agricultural and of principally

industrial workers for the 2 years combined.

1 Type of worker was determined from the history of employment during the 2 years. Workers following agricultural employment solely during the 2 years, or having only

occasional nonagricultural jobs, were classified as agricultural workers. The same

procedure was followed for the industrial group, although there were fewer workers

reporting solely industrial employment. The third group—agricultural and industrial

represents workers whose employment during the 2 years was divided so equally between

agriculture and industry that a combination type was the only logical classification. In the interest of brevity and convenience, the three groups will frequently be referred

to simply as agricultural, industrial, and combination workers.
Extent of Migration 25

Although any conclusions concerning the relative extent of migration among the three types of workers must, on the evidence presented

in table 1, be tentative, there are logical reasons for expecting the migration of agricultural workers to be less extensive than that of in- dustrial workers and of workers following both kinds of employment.

Extent of migration is determined in large part by the sequence

of employment which the worker knows by experience to be possible.

The time consumed in travel from job to job during the working

season represents a loss to the worker. Efforts to minimize this loss would naturally tend to restrict the extent of migration to the

smallest area in which a satisfactory job sequence could be obtained.

Agriculture provides the migratory-casual worker with greater

opportunity for employment sequences within restricted areas than

does industry. The agricultural worker in the Middle West may harvest grain in a number of places in the same State and then double

back for plowing as the season progresses. California boasts that

within her borders a crop matures in each month of the year. Under

favorable crop and employment conditions, a few of the more fortunate migratory-casual workers in that State might begin the year

picking or packing citrus fruits, go on to work in the vegetable, berry,

grain, and hop fields, pick deciduous fruits, or cotton, and return to the citrus groves again with no longer periods of unemployment

than the time required to move from one crop area to another. By

extending the range of migration to adjoining States to take advantage of the variety of climates and diversified crops, the agricultural

migratory-casual worker can, and often does, establish a migratorywork pattern which he follows year after year with a fair degree of assurance that employment will be found.

Analogous situations are less frequent among the industrial processes that employ migratory-casual labor. The completion of a dam

or road construction project may necessitate considerable travel to the

site of another project, or may require travel to several projects before

employment is secured. Moreover, in industrial processes there is less of the regularly recurring employment that follows from the

progression of the seasons.

It would seem, therefore, that insofar as the extent of migration

is a direct result of an established migratory-work pattern, the migratory-casual worker in industry would find it necessary to travel over

a larger area than the agricultural worker. Furthermore, it seems

logical to expect that migratory-casual workers lacking an established

work pattern would have the greater extent of migration since chance

and rumor would be important factors in determining the direction

of their travels. Chance and rumor were found to be important
26 The Migratory-Casual Worker

factors in t\w wanderings of depression transients 2 whose employment during migration was both casual and noncasual in nature, and

included both agricultural and industrial pursuits. Reference to

table 1 shows that among 200 migratory-casual workers following

a combination of agricultural and industrial employments during

both 1933 and 1934, there was a smaller proportion of intrastate migrants than among either the agricultural or industrial types. Further evidence on the relative extent of migration by type of workers

will be presented in connection with the discussion of selected

itineraries. Table 2.

Number of States in Which Employment Was Obtained

During Migration by 500 Migratory-Casual Workers, 1933-34

Number of States in which employed

All workers.

All workers- No State 2 1 State

2 States

3 States

4 States

5 to 8 States Not ascertainable1933

Total

500

Type of worker

Agricultural

200

Industrial

100

Combination '

200

1934

Total

500

Type of worker

Agricultural

200

Industrial

100

Combination i

200

Percent distribution

100 100 100 100 100 100 100

5 4 4 6 4 5 2 55 57 59 51 54 58 52

27 24 26 30 28 24 31 8 10 6 8 9 9 11 3 4 4 1 3 3 2

1 1 2 1 1 1

1 (

3 ) 1 2 1 1

100

i Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

2 1, e., workers unemployed.

3 Less than 0.5 percent. The fact that migratory-casual workers crossed a specified number

of State lines during the year provides no information on their success in finding employment during migration.3 An investigation

of this point (see table 2) shows that the number of States in which

migratory-casual workers obtained employment during each of the

2 years was in sharp contrast to the number of State-line crossings

during these years (see table 1). Somewhat over one-half of the 500

workers were employed in only 1 State and an additional one-quarter

in only 2 States, whereas about one-half of the workers had crossed

1 to 10 State lines and 11 to 15 percent had crossed 11 to 25 State

lines during the migratory period of 1 year.

2 See Webb, John N., The Transient Unemployed, Research Monograph III, Division of

Social Research, Works Progress Administration, Washington, D. C, 1936, p. 54.

3 For the number of jobs obtained during migration, see table 5, p. 56.
Extent of Migration 27

A comparison of the number of State-line crossings with the number of States in which employment was obtained indicates that much

of the travel reported by these workers did not result in employment,

but was for the express purpose of getting to or from areas in which

their labor might be in demand. There are two factors which help

to explain this result: (1) The established work pattern of the ex- perienced migratory-casual worker includes more than one possibility of employment so that when no work is to be had in an area

there is at least one alternative possibility in another area that can be acted upon immediately; and (2) it is known that many of

the confirmed migratory-casual workers congregate in such cities as

Seattle, Minneapolis, and Chicago during their off-seasons, and

winter headquarters are frequently at a considerable distance from

the area in which they were employed during the working season. Whenever either or both of these factors are operative, the extent of migration as measured by State-line crossings is increased relative

to the number of States in which employment is secured.

Further examination, of the data in table 2 shows that in 1933

there was little difference among the two types of workers—agricultural and industrial—in respect to the number of States in which

employment was obtained. In 1934, however, the proportion of agricultural workers employed in only one State was distinctly larger

than was true of the other two types. Here, as in the discussion of

State-line crossings, the more compact migratory-work patterns of

agricultural employment have a direct bearing. The data on number of States in which employed tend to support the conclusion that

the migration of agricultural workers is more restricted than is that

of industrial workers and workers following a combination of the

two types of employment.

GRAPHIC STATEMENT

Measurement of extent of migration in terms of State-line cross- ings clearly establishes the interstate character of the migratorycasual worker; but this device does not disclose the patterns of

migration that are developed. In order to show this important characteristic, a series of maps has been prepared from the itineraries of a

selected number of the migratory-casual workers included in this

study. For the purpose of discussion these maps of routes of travel

during employment are grouped as follows: (1) the routes—without distinction as to type of crop—of migratory-casual workers

following agricultural employment; and—without distinction as to type of processes—of workers following industrial employment; (2)

the routes of agricultural workers employed principally in five important crops; and (3) the routes of industrial workers employed

principally in five important industrial processes.
28 The Migratory-Casual Worker
Extent of Migration 29

>

QC

h-co

=>Q * Z ro2

H

z O

Z

UJ5

crUJ z

< > DC O O 22 _l £

Q. -J 2 <

UJ

to O

< z >

(Z a: D O

Q 5

<r -1 o

Id 2 >< <*> a:

(0 H

Ll. O

c/> IdH

D

O

1

1 CVJ

1307G6°—37 4
90 The Migratory-Casual Worker

Before considering briefly the maps in each of these three groups

it is necessary to slate the Limitations of the data upon which these

maps are based, and to describe the method by which they were prepared. The itinera lies shown were chosen from among 500 work

histories available; choice was based upon indications in these work

histories thai the worker followed either agricultural or industrial

employment with sufficient regularity to permit using his work itin- erary as illustrative of one type of employment. Obviously, this

method favored selection of workers who found employment during

migration over those who did not, and to this extent the maps represent the movement of the more successful migrants among the 500

studied.

Having selected the work histories for presentation, the routes of

travel were described by connecting the locations in which employment was obtained by smoothed lines following as far as possible the

direction of the main highways or railroads. Each itinerary was drawn in full, starting with the location of the first job obtained in

1933 and following throughout 1933 and 1934, without a break, the

sequence of the jobs during the 2 years. Only by following this

method was it possible to reproduce enough itineraries to define pat- terns of migration. It is seldom possible to trace the movements of

any one worker on the maps ; nor would it be correct to insist that the

composite patterns necessarily follow the identical routes actually

traveled. However, assuming that the worker moved in a fairly

direct line by railroad or highway from one job to another, these

maps are a good approximation of the actual routes of migration.

Agricultural Workers as a Group.

The well-defined migratory-work patterns of workers in agricul- ture can be seen in figure 1, which shows the routes of travel during

employment of 100 of these workers in 1933 and 1934. On the Pacific

coast, from Seattle to southern California, the locations in which

employment was obtained form clusters through which the connect- ing lines pass to describe the most definite interstate work pattern on the map. The strictly intrastate movements which were disclosed

by the data in table 1 on page 24 and in table 2 on page 26 are best seen on the maps in the vicinity of Seattle and Minneapolis, though they are

also present in California between San Francisco and the environs of

Los Angeles. Between Seattle and Yakima, and between Minneapolis

and the area immediately adjacent, there is a clear description of a

shuttle-like movement. Both Seattle and Minneapolis are important

concentration points for migratory-casual workers in agriculture,

many of whom go out from and return to these cities year after year

with only occasional trips outside the States in which these cities are
Extent of Migration 31

located. An interesting interstate pattern that involves four Stateline crossings but is still restricted in extent is to be found in the

elliptical cluster of lines connecting Minneapolis, Minn., Fargo.

N. Dak., Aberdeen, S. Dak., and Des Moines, Iowa.

Industrial Workers as a Group.

In contrast with the relatively compact migratory-work patterns

of agricultural workers, shown in figure 1, are the dispersed patterns

of industrial workers, shown in figures 2 and 3. In fact, an attempt

to present 100 itineraries of industrial workers on one map resulted in

such a confusion of lines that patterns could not be distinguished at

all. For this reason the itineraries were divided into two groups:

those in which the routes of travel were restricted to sectional movements (fig. 2), and those in which the movements were both sectional

and transcontinental (fig. 3).

Strictly intrastate work patterns among industrial migratorycasual workers are to be seen in figures 2 and 3 in the vicinity of

Seattle, Denver, and Dallas. When these restricted patterns are ex- cluded it is immediately apparent that the locations in which employment was obtained by industrial workers are much more dispersed

than those of agricultural workers. Even if the itineraries shown in

figures 2 and 3 were combined in one map, there still would be no

such cluster of job locations as that found for agricultural workers

along the Pacific coast in figure 1. The impression gained from a study of the itineraries of industrial

workers is that there was less retracing of the same routes and

greater distances between stops than was found in the itineraries of

agricultural workers. Thus, if agricultural and industrial workers are to be compared in respect to extent of migration, the device

of measuring State-line crossings needs to be supplemented by maps

in order to determine the distances traveled. For example, the move- ment between San Francisco and Salt Lake City involves two Stateline crossings, and yet the extent of migration is less than that

between Los Angeles and Portland (Oreg.) (see fig. 3), which only

involves one State-line crossing. On the basis of the evidence in fig- ures 1, 2, and 3, and in view of the logical considerations advanced on page 25 it may be said that work patterns of migratory-casual

workers in agriculture are not only more clearly defined but are

also more restricted in extent than are work patterns of industrial

workers.

No attempt was made in preparing figures 1, 2, and 3 to differentiate routes of travel among agricultural or industrial workers

according to the crop or process that provided employment during

migration. The purpose of this first group of maps was to show
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Extent of Migration 33

o«to Zm m m Jo; u S o g

"> 2 OU CIZ » ^o fc* ° >. _1 o o < z m

o o t u? SS8 35
.)"/ The Migratory-Casual Worker

the genera] nature of the itineraries of agricultural and industrial

workers, and to provide a basis for comparing the extent of their

migrations. It is possible, however, to go one step further. Maps

have been prepared showing the routes of travel of a selected number of workers according to the crop or process that furnished the

principal employment ' during the years 1933 and 1934. Although

this is admittedly a rough means of distinguishing among the

workers, it is the only practicable method that can be applied. Among

the 500 migratory-casual workers, only a few with even a moderate

amount of employment during 1933 and 1934 reported but one type

of crop (e. g., wheat) or one process (e. g., oil and gas production)

as the source of employment. In the maps that follow, the location

of employment in the specific crop or process is distinguished from

all other employment by appropriate symbols. The location of every

job is shown, since the omission of any stops for employment would

distort the itineraries.

WORKERS IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES 5 Cotton.

Among the 500 migratory-casual workers who are the basis of this

study, there were 43 who were clearly cotton field workers and who

found enough employment during 1933 and 1934 to justify the reproduction of their itineraries. Although the number of cases is small,

the resulting wr ork patterns are clear, as figure 4 reveals. From Memphis, routes of travel of workers in the cotton crop reach out into

southern Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama. A second

pattern is to be found in Texas and Oklahoma, beginning at the

southern tip of Texas and extending north into Oklahoma, and

northwest and west across Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona into California. The absence of migratory-work patterns extending through

the Old South can be explained by the fact that the resident labor

supply is generally equal to the needs of the cotton crop in that

region.

Grain Crops.

The routes of travel of the 47 workers in grain form a pattern, as

figure 5 shows, in the central part of the country, running through

* Principal employment was determined on the basis of job frequency regardless of job duration. Thus, the workers whose itineraries are shown on fig. 4 (cotton crops) had more jobs in connection with the cultivation and harvesting of the cotton crop during the combined period 1933 and 1934 than they had in any other crop. The reason for using

job frequency rather than job duration is that the number, not the duration of jobs, determines how often a worker moves and where he goes.

5 Throughout the specific crop and process figures, there is no duplication in the use of work histories. Thus, the itinerary of a worker whose principal employment was in cotton was used only once, although the itinerary may have included subsidiary jobs in grain or other crops.
Extent of Migration 35
36 The Migratory-Casual Worker
Extent of Migration 37

the "grain basket" of the double tier of States just west of the Mississippi River. From Texas north to the Canadian border, the itiner- aries cross and recross in Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, and the

Dakotas.

Fruit Crops.

Further information on the closely knit work patterns of migratory-casual laborers in agriculture is to be found in figure 6, which

shows the routes of travel during employment of 47 migratory-casual

workers in fruit crops. The movement of migratory-casual workers

up and down the Pacific coast as they pick and pack oranges, grapefruit, peaches, prunes, apples, apricots, cherries, pears, grapes, and

olives produces the best defined pattern to be found among the 500

workers studied. In the State of Washington there is an intrastate

movement connecting Seattle, Wenatchee, and Yakima ; a less pronounced but analogous intrastate pattern in the vicinity of San Francisco and Los Angeles is obscured by the interstate itineraries that cover the Pacific Coast States. It seems apparent from figure 6 that

the three States—Washington, Oregon, and California—constitute a

fairly contiguous labor market for the service of the migratorycasual worker who follows the fruit harvests.

There is evidence of a less important but definite movement of fruit

workers in Florida. In the central portion of the State, the "ridge"'

section reaching from Tampa to Jacksonville, citrus fruit is an

important winter crop. Florida is an exception to the general rule

that migratory-casual workers are of little importance in the agricultural labor supply of the southern States. It is believed that

further study would show that fruit and winter vegetable workers

in Florida have established migratory-Avork patterns that are as

definite, though not as numerous, as those found on the West coast. Sugar-Beet and Berry Crops.

The sugar-beet and berry harvests provide employment for large

numbers of migratory-casual workers, but the nature of the work done

tends to attract migrant family groups to a greater extent than unat- tached workers. In both these crops the entire family can find

employment within their physical capacities. Because only unattached migrants are included in this report, employment in sugarbeet and berry field work is underrepresented. Nevertheless, the

itineraries presented in figure 7 are instructive. Employment in the

sugar-beet fields tends to be of longer duration than the employment

obtained in other crops.

6 More frequently than not, the beet worker

stays through the season, roughly from May through October, and

6 See fig. 24, p. 79 for duration of employment by type of crop.
38 The Migratory-Casual Worker

a a <n

in «i u m n ' t >

o. a uj o. o. y < 2 ooffloo? «-> °

Si ti 2 Si Si 2 3 o
Extent of Migration 39

therefore has a relatively restricted extent of migration. Keference

to figure 7 shows that the locations of the jobs obtained by workers

in the sugar-beet fields (black triangular symbols) were confined to a small area in Minnesota and to a relatively narrow section running

diagonally northwest from Colorado through parts of Nebraska and

Wyoming into Montana.

The itineraries of berry field workers shown on the same map

range over a wider territory, though the locations of employment

have the same tendency to cluster as was found in sugar-beet employment. The berry harvest (strawberries, raspberries, etc.) is of short

duration, and the worker following this crop must move rapidly to the next area if an employment sequence is to be established. Berry

picking is a poorly paid and a disagreeable employment in most cases

;

therefore the unattached worker is likely to resort to it only when

he cannot secure other types of employment.

There are two fairly well defined migratory-work patterns of

berry pickers in figure 7 : One runs north and south from Michigan

to Louisiana with lines running into Arkansas ; the other—an intrastate pattern—is confined, as far as berry field work is concerned,

to the State of Washington. The routes of travel describing both

of these patterns show frequent stops (open circles) for employment

in other crops. Oil and Gas.

The drilling of oil and gas wells, and the construction of pipe

lines connecting the production areas with refineries and distributing centers are processes that provide the migratory-casual worker

with fairly well-paid, but intermittent, employment. The unattached migratory-casual worker is by nature a "boomer", and word

of a new oil field or of a large pipe-line construction job is enough

to attract workers from all directions. The part that chance and rumor play in directing the workers' search for employment results

in itineraries that cross and recross and present, in figure 8, a tangle

of lines confined only by the limits of the more important gas and

oil producing regions. These lines run from southern Texas north

through Oklahoma into Kansas and east into Louisiana and

Arkansas. The extreme mobility of workers in gas and oil production can be seen from movements that extend across several

States without a stop for employment of any kind.

Railroad Maintenance.

Railroad maintenance in the form of extra gang work provides

industrial employment for the migratory-casual worker which approaches in seasonal regularity that provided by some of the agricultural crops. As a result, the migratory-work patterns of the
w The Migratory-Casual Worker

</> <O

Z

< CD H

_J Q

Z

o z

< Id z ^ ro >q

K

bl _i *

Q. QC "? O

LJo < z

rr D

< D

U

Q >

_l O

Ld <

"> oe < o

DC 2 n H »n

ro " u.O

(/) u

H

D

O

or

i 00
Extent of Migration M
'rJ The Migratory-Casual Worker

group (fig. 9) are better defined than in the preceding case of oil and gas Held workers. 1( can be seen from the figure that the loca- tions of employments are grouped in the vicinity of such important

railroad centers as Chicago, Kansas City, Denver, Minneapolis, and

Seattle. Connecting these areas of employment are long lines

of travel reaching, in some cases, across the country with occasional

jol)s at employment other than railroad maintenance.7 Road Construction.

The fair degree of seasonal regularity of employment in railroad

maintenance is not found in employment on road (highway) cont ruci ion projects. Lacking this element, the routes of travel of road

construction workers (see fig. 10) show no clearly defined patterns.

The Middle West was the location of most of the work reported by

the 42 workers following this type of employment, and their routes of travel run east and west and north and south over this area with

no apparent cause other than chance to explain the design which

results. Dam and Levee Construction.

Most of the employment secured by the 39 dam and levee construction workers included in the study was on the Mississippi Kiver

between Vicksburg, Miss., and Cairo, 111. (see fig. 11). Thus, the

work patterns on this figure are more nearly those of levee than of

dam construction workers.

The construction and repair of levees along the Mississippi is a never ending task that has seasonal and intermittent peaks of activity. Projects for flood control and the straightening and clearing of

the river channel are in operation somewhere along the river's length

almost continuously. The constant shift in location and the isolation

of these operations make them dependent upon migratory-casual

workers for an important part of the labor supply. Memphis is centrally located in respect to these operations and therefore is a

recruiting point for such workers.

Logging.

The 41 itineraries shown in figure 12 are possibly an in- adequate description of the routes of travel normally followed by

loggers. Nevertheless, these itineraries do reveal a tendency to7 The absence of railroad maintenance jobs in the South and Southwest is probably to be accounted for by : (1) the plentiful supply of local labor for seasonal work in the South and (2) the extensive use of Mexican labor in the Southwest. Mexican migratory-casual workers included in the study were agricultural rather than industrial workers. For a discussion of the Mexican migratory-casual laborer in railroad maintenance, see Taylor, Paul S., Mexican Labor in the United States, Valley of the South Platte, Colorado, University of California Publications in Economics, Berkeley, Calif., 1928, vol. VI, no. 2, pp. 62 ff.
Extent of Migration 43
H The Migratory-Casual Worker

««2 oi

p O £ z (0 " " S o z

</J 10 < j /)
Extent of Migration 45

ward the distinct patterns that might be expected of workers in an industry that, depending upon weather or market conditions, is seasonal and intermittent in operation.

In two areas, western Washington and northern Minnesota, the

evidence of a regular and recurring migratory-work pattern is clear. Seattle, Minneapolis, and Duluth are well-known labor markets and

off-season headquarters for woodsmen, and figure 12 shows the move- ment from these centers into two important areas of lumbering

operations.

There is also a suggestion, in figure 12, of two other and less important patterns. One is to be found in the hardwood region near Memphis, and the other in Maine, in the vicinity of Bangor. The

shortage of work for woodsmen is reflected in the number of jobs

other than in logging (open circles) that appear in the itineraries,

particularly on the Pacific coast.8 In reviewing the discussion of routes of travel during employment there are several features that seem deserving of restatement in

summary form. The compactness and regularity of work patterns

is more pronounced among agricultural than among industrial workers. This appears to be the result more of the greater seasonal

factor in agricultural employment—the regular and anticipated

recurrence of work opportunities in the same area—than of any distinction in the nature of the work performed. This argument is based upon the evidence in the maps that travel patterns in agriculture were compact (fruit workers) or dispersed (berry workers),

depending upon the sequence of employment that was provided

within contiguous areas. Much the same result was found among

industrial workers where the compact patterns for railroad maintenance and levee workers are in decided contrast to the dispersed

patterns of road construction workers. Thus, seasonal recurrence and spatial sequence of employment appear to be the factors determining the extent and regularity of migration: and it is largely

because these factors are more favorable in agriculture than in in- dustry that the combined patterns of agricultural workers (see fig. 1) are more distinct and restricted in extent than are those of the

industrial patterns (see figs. 2 and 3).

STATE OF PRINCIPAL EMPLOYMENT

Besides illustrating the extent of movement of migratory-casual

workers and, at the same time, showing something of the work pat- terns that they develop, the route-of-travel maps serve the additional

8 However, it would have been easy for woodsmen to get jobs other than in logging, since the slack season in logging came in midsummer when employment activity in other

pursuits was at its peak. See figs. 25 and 26. 130766° —37 5
',(> The Migratory-Casual Worker
Extent of Migration 47

function of indicating the relative importance of the several States

as sources of employment opportunities. However, the fact that all employments during migration are recorded on the maps without

any indication of their duration may fail to distinguish properly

the relative importance of the States in terms of maximum employment obtained.

In order to bring out clearly their importance as sources of

employment, the States in which the maximum amount of employment 9 was secured in each of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934, have been

determined, and are presented in figures 13 to 16 and in appendix

table 2. A summary of the detailed data of appendix table 2 is presented in table 3 below. This summary table adds to the information presented earlier on the relative extent of migration among

the three types of workers.

Table 3.Number of States Designated as Place of Principal Employment, and Proportion of Workers Included in the 5 States Most

Frequently Designated, 500 Migratory-Casual Workers, 1933-34

Tj-pe of worker Number of States designated

Proportion of workers in 5 States most frequently designated

1933 1934 1933 1934

Total . Number

4326

2940

Number

39

273236

Percent

40

5246

29

Percent

41 Agricultural - - 52

Industrial-. 41 Combination i 31

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

A smaller number of States was designated as the location of

principal employment for agricultural than for industrial or for

combination workers, and over one-half of the agricultural workers were included in the five most important States. Among industrial

workers the location of principal employment included more States,

and there was a smaller proportion of workers included in the five States most frequently designated. Workers following combination

employment found their principal employment in the greatest number of States, and had the smallest proportion of workers included

in the five States of most importance.

It should be noted that three States—California, Washington, and

Texas—are included among the first five States for the total and

for each of the three types of workers. The fourth and fifth States were Minnesota and Arkansas for the total and for agricultural

9 The duration of all jobs in one State, regardless of sequence, for workers of each of the three types was combined for 1933 and 1934 in determining the maximum of employment.
'/N The Miyratory-Casiial Worker

workers, Minnesota and Missouri for industrial workers, and Kansas

and Arkansas for combination workers. The report by States may

be found in appendix table i^. and a graphic representation of the

information appears in figures 13 to 16.
Extent of Migration 49
50 The Migratory-Casual Worker
Extent of Migration 51

Chapter III

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF MIGRATORY-CASUAL

EMPLOYMENT

Because this study of migratory-casual workers was made during the depression years 1933 and 1934, it is to be expected

that the characteristics of jobs held during these years would

differ in some degree from those that might have been observed

under more satisfactory employment conditions. An appraisal of

this divergence, and of the probable extent to which the data for

1933 and 1934 would deviate from those of "normal" times, must of

necessity be left for further study. Meanwhile, the data obtained

in this investigation reveal several characteristics of migratorycasual work that are basic, and would persist through both boom

and depression. As pointed out in chapter I, these essential characteristics are: (1) shortness of job duration, necessitating that each

worker secure a number of jobs in order to earn each year sufficient income for subsistence; (2) seasonality of work, permitting the

worker to devise a rough yearly schedule of jobs which may be re- peated year after year; and (3) wide geographical separation of

work, requiring migration from one job to another. The last of

these characteristics has already been dealt with in chapter II; the first two—duration and number of jobs, and seasonality of employment—are the subjects for discussion in this chapter.

DURATION OF JOBS

For the 500 workers included in this study, the average duration

of jobs 1 was about 2 months (including holidays and time lost during employment) in both 1933 and 1934 (see fig. 17). As reported

by the workers, more jobs lasted 1 to 2 months than any other time

interval, and about one-half of all jobs lasted from 1 to 3 months.

As may be observed from table 4 only a small proportion of the

1 For the purpose of this study a "job" was defined as a continuous employment in one

district at one pursuit, regardless of the number of employers involved and regardless of time lost on the job because of holidays and lay-offs. A harvest hand, for example, may

have helped with the harvest at a number of neighboring farms, and yet have been con- sidered to have had only one job, provided the other conditions were fulfilled. It should

be borne in mind that the data on duration of jobs are given in terms of total jobs, rather than in terms of workers. The bases of table 4 are thus 1,190 and 1,107 jobs, rather than 500 workers. 53
54 The Migratory-Casual Worker

jobs lasted i very short, or a relatively long, period of time; in 1933

only G percent, and in 1934 only 8 percent of all jobs lasted less than

8 days, and the same or a smaller proportion of them lasted longer

than 6 months.

MEDIAN WEEKS DURATION

4 5 6 7 8 12

1933

1934

1933

1934

1933

JOBS OF AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

JOBS OF INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

Fig. 17 -AVERAGE DURATION OF JOBS HELD BY 500

MIGRATORY -CASUAL WORKERS

1933-1934

* Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment AF-2336.W. P. A. The duration of the jobs held by the three groups of workers

agricultural, industrial, and combination—was not uniform. Jobs in

agriculture were consistently shortest; jobs in industry lasted

longest; and the average duration of jobs of workers who combined

agricultural with industrial employment was intermediate between

these extremes. These differences are to be expected. As will be

explained in chapter IV, the agricultural workers were employed

largely in such short-time seasonal jobs as harvesting; the industrial

workers were most often engaged in logging, construction, or other

work in which the jobs held are naturally of longer duration; and

the third group of workers held in about equal proportions the

shorter jobs of agriculture and the longer jobs of industry.

Not only did migratory-casual workers in industry hold the longest

jobs, but these jobs were also slightly longer in 1934 than in 1933

(see fig. 17). In contrast, the average length of the jobs held by

the other two groups of workers decreased in 1934. The net result
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 55

of the changes among the three groups of workers was a decrease in

the average duration of all jobs in 1934 compared with the average

duration in the preceding year. Table 4.

Duration of Jobs Held by 500 Migratory-Casual Workers,

1933-34

Duration of jobs

1933

Total

Jobs of agricul- tural workersJobs of industrial workersJobs of combination workers

'

Total Jobs of

agricul- tural workers

Jobs of industrial workers

Jobs of combination workers i

All jobs

All jobs Less than 8 days

8 to 15 days

15 to 30 days

1 to 2 months

2 to 3 months

3 to 4 months

4 to 6 months

6 months and more Median duration of jobs held

in weeks 4

2 1, 190 486 228 476 3 1, 107 471 205 431

Percent distribution

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 6 6 8 5 8 11 5 6 6 6 6 8 9 7 5 4 3 6 7 7 4 30 34 22 32 27 27 18 20 23 19 19 20 20 23

16 13 16 18 13 11 20

11 10 18 8 12 12 14 6 4 8 6 5 3 9

9.2 8.7 11.2 9.0 8.7 8.1 11.6

100

8.3

i Jobs of workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

2 Includes 16 jobs whose duration was not ascertainable, but which were distributed pro rata, and excludes

29 jobs obtained in the off-season.

3 Excludes 35 jobs obtained in the off-season.

* Medians computed for months and converted to weeks on the basis of 4.33 weeks per month. Computed

duration of jobs includes holidays and time lost on jobs. Among the variations in the duration of migratory-casual jobs,

those related to the three different types of work are much more

striking than those which result from a comparison of 1934 with

1933. Although there was a general decrease in the duration of

jobs from 1933 to 1934, the change was not enough to obscure a decided similarity of employment duration in the 2 years. This similarity is one indication of the tendency, to be further illustrated

later, for the employment characteristics of individual years to resemble one another, regardless of how wide the range of variable

elements may be within any single year. NUMBER OF JOBS

The significance of the fact that the average duration of the jobs

held in 1933 and 1934 was about 2 months becomes clear in the

light of information on the number of jobs held during each year. Few of the 500 migratory-casual workers had anything approaching full employment, and most of them held only 1, 2, or 3 jobs each
The Migratory-Casual Worker

year,8 Less than one-fifth of the workers held more than three jobs

in each of the 2 years, and loss than one-tenth of them had more

than four jobs during each year (see table 5).

Table 5. Number of .Ions Held by 500 Migratory-Casual Workers,

1933-34

1933 1934

Number of jobs Total

Type of worker

Total

Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination i Agricultural Industrial Combination i

All workers _ 500 200 100 200 500 200 100 200

Percent d stribution

All workers 1004

24

31239

52

1

100

428

2722

9

6

2

1

100

32636

20

8

5

1

1

100

52034

25

94

2

1

100

52734

1994

1

1

10042930

16

135

1

1

100

32645

20

5

100 No job 5 ljob 2634

3 jobs . 23 jobs 7 5jobs . 3 6jobs--. . .. .. 1 7jobs 1 8jobs.___

9jobs.._- 1 1 (T) 1 1 Median number of jobs per worker - 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.6

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

1 Excludes 29 jobs obtained in the off-season in 1933, and 35jobs obtained in the off-season in 1934.

3 Less than 0.5 percent. The absence of any considerable portion of workers with four or more jobs suggests that the depression has had some effect upon

the high labor turnover which in times past has been one of the

characteristics of migratory-casual employment, especially in such

industrial pursuits as tunnel work, logging, and road construction.

High labor turnover, as it existed in migratory-casual work before

the depression, was a direct result of the failure of legitimate protests to correct employment abuses. Faced with low pay and working conditions sometimes fantastically bad, and denied the right or

the opportunity of labor organization, the workers developed the

habit of working only long enough on one job to get a stake and

then going off the job until the stake was spent. Such a practice was partially dependent upon the probability of securing work

2 The proportion of migratory-casual workers that failed altogether to secure work in 1933 and 1934 cannot be determined here, since this study is confined to workers who had some work in one year or the other. Thus, all those shown in table 5 as having had no work during one of the years had work during the other. It should not be inferred from

the smallness of the proportion of workers in this study who had no jobs that migratorycasual workers in general were so fortunate in finding employment in 1933 and 1934. The

present study does not include workers who had been unemployed since the beginning of 1933 for the obvious reason that such workers could contribute nothing to a study of employment patterns during migration.
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 57

whenever the stake was exhausted, a condition which practically

vanished during the depression.3 A comparison of the frequency of jobs per worker in the 2 years

shows that in 1934 there was an increase in the proportion of workers

with only one and two jobs. Yet, as with the variation between the

years in the duration of jobs, the amount of the change was not

great. According to table 5, the median number of jobs per worker

changed but little from 1933 to 1934, and once again the consistency

of the results for the 2 years is worthy of note. Basically, the

work patterns of migratory-casual workers are time-patterns in

which the variations within the year are clearly recurrent. The

explanation of this fact is to be found in an examination of the

relationship between employment and the progression of the

seasons. SEASONALITY OF EMPLOYMENT

A demand for the labor of migratory-casual workers exists in some

degree throughout the entire year; in each month of both 1933 and

1934 some of the 500 workers had been at work. But, as is well

known, migratory-casual workers are much more active at one season than at another. The extent to which the peak months provide more employment than do other months may be observed in figure

18. which shows the number of man-weeks worked by the 500 workers

during each month of 1933 and 1934. At the low point in the sea- sonal decline of activity, reached early in the winter, the 500 workers

reported less than 600 man-weeks of employment per month. But

at the top of the summertime peak, reached in July, activity had

more than doubled, and the workers reported approximately 1,200

man-weeks per month. However, during this midsummer peak the

workers fell far short of full-time employment.

The consistency of the relationship between migratory-casual employment and the seasons of the year can be seen by a comparison of

the curve of activity for 1933 with that of 1934 (see fig. 18). It will

be observed that the line which represents the activity during each

month of 1934 repeats the essential characteristics of the line for

3 The notorius "three-gang system"—one gang leaving, one gang working, and one gang arriving on the job—characterized much migratory-casual work prior to the depression. Probably the most remarkable record of labor turnover on a migratory-casual

job was reported by Rev. Oscar H. McGill in the Hearings Before the Commission on

Industrial Relations. According to Reverend McGill the labor force employed in building the Milwaukee tunnel through the mountains east of Seattle changed completely on an average

of every 5 days. Thus, out of 1,000 workers employed, 200 arrived and departed every

day. See Report of Commission on Industrial Relations, S. Doc. No. 415, 64th Cong., Washington, D. C, 1916, vol. V, p. 4384. See also Howd, Cloice R., Industrial Relations in the West Coast Lumber Industry, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 349, p. 38. Howd esti- mated that the labor turnover in the logging camps in the Pacific Northwest in 1921 was

considerably more than 500 percent per year.
»N The Migratory-Casual Worker

1300

z3 500

/f

f

• /

19 33

X\\

\

\

193

\

\

» 1

\

1

X\

1i

i

ii

i

i

i

4

/ //

' y^

hh

h

1933

/A/ > / / \ \

X + 7 V 1/ »

11 \

1 \ \

If \ \

1 f \

1

1

* .1 1 ' 7

• / 1934*

• 1 /

' v >

1 \

1\

\

\

l

\

x\ JFMAMJJASONO

ALL WORKERS JFMAMJJASONO

200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

/f

I [_ //

/ /"»

t

i li

i (i

i

\ \

\

\ __

I 193

\ \\\

x\

\\

3

/

//

/

/

/

r

34

x

»\ \

I \

\ \

\ \

x \

X\

X

' X

z

IS 33 \

\ \

\

\N

\

II \

\

\

193

\

\ 4 \

X\

k \

1

X

X1

x,

X

JFMAMJJASONO

100 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS JFMAMJ JASONO

200 COMBINATION WORKERS^

Fig. 18 -SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN THE ACTIVITY OF

500 MIGRATORY -CASUAL WORKERS

1933-1934

* Workers, combining agricultural and Industrial •mploymsnt AF-2372 W. P.
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 59

1933.4 In both years there was a progressive rise in activity from

January to July, and in both there was a continual decline after

July. The nature of the late summer and autumn decline is the same

during each year; after July the curve falls off only slightly until

September, but from this point on, it falls off steeply until the

December trough is reached.

The progression of the seasons affected the various types of migratory-casual workers in somewhat different ways, yet the 1933 peculiarities of each group tended, like the variations for the 500 workers

as a group, to be duplicated in 1934. As shown in figure 18, the

monthly variation in activity among the workers in agriculture

generally resembled that of all workers considered together except

for (1) a later maturing peak season in 1933, which came in September; and (2) a more complete cessation of activity in the winter,

especially in December 1934.

The curve in figure 18 representing the workers in industry shows

that seasonality had much the same effect upon these workers as it had upon those engaged only in agriculture. Both the increase in

their activities from January to June, and the decline from September to December are as sharp as that noted for the agricultural

workers, and the wintertime slack period is equally inactive in comparison with the peak season. Again, there is close agreement

between the monthly variations of 1933 and 1934.

Workers who followed a combination of agricultural and industrial jobs experienced the least seasonal fluctuation in employment.

The curves showing their activity by months lack the pronounced

midsummer peak that is found in the curves for the other two

groups (see fig. 18) ; they secured more employment in the winter

and spring, but decidedly less in the summer and fall. From April

on, workers in this group found distinctly less employment in 1934

than in the preceding year. Month of Obtaining Jobs.

In view of the relationship between the progression of the seasons and the activity of migratory-casual workers, it is evident that more jobs were obtained in certain months of each year than in

* Although the general shape of the two curves is the same, the curve for 1934 falls off more sharply in the latter part of the year than the curve for 1933. This difference in the 2 curves represents a partial collapse, toward the end of 1934, in the activity of the 500 workers. It appears to be associated with the fact that the 500 workers studied were

uniformly affected by adverse conditions during the summer and fall of 1934, since all of them obtained assistance from transient bureaus at some time during the first 6 months

of 1935. Thus, the decline shown in fig. 18 does not necessarily mean a general decline

in the activity of all migratory-casual workers, both on and off relief, during these months. For this reason 1933 is probably more nearly representative of general conditions of migratory-casual employment during the depression than is 1934.
00 The Migratory-Casual Worker

Others. The close relationship between the month and the workers'

success in finding employment may be seen in figure 19, which compares the monthly fluctuations in new jobs obtained in 1933 and

L9S4. Despite the greater decline in jobs during November and

December 1984,' the general agreement of the 2 years is close, both

lor the 500 workers considered as a group, and for the workers in

each of the 11 component classifications.

Flnct nat ions in the number of new jobs are governed by the fluctu- ations in seasonal activity described earlier. The curves showing

monthly actiyity in terms of man-weeks of employment and the curves showing the number of new jobs obtained each month are

not, however, identical. This is the result of a third factor, namely,

the duration of jobs, which also varies according to the season of

the year. Since the peak of the year's activity in migratory-casual

work comes in the summer, the jobs obtained earlier in the year

tend to last through the months of peak activity, and those obtained

later naturally are of shorter duration. The exact effect of the season in which a job was obtained upon the duration of jobs may

be seen in the comparison of the median duration of the jobs obtained

at the four different seasons as shown in figure 20. It may also be

observed from this figure that the seasonal variation in the duration of jobs, like the other characteristics of migratory-casual employment, was repeated with little change in each of the 2 years. LENGTH OF MIGRATORY PERIOD AND OFF-SEASON

It is a common practice for many migratory-casual workers to spend part of each year on the road, working or seeking work, and

then to withdraw from the labor market during the period when

the chances of finding work are small. For workers following this

practice, the year is divided into two complementary periods: the

migratory period, which they spend in working or seeking work;

and the off-season, which they spend in waiting until the advancement of the season revives employment opportunities.6 Since these

two periods are adjusted to fit the yearly rise and fall in the demand

for migratory-casual labor, the off-season ordinarily comes in the

winter, and the migratory period usually covers the spring, summer,

and fall.

5 See footnote 4, p. 59.

6 During the interview each worker was asked whether he followed this custom. Those

replying in the affirmative were asked to designate the duration of the migratory and the

off-season periods for the 2 years 1933-34. For examples of workers with regular migratory and off-season periods, see the personal histories of Jesus Lopez and John Peterson,

pp. 95-97, ch. V.
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 61

100 90 g 80 ? 70 <

£ 60 o

W

50

a>o

» 40

1934

..^

• yy^- I933t ^:^ •^\«^ ^*\/ \^x^

\ r./j ^ ""« \ \ /V \ ^ A \ -V V /

*»"' ""^ \ \ ^-^ "

'^•<r.T "%. \

\ / ^-S. I933t _, ^v 1 -.^ *^.A -

\ / ^ » """ • \ V \

\

\

\\

• I*

k*"""" 1934 \ V \

•

\ •• \

\

\

\

\

\\

\

FEB. MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.

100 90 ieo

! 70

! 60

20

• AGFIICULTU

> - ^

«

RAL \\

.? f^* \\

y

^'

\\ ,/ -\ s/ 1934 \ \

s£\ P7 j< I933t \ U933t -/ / ; / "S, •

\

;% \

/. /

1934

/

INDUS TRIAL ^

--/ w \ / w

< v\ rV\

i \\

FEB. MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.

Fig. 19 -MONTHS OF OBTAINING JOBS IN 1933 AND 1934

500 MIGRATORY- CASUAL WORKERS

' Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment

t Number of Jobs obtained in January 1933

not ascertainable AF-2332, W. P. A. 130766°—37-
62 The Migratory-Casual Worker

JAN.MAR.

3 R.- JULY- JUNE SEPT.

OCT. JAN.- APR.- JULY- OCT.- DEC. MAR. JUNE SEPT. OEC. MONTH OF SECURING JOB

Fig. 20-AVERAGE DURATION OF JOBS SECURED BY

500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS.

1933-1934

AF-2356.W.RA. Table 6.

Duration of Migratory Period of 500 Migratory-Casual

Workers, 1933-34

Total Type of worker

Duration of migratory period Agricultural Industrial Combination i

1933 1934 1933 1934 1933 1934 1933 1934

500 500 200 200 100 100 200 200

Percent distribution

100

3

31530

8

41

100

4

2

1530

742

100

3

5

16338

35

100

34

1734

735

100 100 100

5

114268

46

100

5

1 1332

945

--- 32

944

1 25 to 32 weeks 14 33 to 40 weeks 25

6 49 to 52 weeks. . 49 Median duration of migratory period

41 41 39 39 45 44 45 48

Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

This does not mean that all workers follow a rigid scheme for

apportioning their time within the year. About two-fifths of the

workers in this study, for example, had practically no off-season during either 1933 or 1934 (see table 6). However, a majority of the

workers regularly remained on the road less than the full year } and
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 63

the median length of the migratory period for the 500 workers was

41 weeks in each year (see fig. 21).

Because each of the three types of migratory-casual employment

has its own peculiar seasonal variations, the length of the migratory

period for each type of worker varied considerably from the average

for all workers. The shortest average migratory period was that of

workers in agriculture^ who spent about 39 weeks working or seeking

work. This period was exceeded by that of workers in industry, whose

migratory period averaged 45 weeks. The longest period was that

of workers following a combination of employment in agriculture

and industry, whose migratory period in 1934 was 48 weeks (see

fig. 21).

The length of time represented by the off-season varied, of course, with the length of the migratory period. Thus, workers in agricul- ture had on the average the longest off-season, a period of 13 weeks

each year; workers in industry had the next longest, with 7 weeks in

1933 and 8 weeks in 1934; and workers in the third group had the

shortest off-season, with 7 weeks in 1933 and only 4 weeks in 1934.

Some of the workers had no regular off-season during either of the

years. Excluding them, the off-season most frequently reported

lasted from 12 to 20 weeks (see appendix table 4).

During the off-season these workers were almost wholly unemployed. A few of them picked up odd jobs, but the total off-season

employment was small. Throughout the 2-year period, the 500

workers secured only 64 jobs during the off-season; whereas, they

secured 2,297 jobs during the migratory periods of the 2 years (see

table 4).

EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DURING THE MIGRATORY

PERIOD

Assuming that a satisfactory year for migratory-casual workers

is one in which employment would cover the greater part of the

migratory period, then the years 1933 and 1934 were decidedly unsuccessful years for the 500 workers included in this study. After

losing an average of about 3 months each year in the off-season, many

workers were also unemployed through a large part of the migratory

period. Some indication of the extent of idleness during the migratory period was given when it was pointed out in the discussion of

the number and duration of migratory-casual jobs, for example,

that most of the workers held only one, two, or three jobs each year, and that the average duration of each of those jobs was about 2

months. In addition, it was shown that among the 500 workers, the

busiest month of either year, July 1933 (see fig. 18), supplied only

1,250 man-weeks of employment out of approximately 2,160 man-
64 The Migratory-Casual Worker

MEDIAN WEEKS

e 12 16 20. 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52

ALL WORKERS

1933

1934

AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

combination

workers"

1933

1934

1933

1934

1933

1934

W,

'^mmA \

Wffl%Z77%7ff%W®W7/.

////// Average Migratory Period

[J j Average Off-season

\ // '//\ Average Portion of Migratory Period Spent in Employment

Fig. 21- AVERAGE MIGRATORY, EMPLOYMENT,

AND OFF-SEASON PERIODS

500 MIGRATORY- CASUAL WORKERS

1933-1934

*Work2rs combining Agricultural and Industrial Employment. AF-2342.W.RA.
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 65

weeks possible. 7 More specifically, a distribution of the time spent

in employment by the 500 workers shows that the median period was

24 weeks in 1933 and 21 weeks in 1934 (see appendix table 5). Thus,

as may be observed in figure 21, in 1933 nearly one-half—and in 1934

exactly one-half—of the migratory period of all workers was spent

without employment. In none of the three groups during either year

did the amount of time employed equal as much as three-fifths of the

migratory period and among workers following a combination of

agricultural and industrial employments during 1934, the productive

portion of the year comprised only 37 percent of the entire migratory

period.

It is not known precisely how the proportion of time lost during

migration in depression years compares with that lost by migratorycasual workers in less stringent periods, since comparable data for

earlier years are not available. Although it seems evident that the

amount of unemployment during migration in 1933 and 1934 was

greater than in normal times, there is little doubt that the unproductive part of the migratory period is large at any time. Necessarily, the migratory-casual worker wastes much time and motion

because of the lack of proper direction into the nearest and timeliest

field for labor. Even for seasonal work in which the date of the

opening of jobs is known in advance, the worker often arrives at the

job too late or too soon. He may be unaware of a labor shortage in a nearby community, or he may migrate in response to a rumor of a labor shortage only to find that the rumor had been spread so far that an oversupply of workers had arrived before him. In addition to the regular slack winter season there are a number of periods between

jobs when, whether they wish it or not, workers are idle while waiting

for new jobs to begin. Thus, the migratory-casual worker is faced

not only with the imperfect adjustment of the supply of labor to the demand, but also with the difficulties resulting from the lack of

direction of the workers.

During the depression this situation became acute. Even an

efficient method of controlling the flow of labor in accordance with

demand, which would solve many of the difficulties of normal times,

would be of little use during a period when the oversupply of labor

amounts to a glut in the market.8 With more workers than jobs

7 An estimate for comparative purposes arrived at by multiplying 500 workers by

4.33 weeks.

8 Of course tbere were some exceptions. How the lack of proper information among

migratory-casual workers may result in a labor shortage during a time of widespread

unemployment is illustrated by the fact of a shortage of apple harvesters in some parts

of the Wenatchee and Yakima Valleys, Wash., in the fall of 1935. This district had

experienced such a lar^e oversupply of workers during the apple-picking seasons of 11)33 and 1934 that great numbers of workers failed to return in 1935, and a serious and costly labor shortage resulted.
06 The Migratory-Casual Worker

at all times, the market for migratory-casual labor is further crowded

1 \ migrants newly recruited from the general pool of unemployed.

With the jobs normally filled by migratory-casual workers being

preempted by the "homeguard", and with many of the industries

which would ordinarily supply jobs suspended by the depression, the

probability of finding work in areas of usual employment is greatly

reduced.

Despite this increased scarcity of jobs, the workers included in

ih is report do not appear to have curtailed their migrations in search

of work. According to the averages shown in figure 21, a decrease

in time spent in employment is most often accompanied either by

little change in the average time spent in migration, or else—as in

the case of the combination workers in 1934—by an appreciable

increase.9 It is easy to see why this was true. One of the unique

characteristics of migratory-casual work is the extreme flexibility

of the labor demand at peak seasons. However acute the oversupply

of labor, the possibilities of obtaining some work are always present.

Many of the crops and processes using migratory-casual labor—

.

especially the agricultural pursuits—can absorb an extremely large

number of workers for a very short time at the height of their sea- son, and at such times an oversupply of labor (from the employer's

point of view) is difficult to imagine. Moreover, the nature of

migratory-casual employment is such that the sharing of jobs among

all workers is an automatic and inevitable process. The worker

ordinarily secures a number of jobs each year, all of them of short

duration. The chief requirements for obtaining a job are merely

that the worker be on hand, and have no obvious handicaps. If

there are more workers than jobs, a person who has failed to secure one job stands an equal chance to secure the next, and the probability

of continual failure throughout the migratory period is thereby re- duced. These are the characteristics of migratory-casual labor that

make it appealing to so many unemployed persons. The fact that

there is ordinarily, even under the most stringent conditions, some work to be obtained obscures the inadequacy of that work.10

It is altogether possible that the average time spent in migration had changed little during the depression. The amount of time spent by the workers studied does not appear

to be in disagreement with that observed of other migratory-casual workers during other

periods. See for example, Hathway, Marion, The Migratory Worker and Family Life, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1934, pp. 84-89.

10 Some notion of the unique nature of the seasonal demand in some of the crops employing migratory-casual workers may be obtained from a recent study of farm labor

in the Yakima Valley, Wash. According to this study, "More hired labor was employed

[in hop picking] during the second week of September than during any other week of the

year. It amounted to about 200,000 days of labor. Only about 29,000 days of labor were required during the next to [the] last week in August, when pear picking was at its height ; about 66,000 days of labor [per week] were required when apple picking was at

its height ; and an average of around 3,000 days were required for each of the last 8 weeks
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 67

YEARLY EARNINGS

In exchange for his labor the migratory-casual worker obtains a meager income at best. His low yearly earnings are a direct result

of factors that were given a prominent place in the general discussion

of the migratory-casual worker in chapter I. Short-time jobs, sea- sonal and intermittent employment, work that is principally unskilled and semiskilled, an overcrowded labor market—all these are conditions that make migratory-casual workers one of the most exploited groups in the total labor supply. To say that workers are

exploited is, of course, to pass a judgment on the wages that they

receive. Factual support for this judgment is to be found in a tabulation of the yearly net earnings of the 500 migratory-casual workers

included in the study (see appendix table 6 and fig. 22).

The earnings data shown in appendix table 6 represent the net cash income received during each of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934.

The meaning of net cash income requires some explanation. The

yearly earnings of the 500 workers were reported on the field schedules of this study as gross or net income, depending upon the way

in which the worker could report his earnings more precisely. Gross

income was defined as the total earnings computed in dollars before

deductions were made by employers for housing, meals, transportation, and similar charges; and net income was the total cash wage

actually received after these deductions had been made.11 The money

equivalent of the goods or services received by a considerable number

of the migratory-casual workers in addition to their cash wages

could be determined only by resort to a highly arbitrary procedure

based upon the assumption that these perquisites were uniform in

number and value. It was decided, therefore, to convert gross earnings into net earnings.12 Although this procedure was only slightly

less arbitrary than that mentioned above, it had the distinct advantage of being more immediately based upon data derived from interviews with the workers.

In making the conversion, it was found that the difference between

gross and net earnings was greatest for agricultural workers and

of the calendar year 1935, when there was only dairying and general farm work to do." See Landis, Paul H., and Brooks, Melvin S., Farm Labor in the Yakima Valley, Wash.,

Rural Sociology Series in Farm Labor, no. 1, Washington State College, Pullman, Wash.,

1936.

11 Nearly one-half of the 500 workers reported that deductions were made from their earnings by employers for some of the services supplied.

12 This was done by dividing each of the three types of workers—agricultural, industrial, and combination—according to whether they reported yearly income as net or gross. Statistical frequency distributions were made of net and gross earnings separately, and a

conversion factor was derived which could be used to convert gross to net earnings.

Statistically, there was sufficient evidence of consistency in these distributions for the 2

years to justify this process.
68 The Migratory-Casual Worker

30

s

/

V

\

"OTAl

/

\X.

r^ <^ ^_.._.- i 1933

Maintenance 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

only EARNINGS IN DOLLARS

-AGRICULTURAL

\ •/INDUSTRIAL

NT V'J-Xj' I: V

1933

I nation'

!\M 0.<-

None Maintenance 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

on|y EARNINGS IN DOLLARS 30

r AliKIUUL AGRICULTURAL 1934

i » ^-COMBINATION"'' tatt\_L/r, \-/ w lv» *

*

*N

^-INDUSTRIAL

J L

None Maintenance 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

onl> EARNINGS .IN DOLLARS

Fig. 22- NET YEARLY EARNINGS OF 500

MIGRATORY- CASUAL WORKERS

1933-1934

* Workers combining agricultural and Industrial employment AF-2368, W.P.A.
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment 69

least for workers at a combination of agricultural and industrial

pursuits. The effect of converting gross to net earnings was to reduce somewhat the yearly earnings of each of the three groups

of workers

;

13 but since conversions were necessary for only about

one-half of the workers, the effect on the total was to accentuate

the smallness of the earnings without invalidating them for use as a general indication of the range and average amount of income.

Several striking facts are found in appendix table 6. Yearly

earnings for the entire group ranged from maintenance to approximately $1,350 a year, but the most frequent earnings were between

maintenance and $250 a year. According to table 7, the agricultural

worker had the lowest median earning ($110 to $124), so low, in

fact, that even the knowledge that he was likely to receive a larger

part of his earnings in the form of perquisites does not account for

his low earning status in comparison with workers in the other two

groups.14 Industrial workers had the widest spread between low

and high yearly earnings, but net incomes of over $500 a year were few in number and the median earnings were $257 in 1933 and $272

in 1934. The yearly earnings of workers following a combination

of agricultural and industrial employments occupy an intermediate

position between the low of agriculture and the high of industry.

The median earnings of this group were $223 in 1933 and $203 in

1934. The range and the concentration of individual earnings for

each of the three groups are shown in figure 22. Before attempting a conclusion on the relative earnings of migratory-casual workers in agriculture, industry, and a combination of

the two, it is necessary to take into account the amount of employment obtained during the year. Earlier in this chapter the median

duration of employment during migration was shown. When this

information is brought into comparison with median earnings, a

basis is provided for a conclusion as to relative yearly earnings.

13 Had the conversions been to gross instead of net, the median earnings for agricultural workers would have been approximately $200 in both 1933 and 1934 ; for industrial workers, approximately $400 in both years ; and for combination workers the median would

have been approximately $275 in 1933 and $220 in 1934.

14 A study of farm labor, made during 1935-36 in the Yakima Valley, shows that the yearly cash income of 74 "transient" workers was considerably higher than the agri- cultural earnings shown in the study. The data from the Yakima Valley study cannot

be compared directly with the data in this study because of the difference in the years (1933-34 against 1935-36) and the difference in scope of the studies. Nevertheless, it is interesting to observe that in the Yakima Valley, where wages are higher than in many

other sections of the country, the authors found that "The largest percentage of both

resident and transient (farm) workers received from $200 to $400 during the course of

1 year, although the percentage of residents falling in this income group is greater than

for transients." See Landis and Brooks, op. cit. For a distribution and average of yearly earnings, 1930 to 1935, among migrant family groups following agricultural employment, see Migratory Labor in California, State

Relief Administration, Division of Special Surveys and Studies, San Francisco, 1936, p. 121.
70 The Migratory-Casual Worker

Table 7. Median Net Yearly Income and Employment Period of 500

Migratory-Casual Workers, 1933-34

1933 1934

Tyj>e of worker Median net

yearly earnings

Median employment

period (weeks)

Median net

yearly earnings

Median em- ployment

period (weeks)

$110

257

223

2326

23

$124 272

203

22 Industrial 24

18

i Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

This comparison shows that in terms of averages the higher yearly

earnings of workers employed entirely or partially in industry are

not the result of a longer period of employment during the year. The obvious conclusion is that work in industrial processes is better

paid than Avork in agriculture. However, it must be remembered that

compact work patterns (see ch. II) are less frequent in industrial

employment; therefore, the higher earnings may, in part, represent

a differential necessary to insure an adequate supply of workers for

operations involving a greater range of movement and a lesser cer- tainty of recurrent employment.

The discussion in this chapter has been concerned with the general aspects of migratory-casual employment. This general discussion needs now to be supplemented by more detailed examinations.

The employment characteristics of migratory-casual workers are con- ditioned by activities in a considerable number of particular crops

and processes which behave in ways peculiar to themselves. A complete account of migratory-casual workers and their employment

characteristics must consider these individual pursuits; and it is to such a consideration that the following chapter is devoted.
Chapter IV

TYPES OF MIGRATORY-CASUAL EMPLOYMENT

The fact that many crops and industries are dependent upon

a supply of migratory-casual workers is, in each particular

case, the result of a combination of conditions, none of which

is static. As a result, the importance of the various crops and industries as sources of demand for migratory-casual labor is continually

changing. At about the same time that the spread of cotton cul- tivation in California in the twenties was creating a new demand for

migratory-casual labor, the use of the combine harvester caused a marked decrease in the number of migratory-casual workers needed

in the wheat harvest. Mechanization frequently develops to the

point where, as in the case of road, dam, and levee construction,

the demand for manual laborers (e. g., pick-and-shovel men) is materially reduced. Much the same effect on the employment opportunities of the migratory-casual worker follows when the increase of

population within one area provides a supply of resident workers

for the jobs formerly filled by migrants.

In any case, the crops and industries which provided a substantial

part of the migratory-casual employment during, say, a period of agricultural expansion, extensive railway construction, or the discovery of a new oil field, may decline rapidly in importance when this period is completed. It is difficult, then, to make generalizations about the specific sources of demand for migratory-casual labor that will hold true

for more than a limited period of time. Certainly, it would be dangerous to attempt more than tentative conclusions on the basis of 500

work histories collected during the depression years, 1933 and 1934.

The following description of migratory-casual employment in specific

crops and industrial processes is therefore intended as no more than an

account of the experience of a particular group of workers during

a 2-year period. Despite their obvious limitations, the data in this

section add measurably to an understanding of the part played by the

migratory-casual worker in agriculture and industry.

AMOUNT OF EMPLOYMENT IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES

Agricultural Workers.

Among the 200 agricultural workers studied, the cotton crop was

the largest single source of migratory-casual employment in 1933

71
72 The Migratory-Casual Worker

and \

lXV\ combined.1 Slightly less employment was supplied by

the fruit and sugar-beet crops, followed, in the order of their importance, by grain, general farm work, vegetables, and berries (see

fig. 28).

That cotton should have headed this list is perhaps not altogether

to be expected, since the cotton crop, as an employer of migratorycasual labor, has not generally received as much attention as grain,

fruit, and sugar beets." The ranking position of cotton among the

agricultural workers in this study may be an outcome of the depression, or it may reflect the increasing importance of a crop in which

there lias been but little replacement of manual labor by machines.

The importance of the fruit crops as employers of the workers studied

needs no emphasis. The position of the sugar-beet crop is equally

well known; it not only employs large numbers of migratory-casual

workers, but also provides a longer working season than any other

of the more important crops employing agricultural migrants. Indeed, the real importance of the sugar-beet industry as an employer

of migratory-casual labor is perhaps not adequately shown here,

since the workers studied were unattached men who may have been

handicapped in securing jobs in the beet fields in competition with an

adequate supply of the cheaper and more "reliable" family labor

preferred by employers.

The effect of the general adoption of the combine harvester upon

the demand for migratory-casual workers in the grain harvest is reflected in the fact that, as figure 23 shows, grain was surpassed

by cotton, fruit, and sugar beets as an employer of the agricultural

workers studied. Despite the technological change in harvesting

wheat, however, it is important to note that in 1933 and 1934 the vari- ous grain crops remained 1 of the 4 chief employments of the 200

agricultural workers studied.

1 Employment in the various pursuits is measured in terms of the total man-weeks employed for the 2 years 1933 and 1934. Employment in specific crops and industrial processes for the 2 years is frequently combined in the discussions for two reasons

:

( 1 ) As appendix table 7 shows, there was a marked similarity in distribution of employ- ment in the 2 years; and (2) the amount of information available for the somewhat

detailed descriptions of this section was increased by the combination without any

important loss in accuracy. The importance of cotton as a source of employment for migratory-casual workers comes as much from the duration of the jobs as from the number of persons it employs.

2 Cotton is still usually thought of as a crop belonging exclusively to the Old South, where great supplies of Negro labor are available. However, since 1910 there has been a tremendous increase in cotton acreage and production in the Southwest, where the absence of a supply of cheap resident labor makes the employment of migrants necessary. Over one-half of the total cotton acreage (55 percent) and slightly less than one-half (48

percent) of the total production for the 1926-30 period was concentrated in the three

States of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas ; and California, New Mexico, and Arizona were

becoming increasingly important cotton producers. See Woofter, T. J., Jr., Landlord and Tenant on the Cotton Plantation, Research Monograph V, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, Washington, D. C, 1936, pp. 38, 39 ; and Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1935, pp. 624-626.
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 73

In comparison with the four crops which led in employment,

the work secured in vegetables and berries was relatively much less important. Vegetables supplied about one-half as much employment

as cotton, and because the jobs in berries were of short duration,

they were somewhat less important than those in vegetables.

Work on general farms and on dairy and cattle farms represents,

in part, off-season employment between jobs in the highly specialized

and highly seasonal crops that have been discussed above. Jobs in

general agriculture combined with jobs in dairy and cattle supplied

only about as much work as had been secured in fruits alone. Employment in other crops—tobacco, grapes, hops, etc.—was of minor

importance. Thus, excepting the off-season work, practically all the

employment of the 200 agricultural workers was secured in 6 crops

cotton, fruits, sugar beets, grain, vegetables, and berries.

The description of specific agricultural pursuits as employers of

the 200 agricultural workers has been, up to this point, in terms

of the total man-weeks of work which each supplied. When, in

contrast, the importance of specific crops is stated in terms of the

number of jobs—a measure which should indicate roughly the rela- tive numbers of workers employed in each at some time during the

year, regardless of the length of their employment—a somewhat

different arrangement occurs (see fig. 23). During 1933 and 1934

the fruit crop supplied the 200 agricultural workers with the greatest number of jobs, and probably gave employment, without regard

to duration, to the greatest number of workers.3 Cotton, which supplied the greatest amount of employment to the workers, was second

in number of jobs supplied. Grain, which was fourth in amount

of work, provided almost as many jobs as the cotton crop, and

presumably affected almost as many workers, though for a shorter

period of time.

The lack of agreement between the amount of employment and

the number of jobs provided by the different pursuits indicates

variations in the length of jobs in the various pursuits. Thus, jobs

in sugar beets were relatively protracted, since, although only about

one-half as numerous as jobs in grain, they provided considerably more employment. Jobs in vegetables and berries, on the other

hand, are shown to have been of short duration, since they were more numerous than jobs in either sugar beets or general agriculture,

yet were of minor importance in providing employment. In brief, a comparison of the number of jobs with the amount of employment, as shown in figure 23, reveals that the longest jobs were

those in sugar beets, in general agriculture, and in dairy and cattle

8 See footnote 1, p. 53, ch. Ill, for the definition of a "job" as used in this study.
The Migratory-Casual Worker

NUMBER OF JOBS SECURED

200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS MAN-WEEKS OF WORK

400 600 800 1000

OTHER jj INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

LOGGING

OIL AND GAS

AGRICULTURE RAILROAD

MAINTENANCE ROAD

CONSTRUCTION DAM AND LEVEE

HIPPIN OTHER dj CONSTRUCTION

MINING (METALS) OTHER 200 COMBINATION WORKERS*

GENERAL

AGRICULTURE ROAD

CONSTRUCTION

LOGGING SEAMEN

GRAIN COTTON

DAM AND

LEVEE RAILROAD MAINTENANCE

DAIRY AND CATTLE

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION

FRUITS SAWMILLING SUGAR-BEETS

OTHER

AGRICULTURAL- OTHER .b) INDUSTRIAL

Fig. 23- NUMBER OF JOBS AND MAN-WEEKS OF WORK

OF 500 MIGRATORY -CASUAL WORKERS

1933-1934 COMBINED

"" Worker* combining agricultural ond industrial employment

o] Tunnel, bridge, and building construction £j Not eltwhere classified AF 2378, W. P. A.
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 75

farming, and that the shortest were those in the sharply seasonal

crops—berries, vegetables, grain, and fruits. Industrial Workers.

Logging was the most important source of employment among the

100 industrial workers, in spite of the fact that it has probably been more affected than any other operation by decasualization consequent

upon long-time and depression changes. In 1933 and 1934 logging

supplied far more man-weeks of work than any other industry (see

fig. 23). Somewhat less important than logging were oil and gas, agriculture,4 and railroad maintenance. These pursuits, together with

road, dam, and levee construction, and work as seamen, furnished

practically all the employment secured by the 100 industrial workers.

The remainder of their employment was furnished by other 5 construction, metal mining, sawmilling, and a miscellaneous assortment

of pursuits of minor importance.

The fact that logging was the most important single industry in

giving employment to the 100 workers suggests that it continues to

be, in comparison with other industries, a large employer of migratory-casual labor. Yet it is well known that the decasualization of

logging was far advanced as early as the late 1920's. The growth

of urban areas adjacent to logging regions and the betterment of

transportation facilities between the two made it possible, some years

ago, for employers to begin replacing migratory-casual workers with more stable operatives who could settle their families close by, and

the depression hastened this process. Nevertheless, the position of

logging in providing employment for the 100 workers studied shows

that migratory-casual workers, even at the bottom of the depression,

could secure work in the logging camps.

The importance of the oil and gas industry in supplying work to the 100 industrial workers suggests a change in the character of the

employments of migratory-casual workers, as mentioned earlier in

the chapter. After logging operations had passed their peak and

their need for migratory-casual workers was declining, new oil fields were opening up and creating a demand for migratory-casual

workers.6

4 The industrial workers in this study made frequent excursions into agriculture for employment. However, industrial employment was so much the rule among these workers that they are referred to for convenience as industrial rather than as principally

industrial workers, which is a more exact description.

5 Construction of tunnels, buildings, and bridges.

6 The all-time high in lumber production occurred in 1909. At that time oil drilling produced only about one-sixth of the amount of petroleum that it produced in 1933. In

1933, lumber production was less than one-third of the 1909 production. See Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1935, pp. 661, 706. Of course, it is not suggested that the developing demand in drilling absorbed the unemployed migratory-casual workers from

logging.
76 The Migratory-Casual Worker

The relatively Large amount of employment supplied by railroad

maintenance is to be expected. Unskilled and low paid, requiring

mobility and work in remote districts, section and extra-gang work

lias long been an important source of employment for migratorycasual workers. It was affected by the depression largely because

railroad repair work was reduced to a minimum, rather than because

the need declined.

Notable for the fact that they supplied the 100 industrial workers

with little work during 1933-34 are: road construction, the construction of tunnels, buildings, and bridges, the mining of metals, and

sawmill ing, all of which have at one time required great numbers of

migratory-casual workers. It is highly probable that the position of

these industries as indicated in figure 23 is the result of the conditions

existing in 1933 and 1934. During the depression, road construction was to a large extent public work, hiring local unemployed and relief

labor. Tunnel and bridge construction projects almost disappeared

during the early years of the depression, and reappeared principally

as public works in 1933. Mining and sawmilling both restricted their

operation during the depression ; moreover, both had been largely decasualized before the depression began.

When the various industrial pursuits are rated on a basis of the

number of jobs—rather than on the basis of man-weeks of employment—the changes in order are small (see fig. 23). It appears, therefore, that there was little variation among the different industrial

pursuits in the average length of jobs. It may be observed, however,

that such jobs as these workers obtained in agriculture were some- what shorter than those in the more important industries; and that

the jobs in levee and dam construction tended to be somewhat longer

than those in other pursuits.

Combination Workers.

The 200 workers whose employment combined agriculture and in- dustry found about equal amounts of employment in each. The single

pursuit which furnished the greatest amount of employment was

general agriculture, followed by road construction, logging, shipping,

and grain (see fig. 23).

It will be observed that the order of the agricultural pursuits in

providing work for the combination workers differs markedly from

that described above for the strictly agricultural workers. Thus,

general agriculture, which was the fifth most important pursuit of the

strictly agricultural workers, is the most important pursuit of the

present group ; and grain, which was fourth when considered above,

is the second most important agricultural pursuit of the combination

workers.
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 77

These differences appear to indicate roughly which agricultural

pursuits were most often combined with industrial work. Thus, as figure 23 shows, general farm work and work in grain were probably more often combined with industrial work than with other types of

agricultural employment. The relatively small amount of employment in fruits and sugar beets among the combination workers is striking. It appears to be associated with the fact that habitual

migratory-casual workers in fruit tend to confine themselves to the

fruit harvest the year around, and with the fact that the peculiar

nature of the sugar-beet season makes any combination of work with

it difficult.7 Similarly, some industrial pursuits appear to be more easily combined with agricultural work. Road construction, which was rela- tively unimportant as a source of employment for the 100 industrial

workers, is the most important industrial employment of the combination workers. On the other hand, oil and gas ranked second among

the strictly industrial workers, but provided almost no employment

to the combination group.

SEASONALITY OF EMPLOYMENT IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND

PROCESSES

The total amount of employment obtained during 1933 and 1934,

and the relationship of this total to the length of the migratory

period were described for the 500 workers in chapter III. For a majority of the workers the employment season was short in relation to the migratory period and the full year. This short workingseason, of course, was the result of the fact that the types of jobs

that were open to them—in agriculture, in industry, in combination

employment—not only all tended to be highly seasonal, but also

tended to reach peaks of employment at much the same time.

A study of particular activities in the three general types of employment which the workers followed helps to explain the shortness

of the work season and the difficulty of dovetailing jobs to decrease

the amount of working time lost. Very few of the pursuits afforded

year-round employment. The majority of them were strongly sea- sonal, and most of them reached their peaks of employment activity

between the months of May and September; during these 5 months

the periods of greatest activity in the several pursuits overlapped

in such a way that employment was concentrated within those few

months.

7 See the discussion of seasonality as it relates to sugar beets, p. 78. The sugarbeet season is difficult to combine with any other work, either industrial or agricultural. In addition, compare the number of stops made for jobs other than those in fruit and

sugar beets as shown in the itineraries of the fruit and sugar-beet workers, figs. 6 and

7, ch. II.130766°—37 7
78 The Migratory-Casual Worker

Agricultural Workers,

Though Infrequently reported, full-year employment sequences were possible in agriculture because of some degree of activity

throughout the year in fruits, cotton, dairy and cattle, vegetables,

and general agriculture. However, dairy and cattle, vegetables,

and general agriculture (1933 only) were the only pursuits which

could properly be termed year-round employment in the sense that

their peak mouths were not strikingly higher than their low months

and that their employment curves were flattened out over a large

proportion of the year (see fig. 24). Of these three, only general

agriculture ranked among the five most important pursuits for agricultural workers in the 2 years combined (see appendix tables 7 and 8).

Eight of the nine principal pursuits in which agricultural migratory-casual workers were engaged showed definite peaks of employment activity of varying degrees of sharpness in both years. One

of the crops, vegetables, had a clearly marked double peak of activity; and in another crop, sugar beets, the high point of activity

resembles a plateau extending through all the summer months.

The extent to which activity in the more important crops overlapped

is indicated by the fact that the high points of employment in fruits,

grain, hops, and vegetables (in 1933) occurred in 3 months, July

through September.

Cotton was the only one of the five leading employments whose

peak months did not overlap those of other important pursuits;

activity reached a high point in October in both 1933 and 1934. Fruits, with maximum employment reached in the period June

through September, overlapped grain. Employment in both fell away sharply on either side of these peak months. Employment in

sugar beets remained at the same high level from May to September,

overlapping both grain and fruits, and declined to almost nothing

during the rest of the year. Although general agriculture in 1933

provided some work during the winter, it nevertheless showed a

definite peak in May and somewhat overlapped fruits and sugar

beets. Of the minor pursuits, berries were active from May to August 1934, and the entire hop season occurred in September of

both years. In summary, it may be said that of the five most important agricultural pursuits only one, general agriculture in 1933, provided

anything approaching a year-round level of employment. The

others were sharply peaked in the 6 months between May and

October, and the overlapping of their peaks tended to concentrate

employment in the summer period. In addition, two minor crops,

berries (in 1934) and hops, reached their peaks during the same

6-month period.
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 79

* 50

1934

1933 v X» >.

1 1 1 1 i

1 1 1 1 1 M J J A S COTTON

J FMAMJJASOND

GENERAL AGRICULTURE JFMAMJJASOND

SUGAR BEETS

5 400-

A S N V

1933 /'^"\ * % \

If * \

% \

» \

II l \

II » \ * J

I934»

t \

# f

r j \ \

- ^f % \ \

\

\

1 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 JFMAMJJASOND

ALL PURSUITS OF AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

Xz

o 100 K

Ul

Q.V>

HEU)» 50

1934 S

o i i i l I

1933

i i i i-N—

JFMAMJJA

VEGETABLES

M J J A S BERRIES FMAMJJASOND

DAIRY and CATTLE

1933 -

Fruits / ,sT^I934

/ / / / \ i

- / / »\ ft Hops

1934 \\ AN 1933// \\

J F M A M J J A S N D FRUITS and HOPS

Fig. 24 -SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL

AND IN SELECTED PURSUITS

200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

1933-1934

AF-2382.W.PA.
<SV> The Migratory-Casual Worker

Industrial Workers.

The employment of industrial workers showed the same sharp

seasonality as thai of agricultural workers. There was a like tendency for l»iit little year-round employment to exist, and for the more

important sources of employment, with the exception of logging, to

rise to high, overlapping, midyear peaks of activity and to decline

sharply in the late months of the year. Among the 5 most important industrial pursuits, which together

provided the greater part of all the employment of the 100 industrial

migratory-casual workers, only 1, gas and oil in 1933, furnished an

appreciable amount of year-round employment.

Dam and levee construction also furnished fairly continuous employment during the greater part of the year, although its activity

declined for a short period during the winter months. Seamen (few

in number) secured fairly consistent year-round employment in 1934,

but in 1933 their employment fluctuated markedly. Bridge, tunnel,

and building construction furnished the 100 industrial workers with

a very small amount of year-round employment opportunity throughout 1933, and only slightly more in 1934. All of the major industrial pursuits—logging, oil and gas, agriculture, railroad maintenance, and road construction—showed definite

seasonal peaks in both years. Most of the peak activity during the

2 years fell within the months of June, July, and August (see fig. 25

and appendix table 9). Logging alone of the major pursuits did

not reach a peak of employment activity in midyear. During both

1933 and 1934 logging provided the industrial workers with the

greatest amount of employment in March, declined thereafter until

it reached its annual low during the dangerous forest fire months of

midsummer, then began a slow rise to winter activity.

Combination Workers.

Although the workers in the combination group had a much greater

variety of jobs than those in the other two groups and were less affected by pronounced peaks in employment, their work was still definitely seasonal and was concentrated largely in the midyear

period (see fig. 26 and appendix table 10). This group of workers

had more employment in the winter and spring than did the agricultural group, but much less in the early fall and summer, even though

the most active months for employment were June in 1933 and July

in 1934.

Although the 200 migratory-casual workers who combined agricultural with industrial employment have been treated as a separate

a combination—group in this analysis, the specific jobs they held were much the same as those described in the discussion of the 200
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 81

JFMAMJJASOND

LOGGING JFMAMJJASOND

OIL ond GAS JFMAMJJASONDAGRICULTURE

JFMAMJJ ASONO

RAILROAD MAINTENANCE JFMAMJ JASONO

ALL PURSUITS OF

INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

JFMAMJJASOND

SHIPPING (SEAMEN)

JFMAMJJASOND

ROAO CONSTRUCTION i JFMAMJJASOND

OAM and LEVEE CONSTRUCTION JFMAMJ JASONO

OTHER CONSTRUCTION

Fig. 25 -SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL

AND IN SELECTED PURSUITS

100 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS

1933-1934

"* Tunnel, Bridge, and Building Construction AF-2376, W.RA.
82 The Migratory-Casual Worker

FMAMJ JASOND

ALL PURSUITS OF

COMBINATION WORKERS

MJJASOND

COTTON

FMAMJ

and LEVEE CONSTRUCTION

J F M A M J A S N RAILROAD MAINTENANCE DAIRY and CATTLE

Fig. 26 -SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL

AND IN SELECTED PURSUITS

200 COMBINATION WORKERS*

1933-1934

#Wofker» combining Agriculture! and Industrial Employments AF-2380.W.PA.
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment 83

agricultural and the 100 industrial workers. Thus, the separate

classification was necessary, not because the work done was different,

but because these 200 individuals were not attached solely, or principally, to either agriculture or industry during the years 1933 and

1934.

The fact that these workers were, in a sense, "free lances", because

they did not appear to be attached to either agriculture or industry,

undoubtedly affected the number and duration of their jobs; but,

as can be seen from figure 26, the jobs that provided the most employment were those that have already been discussed. It would seem,

therefore, that little additional information would be gained on the

nature of specific migratory-casual employments from a description

of the jobs held by the 200 combination workers. The essential information on the jobs held by these workers is presented in figure 26;

and the earlier discussion of these same types of employment applies,

in general, to these workers also. 1934 CHANGES IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES

In presenting information on the amount and the seasonality of the

employment of migratory-casual workers in various pursuits, the general similarity of data for the years 1933 and 1934 has been noted.

In sugar beets, cotton, railroad maintenance, and logging (see figs.

24, 25, 26), the 1934 seasonal variations were practical duplications

of those of 1933. However, for some crops and processes there were

differences both in the amount of employment and in the seasonal

variations ; these differences appear to be the result of special factors

operating during 1 of the 2 years. Factors that probably affected agricultural employment in 1934 were the drought and the crop-reduction program. Evidence of the

effect of these factors is to be found in the striking reduction in the

amount of employment in grain ; the drop in the amount of employment in cotton in 1934; and the increase in the importance of berry

picking and general farming jobs during 1934, which suggests that

workers Avere forced to take less desirable jobs because of the reduction in grain and cotton employment.

There were exceptions, also, to the general agreement of amount and

seasonality of employment among industrial workers. Road construction declined in importance during 1934 as compared with 1933

because such construction depended so much upon public works and

relief grants designed to provide jobs for the resident unemployed.

Railroad maintenance, on the contrary, increased in importance as a source of employment, probably because transportation lines began

to make badly needed repairs to their right-of-ways.
84 The Migratory-Casual Worker

This chapter, in addition to presenting more detailed information

on the particular jobs that migratory-casual workers follow, contributes to an understanding of why the supply of workers is generally in excess of the number that can be given employment at any

time. The seasonal peaks of activity in agricultural and industrial

employments are so sharp in contrast to the troughs, and there is such

a concent rat ion of activity within a few months in the summer and

tall, that clearly a labor supply large enough to meet these peak demands must of necessity go unemployed during much of the year. This bunching of demand in a few months makes employment se- quences covering the year extremely difficult to obtain. The most re- markable thing about the amount of employment secured during the

year, pitiably small as it has been shown to be, is that so much employment was obtained under the circumstances. One explanation of

how the workers managed to extend the period of employment in

highly seasonal operations is that they traveled with the seasons, taking all possible advantage of the fact that climate and geography

alter the timing of even the most seasonal of employments.
Chapter V

SOME PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS

There are two reasons for reserving until near the end of this

report a discussion of some of the personal characteristics of the

500 migratory-casual workers studied. First, there is the belief

stated in chapter I that although the migratory-casual worker is the

result of a combination of economic and personal factors, the eco- nomic factors are of principal importance, and therefore should be

considered first. Second, there is the fact that data on personal

characteristics must be qualified to a greater extent than has been

necessary up to this point, because of the bias occasioned by the

method of selecting workers for study. In choosing cases, preference was given to those with complete work histories, and consequently

there was a tendency to include only the more successful workers.

This preference undoubtedly affects the distribution of personal-characteristics data.

Earlier chapters have presented the more important discussions

of the general nature of the migratory-casual worker, his position

in the labor market, the extent of his wanderings, the kind and

amount of work he does, and the earnings that he derives from his

efforts. At this point it should be interesting and valuable to consider some of his personal characteristics. This will be done quantitatively in terms of data on age, color and nativity, and years spent

in migratory-casual employment. And it will be done qualitatively

in terms of selected personal histories. YEARS SPENT IN MIGRATORY-CASUAL LABOR

Just when a migrant becomes a confirmed migratory-casual worker

cannot be determined with any pretense of accuracy. The worker

who leaves a settled residence because of economic conditions, per- sonal difficulties, or any one of a dozen motivating forces usually takes

to the road as a means of escaping a situation over which he believes

he has no control. Migration is a time-honored and, frequently, an

effective device for "changing your luck"; and more often than not

it is a temporary expedient. During the depression, thousands of

persons became transients for relatively short periods of time

;

x but

1 See Webb, John N., The Transient Unemployed, Research Monograph III. Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration. Washington. D. C 1936. p. 64 ff. 85
86 The Migratory-Casual Worker

only a small proportion of them found life on the road as satisfactory

in experience as it had seemed in prospect. Among the many who set out in good times and had. some would-be migrants get no farther

than their first impulse carries them; others go on for months in a

state of semiadaptation ; while a small proportion drifts slowly into an irrevocable attachment to life on the road.

Because this study of the confirmed migratory-casual worker was made at a time of social unrest when thousands of temporary

migrants were moving about the country, it was essential to select individuals who clearly had made a complete break with the sedentary way of life. There were two tests which, if applied jointly,

would distinguish the habitual from the temporary migrant: (1) a

livelihood that depended upon short-time seasonal or intermittent

employments at casual pursuits, joined with (2) at least 1 year of

migration immediately preceding the time this study was made.

Actually, as table 8 shows, the great majority of the 500 workers in

this report were veterans of the road—men who had "learned the

ropes" before the depression brought temporary recruits by the tens of thousands.

Table 8.

Years Spent in Migratory-Casual Work by 500 Workers

Total

Type of worker

Years spent in migratory-casual work

Agricultural Industrial Combination i

All workers _ . ... 500 200 100 200

Percent distribution

All workers .. 100 100 100 10 Less than 1 year .... .. , 1 to 2 years _________________________ 317

1410

9

16

12

18

1

4

18

17

11

81610

15

1

2

1410

8

10

16

1723

2 2 to 4 years . . 17

4 to 6 years . 14 6 to 8 years ._ _. ... ... .. ... . ... .... 10 8 to 10 years - ....-- 9

10 to 15 years _____________ . - - . . . -_ 17

15 to 20 years ..- .. ,..,-,. -.. ... 1119 Not ascertainable . -.- - .._-.. 1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

Nearly half of the 500 workers had followed migratory-casual

pursuits for 10 years or longer, and a substantial proportion for 20

or more years. Workers following industrial employment had the

greatest proportion of "old timers", and agricultural workers the

least. However, the importance of table 8 lies not in the distribution of w

T orkers by years of service, but in the clear evidence that
Some Personal Characteristics 87

the 500 workers were habitual migrants who are not to be confused

with the depression transient or with the nonworking tramp.

AGE

The fact that workers were selected for study on a basis of clearly

demonstrated service in the ranks of the migratory-casual worker

must be kept in mind when examining the age data presented in

table 9. Both the young (under 20 years) and the old (65 years

and over) were few in number. The proportion of younger persons was directly affected by the selection of workers with at least a full year on the road and enough employment to allow classification by

type of employment ; this procedure tended to exclude all but a few

migratory-casual workers under 20 years of age. The small number

of individuals 65 years and over is also the result of a selective

process ; but in this case it is the natural process of selection imposed

by the strenuous life that migratory-casual workers lead. Table 9.

Age of 500 Migratory-Casual Workers

Total

Type of worker Age

Agricultural Industrial Combination l

All workers - _.. _____ _ ... . . 500 200 100 200

Percent distribution

All workers. . 100

1 10

161628

189

2

100

1 12

15

1425

1713

3

100 100

15 to 19 years. . .. ... < . 1 20 to 24 years 1110

2130

20

7

1

8 25 to 29 years. . . 20

30 to 34 years . 16 35 to 44 years . .... . _ . . . . . .... 31 45 to 54 years. . . ... . . 18

55 to 64 years

65 years or over .... ....

5

1

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

Most of the 500 workers were between the ages of 20 and 45

age limits within which the unskilled worker's efforts are most productive. Comparable age data from a study of the depression transient indicate that the 500 migratory-casual workers of this report were older than the depression transient, but younger than the resi- dent (local) homeless population 2 of the large cities.

2 Resident or local homeless persons are a distinct and identifiable group in all large

cities. They are to be found on the streets and in the subways, in the municipal lodging

houses, the missions, the Salvation Army soup kitchens, and in the "shantytowns" ; weather

permitting, they can be seen along the docks and in the parks. Certain sections of the

large cities are known afc their habitat ; for instance, the Bowery in New York City, the
88 The Migratory-Casual Worker

roup Median age 45 years and over

Unattached transients

.r>(H) mlgratory'Oasua] workei

27 to 30 years

37 years

12 to 16 percent

Local homeless person, i 42 to 45 years. 40 to 49 percent

; Represents the ranee of monthly values during the period October 1934 through April 1935. See The

Transient Unemployed, <>p. dt. p. 29. The reasons for those differences in age are readily found. Transients were newcomers among the mobile labor group; they came

principally from among the younger group of the unemployed resi- dent population; and about one-half of them remained on the road

for (> months or less. In contrast, the 500 migratory-casual workers

in this study were chosen on a basis of clearly defined work patterns

involving at least a full year of migration. Even though some few

depression transients were included in this selection, it was only in

those cases where the process of adaptation to the life of the confirmed

migrant had gone far enough to leave little question that the worker

would remain on the road. The local homeless of the cities are made

up largely of men who have been wanderers of one sort or another

but who have been forced by age or physical disabilities to abandon

the strenuous life on the road.

COLOR AND NATIVITY

The native-white migratory-casual worker supplies the greater

part of the labor force needed for seasonal and intermittent jobs,

despite efforts to obtain a cheaper and more tractable supply of

foreign-born workers.3 Among the 500 migratory-casual workers in- cluded in this study, the native-white group represented about threequarters of the total, the foreign-born group—white, Oriental, and

Mexican—about one-sixth, and the Negro group, one-twentieth (see

table 10). Because of limitations imposed by the selection of the

cases for study, these proportions should be used only as a rough

indication of the relative importance of the different color and

nativity groups in the total migratory-casual labor supply.

The color and nativity characteristics of the three types of workers

in table 10 show the Mexican to be a more important element among

Avorkers following agricultural employment than among those fol-

"Slave-Market" at West Madison and South State Streets in Chicago, and the "Skidroad"

in Seattle. These sections, of course, are also frequented by migratory-casual workers. Although most of the resident homeless group are casual laborers when they work, and

although many of them leave the city for short periods of time, they are not migratorycasual workers in the sense employed in this report. Rather, they are a "home guard"

that exists precariously on panhandling, odd jobs, the missions, and city institutions for the unattached resident homeless.

3 The use of Oriental and Mexican workers was discussed on p. 12 ff.
Some Personal Characteristics 89

lowing industrial, or a combination of types of employment. It is probable that the actual percentages were biased by the fact that

two of the cities in which interviews were made—Denver and Minneapolis—are in sugar-beet areas where the Mexican worker is an

important element in the labor supply for that crop. Other studies 4 have shown that the Mexican is extensively used in industrial employments, such as railroad right-of-way maintenance, and it is likely

that the Mexican migratory-casual worker in industry was underrepresented in this study. None the less, the indication in table 10

that Mexicans are more frequently found in agricultural than in

industrial employment is believed to be a correct statement of the

order of importance.

Table 10.Color and Nativity of 500 Migratory-Casual Workers

Total

Type of worker

Color and nativity

Agricultural Industrial Combination >

All workers - - . _ 500 200 100 200

Percent distribution

All workers - . 100

85

10078100

91

100 White 90 Native

Foreign-born - 778

73

5 8011 819 Negro . . _ - ._. _ 5

9

1

5

15

2

36

5 Mexican. .. . _ . _ _ ... . 4 Others ..... ... .. ... 1

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

The small proportion of Negroes among the migratory-casual

workers studied is a reflection of the fact that for them employment

opportunities on the road are limited. Moreover, the Negro has,

traditionally, been an immobile group in the population. The only

striking example of migration of Negroes in recent years was the

movement of southern Negroes to the industrial centers of the North

during and after the World War as the result of extensive recruiting

activities to supply a cheap labor supply for the heavy industries.

Racial prejudice commonly operates as a check on the mobility

of Negroes by increasing the difficulties of travel, and by limiting the

number of job opportunities. The Negro who travels by highway

or freight train is more likely to encounter overstrict interpretation

of the vagrancy laws than is the white migrant, and racial prejudice on the part of some employers and many workers places the Negro

See footnote 7, p. 42.
90 The Migratory-Casual Worker

:ii a competitive disadvantage in finding employment in some parts

of the country. An interesting example of deliberately restricted

employment opportunities is to be found in a report which states

that in several southern States, employment agencies sending Negroes

out of the St at i

1 for migratory labor assignments were practically

taxed out of existence.

It will be recalled that the maps in chapter II showing routes

of travel (by crops and industrial processes) had few lines running

into the States of the Old South. In these States, where the Negro

is most numerous, he provides a ready supply of cheap labor for

agricultural and, to an important but lesser extent, for industrial

operations that otherwise would require a mobile labor reserve for

seasonal and intermittent peaks of activity.

PERSONAL HISTORIES

The principal advantage of the foregoing statistical description

is that a few of the personal characteristics of all the 500 workers

can be viewed at one time. The principal disadvantage of this procedure is that the results fail to show, or even to suggest, the distinctive personality of any of these workers. Without some indication of what they are as individuals, this report would fall short of its purpose of describing, in terms of economic and personal factors, the

confirmed migratory-casual worker.

The purely personal factor will be presented through the device

of brief histories, some of them abstracted from the field interviewer's

report on the worker, and some of them in the worker's own words,

edited solely for length. Since only a few of the available 500

histories could be included, a selection was made of those that seemed

to represent attitudes, habits, and personalities of frequent occur- rence among the entire group, and, it is believed, among confirmed

migratory-casual workers in general.

Wanderlust.

The constant urge to be on the move, the tendency to treat employment as a means of gratifying this urge, and the real or fancied

independence of the migratory-casual worker are illustrated by the

personal histories of Jack Lamb, John McClosky, and Harry

I>urnside.G

5 "In Alabama a license fee of $2,500 was required, and an additional amount up to 50 percent of this sum might be levied in each county of the State in which the private agency operated. * * * A bond of $5,000 was required in each county." Harrison,

Shelby M., and Associates, Public Employment Offices, Russell Sage Foundation, New York,

1924, p. 86. Moreover, "efforts of citizens to prevent Negro recruiting [for out-of-State employment] went as far as threats of violence to the recruiting agent", p. 606. The names here, and throughout this section, are fictitious.
Some Personal Characteristics 91

Jack Lamb, 32 years old, a Cherokee Indian, began work in the

gas and oil fields after he left the Navy in 1926. By following pipeline construction and repair jobs throughout Texas and Oklahoma,

Mr. Lamb was able to remain employed a good part of the time,

despite the short duration of most of the jobs he secured.

His largest yearly earnings at this work were $900, made in 1929.

Since that time he had earned considerably less, but never less than

$250. In 1934, a fairly typical year for his employment, he held

three jobs : one in Duval County, Tex., lasting 1 month ; the second

in Victoria, Tex., lasting 5 months; and a third at Refugio, Tex.,

lasting 2 weeks. His earnings for the year were $550.

Jack Lamb went into migratory-casual work because it appealed to him. Not liking confinement to a single job or place, he prefers pipeline work to any other because it allows him to leave a job whenever

he wishes, and to obtain another without much difficulty. His fre- quent periods of unemployment are not unwelcome, for he is ex- tremely fond of fishing and gambling. Mr. Lamb's earnings have

nearly always been adequate for his needs ; and if necessary, he could

usually borrow from other pipe-line workers. Accordingly he has

rarely sought relief.Autobiography of John McClosky

Born in Missouri in 1889. Went to Illinois in covered wagon along with

father, mother, three sisters, two brothers. Father ran hoist at coal mine, traded horses, peddled fish, crockery, and did jobs of work around Peoria,

111. About 1893 my mother and one sister died of typhoid fever. Dad came to Seattle. Built and lived in one-room shack at foot of Kinnear Park. Moved

to 6 miles north of Bellingham. On this place I begin to do hard labor, helped saw stove wood. I hauled wood to Bellingham and peddled it. Then I got a job as bellboy in Byron Hotel (was awfully green) then went to work for Western

Union, messenger boy.

Ran away from home. Went to Seattle and got a job as deckboy on steamship that went to San Francisco. I got paid off there, got taken in by sights of the big city. Came to my senses, my boat had sailed. I had 50 left in my

pocket. I spent it for a newspaper and looked through the ads. Porter wanted,

Restaurant. Convinced the boss I could do the work, $5 a week and board. Stayed there 10 days, had fight with cook, got fired. Got a job on a steamer

to San Diego. Worked 3 months then quit. Got a job in a family hotel in San Francisco as bellboy, stayed there 3 weeks and got fired for pulling a boner. Went back to San Diego. Left after short time. Got job in Hotel San Rafael,

San Francisco, bellboy, $15 per month.

About this time I began to think of home for the first time. After 4 weeks

I wrote home. Dad had moved to near Blaine, Wash., on 40 acres of unimproved

land. Headed for home. Went to Aberdeen on a lumber schooner, Seattle on

train, to Blaine on the boat. Stayed awhile. Struck out for Seattle. Got job

as flunkey in logging camp. Never stayed long in one place. Get few dollars, go to Seattle, go broke—then go back and work some more. After a while I would get sick. Go home. Stay a short time. Gone again.
92 The Migratory-Casual Worker

I finally got work in n now shingle mill near my father's ranch. I worked

there In the woods cutting shingle bolts, and learning to saw and pack shingles.

Then I went to Everett, Wash., and lived around there cutting shingle bolts, sawing, and packing. Worked in shingle mills up and down Puget Sound. Never stayed long In one place. I put in 3 years on Vancouver Island sawing

shingle-, spent most of my winters on a trap line in Whatcom County, near my father's ranch.

In L918 I married (May 3). Wife and I came to Seattle and I longshored up to the general strike in 1919. Drove a car for my brother-in-law for 18

months. Went east of the mountains logging. Back to Seattle. Peddled handlulls from house to house. Worked for junk company. Cut wood on the

beach. Worked on a paving job, wheeling sand and gravel to the concrete

mixer. My wife's health was poorly, and they said the mountain air would help her.

I went Up to Lake Wenatchee to cut shingle bolts and took my wife. Stayed

there - years while my wife's health greatly improved. Picked apples in Wenatchee Valley for the first time. Wife wanted divorce. Started same

then changed mind. After another year took another notion for divorce. I went to San Juan Island and cut cordwood from January to August. When I came out to Bellingham I found I was divorced.

I worked 2 months mucking on the Cascade Tunnel. Sawed shingles at Quilcene, Wash. Worked one winter for a coal company in Seattle. Made cedar shakes one summer at Kerriston, Wash. Was married while there. Wife and I parted same year. Since then I have been knocking around Washington working

here and there at odd jobs, mostly in the Wenatchee Valley but I have only

averaged 4 months work per year since 1928. Harry Burnside, 40 years old, has been a logger, Great Lakes sea- man, harvest hand, general farm laborer, and itinerant peddler in

every State from Illinois to Washington. Largely as a result of his

experiences he had become a remarkably independent and self-reliant

person, jealous of his rights and, except in the worst of times, capable

of taking care of himself. Mr. Burnside supplied the following

account of his wanderings from January 1, 1933, to February 18, 1935 : Minneapolis, Jan. 1, 1933 by street-car to White Bear Minnesota by buss

to Stillwater from Still

w

Tater walked payd fare and rode freight to Madison,

Wis. AVhen I arrived in Madison Feb. 2 1933 i had accumulated about seven

dollars in cash, i rented a room and boght some paint and other material

and made some articles to sell but to my distress the chamber of comirce and

the Police notified me that i have to pay 5' dollars permit (the five dollars which i dint have) so after eating a bowl of soup at the relieff station i took my bundles of unsold goods and mounted a blind of Milwaukee passenger train headed for Watertown Wis. when i arrived in Watertown in 2 below zero Weather a brave citysen (his name is motercicle Mike) told me to stay on

because the dint want no one without money in this town so i stayed on to nex

division, from there i went to Oshkosh Wis by freight, same thing there so i rode a freyght to Fond du Lac where i sold my goods [celluloid novelty pins

and rings].

i took a freyght from state of Wis and rode to Margaret Iowa from Margaret

to Freeport 111 by way of Dubuque Davenport and Moline by freyght and buss,

in Freeport i met a man with a car selling cleaner, i made a deal with him to stand half expenses and change off driving, both of us got along pretty well,
Some Personal Characteristics 93

for a while so went back by way of Moline Rock Island etc to Omaha Neb

when we arrived in Omaha it was about midle of March 1933 so we stayed in Omaha about 45 days and things went well, from Omaha we went to Aberdeen

S. Dak. where our car broke down, my frend sold it for 7 dollars and went

home, we had saved during our travels 72 dollars each, i went to Minniapolis

with intentions to buy myself an old Ford but could not make a satisfactory deal and it was getting late in August so i decided to visit my sister in Chicago,

i had a few dollars left but not enough to travel as people should so i rode

freyght back to Chicago expecting to get work of some kind (being under the Elusion of the New administration) but in Chicago i dint get emploiment or

find my sister, so discurraged and disappointed i had to leave Chicago pedling baskets and what not towards the northwest, when i arrived in Duluth in November i was in hopes to get work in the woods but all those i had worked

for prevous had shut down or went out of Operation entirely, so i went to minniapolis to winter, i stayed around there until May 15, 1934 (during that time i spent 4 months in the Minniapolis Penal Institution for trying to keep

above the grave) i left Minniapolis by fregt train to Fargo to Grand Forks to Devils Lake to Minot to Kenmore to Egeland to Devils Lake to Caselton to Valley City to Jamestown to Bismark to Glendive Mont. Miles City to Forsyth

to Helena to Misula to Sand Point to Spokane las week in October. Spokane to Yakima to Auburn to Tacoma. stayd in Tacoma 3 weeks selling willow

baskets. Tacoma to Seattle by boat staid there 7 weeks Seattle to Portland

by fregt. 2 weeks there. Back to Tacoma for Chrismas and came by bus to

Seattle. Been here ever since. Occupational and Physical Deterioration.

The long-time effects of the migratory-casual life upon the workers

could hardly be expected to be other than injurious. Since the work

is largely unskilled, any specialized occupational fitness the workers

may have had is likely to deteriorate through disuse. Many of the

workers studied had suffered in this way ; typical cases of deterioration of skill are those of Joe McMathews and Tony Slotnig.

Physically, the effects of migratory-casual workers are likely to be even more disastrous. Inadequate shelter and diet, strenuous work

under conditions often unhealthful, and lack of medical care, all contribute to the premature superannuation that is characteristic of

many of the workers over 40 years. Evidence of physical deterioration are to be found in the cases of John Peterson and Jesus Lopez.

Joe McMathews, 46, was the son of a well-to-do Ohio farmer.

During his junior year in college he had a violent quarrel with his

father "over abusing a horse", and as a result left home. Soon after- ward he married and moved to San Francisco. There he obtained a

job in a seed house, and was soon promoted to one of more responsibility, his knowledge of agriculture standing him in good stead. His wife, however, did not like California, and her insistence that he

quit his job and return to the Middle West finally resulted in a

quarrel and divorce.

180766°—37 8
94 The Migratory-Casual Worker

After his divorce. Mr. McMathews left the seed house and drifted

into loss stable jobs, such as skilled cannery work and crew boss in

the vineyards. In L923, he went into politics and got an appointment as a county highway inspector at $14 a day, but lost the job 9

months later, following an election. He said that he regretted ever having gone into politics because it had given him a taste for an

* asy job at big pay and spoiled him.

Failing to get another political job, he became a migratory-casual

worker, and with the exception of 1 year spent in operating a rented

orchard and a second year spent as a faro dealer in a Los Angeles

gambling house, he had remained one ever since. His migrations

had carried him to jobs in nearly all the Mountain and Middle Western States. He had been an oil-field worker, a wheat, lettuce, and

fruit harvester, a bricklayer, a truck driver, a cannery worker, a cornhusker, a tie cutter, a houseman in a pool hall, a berry picker,

and a trapper. During this period his unskilled jobs became more

and more frequent until, by 1934, he was reduced mainly to picking

berries and trapping.

When interviewed, Mr. McMathews was "stoically patient" about

accepting his "present condition" and was busy making plans for

the future on the basis of recognition of "past mistakes", that is, his wandering life during the last decade. He believed that he

could establish himself as an influential member of a "respectable"

community. The interviewer remarked that Mr. McMathews' optimism was probably due to the fact that he intended to return to Ohio in the spring to marry a childhood sweetheart who had just

inherited a large, fertile farm upon the death of her father.

Joe McMathews had "definitely concluded" that the depression

would continue only 1 year longer.

Autobiography of Tony Slotnig

I was born in Ohio. My folks took me back to the old country [Austria]

when I was a baby and I don't know why. My father worked in the vine- yards, and I did too. I kept running away from home and working. My

uncle wrote me about how fine everything was over in America, and I came

over here and found it wasn't so fine. (Oh yes, I did make good money, but

that's all gone now.)

I first went to work in an iron foundry at Verona, Pa., for $1.75 a day.

Then I got a big job with an insulator company doing piece work, trimming

insulators. I was making as high as $10 a day. I was young and full of

hell and went into the city every night, got drunk, stayed out all night, and

would come back to work in the morning too sleepy to see. The inspectorwould come along, take a look at an insulator and throw it into the scrap

heap. I told him not to do it and got mad and hit him over the head with

one. He chased me and I ran and when we passed the cashier's window my

check was already waiting for me.
Some Personal Characteristics 95

Then the papers came out all about the big wages Henry Ford was paying,

and I got hungry for that. Packed up and went to Detroit. Found that everybody there was a mechanic. Worked at common labor until I could buy some tools, then worked for Ford for 13 months at $5.60 a day during the war. I quit him because there wasn't enough money in it. Went back to Detroit and worked as a machinist. In 1924 I met my wife and got married with her. I worked at piece work

in the Fisher Body Plant, getting as high as $20 a day. In 1926 I went to work for the U. S. Radio Corporation at $1.50 an hour. In 1929 I got my arm

caught and tore up the muscles in it. I was sick 4 or 5 months. My wife was

in the family way and we had one hell of a time. I signed a petition I was

o. k. and went back to work for 2 months in 1930, then they laid me off because

there wasn't enough work. I had slowed down because my hand got numb

when I tried to use it and I couldn't grasp a lathe like I used to. I had the case reopened twice trying to get more damages, but the company had smarter

fellows than I had.

Well, my wife went back to her folks. They forclosed the mortgage on our

house. My wife's brother-in-law and sister had to move in with the old folks

too, making nine of us in the little house. Her folks didn't like me and said

I was a foreigner and a Catholic and didn't have any education. I packed up and left. They had me arrested for deserting my family, and made me

work for the relief and report to the judge every week. I couldn't stick it, so came out west in 1933.

I hitch-hiked through the Dakotas, inquired in a pool hall for a job, and

found one on a farm plowing for 500 a day. Worked there 8 weeks and

never got but $4. Was walking around the street hungry when I met a

fellow half drunk who told me about a job he was supposed to go to that I could have if I wanted it. I sure was lucky he was drunk. I harvested there, and made about $60. Then I went to Colorado to work in the sugar beets, but nothing there but Mexicans. I got a job cutting grapes for Filipino contractors. They hire more men than they need so they can collect for boarding them. We had rice three times a day and slept on the floor like hogs.

I think I owed them board when I left. It was terrible there and if the gov- ernment doesn't believe it, I've got the man's name here on a card and you

can go see for yourself. [He produced a card with the name and address of the vineyard owner on it.] I started to pick cotton but heard that there was a big strike on and two

people killed, so I got cold feet and left the country. Had a dish-washing job

for a fellow who got sick, but he was only sick a week. Then I hit the freight

and got in a good job of harvesting at Colfax, Wash. I tried to pick apples, but couldn't find anything. Went to Moxie, Wash, and picked hops and sure made it good—about $25 in two weeks ; slipped in lots of leaves in the bottom

of the sack. I found a farm job where I have been ever since. They expected me to milk 6 cows and kept piling on more work, all for just tobacco money,

so I quit. I'll do most anything I can find, though. Think I'll stay in Washington, because if you go to California, you can't get nothing to do unless you

are a Filipino or a native son. Jesus Lopez, 50-year-old Mexican, came to the United States with

his family in 1916. During the first 3 years of his stay he did extra- gang work on various Middle Western railroads. In 1919-20 the

possibility of larger earnings through the employment of his wife
96 The Migratory-Casual Worker

and children caused him to leave extra-gang work to take his family

(o the Texas cottonfields.

He and his family separated and he worked again in extra gangs until, in 1924, he took the usual migratory-casual method of

protesting against bad conditions—quitting the job. After 4 years

of work in sugar beets (1924-28) he had secured a steady job as a

section hand near Broken Bow, Nebr.

Jesus Lopez lost this job in 1931, when he was 47. "They tell me I am too old", he said. Unable to get railroad work again, he

turned to the beet fields like many other migratory-casual workers

who were judged to be too old for industrial occupations. After

1932 he had worked mostly in sugar beets, with some apple picking.

Jesus Lopez had not earned more than $75 in any 1 year after

1932. His highest earnings (in 1922) were $500. Since 1928 he

had made his headquarters in Seattle, where he ordinarily spends

July to September and December to May. When interviewed, he was living in Seattle's shantytown, "Hooverville", and had been

spending his spare time collecting junk to sell and hunting firewood.

John Peterson, 55 years old and in poor health, came to America

from Sweden when he was 20. In Sweden he had been a farm

laborer, and he continued with the same work in America, spending

his time in the Dakotas and in Minnesota doing seasonal farm work

plowing, haying, and threshing wheat. In between times he worked

at road construction, street repairs in Fargo and Minneapolis, as a general farm hand in various places in the Northwest, and as a logger in northern Minnesota. During all this time he had periods

of ill health caused by an early illness and aggravated by the rigors of

his migratory life. An especially serious illness followed an accident

in which his leg was broken.

A combination of harvest work with logging and construction had

provided him with adequate employment up until 1932, but in 1933

he secured only 3 weeks of harvest work at Fargo, and spent the rest of the year idle. In 1934 he had had three jobs, which together

lasted less than 6 months; in the spring he had gone to northern

Minnesota as a logger and earned $1 a day for 4 months; late in

the summer he had 1 month of work hauling grain; and shortly

before being interviewed he had worked for a week shoveling snow

in Minneapolis. He had just refused a job in a logging camp paying

35 cents a day.

Throughout his 25 years of migratory-casual work, Mr. Peterson

has been in the habit of spending the winter idle in Minneapolis,

except for short portions of a few winters spent in logging. However, the mode of living which the miserable earnings of his migratory work forced him to follow had undermined his health so com-
Some Personal Characteristics 97

pletely that he was forced at last to leave for a warmer climate.

When interviewed, he was en route to Texas, where he had some

hope that his health would become improved. He wished to spend

the rest of his life in a warmer climate.

John Peterson was very gloomy during the interview. He declared that there would never be any more seasonal work available

in the wheat harvest, and that the future was "very dark" for all men of his type. He was unmarried, and thought this situation

fortunate inasmuch as he is no longer able to find enough work even

to support himself.

Attitude Towards Relief.

In general, the habitual migratory-casual worker applied for relief

only when there was no alternative. Pride in his ability to care for

himself, and a dislike of the routine of relief procedures—interviews,

delays, and a scheduled way of living—kept him out of transient

bureaus except for an occasional stop. Three typical expressions of

the dislike of relief are illustrated by the personal histories of

Herbert Randolph, Thomas Stribling, and Thad Carlton.

Herbert Randolph, a 37-year-old veteran, had been following

migratory-casual work for 17 years. During the first part of this

period he was employed largely in logging camps on the Pacific coast and in Idaho, but recently he has been doing work of all sorts

marine fireman, extra-gang laborer, apple picker, and oil-field worker.

He did not have a regular off-season although he said that when

he was working in the logging camps he periodically took lay-offs

of a week or so and then returned to the same job. Otherwise, his

practice was to accumulate $100 and to travel until the money

was gone.

The largest sum he had ever made during a single year was $1,200,

earned in 1924. In 1932 he earned nothing; in 1933 as a seaman,

logger, and section-hand he earned a total of $50; and in 1934, $100 on a logging job at Sand Point, Idaho.

Herbert Randolph had been to Washington, D. C, on the first bonus march, and said he had been "on the bum" for over a year

after that. Early in 1934 he "just happened to see a cabin that

could be lived in by fixing a couple of windows" in Whatcom

County, Wash. He had repaired it and settled down for nearly a

year. He was jovial, but rather cynical. He complained of the poor

food served him at the local shelter, and said he guessed he would

have to find some kind of a job "because he just couldn't stand that

stuff." He referred to transient relief as "the bread line", and.
98 The Migratory-Casual Worker

although he had no specific plans for the future, lie was anxious

jo leave the transient shelter as soon us possible.

Thomas Stribling, 50 years old, a native Texan, became an

agricultural migratory-casual worker in 1927. From 1906 until

1927 Mi'. Stribling had worked as a painter, carpenter, and cement

finisher. A period of unemployment forced him to seek aid at a

mission in Forth Worth. The mission secured a job for him as a

cotton picker, and he has been following agricultural work in Texas

ever since. In 1933, a typical year for Mr. Stribling, he worked in six dif- ferent places, on five different crops: worked as a general farm

laborer at Handley, Tex., during February; picked fruit at Pharr,

Tex., for a month in the spring; cultivated onions at Haymondville,

Tex., through most of the summer; picked cucumbers at Mathis,

fex.. for 1 month; picked berries at Lindale, Tex., early in the fall; and from September until December picked cotton at Sebastian and

Corpus Christi. He spent 1934 in much the same way, but despite

the fact that he kept reasonably busy during both 1933 and 1934,

his earnings were only $300 each year. Thomas Stribling was excessively apologetic about being on relief. The onion harvest, which had brought him to Dallas, was late in

1935, and, having no funds, he had been forced for the first time

since 1927 to ask for help. He seemed to pride himself on the fact

that he had learned to live on such a small yearly income; he was

even content, for example, to sleep outdoors most of the year. Thad Carlton, a Negro, 29 years old, became a migratory-casual

worker in 1932, when replacement of Negro workers by white workers

closed the opportunities for his employment as porter and bellboy

in Chicago. His last "permanent job" Avas as porter in a night

club in Memphis. When he lost that job, he hitch-hiked to California, partly because of the attraction of the climate, but mainly

in hope of finding hotel work there. He had several jobs as a bootblack and car washer around Los Angeles, and when someone told

him of work in the lettuce fields, he went there and found a job

cutting, packing, and loading lettuce. Thad Carlton was working on a truck in the lettuce fields in

Imperial Valley when the shed packers struck for higher wages.

Since he was a Negro, he was not permitted to join the A. F. of L.

shed-packers' union, and as a result he had continued to work on the

truck with armed guards until the strike was over. After the

strike, his employer had. sold the crop to a San Diego contractor,

who brought in his own laborers, displacing Mr. Carlton and the

other Avorkers who lived on the lettuce farm.
Some Personal Characteristics 99

Thad Carlton was proud of his record of being self-supporting

throughout the greater part of the depression and was extremely

"anxious to get off relief." He described some of the ways of getting work. "You always

hang around a car rack after a rain because they have extra work

washing cars then." He also watched the papers for announce- ments of conventions, and would follow them up and apply for

work in the hotels where the conventions were to be held.

Political Attitudes.

The difficulty which migratory-casual workers had experienced

in finding employment had various effects upon their thinking.

Almost all of them had been in some measure discouraged by their

experiences; but this feeling of discouragement was mitigated, in

most cases, by a belief that the lack of employment was a temporary

phenomenon connected with the depression, and that the lean years

would pass. There were some, however, particularly among those

prematurely superannuated, who felt that there was something basically wrong with the economic system, and that their troubles were

merely symptoms of a widespread and grave ailment affecting all society.

Their conceptions of the nature of the ailment, and its cause and

cure, were various. As may be observed in their personal histories, their diagnoses and suggested cures had little in common.

Arthur Hagen, a native Kansan, 44 years old, spent most of his

life following the wheat harvest as a migratory-casual worker.

Beginning in 1912, he harvested wheat each summer from Kansas

to Canada, and occasionally worked between times on extra gangs

and in logging camps. After the war he continued to follow the

wheat, and filled in between seasons with general farm work near Sioux City, Iowa.

Arthur Hagen gave an account of the good wages and large labor

demand in the wheat harvest before the war, when the shortage and

inefficiency of farm machinery had to be made up in manpower. So

great was the need for help that he often worked 40 days consecutively. His principal method of finding jobs was to ask the country

storekeepers to tell where there was a shortage of workers. The

extreme casualness of harvest employment is shown by the fact that

although he returned each season to the same locality, and often

threshed on a farm several years in succession, he seldom knew his

employers' names. As the farming country in Montana opened up, about 1915, he

began going there because "men are scarcer and wages higher in a new country." After 1923 he no longer went into Canada, and by
/(Hi The Migratory-Casual Worker

he said thai harvest work was "no good at all because by then

they had a combine for every quarter-section and didn't need many

men." Nevertheless, he continued to make the trip into the Dakotas

each summer, although he had secured no harvest work whatever

si net4 L931. In L933 and 1934 he had been almost altogether without

work of any sort, and had secured only four jobs lasting an average

of a week apiece during these 2 years. Arthur 1 1 agon freely expounded his plan for "running the country",

which he had often wanted to write up, except that "his spelling

bothered him too much." His plan, a$ he explained it, was to pay

everyone over 40 years of age $200 a month, to be raised by a manufacturers' tax on the goods which would be sold when the recipients

of the payments began to spend. Meantime, every relief client was

to be fingerprinted and his record filed at a "National Bureau of

Identification." Each relief client would then be issued a statement

certifying that he was "homeless." Afterwards, whenever the client

wanted relief again, he would present his certificate and his fingerprints and be granted assistance without delay.

Arthur Hagen felt that unless profound economic changes were made, his generation would probably never return to work. He was

afraid, however, that there would be a war before those changes

could be made.

Sylvanus Spenser, 43 years old, had been an agricultural migratory-casual worker around the Dakotas for several years after he was discharged from the Army. Subsequently he had secured a job

as a moving-picture operator. When he lost that job in 1929, he

jumped a freight and, resumed following the harvest and odd construction jobs through the West and Southwest. In 1933 and 1934

he held nine different jobs: picking cotton near Buckeye, Ariz.;

digging potatoes at Idaho Falls, Idaho ; doing odd jobs in a hospital

at Joplin, Mo. ; picking strawberries at Fayetteville, Ark. ; painting

houses in Tulsa, Okla. ; harvesting wheat in North Dakota; and

picking wild blackberries and working at an orphanage in Joplin.

Sylvanus Spenser declared that he didn't know what was going

to happen to the country; also, that "he'd hate to say what he

thinks will happen to the country." He read a great deal in the

newspapers and listened to speeches over the radio (he thought

Father Coughlin and Huey Long were both "very fine men") but

spent most of his time looking for work. His opinion that the condition of the country was hopeless had not destroyed his hope of finding "steady work some place", and when interviewed, he was en route

to the Yakima Valley, Wash., to seek work in the fruit harvest.
Some Personal Characteristics 101

John Hill had been a butcher for 14 years when the war began.

After he returned from the war he was restless, and, finding that

ex-service men were "getting the breaks" on construction jobs, he

sold his butcher shop and became a migratory-casual worker. Since

1922 he has been employed almost continuously on construction jobs

throughout the West—on hydroelectric developments at Skagit, Kock

Island, and Renton, Wash.; on tunnel jobs at San Francisco and

Malone, Calif., and at Cascade Tunnel, Wash. From 1931 to the

middle of 1933 he was a machine driller at Boulder Dam, and in

the last months of 1933 he worked on highway construction near Las

Vegas. In 1934 he worked on road construction at Kingman, Ariz.,

and in the fall, worked for 3 months on an irrigation tunnel near

Casper, Wyo. Late in 1934 he secured a short job on a tunnel at Fort Peck Dam, Mont.

John Hill never worked more than a few months on a construction

job without taking time off to rest and "get the smoke out of his

lungs." When working on Cascade Tunnel, "a very smoky job", he

would work 2 months, then go to Seattle for a month's rest. While

working in the Southwest, he habitually took time off periodically

and went either to the jungles, where he slept in the open and "sunned

himself" until he was rested, or else went to Las Vegas, where he

frequently lost his money gambling before he had time to rest on

his savings.

John Hill said that he had never "felt the depression" (when interviewed at a transient bureau he was en route to a construction job

at Grand Coulee Dam, Wash.). Because of his strength and health,

and his skill as a machine miner, combined with his wide acquaint- ance with contractors throughout the West, John Hill had never been out of work long. Despite these advantages, however, he had

never made more than $1,200 net during any year. His best years were in 1929 and 1930 when wages were high and when, living near town, he could take rest periods easily without losing too much time

from work.

John Hill said that he "wasn't worried about politics", and that

like 19 out of 20 of his fellow-workers, he had no voting residence

"a person's vote doesn't count anyway", he said.

George Zimmerman, 37 years old, was 1 of 11 children of German

immigrant parents. Since his first job as a cement worker, secured

when he was 13 years old, he has held over 100 migratory-casual

jobs. Most of them have been in the eastern Washington fruit

harvest, in fruit and fish canneries, and in the grain harvest of the

Big Bend country of eastern Washington.
t02 The Migratory-Casual Worker

At one time, spring-cultivation work had enabled him to maintain

a fairly complete year-round work pattern, but in the last few years, he reported, cultivation jobs had become almost entirely mechanized.

His seasons were now beginning in June, with apple thinning.

George Zimmerman had several times attempted to leave migratorv-easiial work. He had had occasional jobs in Seattle warehouses,

had once taken a correspondence course in automobile repairing,

and had subsequently worked at the trade in Seattle for a short

period. At another time, he had for 3 months sold automobiles.

But his lack of education and his German accent always handicapped

him, and because his early training made farm jobs the easiest to

find and the best paid he could get, he had eventually confined himself entirely to them. His highest earning years were in the early

1020's. Since 1930 he had never made more than $300 a year and

had earned only $125 in 1934.

George Zimmerman expressed fear that the depression would lead

to war. When questioned further as to his attitudes, he wrote this

reply

:

Not being a writer, and being more used to watching and studying, I may

not convey my ideas as I see them. But I will do my best to that end. In order to be able to give work to more persons we must know as much

as possible about the cause of unemployment. Industrialism claims the regaining of foreign markets will end the depression and unemployment. But they

do not tell us that foreign countries are trying to do the same thing, trying

to produce all their own needs and restore prosperity by exporting their surplus. So no help there. Some of our unemployment is only for a time, caused by temporary depression. But most of those unemployed will never find work again yet. The

reason for this is machines, which have taken the place of men in every branch of industry and farming. Much of the labor they displace is not again

absorbed because employers do not increase the wages of the men they keep

enough to stimulate them to buy products of other industries, or lower prices

enough to increase demand to where production increases will reemploy

laid-off men. But let us not blame the machine—to do away with it would be to increase production cost, prices, which would decrease consumption and cause more

unemployment. It is the system which is at fault. Put more profit in the hands of the employees, so they can buy back that which is produced by their labor. Greedy employers will not do this, so government must ; government of the people, by the people, for the people. All people have the right to a chance to earn a decent living and our govern- ment must prevent any minority from causing depression by uncontrolled

use of money and profit. I do not say divide the wealth. But we should make a reasonable limit to a

person's wealth. I believe in government ownership of all natural resources and public serving institutions. I come to this conclusion through more than

20 years of work, study, and observation all over the United States.
Chapter VI

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence of tliis report points clearly to the conclusion that

the migratory-casual worker, despite his independent attitude

and his pride in his ability to "get by" on the road, is in fact an underemployed and poorly paid worker, who easily and frequently

becomes a charge on society. Directly or indirectly, State and local governments are forced to accept some responsibility for individuals

in this group. Hospitalization, emergency relief, border patrols,

and the policing of jungles, shantytowns, and scenes of labor dis- putes are examples of money costs that are borne directly by the

public. Moreover, it must be remembered that many of the local homeless of the large cities who are dependent on public or private

assistance—those who fill the municipal lodging houses, missions,

and cheap flop houses at night, or sleep on park benches, docks, and

in subways—are discards from the ranks of the migratory-casual

worker, since by reason of age, habits, or infirmities, they are no

longer able to make a living on the road.

There is another cost that cannot be assessed in dollars: the exist- ence of a group whose low earnings necessitate a standard of living

far below the level of decency and comfort. The presence of such

a group in any community, even though for a short time each year, cannot fail to affect adversely the wage level of resident workers

who are engaged in the same or similar pursuits.

The social and economic problem growing out of inadequate em- ployment at low wages is, of course, not confined to the migratorycasual worker. Millions of resident workers have been, or are now,

dependent upon unemployment relief because of these same inadequacies. The problem of the migratory-casual worker is one aspect

of the general problem of economic insecurity, but, because of the

economic function involved, its relation to the larger problem is peculiar.

The migratory-casual worker exists because of the labor demand of

agricultural and industrial processes that operate seasonally or intermittently in areas where the resident population does not supply the

necessary labor force. The demand arises from operations associated

with the progression of the seasons; and the supply comes from

among the more mobile individuals that compose the general pool of

unemployed.

103
tOh The Migratory-Casual Worker

This integral relationship of the migratory-casual worker to the

total labor supply is sometimes overlooked. The thinking that has

From time to time been given to a solution of the problem presented

has overemphasized the unique character of migratory-casual employment. Solutions commonly suggested are: (1) assisting the worker

to establish employment sequences through dovetailing employment

in processes differing as to time of peak operations; and (2) stabilizing the migrant worker through off-season employment in related or nonrelated operations.

These proposals are not entirely consistent, since the line of

thought in (1) is based upon the assumption that a mobile labor force

is essential to these processes, while in (2) this assumption is denied.

Public employment offices would provide the mechanism for facilitat- ing employment sequences, while it is primarily the employer, perhaps aided by employment offices, who would arrange the off-season

employment necessary for stabilization.

There is sufficient evidence in this report to permit a critical ex- amination of both these proposals. Any plan to develop employment sequences extending over a major part of the year runs counter

to the fact shown in chapter IV that both agricultural and industrial

processes employing mobile labor reach their peaks of labor demand

at about the same period of the year—late spring to early fall—and

that for a good number, the peaks of employment coincide. Under

these circumstances, employment sequences exceeding one-half of the

year are impossible for all the workers employed during the summer

months. This conclusion does not overlook the fact that some

workers follow logging in the winter and harvesting in the summer, or that some extra-gang workers fill in the winter as general

farm hands. These and similar sequences occur, but by the very

nature of the unequal labor demand of the summer, as against that

of the winter months, all, or even a substantial proportion, of the

mobile reserve cannot secure such sequences of employment.

Another objection must be raised against dependence upon public

employment offices to spread employment among migrants. During

periods of depression, when the general pool of unemployment rises by reason of wholesale layoffs of resident workers, the effectiveness of

employment offices in directing the movement of the migratorycasual worker would be seriously restricted. When there is a general

surplus of workers, employment offices, like business establishments,

have little market for their offerings. The experience of the past few

years shows that resident workmen turn migrants in sufficient numbers to provide serious competition to the habitual migratory-casual

worker in those seasonal operations—particularly in agriculture

that continue in good times and in bad. During such times what is needed is not employment office direction of the labor reserve, swollen
Conclusions 105

with newcomers, into areas where it will compete for the jobs ordinarily held by habitual migratory-casual workers. Instead, what is needed is the diversion of the surplus into such channels as public

works, for the purpose of lessening the progressive disorganization

of the labor market.

Although it is a conclusion of this study that the direction of the

migratory-casual worker by employment offices would not provide a

basic solution of the problem, plainly such direction could assist materially in reducing the intensity of the problem. By anticipating

local demands for seasonal labor, and exchanging this information

with other offices in the same area, they could do much to restrict the extent of migration illustrated in chapter II of this report. Furthermore, if these offices could become the means of impounding the sur- plus of mobile workmen through diversion to public works projects

during depressions, migratory and resident workmen alike would

benefit. Any such procedure would, of course, run counter to the

deeply rooted custom that "residents come first" which is to be found

in the settlement laws on the statute books of most of the States. The second of the proposals mentioned above—stabilization of the

migratory-casual worker—needs but scant attention here. It is obviously unworkable except in such industrial operations as lumbering,

where the seasonality of employment is largely the result of market

conditions that conceivably could be controlled. Mention was made

in chapter I of the efforts of a large sugar-beet company to find off- season employment for its migratory workers. Because of the rela- tively long employment season in sugar beets it would seem to provide an exceptionally favorable opportunity for attempting stabilization.

But here, as elsewhere, stabilization would depend on some seasonal

operation—existing or to be devised—that complements the principal

employment season. The difficulty of finding existing off-season

operations seems to be self-evident ; and operations devised to use this

off-season excess of labor have generally led to even more than

ordinary exploitation.1 No doubt something could be done toward stabilization of agricultural workers in some States, such as California, which have an

almost continuous growing season. Some relative degree of stabilization might be achieved through the staggering of the planting. However, two careful students of agricultural labor point out that

:

Reorganization of crop plantings in order to regularize demand for farm labor, and so to stabilize it, has long been urged in California. But

considerations of market, soil, and climate, rather than conservation

1 As an example of how operations planned to use migratory workers during the off- season, see the testimony concerning the Grays Harbor Commercial Co., in the Report of the Commission on Industrial Relations, S. Doc. No. 415, G4th Cong., Washington, D. C,

1916, vol. V, p. 4285 ff.
100 The Migratory-Casual Worker

of labor power and the human resources of the laborer, continue to

i ii. On the whole they impede stabilization.2 No mention has been made up to this point of the possible effect of the unemployment insurance provision of the Social Security Act on

the problem of the migratory-casual worker. In its present form un- employment insurance can be of little or no direct benefit to this

group. In the first place, agriculture, the largest employer of migratory-casual workers, is an "uncovered industry." In the second place,

migratory-casual workers in the covered industries are either specifically excluded from benefits (e. g., in Massachusetts) or, what in

most cases amounts to the same thing, will be excluded because of

failure to meet the requirement of a minimum period of employment

in covered industries within the State 3 (see ch. Ill on duration of

jobs). Even workers having employment in covered industries in

excess of the minimum requirement may be excluded because this

employment was held in two or more States.4 Assuming, as seems reasonable, that coverage will be broadened,

there arises the nice problem of how the migratory-casual worker,

with his preponderantly short-term jobs and frequent movement

across State lines, would be handled administratively under an insur- ance plan. Moreover, the yearly earnings of migratory-casual

workers in both agriculture and industry are so small (see ch. Ill)

that benefits would be of little help even if the other difficulties could

be surmounted.

Indirectly, however, unemployment insurance should work to the

benefit of the migratory-casual worker. It has been pointed out re- peatedly in this report that the general instability of industrial employment creates a pool of unemployed from which come many of the

migratory-casual workers. Insofar as unemployment insurance for

resident workmen reduces this source of pressure on the labor market

it will assist the migratory-casual worker, particularly during depressions. Moreover, the unemployment-insurance laws of many States,

by rewarding the reduction of labor turnover, may tend toward

2 Taylor. Paul S., and Vasey, Tom, Contemporary Background of California Farm Labor, Rural Sociology, December 1936, pp. 416-417.

3 At the time this report was written, 36 States had unemployment compensation laws

in effect. All of them contained a provision for a minimum period of employment in covered industries within the State during the preceding 52 weeks. The most liberal provision was 13 weeks, and the least liberal, 26 weeks.

4 See Burns, Eveline M., Towards Social Security, Whittlesey House, New York, 1936,

pp. 84-85. "Migratory workers will have difficulty in obtaining benefits even if they work for a

time in States with compensation laws * * *. Even a worker who has had jobs in two States, both providing unemployment compensation, may lose his rights. His period

of work in each State may be too short to permit him to claim benefits, although when

added together they would amount to the minimum period required by the laws of either State."
Conclusions 107

stabilization of both employment and workers

;

5 and it may well be

that the covered industrial processes thus affected may, in becoming

less seasonal and intermittent, reduce the necessity for the migration

of workers.

Because of its essentially seasonal nature, agricultural employment

presents the major problem that must be solved if the migratorycasual worker is to improve his status. The prospects here are not

encouraging, although it should be noted that in many sections of

the country the increase of population density has brought with it a solution of a kind. For instance, the New Jersey truck farms are

as dependent upon seasonal labor as are those of the Imperial Valley

in California. But New Jersey farmers can draw upon the local unemployed of Philadelphia, Camden, and other lesser urban centers for workers that more nearly resemble underpaid commuters than

they do the agricultural migratory workers of the West.6 Thus, the population pattern may, in its development, reduce or re- move the need for the habitual migrant. Certainly the function of

the migratory-casual worker decreases in importance or disappears

when a surplus of labor is available locally. It will be recalled

that few of the 500 migratory-casual workers in this study made

excursions into the Old South, where the supply of Negro workers

is adequate to handle all seasonal work.

In summary, there does not appear to be any immediate solution of the social and economic problem presented by the

habitual migratory-casual worker. The most promising means of

reducing the intensity of the problem appears to lie in some degree

of employment-office control involving a high degree of cooperation

among offices, employers, and workers; and, during depression periods, the diversion of the surplus to public works. However, the

possibility of the workers themselves improving conditions through

unionization cannot be ignored. It is true that organization is ex- traordinarily difficult because of the high mobility and the low earn- ings of these workers; but the recent success of union campaigns

5 1, e., through the operation of the merit-rating clauses, the individual-plant-reserve

plans, and guaranteed employment.

"Opinions differ greatly as to how far unemployment will be reduced by these methods. The most serious kinds of unemployment are, after all, outside the control of any indi- vidual employer * * *. At most he can control minor fluctuations. Some ways of stabilizing production may be quite costly and may even counterbalance any gain through

a reduction in his payroll tax." See Burns, Eveline M., op. cit., p. 74.

6 This use of urban laborers is already under way in California, according to Taylor and Vasey (op. cit., p. 408) : "The tenuousness of the connection of California farm laborers with the farm is further emphasized by their residence. While 74.4 percent of paid farm laborers in Mississippi and 77.4 percent in Iowa resided on the farm in 1930, only 43.5 percent resided on the farm in California. In Mississippi 5.2 percent, and in Iowa 7.6 percent of paid farm

laborers had urban residence. But in California 28.6 percent were urban."
tOS The Migratory-Casual Worker

among the Loggers in (he Pacific Northwest and in Minnesota, the

Beamen on both coasts, and the fruit and vegetable workers of California shows that organization of migratory-casual workers is far

from impossible.

Aside from the means summarized above there does not, on the

basis of this study, appear to be any other possibility of full or partial solution—except for the contingency of unforeseen economic developments—short of those eventual and unhurried changes in population patterns that promise to eliminate the economic function of

the migratory-casual worker. This solution can be fully approved

only by those who oppose any attempt to alter the working of the

'"natural laws" of our economy.
APPENDIX

109

130766°—37 9

APPENDIX

Table 1.Number of Migratory-Casual Workers in 13 Study-Cities

All workers

Type of worker

City

Agricultural Industrial Combination i

Total 500

171230

79

24

2156

62

6120

24

490

200 100 200 Boston, Mass... . . . . . ... 17 Chicago, 111 1 1118

4

535

25

33

15

17

512206 Dallas, Tex. . . Denver, Colo 41 Jacksonville, Fla . 20 Kansas City, Mo

Los Angeles, Calif , .. . _ _ ... ....

6

111316

10

10 Memphis, Tenn 24

12

5 Phoenix, Ariz. . ... . . .. ... Pittsburgh, Pa 4 Seattle, Wash 36 17 37

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

Table 2.

State of Principal Employment * of 500 Migratory-Casual

Workers, 1933-34

1933 1934

State of principal employ- ment i All workers

Type of worker

All workers

Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination 2 Agricultural Industrial Combination <

Total ._ 500

4

730

48

19

1 10

56

44

416

2106

13

1142

200 100

2

_.8

1

200

2

1 12

138

164

3

23

19

124

13

3

8

500

31329

5120

200 100

1

14

9

2

200 Alabama. ... ... 2 Arizona. 6

1327

10

10

1129

10

2 Arkansas .. 14 California . .. ... 13 Colorado .. 8 Connecticut .. Florida 4

13

1

..

2

114

52

28

144106

3

12

1

_.

14

3

13

2

Georgia 3 Idaho 3

Illinois Indiana . . 1 Iowa 3

7

13

2

22

4

2 Kansas... ... .. ... 9 Kentucky. ... ....... 13 Maine .. ... 4 Maryland... ... Massachusetts 410

41

1627

......8

3 Michigan... 726

18

3 Minnesota . 6 111
m The Migratory-Casual Worker

TlBU 2.

State of Principal Employment of 500 Migratory-Casual

Workers, 1933-34—Continued

1933 1934 state of principal employAll workers

Type of worker

All workers

Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination Agricultural Industrial Combination Mississippi 6

22

10

13

4

15

1 11

1 154

16108

2

532

1 49

19

11

1722

2

9

2

12

48

46

1

13

7

15

3

4

5

6

616

14

16

5

1 10

16

1 10

4

17

10

3

146

5

2

52

3

3

3 Missouri 5

46

1

76 Nebraska 8 Nevada 2 New Hampshire 1 New Mexico 2

12

2 2

1 6 New Jersey. .. ..... Now York . 1 5 North Carolina 1 North Dakota . 9 114

2

2

119

1 12

5 __32

1

5 Ohio 2 Oklahoma 8

3 84

6 Oregon.

.

4 Pennsylvania .. 2 South Dakota. . . ... 1 Tennessee- 48

531

1 53

...

24"

17

1 12

4 Texas 15 10 Qtah

Washington.. . 23 14

138

17 West Virginia Wisconsin 13

5 .....

13

9

15

1622

2

5

4

3

3 Wyoming 7 Alaska 1 Not ascertainable . . 8

6

11

12

5 No State 3

. 9 11

1 Maximum employment in a State.

2 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

3 1, e., workers unemployed.

Table 3.

Month of Obtaining Jobs, 500 Migratory-Casual Workers,

1933-34

1933 1934 Month

All jobs Jobs of

agricul- tural workers

Jobs of industrial workersJobs of combination workers

'

All jobs Jobs of agricul- tural workers

Jobs of industrial workers

Jobs of combination workers

Total - -- -- 1,190

6 13144

7890

117 118

123 102

14598

75

4326

486

6 38

142636

54

51574676

49

24

7

8

228

6 33

1212

23

272520

1724

1212

92

476

6 60

1840

3136

42

4639

45

37

39

27

16

2 1, 10783

53

62

81 115 124

126

107

133

9139

23

6

3 471

23

2120

37

55

57

55

50

7042

7

7

<205

12

1315

1430

26

19

1523

1110

7

1

5 43148

1927 April 30

30 June

Julv

41

52 August

September

October November

42

4038

22

9

5

i Jobs of workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

2 Includes 64 jobs which were continuations of jobs obtained in 1933.

3 Includes 27 jobs which were continuations of jobs obtained in 1933.

4 Includes 9 jobs which were continuations of jobs obtained in 1933.

5 Includes 28 jobs which were continuations of jobs obtained in 1933.

6 An unknown number of January jobs were continuations of jobs obtained in 1932.
Appendix 113

Table 4.

Duration of Off-Season of 500 Migratory-Casual Workers,

1933-34

1933 1934

Duration of off-season Total

Type of worker

Total

Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination i Agricultural Industrial Combination i

500 200 100 200 500 200 100 200

Percent distribution

100

41

830

15

3

3

100

358

33

15

5

3

10045

932

13

1

10046

826

14

15

10042

730

152

4

10035

734

17

4

3

10044

9

32

15

100 Less than 4 weeks. ... ... . 49

4 to 11 weeks ... . 6

12 to 19 weeks .. 25 20 to 27 weeks ------- - - 14 28 to 51 weeks 1 52 weeks 5 Median duration of off-sea- 11 13 7 7 11 13 8 4 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

Table 5.- -Time Spent in Employment During Migratory Period ry 500

Migratory-Casual Workers, 1933-34

Type of worker Time spent in employment Total Agricultural Industrial Combination '

U933 1934 1933 1934 1933 1934 1933 1934

All workers. ..... 500 500 200 200 100 100 200 200

Percent distribution

All workers 100

5142429

1412

2

100

5192632

117

100

4132729

1412

1

100

51824

36

10

7

100

38

28

27

1517

2

100

3

15

2143

108

100

5

1820

31

1410

2

100

523

10 to 20 weeks.. 31

21 to 32 weeks 23 33 to 40 weeks... 12 40 to 52 weeks. 6 Not ascertainable .. . Median time spent in employment,

24 21 23 22 26 24 23 18 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
//'/ The Migratory-Casual Worker

Tabu 6.

Net Yearly Earnings of 500 Migratory-Casual Workers,

1933-34

L933 1934

Amount ofOBraioga

All workers

Type of worker

All workers

Type of worker

Agricultural Industrial Combination i Agricultural Industrial Combination i

Total 500

182

477969

6148

34

33

182420

6

144

23

200

6

1 24

55

4124

188

52

13

100

11668

169

14106

58

15

13

200

11

500

21249

7469

6348

46

212327

149

11320

200

9

100

12

512

7

13

5108

712

73

5

12

200 None 11 .- M aiiii onance only. $0tO$tt 17

1820

21

2112

1810189

5

9

3

8

30

3739

27

19

144

42

2

1425

23

2324

22

912

$50 to $99. $100 to $149.. $150to$199.

$200to$249..

$360 to $309

$300 to $349.. $350 to$399..-

$400 to $499. 13 $500 to $599 5

$600 to $699 6 $700 to $999 1 $1,000 to $1,350

12

2

12 6

i Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.

Tarle 7.Man-Weeks of Employment and Numrer of Jors of 500

Migratory-Casual Workers, Classified ry Type of Worker and ry

Specific Crops and Processes, 1933-34

Type of worker and pursuit

All workers

Agricultural workers:

All agricultural workers Cotton

Fruits Sugar beets Grain

General agriculture Vegetables

Berries. Dairy and cattle Other, n. e. c1 Industrial workers:

All industrial workers. .. Logging

Oil and gas Agriculture Railroad maintenance- - Road construction Dam and levee Seamen

Other construction 2 Metals (mining)

Other, n. e. c1

Number of jobs

Total 1933 1934

2,297

957

156

193

433

1,190

228

471

20532

28

33

25

13

1418

10

1220

Man-weeks of employment

Total

21, 128.

5

8, 171. 5

1, 401. 5

1, 318.

1, 253.

1, 121. 5 935.0

687.0

611.0 418.0

426.5

4, 767. 5 906.0

585.0

549.0

516.0 445.0

424.5 406.0

206.0

203.0

527.0

1933

11, 182.

4, 264. 5 790.0 697.0

608.0

603.0 443.0

362.0 300.0

195.0 266.5

2, 522. 5 476.0

297.0

244.0

229.0 295.0

217.5 240.0

116.0

100.0 308.0

1934

9, 946. 5

3, 907. 611.5 621.0 645.0

518.5 492.0 325.0

311.0

223.0

160.0

2, 245. 430.0

288.0

305.0

287.0

150.0 207.0

166.0 90.0

103.0 219.0
Appendix 115

Table 7.

Man-Weeks of Employment and Number of Jobs of 500

Migratory-Casual Workers, Classified by Type of Worker and by

Specific Crops and Processes, 1933-34—Continued

Type of worker and pursuit

Combination workers: 3 All combination workers. General agriculture Road construction Logging Seamen

Grain - Cotton Damandlevee

Railroad maintenance

Dairy and cattle Building construction

Fruits Sawmilling Sugar beets ,... Other agricultural, n. e. c Other industrial, n. e. c.

1 .

Number of jobs

Total 1933 1934

907

56

797895

88

6127

48

3442

5725

289990

476

3146

40

52

49

34

1516

1820

31

17

1745

45

431

2533

38

43

39

27

1232

1622

26

8

115445

Man-weeks of employment

Total 1933

8, 189. 5 910.0

842.0

800.5 778.0

660.5 465.0

430.0

385.0

385.0

357.5 348.0

237.0

181.0

508.5

901.5

4, 395. 465.0 486.0

416.0 460.0 409.0

280.0

233.0

130.0 218.0

146.0

195.5 141.0

106.0 224.5

485.0

1934

3, 794. 5 445.0

356.0

384.5 318.0

251.5

185.0

197.0 255.0 167.0

211.5

152.5 96.0

75.0

284.0

416.5

i Not elsewhere classified.

2 "Other construction" represents workers in tunnel, bridge, and building construction.

8 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employments.

Table 8.

Seasonal Fluctuation in Employment in all Pubsuits and

in Selected Pubsuits, 200 Agbicultubal Wobkebs, 1933-34

Man-weeks of employment •

Month and year

All pursuits

Selected pursuits

Cotton Fruits Sugar

beets Grain

General agri- culture Vegetables Berries Dairy and

cattle Hops

1933

162 184

208

263 397 460

519

527

555

461 328

186

216

240 270

304

420 439

481 459

465 358

18964

4140

39

49

5546

52

56

110

127

11858

48

36

43

4735

30

43

5388

101

6522

26

39

35396086

11095

7668

37

21

35

35

2746

49

49

78 10397

53

32

16

4

4

915 100

104

10288

98

68

12

4

4

.. 13 111 108

100

104

101

74

21

9

741222

68

100

14296

74

48

20

1113

17

212989

109

91

57452G

9

30

30

37

52

65

5630

3932

24

26

18

52

58

7580

715232

25

16

119

11

2629

1320

2326

31

24

55

414132

3556

37

1118

14

1730

35

38

286

131758

50

49

38

35

17

1192

.. 3042

73

6759

19

114

2

9

9

49

131726

28

17

1722

24

22

2826

38

30

22

22

9

11132

February

May .. June

July 4 August 9 September.. . . 34 October... .. 4 November ....

December...

1934 January... . . February.. . .. March

April...

July... August.. ... 636 October 11 November. December
na The Migratory-Casual Worker

I ' v 1 1

1

i .». Seasonal Fluctuation in Employment in all Pursuits and

in Selected Pursuits, 100 Industrial Workers, 1933-34

Month and your

1933 January

February March

April June

July August September

October November..

December..

1934 January February . .

.

March

April May

June

July. August

September.

.

October November.

.

December..

All pursuits

136

L69

171 216

232

281 284 270

278

192

175

118

92

122 165

165 223 275

281 242

244

200

149

Man-weeks of employment

Selected pursuits LogKing

Oil and

gas

Agri- culture Railroad mainte- nance Dam and

levee construction

Sea- men

Road

construction

Other

construction

Tarle 10.

Seasonal Fluctuation in Employment in All Pursuits and

in Selected Pursuits, 200 Gomrination Workers,1 1933-34

Month and year

1933 January

February March

April May

June

July August

September. _. October November...

December..

.

1934 January

February March

April May

June

July August

September. _. October November...

December. ..

Man-weeks of employment

All pursuits

241 275 366

361 425

454

439

434 388

378

307

239

306 298

362

352

357 372

411 403

332

290

18383

Selected pursuits General

agri- culture Road

construc- Log- Grain Cotton

tion ging

23 39 4 13 52 43 4 6 67 26 9 13

61 26 4 13 52 28 17 24

48 26 61 22

40 19 99 29

51 35 103 17 27 36 56 54

17 32 32 61 22 53 13 18 22 . 49 7 10

39 45 9 45 39 4 4 50 43 9 13 39 24 13 17 26 22 13 22

37 26 31 15

28 28 43 14 35 24 45 17 24 26 34 39

22 37 26 28

5 40 16 6

6 26 8 9

Dam and

levee construction

Railroad mainte- nance Dairy and

cattle

1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
INDEX

117

INDEX

Page

Age, by type of worker 87-88

Agricultural pursuits:

Characteristics of 7-9 Employment in specific 71-75,114—115

Followed by migratory-casual workers 5-6 Located in areas of low population density 9

Seasonality of 8, 77-79, 115

Unskilled labor, use of 7-8

Agricultural workers

:

Age 87-88

Color and nativity 88-90

Definition 24n

Duration of jobs 53-55 Earnings

:

Compared with duration of employment 69-70 Hours worked, migration, and 3—4 Net yearly 67-70, 114 Employment

:

Amount of in specific crops 71-75,114-115 Cotton crop largest source of 71-72,114-115

Duration of, compared with earnings 69-70 Duration of jobs 53-55 Hours worked, earnings, migration, and 3-4 Man-weeks of, by type of work, per month 57-59, 74, 79, 114-115 Month of obtaining jobs 59-60,61,112

Number of jobs held 55-57 Number of jobs secured, by type 74,114-115

Period, length of 62-63,64,113 Routes of travel during 28,30^31,33,34-39

Seasonality of: In specific crops 77-79, 115 Of all agricultural workers 57-60

States, number of in which secured 26-27

States, of principal 47-48,49,111-112

Work history 3-4

Work patterns and itineraries in specific crops (see also Itineraries) 28, 30-31, 33, 34-39

Foreign-born 12-14,88-90

Itineraries and work patterns (see also Itineraries) 28,30-31,33,34-39

Mexican 12-13, 88-89

Migration, extent of 24,25

Migratory period, length of 60,62-63,64

Nativity 88-90

Negroes 88-90

Number studied 111 119
t20 Index

Agricultural workers—Continued. Page

Off-season, Length of — 63,64,113

Seasonality of employment:

In Bpeclflc crops 77-79, 115 Of Mil agricultural workers 57-59

State-line crossings 24

Stales, number of in which employment was secured 26-27 States of principal employment 47-48,49,111-112

Unemployment, during migratory period 63-66,113

Work history of typical 3-^ Years spent as migrants 85-87

Agriculture, general

:

Jobs, number of secured in 74,114—115

Largest source of combination employment 74,76,114-115

.Man-weeks of work in 74,114—115

Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 77-79,115

Attitudes of workers:

Political 99-102

Toward relief 97-99 Autobiographical accounts of typical migrants 90-102 Berry crops:

Itineraries of workers in 37-39

Jobs, number of secured in 74,114-115

Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115

Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79, 115

Beverldge, Sir W. H., Unemployment 2n

Bradford, Roark, John Henry 20n

Brooks, M. S., and Landis, Farm Labor in the Yakima Valley, Washington 9n, 67n, 69n

Burns, Eveline M., Towards Social Security 106n

California State Relief Administration, Migratory Labor in California 5n, 12n, 13n, 15n, 16n, 69n

Casual employment, definition 2-3

Characteristics, personal, of migrants, see Personal characteristics of migrants.

Cheap labor supply 12-14 Chinese labor 13

Cities, list of included in study xin, 111

Color and nativity characteristics, by type of worker 88-90 Combination (agricultural and industrial) workers:

Age 87-88

Agriculture, general, largest source of employment 74, 76, 114-115

Color and nativity 88-90

Definition 24n

Duration of jobs 53-55 Earnings

:

Compared with duration of employment 69-70 Net yearly 67-70, 114 Employment

:

Agriculture, general, largest source of 74, 76, 114-115 Amount of in specific processes 74, 76-77, 114-115 Duration of, compared with earnings 69-70
Index 121

Combination (agricultural and industrial) workers—Continued.

Employment—Continued. Page

Duration of jobs 53-55 Man-weeks of, by type of work, per month 57-59, 74, 82, 114-115 Month of obtaining jobs 59-60, 61, 112 Number of jobs held 55-57 Number of jobs secured, by type 74, 114-115

Period, length of 64, 113 Seasonality of: In specific processes 80,82,83,116

Of all combination workers 57-60

States, number of in which secured , 26-27

States, of principal 47-48, 51, 111-112

Foreign-born 88-90 Mexican 12-13, 88-89

Migration, extent of 24,25-26

Migratory period, length of 60,62-63,64

Nativity 88-90

Negroes 88-90

Number studied 111

Off-season, length of 63, 64, 113

Seasonality of employment:

In specific processes 80, 82, 83, 116 Of all combination workers 57-59

State-line crossings 24

States, number of in which employment was secured 26-27

States, of principal employment 47-48,51,111-112

Unemployment during migratory period 63-66, 113 Years spent as migrants 85-87 Conclusions of study

:

Diversion of labor supply needed 104-105, 107 Employment offices as aids to migrants 104-105, 107 Employment sequences, establishment of 104-105 Population density, increase affects migrants 107

Solutions of migrants' problems 104

Stabilization of migrants 104, 105-106 Underemployment and poor wages 103 Unemployment insurance, effect on migrants 106-107 Wage level, effect on resident labor supply 103 Cost of recruiting workers 14-15 Cotton crop:

Itineraries of workers in 33,34

Jobs, number of secured in 74,114-115

Largest source of agricultural employment 71-72, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Requires migratory-casual workers 6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79, 82, 115, 116 Crops

:

And processes: Amount of employment in, by type of worker 71-77, 114-115

1934 changes in employment in specific 83-84

Seasonality of employment in combination of 80, 82, 83, 116 Followed by migratory-casual workers 5-7
m Index

Crops Continued.

Bpeciflc: Page

Employment in 71-75, 114-115

Seasonality of employment in 77-79,115

Dam and Levee const nut ion, 8€€ Levee and dam construction. Density of population, increase of, aids migrants 107

Destinations of migratory-casual workers, see Itineraries; Migration.

Deterioration, occupational and physical, of selected migrants 93-97

Direction of workers, lack of 65 Distances traveled, see Itineraries; Migration.

Diversion of labor supply needed 104-105,107

Duration of employment, see Employment, duration of. Earnings : Compared with duration of employment, by type of worker 69-70 Hours worked, migration, and 3-4 How determined for study 67,69 Net yearly, by type of worker 67-70,114

Reflect exploitation of workers 67 Economic factors affecting migrants lf>-16 Employment (see also under Agricultural workers; Combination workers;

Industrial workers) : Amount of in specific crops and processes, by type of worker 71-77, 114-115

Casual, definition— 2-3 Duration of: Compared with earnings, by type of worker 69-70

Jobs, by type of worker 53-55 Seasonal variation in 57-59, 63-66, 77-83 During migratory period, by type of worker 63-66, 113

Jobs, definition of 53n

Location of and migration to, by type of worker 27-51 Man-weeks of, by type of work, per month 57-59, 74, 77-83, 114-115, 116 Migration to, by type of worker 27-51 Month of obtaining, by type of worker 59-60,61,112

Number of jobs held, by type of worker 55-57 Number of jobs secured, by type 73-75, 76, 114-115

Period, length of, by type of worker 62-63,64,113 Routes of travel during 27-46

Seasonal, climate factor in producing 10 Seasonality of, by type of worker 57-60,77-83,115,116

States, number in which secured, by type of worker 26-27

States, of principal, by type of worker 45, 47-51, 111-112 Types of, followed by migrants 5-7 Work histories of typical migrants 3-4 Work patterns and iteneraries (see also Iteneraries) 27-46 Working conditions

:

Due to oversupply of workers 15

Protests against 15-16 Years spent in migratory-casual work, by type of worker 85-87 Employment histories, by type of worker, earnings, hours worked, extent

of migration 3-4 Employment offices, as aids to migrants 104-105, 107
Index 123

Page

Employment sequences, establishment of 104-105 Employments and processes followed by migrants 5-9

Farm work, general, see Agriculture, general.

Foreign-born migrants, number, by type of worker 88-90

Frisselle, S. P., Seasonal Agricultural Laborers from Mexico 13n

Fruit crops:

Itineraries of workers in 36,37

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 11-1-115 Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Require migratory-casual workers 5 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79, 82, 115, 116 Grain crops:

Itineraries of workers in 34,35,37

Jobs, number of secured in 74,114-115

Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79,82,115,116 Great Western Sugar Company, Through the Leaves 9n

Habitual migrants, distinguished from temporary 86

Harrison, S. M., and Associates, Public Employment Offices 90n

Hathway, Marion, The Migratory Worker and Family Life 66n

Hearings Before the Committee on Labor 16n

Histories, personal, of selected migrants 90-102 Howd, C. R., Industrial Relations in the West Coast Lumber Industry 57n

Immigrant labor 12-13 Income, see Earnings.

Independence of migrants, illustrated by personal histories 90-93

Industrial pursuits

:

Characteristics of 7-9 Employment in specific 74,75-76,114-115

Employment irregular 11 Followed by migratory-casual workers 6-7 Located in areas of low population density 9

Seasonality 8, 80, 81, 116

Unskilled labor, use of 7-8

Industrial workers:

Age 87-88

Color and nativity 88-90

Definition 24n Duration of jobs 53-55 Earnings

:

Compared with duration of employment 69-70

Hours worked, migration, and 4 Net yearly 67-70, 114 Employment

:

Amount of in specific processes 74, 75-76, 114-115 Duration of, compared with earnings 69-70 Duration of jobs 53-55 Hours worked, earnings, migration and 4 Logging, largest source of 1 74, 75, 114-115
t2h Index

i adust rial workers

Continued,

Kniplo.N niont Continued. Page

Maii-wocks of, by type of work, per month 57-59,74,114-115

Month of obtaining jobs 59-60,61,112

Number of jobs bold 55-57 Number of jobs secured, by type 74, 114—115

Period, Length of 64,113 Routes of travel during 29,31,32,34,39-43

Seasonality of:

In specific processes 80,81,116

Of all industrial workers 57-60

States, number of in which secured 26-27

States, of principal 47^8, 50, 111-112 Work history 4

Work patterns and iteneraries 29,31,32,34,39-45

Foreign-born 88-90

Itineraries and work patterns {see also Itineraries)—— 29,31,32,34,39-46

Mexican 88-89

Migration, extent of 24,25

Migratory period, length of 60,62-63,64

Nativity 88-90

Negroes 88-90 Number studied 111

Off-season, length of 63, 64, 113

Seasonality of employment:

In specific processes 80, 81, 116 Of all industrial workers 57-60

State-line crossings 24

States, number of in which employment was secured 26-27

States, of principal employment 47-48, 50, 111-112 Unemployment during migratory period 63-66, 113 Work history of typical 4 Years spent as migrants 85-87

Interstate migration, extent of 23-24

Intrastate migration, extent of 23-24

Itineraries

:

And work patterns 27-45 Of workers in specific crops and processes

:

Berry crops 37-39

Cotton crop 33, 34

Fruit crops 36, 37 Grain crops 34, 35, 37 Levee and dam construction 42, 44 Logging industry 42, 45, 46

Oil and gas production 39,40

Railroad maintenance 39,41, 42 Road construction 42, 43 Sugar-beet crop 37-39

Selection of for study 30

Japanese labor 13

Jobs, see Employment.

Kerr, Clark, and Taylor, Uprisings on the Farms 15n
Index 125

Labor supply: Page

< 'heap 12-14 Chinese 13 Diversion of as aid to migrants 104—105, 107 Japanese 13 Mexican 12-13, 88-90

Mobile, advantages to employers 13-75 Negro 88-90

Resident

:

Affected by migrants' wage level 103 Not supported by certain industries 9 Surplus 12

Unskilled, predominant among migrants 7-8

Lfindis, Paul H., and Brooks, Farm Labor in the Yakima Valley,

Washington 9n, 67n, 6!)n Lescohier, Don D.

:

Harvest Problems in the Wheat Belt 19n Labor Market, The 2n Levee and dam construction

:

Itineraries of workers in 42,44

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Requires migratory-casual workers 6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 81,82,116

Location of operations requiring migratory-casual workers 9 States of principal employment 45-51, 111-112 Logging industry:

Itineraries of workers in 42, 45. 46

Jobs, number of secured in 74,114-115

Largest source of industrial employment 74, 75, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74,114-115

Requires migratory-casual workers 7 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 81, 82, 116 Man-weeks of employment, per month, by type 57-59, 74, 79, 81, 82, 114-115, 116 Mexican labor: Merits of 13 Proportion of among migrants, by type of worker 88-89- Migrants (see also Agricultural workers; Combination workers; Industrial workers; Migratory-casual workers):

Habitual and temporary- 86 Types 1-2 Years spent as, by type 85-87 Migration (see also Itineraries) : Employment and, histories 3-4 Extent of, by type of worker 24

Interstate 23-24

Intrastate 23-24 Migratory periods:

Employment during 63-66, 113 Length of 60. 62-63, 64 Unemployment during 63-66, 113

State-line crossings, by type of worker 23-24 130766°—37 10
l^O Index

Migration {see also Itineraries) —Continued.

States in which employment was found during 26-27,45-51,111-112

Work patterns and Itineraries during 27^5

Migratory-casual workers {see also Agricultural workers; Combination

workers; Industrial workers):

Aided by Transient Relief Program x-xi

Definition and Identification 1-5 Employments followed by 5-9

Indistinguishable from tramps and transients 1-2 Number ol* studied, by type in

Seasonal industries and operations require 1,8

Mobility (see also Migration; Itineraries):

Created by circumstances xvi

State-line crossings, by type of worker..: 23-24 Wanderlust, personal histories depicting 90-93

Nativity characteristics, by type of worker 88-90

Negroes, proportion of among migrants, by type of worker 88-90

Nonresidents, Transient Relief Program distinguishes ix-x

Number of jobs, see Employment,

Number of workers studied, by type ill Occupational and physical deterioration, of selected migrants 93-97

Off-season, length of 63, 64, 113

Oil and gas production:

Itineraries of workers in 39, 40

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Requires migratory-casual workers 6-7 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 81, 116 Organization of workers 16, 107-108

Parker, Carleton, The Casual Laborer and Other Essays 11 n

Personal characteristics of migrants 17-21,85-102

Age 87-88

Color and nativity 88-90

Histories of selected migrants 90-102 Years spent in migratory-casual work 85-87

Physical, occupational and, deterioration, of selected migrants 93-97

Political attitudes of selected migrants 99-102 Population density, increase affects migratory-casual workers 107 Power and pipe-line construction, requires migratory-casual workers 6 Problems of migrants, solutions 104-105

Processes

:

And crops

:

Amount of employment in, by type of worker 71-77, 114-115

1934 changes in employment in specific 83-84

Seasonality of employment in combination of 80, 82, 83, 116 And employments followed by migratory-casual workers 5-9

Industrial

:

Employment in specific 74, 75-76, 114-115

Seasonality of employment in 80, 81. 116
Index 127

Page

Progression of seasons and employment, see Seasonality of employment.

Protests against working conditions 15-16

Pursuits, see Agricultural pursuits; Industrial pursuits.

Race, see Color and nativity.

Racial discrimination, check on mobility 89-90 Railroad maintenance:

Itineraries of workers in 39,41,42

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115 Requires migratory-casual workers 6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 81,82,116

Relief attitudes toward, of selected migrants 97-99 Report of the Commission on Industrial Relations 12n, 57n, 105n Resident labor supply

:

Affected by migrants' wage level : 103 Not supported by certain industries 9 Road construction:

Itineraries of workers in 42, 43

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74,114-115

Requires migratory-casual workers 6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 81,82,116 Routes of travel, see Itineraries. Seasonal industries and operations, require migratory-casual workers 1, 8 Seasonality of employment:

Climate produces 10 In specific crops and processes 77-83, 115, 116 Of various types of workers _ 57-60 Shephard, Esther, Paul Bunyan 20n

Shields, Louise F., Problem of the Automobile "Floater" 2n, 12n

Solutions of migrants' problems 104 Source of data for report xi-xii, 111

Stabilization of migrants 9-10, 104, 105-106

State-line crossings, by type of worker 23-24

States, number of in which employment was secured, by type of worker 26-27

States, of principal employment, by type of worker 45,47-51,111-112

Statistical Abstract of the United States 7n, 72n, 75o

Stevens, James, Paul Bunyan 20n

Sugar-beet crops

:

Itineraries of workers in 37-39

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115 Man-weeks of work in 74,114-11.5

Require migratory-casual workers 6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79. 115 Summary of report xv-xix

Surplus labor supply 12
m Index

Page

Taylor, Paul 8.: American Mexican Frontier, An I4n

Mexican Labor in the United stales, Valley of the South Platte, Colorado 15n, 42n

and Ken-. Uprisings on the Farms 15n

and Vasey. Contemporary Background of California Farm

Labor _ 160n, 107n

Temporary migrants, distinguished from habitual 86 Time spent in migratory-casual work, by years and type of worker 85-87 Tramp, distinguished from migratory-casual worker 1 Transient bureaus of 13 cities, source of data xi Transient Relief Program:

Initiated, distinguishes between nonresidents ix-x

Relation to migratory-casual workers x-xi

Tunnel construction, requires migratory-casual workers 6

Types of workers, definition 24n Unemployment

:

During migratory period, by type of worker 63-66, 113

Insurance, effect on migrants 106-107 Surplus labor supply 12 Unskilled workers, predominant among migratory-casual workers 7-8

Vasey, Tom, and Taylor, Contemporary Background of California Farm

Labor 106n, 107n

Vegetable crops:

Jobs, number of secured in 74, 114-115

Man-weeks of work in 74, 114-115

Require migratory-casual workers 5-6 Seasonal fluctuation of employment in 79,115

Wage level, migrants', effect on resident labor supply 103 Wages, see Earnings.

Wanderlust, personal histories depicting 90-93 Webb, John N., The transient Unemployed ixn, xin, 8n, 26n, 85n, 88n

Wheat harvest, requires migratory-casual workers, see also Grain crops

5

Whitaker, P. W., Fruit Tramps 19n

Woofter, T. J., Jr., Landlord and Tenant on the Cotton Plantation 72n Work, see Employment.

Work histories, by type of worker, earnings, hours worked, and extent

of migration 3-4

Work patterns and itineraries, by type of worker, see also Itineraries. 27-45, 46

Worker type, definition 24n Working conditions

:

Due to oversupply of workers 15

Protests against 15-16 Years spent in migratory-casual work, by type of worker 85-87 o