UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 

II I II IIIIII Ill Ill lllll lllll II IIIIII II IIIII IIII Ill 11111111111111 1 

3 1262 08482 9893 Registry No. 299-25 

NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 

CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION 

FOR THE 

COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY 

AS APPROVED ON JULY 9, 1933 

BY 

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT 

WE DO OUR PART 

I l 

1. Executive Order Approving Code 

2. Administrator's Letter of Transmittal to the President 

3. Text of Code 

4. Executive Orders Applying Provisions to other Industries 

5. Amendment Creating Cotton Textile National Industrial 

Relations Board 

U ITED STATES 

GOVER ME T PRI TING OFFICE 

W .ASHINGTON : 1933 

For sale by the uperintendent of Documents, Was hington, D.C. • • - - - • • • Price 5 centa 

/ 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2011 with funding from 

University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS and the Sloan Foundation 

http://www.archive.org/details/codeoffaircompet9893unit 
EXECUTIVE ORDER 

CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY 

The Cotton Textile Code, a stenographic transcript of the hearing 

thereof, a report and recommendations of the National Recovery 

Administration thereon, (including a special statistical analysis of the 

industry by the Division of Planning and Research) and reports 

showing unanimous approval of such report and recommendations by 

each the Labor Advisory Board, the Industrial Advisory Board, and 

the Consumers' Advisory Board, having been submitted to the 

President, the following are his orders thereon. 

In accordance with Section 3 (a), National Industrial Recovery 

Act, the Cotton Textile Code submitted by duly qualified trade 

at:isociations of the Cotton Textile Industry on June 16, 1933, in full 

compliance with all pertinent provisions of that Act, is hereby 

approved by the President subject to the following interpretations and 

conditions: 

(1) Limitations on the use of productive machinery shall not apply 

to production of tire yarns or fabrics for rubber tires for a period of 

three weeks after this date. 

(2) The Planning Committee of the Industry, provided for in the 

Code, will take up at once the question of employee purchase of homes 

in mill-villages, especially in the South, and will submit to the 

Administration before January 1st, 1934, a plan looking toward 

eventual employee home-ownership. 

(3) Approval of the minimum wages proposed by the Code is not 

to be regarded as approval of their economic sufficiency but is granted 

in the belief that, in view of the large increase in wage payments 

provided by the Code, any higher minima at this time might react to 

reduce consumption and employment, and on the understanding that 

if and a.s conditions improve the subject may be reopened with a view 

to increasing them. 

(4) That office employees be included within the benefits of the 

Code. 

(5) The existing a.mounts by which wages in the higher-paid 

classes, up to workers receiving $30 per week, exceed wages in the lowest paid class, shall be maintained. 

(6) While the exception of repair shop crews, engineers, electricians 

and watching crews from the maximum hour provisions is approved, it 

is on the condition that time and one-half be paid for overtime. 

(7) While the exception of cleaners and outside workers is approved 

for the present, it is on condition that the Planning and Supervisory 

Committee provided by Section 6 prepare and submit to the Administration, by January 1, 1934, a schedule of minimum wages and of 

maximum hours for these classes. 

(8) It is interpreted that the provisions for maximum hours 

establish a maximum of hours of labor per week j or every employee 

covered, so that under no circumstances will such an employee be 

9713°-33 (1) 
2 

employed or permitted to work for one or m?re employers in the 

industry in the aggregate in excess of the prescribed number of hours 

in a single week. 

(9) It is interpreted that the provisions for a minimum wage in this 

code establish a guaranteed minimum rate of pay per hour of employment regardless of whether the employee's compensation is otherwise 

based on a time rate or upon a piece "'.\Tork performance. This is to 

avoid frustration of the purpose of the code by changing from hour 

to piece-work rules. 

(10) Until adoption of further provisions of this Code necessary to 

prevent any improper speeding up of work to the disadvantage of 

employees ("stretch-outs") and in a manner destructive of the 

purposes of the National Industrial Recovery Act, it is required that 

any and all increases in the amount of work or production required 

of employees over that required on July 1, 1933, must be submitted 

to and approved by the agency created by section six of the code and 

by the administration and if not so submitted such increases will be 

regarded as a prima facie violation of the provision for minimum 

wages. 

(11) The code will be in operation as to the whole industry but, 

opportunity shall be given for administrative consideration of every 

application of the code in particular instances to any person directly 

affected who has not in person or by a representative consented and 

agreed to the terms of the code. Any such person shall be given an 

opportunity for a hearing before the Administration or his representative, and for a stay of the application to him of any provision of 

the code, prior to incurring any liability to the enforcement of the 

code against him by any of the means provided in the National 

Industrial Recovery Act, pending such hearing. At such hearing 

any objection to the application of the code in the specific circumstances may be presented and will be heard. 

(11) This approval is limited to a four months' period with the 

right to ask for a modification at any time and subject to a request 

for renewal for another four months at any time before its expiration. 

(13) Section 6 of the Code is approved on condition that the 

Administration be permitted to name three members of the Planning 

and Supervisory Committee of the industry. Such members shall 

have no vote but in all other respects shall be members of such Plan-· ning and Supervisory Committee. 

(Signed) FRANKLIN D. RoosEVELT. 
NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 

JULY 9, 1933. 

To the President: 

I have the honor to submit herein my report on the Cotton Textile 

Code and hearing submitted and conducted in accordance with the 

provisions of the National Recovery Act. The Code may be summarized as follows: 

SECTION 1. Definitions.-This is the Spinning and Weaving division of the Cotton Textile Industry. The only controverted matter 

in this section was a definition of "productive machinery" as cotton 

looms and spindles. The question of the validity of excluding carding machines as auxiliary was raised by President McMahon, of the 

United Textile Workers, and was justified by Mr. Robert Amory 

that inasmuch as the product of the card is not sold it cannot lead 

to overproduction yet the flexibility of running it is necessary to 

balance the mills operation (II-K-8-M-2). Mr. Batty, Secretary, 

New Bedford and Fall River Textile Councils (Labor) concurred 

that this was an unsubstantial objection. 

SEc. 2. Proposes a minimum wage of $12 in the South and $13 in 

the North-exempts learners for six weeks, also cleaners and outside 

employees. · 

SEc. 3. Provides for a 40-hour work week and an 80-hour machine 

work week and excepts repair crews, engineers, electricians, firemen, 

office and supervisory staff, shipping, watching, and outside crews 

and cleaners. 

SEc. 4. Abolishes child labor (minors under 16). 

SEc. 5. Provides for periodical statistical reports from all members of the Cotton Textile Institute, bearing on wages, hours, production and consumption, etc. 

SEc. 6. Sets up as a continuing planning and fair practice agency 

the Cotton Textile Industry Committee of all the affected trade associations to supervise the execution of the code, to develop statistical 

accounting, credit and other controls and to carry out long-range 

planning in the interest of the industry and the stabilization of employment. This is the proposed self-government agency of the 

mdustry, to function subject to the approval of the Administration. 

SEc. 7. Provides that the Committee may tender its good offices to 

secure, by mediation, modifications of existing contracts rendered 

burdensome by costs increased by this code. 

SEc. 8. Mandatory statutory recitation of the Rights of Labor. 

SEc. 9. Mandatory statutory recitation of the President's right to 

cancel, modify, or amend. 

SEc. 10. Provides for consideration by the President of future 

amendments at the instance of the industry. 

This code was formulated during the Congressional debate on the 

Recovery Act by conference among representatives of the industry, 

(3) 
4 

with unofficial assistance of the present Administrator's aides. It 

was submitted the day the President signed the Act. After due legal 

published notice the hearing opened on June 27th and concluded 

July 1st. 

The hearing was presided over by the Ad mini trator and conducted 

by Deputy Administrator William H. Allen with the aid of members 

of the staff of the National Recovery Administration in the presence 

of the Industrial Advisory Board, appointed by the Secretary of 

Commerce, the Labor Advisory Board, appointed by the Secretary 

of Labor, and the Consumers' Advisory Board, appointed by the 

Administrator. Representatives of the Department of Justice and 

the Federal Trade Commission were also in attendance. The hearing was attended by considerable numbers (about 500) of the public 

and a full press complement. 

The code was presented by duly qualified representatives of the 

industry after due qualifications of its proponents complying with all 

statutory requirements as representing 7 5% of the capacity of the 

industry. In accordance with announced procedure, every person 

who had filed an appearance, whether as a worker, employer, or consumer, was freely heard in public, including a representative of a 

Communist organization. (List of witnesses, Appendix 1.) 

All statutory and regulatory requirements were complied with. 

III. SUMMARY OF AND CONCLUSIONS ON THE EVIDENCE 

l. Hours of Labor. (Proposed Reduction of Weekly Hours to 40.) 

President McMahon, of the United Textile Workers of America, 

affiliated with the American Federation of Labor (who had participated in the formulation of the code and had concurred in it before 

submission) submitted at the hearing amendments to his original 

statement and to the code and urged that the hours of work be limited 

to 35 instead of the proposed 40, in order to bring about a reabsorption 

of the unemployed of the industry (II-H-3 ff.; I-7-11; J-1 ff). President Green of the American Federation of Labor went further and 

asked for a 30-hour week on the ground that "the work available at 

the May level in industry generally would provide only 25.6 hours 

per week for all who needed work", and that it was, therefore, best 

to arrange a single standard, presumably regardless of differences 

between industries as to rates of activity and employment (Statement, 

p. 6; Record III-S-9, III-S-11). Both testified to the prevalence in 

the past year of as high as a 53-to-54 hour week for the industry and 

suggested as an objective the bringing up of the employment to the 

level which prevailed in the period from 1923 to 1929 when approximately 450,000 persons were engaged in the industry as compared 

with the May 1933 rate given by Mr. Green as around 350,000 on 48 

hours a week (Record III-I-7; statement of Mr. Green, page 6; Record 

III-I-5). 

The isolated figures cited by Mr. McMahon and Mr. Green as to 

numbers employed and hours reflecting conditions as of varying dates 

in the past half year, were all based upon official government and other 

public sources. Hence, the issue resolves itself into a stati tical one 

of determining the neces ary and feasible hours and hif ts for handling 

the present level of cotton textiles production and taking care of the 

seasonal fluctuations and spurts in demand for the products of the 
5 

industry. An exhaustive analysis of this sort was carried out by our 

Research and Planning Division (Dr. Sachs), and the results thereof, 

submitted in the course of the hearing to President Green of the 

American Federation of Labor and to Dr. Wolman of the Labor Advisory Board, were uncontroverted by the former and concurred in 

by the latter. 

Briefly, in the course of the depression employment in the Cotton 

Textile Industry has declined from 425,000 in 1929 to a low mark in 

1'1arch of this year of 314,000, or 26%. Since then, under the impetu of the recovery policies of the Government, this industry, like 

other consumers goods industries, has been enjoying a sharp revival, 

with rising employment, having reached 346,000 for the month of 

May, and around 400,000 in June. 

With productive operations in June around the 1929 level, and this 

month above it, it is clear that hours and shifts should be so fixed as 

to allow a general average of production at least as high as 1929. In 

that year there were processed 3,370,000,000 pounds of cotton, or 5% 

below the peak year of 1927. This was at the rate of 65,700,000 

pounds per full working week, taking the working year as 51.3 working weeks. The labor required in 1929 to process the 65,700,000 

pounds of cotton was in man-hours 20,600,000 for an effective working 

week of 49 hours. Under the proposed code, limiting the week to 40 

hours, the effective average working week, allowing for those manufacturers who will not be able to obtain the maximum, would be 39 hours. 

Hence, dividing the 20,600,000 man-hours by the 39 effective hours 

yields 528,000, as the employees required for producing an average 1929 

weekly level of cotton production. In other words, the 40-hour limit 

would not only call back to work those who became unemployed Bince 1929, 

but would call for 13% more employees than the average in the peak 

year of 1927 when 467,000 were employed. It is furthermore noteworthy that this computation only provides for the 1929 average and 

does not make any allowance whatsoever for the seasonal peaks or 

sudden spurts of demand which according to the experience of the 

past decade may well carry production from 10 to 20% above any 

apparently well established level. To provide for such a 15% spurt 

above the normal at any given period would require the full utilization of the 10 to 15% increase in labor efficiency that has developed 

in the depression under conditions of the very long hours which have 

obtained hitherto. Accordingly, the industry under the 40-hour week 

would presently absorb the available corps of textile workers and assuming a continuation of the present trend would provide openings for unemployed from related or nearby industries, whose absorption would, 

according to Mr. Batty of the New Bedford Textile Council, require a 

very considerable apprenticeship. On the data submitted and on the 

basis of the present requirements of the industry, the reduction in the 

working week to forty hours will effect the re-employment of the 

hitherto unemployed and permit the substantial absorption from the 

outside of a potential 15 to 25% employment over and above the 

predepression level. · 

It must be kept in mind that there is nothing static about such conclusions. Should there be a marked recession in production the question of hours would have to be reconsidered. For this and other reasons hereinafter set forth approval should be limited to a four months 

period. 
6 

2. Limit on machine hours. 

The provision in the code to limit the operation of productive machinery to two shifts a week of forty hours each was vigorously supported by representatives of the industry as a means of preventing 

overproduction and unemployment and as a means of aiding the large· number of small mills which lack the resources for more than two 

forty-hour shifts and which otherwise would be at a competitive disadvantage in meeting increases in labor costs resulting from the code. 

Certain labor representatives appeared not to be concerned about a 

limitation in shifts. Mr. Green stated, "If necessary to work two 

shifts, or three shifts, or even four, I think that should be permitted", 

(III-T-1), but ended up (III-W-4) by declaring that he was "not 

fundamentally opposed to the regulation of the hours of machines."- A similar position was taken by Mr. Frey (III-Y-3 ) though the burden 

of his testimony as to the widening gap even before the depression 

between increasing labor productivity and inadequate mass-purchasing power tended to throw into relief the importance of -controlling 

technological unemployment. · 

The predominant view of the industry was that while less than the 

maximum of two shifts might easily cause shortages and lead to- unreasonably high prices to the consumer, the needs of the country 

can be fully taken care of by two shifts, which are- not likely to be 

utilized by more than half of the mills, thus avoiding the overproduction involved in three shifts and the resulting migration and concentration of the business in special areas (l-F-8). The proposed limitation was also defended-by members of the industry-on social 

grounds as eliminating the use of the so-called "grave-yard" shift. 

The strongest objection to the limitation of machinery came from 

representatives of outside but overlapping industries and companies 

which carry on cotton textile production as an integrated part of 

other manufactures such as the tire fabrics and surgical supply industries. Mr. Russell Watson, of Johnson and Johnson, favored three 

shifts in the interests of low prices for surgical dressings, of affording 

opportunity for the more efficient units of the industry (II-C, D-ff) 

and on the ground that limitations applied to his company would 

throw some employees out of work. On the other hand, Mr. Kendall, 

who is engaged in the same business, declared that in an industry 

like textiles, an over-supply of production machinery coupled with 

unrestricted machine hours would not only make it difficult to bring · about a reasonable equilibrium between consumption and production, 

but would seriously interfere with the reemployment of labor and the 

geographical distribution of that reemployment, and in addition 

would tend toward monopoly by the concentration of the production 

in a few efficient plants (II-G-11, 13 ). 

The same issue arose in respect of the application made by Mr. 

Stillman of the Goodyear Company in behalf of the so-called "Big" 

Four" tire producers for exclusion of the tire fabric operations from 

the scope of the term "cotton textile industry" and so froin the 

consequent limitation upon machine hours (I-Q-II, R-1-5). A con-· trary position was taken by Mr. Seiberling speaking for the nonintegr ated tire companies which obtain their fabrics from outside 

textile mills instead of their own subsidiaries as is the case with the 

"Big Four." It was estimated by him that the difference in cost of· running an eighty-hour cotton-fabric mill against one running one 
7 

hundred forty-four machine hours would be 6¢ per pound or equivalent to 25¢ a tire which "is more (profit) per tire than the industry 

has made within the last three years " (I-S-2-5). This situation in 

his opinion, would "unquestionably tend to promote monopoly by ' 

the Big Four" (I-S-7). 

On these grounds, a request was made on behalf of all the manu- 1 

facturers of tires for a delay until September 1st in the application I 

of the machine-hour provision of the code to spindles or looms producing tires, yarns, or fabrics (memoranda of l\t.Ir. C. A. Stillman). 

In respect of the request for exemptions by the makers of surgical , dressing- units and similar requests involving the upholstery, drapery 

and knitwear units, it is clear that the granting of an exemption would I 

place them in a privileged position and would discriminate against 

other units of the cotton-textile industry making the same or similar 1 

products. As that would contravene the provision in Section 3A of ' 

the Act against permitting "monopolies or monopolistic practices", l 

it is recommended that these requests be denied. 

In respect to the production of tire yarn and fabrics, the cotton 

textile industry itself recognizes that owing to the elaborate machinery 

involved a violently sudden limitation might have a serious effect 

on the production and sale of automobiles and tires. It is therefore 

recommended that the interested tire companies present within two 

weeks after the approval of this code statistical evidence as to the 

need for limited exemption, and during those two weeks the provisions of the Code limiting the operation of productive machinery 

should not apply to spindles, looms, or production of tire yarns or 

fabrics, and that at the end of three weeks a final decision on this 

exemption be made by the Administration. 

In respect of limitation of machinery hours of the industry as a 

whole, the testimony of the workers (particularly III-R-2) and the 

employers (particularly II-B-1) is eloquent of the danger and distress 

from overproduction in the fact of the admitted excessive capacity 

in the industry. The comparisons given in the report of the Director of the Division of Research and Planning between textile and 

cotton goods industries on the one hand, and general manufacturing 

on the other hand, disclose the prolonged depression of the industry 

even during the decade of the post-war prosperity for general manufacturing. The industry has been consistently losing relative to 

manufacturing industry as a whole in values of product and, what is 

the most significant, in value added by manufacture, which is the 

difference between selling value and the cost of materials out of which 

"mill margin" must be paid. Between 1923 and 1929 this margin 

or value added declined 15% as against a rise of 24% in all other 

manufactures. It would appear therefore that the causes of low 

wages lie largely in the general unprofitability of the industry and 

its inability to command a stable price for its products by reason of 

the overcapacity of the industry in terms of spindles (which have 

declined from thirty-seven million at the beginning of 1923 to thirtyone million and a half beginning 1933 with only 80% active even now 

at the present high level of activity), the overproduction in terms of 

hours and shifts and the lack of internal organization and coordination looking towards a stabilization of production and consumption 

and employment. 

9713°-33-2 
8 

These considerations confirm the view of the industry that an 

eighty-hour limit on machine operations is necessary and should aid 

in the organization of the industry with a view to checking the 

accumulations of diseconomic surpluses (Report, Division of Research 

and Planning, Chapter I and Chapter V, Part 2). Such a limitation 

will not interfere with adequate opportunity for fair competition on 

the part of efficient producers for increasing the volume of their production, nor will it interfere with the interests of consumers and 

workers. On the contrary the preservation of existing opportunities 

for employment and profitable operation and the protection of the 

industry against both undue market stimulation and undue market 

demoralization require control of machine hours and the working 

out of additional flexible controls for stabilizing the industry as a 

whole in the planning provisions of Section 6 of the Code. Especially 

in view of the instant tendency, which is clearly toward a new and 

dangerous overproduction, the prevention of dislocations in employment and demoralizing market conditions warrants the machine-hour 

limits proposed in the code, and the approval of this provision is _recommended. · 

Another problem involving the working rate of machinery is the 

tendency to increasing the maximum machine load on employees, 

popularly called the "stretch-out system." This problem, recurrent 

in the statements of labor representatives, was dealt with in an address 

by Senator James F. Byrnes of South Carolina at the opening session 

of the hearing (IK12-L5). In pursuance of this, a committee was 

appointed by the Administrator, consisting of Mr. Robert W. Bruere 

as Chairman, and Mr. B. E. Geer, representing the industry, and 

Major Berry, representing labor, with their technical aids. In behalf 

of the industry Mr. Amory for the North and Mr. T. M. Marchant 

for the South are conducting inquiries and securing information for 

the "Stretch-out" Committee. Similarly the Department of Industrial Studies of the Institute of Human Relations at Yale University, 

is making available to the Committee the results of a study of the 

system in twenty representative mills. Meanwhile Messrs. Bruere 

and Geer are making a field trip into the cotton textile centers to 

conduct engineering studies and to hold a number of open hearings 

~t which all parties at interest may express their minds. As a preliminary result of its work, the Committee has drawn up a proposal 

designed not only to check the possible tendency towards a too rapid 

introduction of the "stretch-out" which may be stimulated by the 

forty-hour week limitation, but also to provide a simj)le machinery by 

which the principle of consent and participation by labor may be 

effectuated. This proposal, summed up towards the end of this 

report, is recommended for approval. 

3. Wages. 

The original Code submitted on June 16th, proposed a minimum 

wage for a forty-hour week of $10 for the South and $11 for the North, 

which scale towards the end of the hearing, and upon intimation 

that such low figures could not be considered, was lifted to $12 and 

$13 respectively. _ The labor representatives in their criticism of the original proposed 

scale of minimum wages made reference to the very low levels of 

ri1inimum wages prevalent in the indu try. President McMahon in 

his statement in behalf of the United Textile Workers o~ .t\.~erica, 
9 

submitted early in June, stated: "Today in several sections of our 

country, including the North, we have had personal contact with 

Textile Workers who after a full working week were compelled to 

appeal to public charities to supplement their earnings. Wages of 

$5 and $6 a week are common throughout the industry." In his testimony at the hearing he protested against accepting .$10 as an economically sound wage for any worker regardless of degree of skill (Record 

II. 1.3); and proposed a minimum for the North of $14 in place of 

the old one that he had submitted of $12 (Record II. J-1). President 

Green, of the American F ederation of Labor, set the average weekly 

wage in the Cotton Goods Industry, as of the month of May 1933, 

as $10.40 (III T-. 7-8) and as of the recent past, in 1932, he said, 

"12% of all men employed in the cotton mills studied were receiving 

wages which averaged below $10 and in some cases below $8 for a 53-54 

hour week. (III T.-5. ) 

Speaking for the consuming public, Miss Lucy Mason, Secretary, 

ational Consumers' League, joined with labor in urging a higher 

minimum but dismissed the fear expressed by certain labor representatives that the minimum wage might tend to become maximum: 

"The Consumers League was the first proponent of minimum wage 

laws in this country, and it has been their experience that in America 

minimum wage rates do not tend to become the maximum, but 

establish bargaining power for the more skilled worker, and that the 

wages rise rapidly above the minimum (IV. H 1-7). 

Figures such as those stated by Mr. Green and others reflect very 

inadequately the extent of the declines that have taken place in the 

wages of the unskilled and the skilled, as well, by reason of the progressive narrowing during the depression of the wage differential for 

the skilled, and besides, the record for unskilled rates applies largely to 

certain of the more important mills whose wage level, particularly in 

the latter part of the depression, has been higher than that of the 

country as a whole. To meet the shortcomings of the wage rate data for 

this, as well as for other industries, as a basis for determining minimum 

wages, the Research Division secured from representative mills in the 

industry sample or illustrative pay rolls for North and South. These 

pay-roll records showed that minimum wages as of the low in MarchApril this year, applicable to between 10% to 20% of the pay rolls, were 

in the neighborhood of $8 to $8."50 for the South for a.fifty-hour week and 

$9 to $9.50 for the North for a forty-eight-hour work week. 

In attempting to aid in working out a proper minimum wage, this 

Administration sought to do something more than strive for a compromise between opposing claims. The guiding thought was to effectuate the policy laid down in the President's statement upon signing 

the ational Recovery Act, to wit: "The idea is simply for employers 

to hire more men to do the existing work and at the same time paying 

a living wage for the shorter week." This policy sets as an objective 

and as a norm for the emergency at any rate the restoration of the 

purchasing power which the worker in the industry had prior to the 

depression. Now, in 1929, the average unskilled weekly wage in the 

North was $17.60 ($19.47 for male workers and $15.75 for female 

workers). This average unskilled wage for the forty-eight-hour week has 

in the course of depression declined to a recent low point of $11.76 in 

April and $11.62 in January this year (for male workers, $13.27-$13.15 

for the respective months, and for female, $9.96 and $10.37). During 
10 

the same period the decline in the cost of living as computed by our 

Division of Research has amounted to about 30%. Applying the 

progressive decline in living costs to the original $17 .60 of 1929 weekly 

earnings, we obtain as a " real" weekly earnings for May this year 

$12.16; that is, the present required dollars to give the 1929 purchasing 

power. We have to carry this idea of purchasing power wages one 

step further. For in a period of price increases living costs tend at 

first to lag behind the advance in the price level, which has followed 

in the wake of the end of the liquidity complex and deflation and the 

synthetic business and price recovery brought about since March of 

this year. 

To lift up and pro1.,'ide adequate ;purchasing power, we should adjust 

"real " wages to the mo1uing trend oj prices and living costs, else we shall 

be no more eifectire than trying to catch a train moving out of the station 

by aiming for where the back platjorm was when the train was standing 

still. There has already occurred an advance of between 16% and 

20% in certain comprehensive yet not too insensitive indices of wholesale prices. In general the cost of living changes about 6% for each 

10% change in wholesale prices due to the inclusion of certain relatively stable and slowly varying elements. It appears necessary then 

to anticipate and adjust for a rise of 10% in the cost of living, which as of 

May 1933 was 69% of 1929 taken as 100. This gives the figure of 

$13.21 as the requisite average weekly wages for unskilled male and female 

workers in Norther_n mills to produce now on a forty-hour week the purchasing power which they had on a forty-eight-hour week in 1929. 

In applying this figure of $13 as the prospective purchasing power 

parity of the 1929 wage income of the unskilled, consideration should 

be given to certain geographical differentials in accordance with the 

last sentence of Section 7 (c) of the Act. The differential between 

North and South has developed in part from the practice of furnishing 

housing at much less than cost, far more common in the South than 

in the North. Evidence under this head was submitted by Colonel 

G. Anderson of Macon, Georgia, whose figures indicate the saving 

per week per employee in a Southern mill village to be in the neighborhood of $2 (T.H-M). Wbile there was some opposition to the differential as expressed 

particularly by Mr. F . C. Dumaine of Amoskeag (IIB), Mr. Robert 

Amory, representing the Northern part of the industry stated that 

the differential was conceded by the North as warranted, not on the 

basis of living costs, but on the basis of saving in rents, and that the 

proposed exemption of cleaners and outside help would further operate . in favor of the South to meeting the difference where it is in excess 

of $1, inasmuch as such hel:p is now paid iri the North considerably 

higher than the proposed nunimum (IIIHl-2). 

Notwithstanding the probable original justification for the er~ction 

by employers of mill villages there is something feudal and repugnant 

to American principle in the practice of employer-ownership of employee homes. We must recognize existing realities, however, and it 

is therefore recommended that the existence of the regional differential 

of $1 per week in the minimum wage between the North and South 

should be for the present accepted, but it is hoped that, with the 

creation of real industrial self government and improvement in the 

minimum wage, an impetus will be given by employers to independent 

home ownership eventually looking toward home ownership by em- , 
11 

ployees and the conversion of the differential into a wage equivalent. 

Applying the porposed minimum of $13 for the North and $12 for 

the South, to the wage distribution payrolls of typical mills, it has 

been calculated by the Division of Research that the average mill wages 

throughout the country would be increased about 30%, and hours 

reduced over 25 %. This proposed minimum wage ~as in turn tested 

from the point of view of management by relating it to the "millmargin," that is to say, to the difference between the price of finished 

cotton goods per pound and the cost of raw materials inclusive of 

power. Being partially subject to adjustmen.t by mana~ement (as 

opposed to raw material costs which are determined by outside forces) 

the "mill-margin" (under gi en conditions of material crsts) is some 

measure of the extent to which a wa~e increase is supportable. 

While the proposed increased mirnmum wage and lower working 

hours will raise labor costs somewhat above the 50% ratio of wages to " mill-margin" that existed between 1923-1929, there has recently 

occurred a marked improvement in mill-margin back to conditions of 

profitable operations. Therefore the increased wages could now be 

absorbed with only a small increase in price to the consumer. 

Our studies show, however, that any larger wage increase would 

require such a mark-up as might impair consumption and so react 

unfavorably on the President's whole re-employment policy. There' 

is such a thing as taking too big a bite. This was an industry of low 

wages. We are increasing for certain mills unskilled rates enormously and total wage payments by about 20% and lowering hours 

over 25%. It is about the limit of present practicability. While 

it is not enough to produce the general effect at which we are aiming, 

as a . practical matter, it should be accepted for the present. As 

general purchasing power increases and as the industry gets the benefits which it should reap from the wise self-government authorized 

under the code, further adjustments can be made. 

Far from criticizing management for not profferring more at this 

time, the courage and cooperative spirit of this industry in coming 

forward ahead of all others is to be commended and, as will later be 

shown, these conclusions have the unanimous support and commendation of the whole Labor, Consumers' and Industrial Advisory 

groups of this Administration. 

4. Exceptions of certain classes. 

The exception of low paid cleaners and outside employees from hour 

and wage provisions of the code were subjected to some criticism which 

seems legitimate (I-H-1 ; IV-E-1, ff. ; com pare III-O-5; IV-I-2 and 3; 

VI-C-7, ff.; II-G-1 ). The exception of learners for a six weeks period 

from the wage scale is open to possible abuse anq. must be watched in 

administration (IV-1-12; III-O-5; III-2-8, ff.; III-Q-1; IV-K-6). 

The exception of office and supervisory staff from the hour provisions is inconsistent with the priniple of the President's statement 

of June 16, 1933, which requires inclusion of the "white collar" class 

within all benefits of the Act, and an agreement (see p. -, infra) to 

remedy this defect was reached. 

This code applies minimum wage provisions only to the lowest-paid 

classes of employees. The general theory is that the normal differentials in the higher grades of skilled labor will automatically be proportionately increased by economic pressure. Mr. William G. Batty, 

Secretary of the Massachusetts Textile Council, however, argued very 
12 

persuasively that definite specifications for each pay grade are 

necessary to protect the higher classification of workers receiving 

more than the minimum code scales (III-A-5, ff.), but the adminis- trative difficulty of promptly developing such scales is sufficient 

reason for not including them at this time. It is believed, however, 

that the President's approval should be conditioned on the understanding that existing differentials in the higher-paid grades shall be 

maintained (III-Q-7). The exception of repair shop crews, engineers, electricians, firemen, 

shipping and watching crews from the hour scale is subject to criticism 

which would be removed if such workers are guaranteed time and a 

half for overtime (III-S-1) (memorandum of Joseph S. McDonald), 

and it is recorrμnended that approval be so conditioned. 

It is recommended that the President direct the planning agency of 

the industry provided for in the code, to consider and submit a scale 

of hours and wages for cleaners and outside help an~ to devise means 

for so administering the provisions excepting learners as to avoid 

abuses. 

It is further recommended that the President's approval include a 

condition that the resolution, passed at a meeting of the Cotton Tex- tile Industry Committee, held on June 30, 1933, to include office 

employees within the hour provisions of the code shall be carried into 

effect. 

5. Concessions in original proposals obtained during the hearing.-

(Child Labor-Increased Minimum-Stretch-out). 

Increases in the $10 and $11 wage scales originally proposed to $12 

and $13, and the elimination of child labor, were provided for in amendments adopted during the hearing. 

Of course, the most dramatic and significant development was the 

voluntary proposal by the industry to abolish child labor. This 

resulted less from the hearings than from the intendments of the Act 

itself. This resulted from the President's own concept that a minimum wage applied without distinction as to age would automatically 

eliminate child labor and it did. The reason why this ancient 

atrocity could be so easily killed, notwithstanding its tenacity of life 

against 25 years of attack, was also intrinsic in the President's idea 

that employers would be glad to do much by general agreement that 

no single employer would dare to do separately. 

6. Planning and Supervisory Agency.-A planning and fair practice 

agency was provided for in an amendment which is now section 6 of 

the Code, adopted and submitted by the industry towards the end of 

the hearing along with other amendments, chief of which were the 

child labor provisions and the increases in the proposed minimum 

wage. While these proposals were advanced too late for complete 

public discussion, no objections to their inclusion have come in from 

any of the interested parties. There has been some newspaper 

criticism on permitting new matter so late in the hearing. This 

springs from a misconception of the nature of this procedure. It is 

an administrative process to arri e at a just result. It is not an 

adver ary judicial trial. The am ndm nts were all in the public 

intere t. This method will be continued. 

Section 6 was included at the in tance of the Administration and 

with the active collaboration of our Di ision of Re earch and Planning 

(VI-D). It is a series of permissi e powers and directions for indust.rial administration. It sets up a committee for industrial self 
13 

g_overnment. The creation of such a planning agency for the contmuous collaboration of the industry with the Administration is an 

application to an individual industry of the industrial planning and 

research agency provided under Section 2 (b) of the Act for effectuating the policies of the Act and is an intrinsic and necessary part of 

these policies. 

Recurring reference in the course of this report has been made to 

the plight of the industry even in the prosperity years prior to the 

depression. Comparisons between that industry and general manufacturing and business contained in the accompanying economic 

report bear ample testimony to the need of rational control of production and balancing with consumption, the more pressing because 

of overcapacity of this staple industry as a byproduct of war expansion, of cut-throat competition from within, and the competition of 

substitute products from without. 

Broadly, the industry proposes an economic clearing house for the 

development of statistical accounting and economic controls which 

will aid its members in the conduct of their individual business pro-- duction and distribution, and (through a service bureau for engineering, accounting, and credit) aid more especially the smaller mills in 

meeting the emergency and the requirements of the Code. As 

a supplement to this, it projects the development of an open 

trading association through which, as in the case of commodity 

exchanges, prices and terms of trading would be reported by all 

companies with a view to avoid and eliminate unfair and destructive 

competitive prices and practices. It further proposes to fashion 

instruments of self-government for dealing with the problems of overcapacity and overproduction by subjecting the installation of additional productive machinery to its scrutiny and the approval or 

disapproval of the Administration, at the same time allowing for 

flexibility of control over machinery through recommendations to 

the Administration for changes in or exemptions from limitation 

upon machinery hours when the interest of the industry and the 

public render it necessary. Finally, mindful of the importance of 

credit in furthering economic stability, it proposes a cooperation 

with the banking and credit systems to advise them of the actual 

functioning of the Code and the operations of its members, to the end 

that available credit be adapted to the needs of the industry considered as a whole and the needs of the small as well as the large units. 

The foregoing and other listed functions of the Planning and Fair 

Practice Agency are thus placed within framework in which the 

common interests in stabilization of profitable activity and employment at adequate wages can be brought into focus in practice. It 

remains to provide the framework for cooperation on the part of this 

agency with the Admini!;;tration to which it is to make recommendations v hich, when approved by the Administration, have the same 

force and effect as provisions of the Code. 

For the purpose of permitting the development of cooperative 

planning and rational self-government in this industry, as in other 

indu tries, and for the purpose of protecting the public interest, it is 

recommended that Section VI of the Code be approved with the condition that the Administrator shall appoint a committee of three, one 

representing labor in the cotton textile industry, one representing the 

owners and managers of the industry, and one representing the Ad-
14 

ministration of the Recovery Act, to act with such agency in supervising the execution of the Code and in promoting the purposes 

defined by Section 6 for the effectuation of the policy of the Recovery 

Act. 

Other provisions of the code were not subjected to controversy; 

were found advisable in the Administration's own analysis, and their 

approval is recommended. 

7. Suggested Conditions on Approval. 

For obvious reasons, it is recommended that the following conditions 

be imposed on approval of the cotton textile code: 

(a) Maximum hours to apply to particular persons.-It is interpreted that the provisions for maximum hours established a maximum 

of hours of labor per weekjor every employee covered, so that under no 

circumstances will such an employee be employed or permitted to 

work for one or more employers in the industry in the aggregate in 

excess of the prescribed number of hours in a single week. 

(b) Piece work not to frustrate the code.-It is interpreted that the 

provisions for a minimum wage in this code establish a guaranteed 

minimum rate of pay per hour of employment regardless of whether 

the employee's compensation is otherwise based on a time rate or upon 

a piece work performance. This is to avoid frustration of the purpose 

of the code by changing from hour to piece-work rules. 

(c) "Stretch-outs" to be held in abeyance.-Until adoption of further 

provisions of this Code necessary to prevent any improper speeding 

up of work to the disadvantage of employees ("stretch-outs") and in 

a manner destructive of the purposes of the National Industrial Recovery Act, it is required that any and all increases in the amount of 

work or production required of employees over that required on July 

1, 1933, must be submitted to and approved by the agency created 

by section VI of the code and by the Administration and if not so 

submitted such increases will be regarded as a prima facie violation 

of the provision for minimum wages. 

(d) Nonsignatories to be given a hearing.--Opportunity shall be 

given for administrative consideration of every application of the 

Code in particular instances to any person directly affected who has 

not in person or by a representative consented and agreed to the terms 

of the code. Any such person shall be given an opportunity for a .hearing before the Administrator or his representative, and for a stay 

of the application to him of any provision of the code, prior to incurring any liability to the enforcement of the Code against him by 

any of the means provided in the National Industrial Recovery Act. 

At such hearing any objection to the application of the Code in the 

specific circumstances may be presented and will be heard. 

(e) Temporary approval.-The existing condition in the Cotton 

Textile industry is not static. It may change very quickly. This 

ls the first Code and is frankly experimental. Its approval should be 

limited to a four months' period with the right to ask for a modification at any time and subject to a request for renewal for another four 

months at any time before its expiration. 

The attention of the President is called to the provision of Section I 

of the code, by virtue of which approval of the Code on or before Sunday, July 9, will make it effective on Monday, July 17. 

Respectfully submitted, 

HUGH s. JOHNSON, 

Administrator. 
LIST OF WITNESSES 

Mr. George A. Sloan, President, Cotton Textile Institute, Inc. 

Mr. Robert Amory, President, Nashua Manufacturing Company. 

Mr. William D. Anderson, President, Bibb Manufacturing Com-! 

parry. 

Mr. F. C. Dumaine, Amoskeag, Manufacturing Co. 

Senator James F. Byrnes, S0uth Ca~olina. 

Mr. Harry P. Kendall, The Kendall Company. 

Mr. B. D. Gordon, representing four hosiery knitting mills. 

Mr. F. A. Seiberling, representing 20 independent tire manufacturers. 

Mr. E. J. McMillan, President, American Knitwear Manufacturers 

Association. 

Mr. Thomas McMahon, President, United Textile Workers of 

America. 

Mr. W. E.G. Batty, Secretary, New Bedford Textile Council. 

Mr. C. A. Stillman, Vice President, Goodyear Tire and Rubber 

Company, speaking for Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., Goodrich 

Rubber Co., Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.; and U.S. Rubber. Company. 

Mr. S. Gottschall, National Upholstery and Drapery Textile Association. 

Mr. Russell E. Watson, representing Johnson & Johnson. 

Senator Hugo L. Black, of Alabama. 

Mr. John Frey, Metal Trades Department, American Federation of 

Labor. 

Mr. Sidney Hillman, President, Amalgamated Clothing Workers. 

Miss Lucy R. Mason, General Secretary, National Consumers 

LeaO'ue. 

Miss Margaret Wiseman, Executive Secretary, Consumers League 

of Massachusetts. 

Miss June Croll, National Textile Workers Union. 

Mr. William Green, President, American Federation of Labor. 

Mr. John P. Davis, Executive Secretary, Negro Industrial League. 

Mr. John L. Barry, New Hampshire Federation of Labor. 

1iss Maud Younger, Chairman, National Women's Party. 

Mr. Flint Garrison, Director, Wholesale Dry Goods Institute. 

Mr. T. M. Marchant, President, American Association of Cotton 

Manufacturers. 

Mr. H. J. Carr, General Vice President, International Association 

of Machini ts. 

Mr. Joseph S. McDonagh, International Brotherhood of Electrical 

Worker. 

Mr. Robert R. West, President, Riverside and Dan River Cotton 

Mills. 

1'1r. Stuart W. Cramer, President, Cramerton Mills, Inc. 

Mr. Courtenay Dinwiddie. 

9713°-33-3 (15) 
CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE 

INDUSTRY 

To effectuate the policy of Tjtle I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, during the period of the emergency, by reducing and relieving 

unemploymen t, improving the standards of labor, eliminating competitive practices destructive of the interests of the public, employees, 

and employers, relj eving the q.isastrous effects of overcapacity, and 

otherwise rehabilitating the cotton textile industry and by increasing 

the consumption of industrial and agricultural products by increasing 

purchasing power, and in other respects, the following provisions are 

established as a code of fair competition for the cotton textile 

industry: 

I. Definitions.-The term "cotton textile industry" as used herein 

is defined to mean the manufacture of cotton yarn a.nd/or cotton 

woven fabrics, whether as a final process or as a part of a larger or 

further process. The term "employees" as used herein shall include 

all persons employed in the conduct of such operations. The term 

"productive machinery" as used herein is defined to mean spinning 

spindles and/or looms. The term "effective date" as used herein is 

defined to be July 17, 1933,or if this code shall not have been approved 

by the President two weeks prior thereto, then the second Monday 

after such approval. The term "persons" shall include natural persons, partnerships, associations, and corporations. 

II. On and after the effective date, the minimum wage that shall 

be paid by employers in the cotton textile industry to any of their 

employees-except learners during a six-weeks' apprenticeship, 

cleaners, and outside employees-shall be at the rate of $12 per week 

when employed in the Southern section of the industry and at the 

rate of $13 per week when employed in the Northern section for 4.0 

hours of labor. 

III. On and after the effective date, employers in the cotton textile 

industry shall not operate on a schedule of hours of labor for their 

employees-except repair shop crews, engineers, electricians, firemen, 

office and supervisory staff, shipping, watching and outside crews, 

and cleaners-in excess of 40 hours per week and they shall not operate 

productive macrunery in the cotton textile industry for more than 

2 shifts of 40 hours each per week:. 

IV. On and after the effective date, employers in the cotton textile 

industry shall not employ any minor under the age of 16 years. 

V. With a view to keeping the President informed as to the observance or nonobservance of this Code of Fair Competition, and as to 

whether the cotton textile industry is taking appropriate steps to 

effectuate the declared policy of the National Industrial Recovery 

Act, each person engaged in the cotton textile industry will furnish 

duly certified reports in substance as follows and in such form as may 

hereafter be provided; 

(16) 
17 

(a) Wages and hours of labor.-Returns every four weeks showing 

actual hours worked by the various occupational groups of employees 

and minimum weekly rates of wage. 

(b) Machinery data.-In the case of mills having no looms, returns 

should be made every four weeks showing the number of spinning 

spindles in place, the number of spinning spindles actually operating 

each week, the number of shifts, and the total number of spindle 

hours each week. In the case of mills having no spinning spindles, 

returns every four weeks showing the number of looms in place, the 

hum.her of looms actually operated each week, the number of shifts 

and the total number of loom hours each week. In the case of mills 

that have spinning spindles and looms, returns every four weeks 

showing the number of spinning spindles and looms in place; the 

number of spinning spindles and looms actually operated each week, 

the number of shifts, and the total number of spindle hours and loom 

hours each week. 

(c) Reports of production, stocks, and orders.-Weekly returns showing Production in terms of the commonly used unit, i.e. linear yards, 

or pounds or pieces; stocks on hand both sold and unsold stated in 

the same terms and Unfilled Orders stated also in the same terms. 

These returns are to be confined to staple constructions and broad 

divisions of cotton textiles. The Cotton-Textile Institute, Inc., 320 

Broadway, New York City, is constituted the agency to collect and 

receive such reports. 

VI. To further effectuate the policies of the Act, the Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the applicants herein, or such successor 

committee or committees as may hereafter be constituted by the 

action of the Cotton Textile Institute, the American Cotton Manufacturers Association, and the National Association of Cotton Manufacturers, is set up to cooperate with the Administrator as a planning 

and fair-practice agency for the cotton textile industry. Such agency 

may from time to time present to the Administrator recommendations based on conditions in the industry as they may develop from 

time to time which will tend to effectuate the operation of the provisions of this Code and the policy of the National Industrial Recovery 

Act, and in particular along the following lines: 

1. Recommendations as to the requirements by the Administrator 

of such further reports from persons engaged in the cotton textile 

industry of statistical information and keeping of uniform accounts 

as may be required to secure the proper observance of the code and 

promote the proper balancing of production and consumption and 

the stabilization of the industry and employment. 

2. Recommendations for the setting up of a service bureau for 

engineering, accounting, credit, and other purposes to aid the smaller 

mill in meeting the conditions of the emergency and the requirements 

of this code. 

3 Recommendations (1) for the requirement by the Administrator 

of registration by persons engaged in the cotton textile industry of 

their productive machinery, (2) for the requirement by the Administrator that prior to the installation of additional productive machinery 

by persons engaged or engaging in the cotton textile industry, except 

for the replacement of a similar number of existing looms or spindles 

or to bring the operation of existing productive machinery into b&lance, 

such persons shall secure certificates that such installation will be 
18 

consistent with effectuating the policy of the National Industrial 

Recovery Act during the period of the emergency, and (3) for the 

grantin~ or withholding by the Administrator of such certificates if 

so reqmred by him. 

4. Recommendations for changes in, or exemptions from the 

provisions of this code as to the working hours of machinery which will 

tend to preserve a balance of productive activity with consumption 

requirements, so that the interests of the industry and the public 

may be properly served. 

5. Recommendations for the making of requirements by the Administrator as to practices by persons engaged in the cotton textile 

industry as to methods and conditions of trading, the naming and 

reporting of prices which may be appropriate to avoid discrimination, 

to promote the stabilization of the industry, to prevent and eliminate 

unfair and destructive competitive prices and practices. 

6. Recommendations for regulating the disposal of distress merchandise in a way_ to secure the protection of the owners and to 

promote sound and stable conditions in the industry. 

7. Recommenda~ions as to the making available to the suppliers of 

credit to those engaged in the industry of information regarding terms 

of, and actual functioning of any or all of the provisions of the code, 

the conditions of the industry and regf!.,rding the operations of any 

and all of the members of the industry covered by such ~ode to the 

end that during the period of emergency available credit may be 

adapted to the needs of such industry considered as a whole and to 

the needs of the small as well as to the large units. 

8. Recommendations for dealing with any inequalities that may 

otherwise arise to endanger the stability of the industry and of production and employment. · 

Such recommendatjons, when approved by the Administrator, 

shall have the same force and effect as any other provisions of this 

code. · 

Such agency is also set up to cooperate with the Administrator in 

making investigations as to the functioning and observance of any 

of the provisions of this Code, at its own instance or on complaint by 

any person affected, and to report the same to the Administrator. 

Such agency is also set up for the purpose of investigating and 

informing the Administrator on behalf of the Cotton Textile Industry 

as to the importation of competitive articles into the United States 

in substantial quantities or increasing ratio to domestic production 

on such terms or under such conditions as to render ineffective or 

seriously to endanger the maintenance of this Code and as an agency 

for making complaint to the President on behalf of the Cotton 

Textile Industry, under the provisions of the National Industrial 

Recovery Act, with respect thereto. 

VII. Where the costs of executing contracts entered into in the 

Cotton Textile Industry prior to the presentation to Congress oL the 

National Industrial Recovery Act are increased by the application 

of the provisions of that Act to the industry, it is equitable and 

promotive of the purposes of the Act that appropriate adjustments 

of such contracts to reflect such increased costs be arrived at by arbitral proceedings or otherwise, and the Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the applicant for this Code, is constituted an agency to assist 

in effecting such adjustments. 
19 

' VIII. Employers in the Cotton Textile Industry shall comply with 

the requirements of the National Industrial Recovery Act as follows: 

"(1) That employees shall have the right to organize and bargain 

collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and shall 

be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of 

labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in 

self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of 

collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; (2) that no 

employee and no one seeking employment shall be required as a condition of employment to join any company union or to refrain from 

joining, organizing, or assisting a labor organization of his own choosmg; and (3) that employers shall comply with the maximum hours of 

labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of employment, 

approved or prescribed by the President." 

IX. This code and all the provisions thereof are expressly made 

subject to the right of the President, in accordance with the provision 

of Clause 10 (b) of the National Industrial Recovery Act, from time 

to time to cancel or modify any order, approval, license, rule, or regulation, issued under Title I of said Act, and specifically to the right 

of the President to cancel or modify his approval of this Code or any 

conditions imposed by him upon his approval thereof. 

X. Such of the provisions of this Code as are not required to be 

included therein by the National Industrial Recovery Act may, with · 

the approval of the President, be modified or eliminated as changes 

in' circumstances or experience may indicate. It is contemplated 

that from time to time supplementary provisions to this Code or 

additional codes will be submitted for the approval of the President 

to prevent unfair competition in price and other unfair and destructive 

competitive practices and to effectuate the other purposes and policies 

of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act consistent with the 

provisions hereof. 

,, 

\ 

... 
EXECUTIVE ORDERS APPLYING PROVISIONS OF THE 

COTTON TEXTILE CODE TO OTHER INDUSTRIES 

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933 

In supplement to an application filed for approval of a code of fair 

competition for the rayon weaving industry, the applicants have requested immediate approval of certain provisions, and after due consideration, acting under the Provisions of the National Industrial 

Recovery Act, I agree with the applicants who have filed said code for 

the rayon weaving industry, that the provisions of section V, paragraphs A, B, D and E, which are identical with corresponding provisions in the Cotton Textile Code, approved by me July 9, 1933, 

should be made effective on July 17, 1933, which is the effective date 

of the Cotton Textile Code, and I hereby approve of said provisions 

of said code for the rayon weaving industry subject to the interpretation and conditions imposed by me on my approval of the corresponding provisions of said Cotton Textile Code, and subject further to 

such revision or modification as I may find proper after a hearing has 

been held on said code of fair competition for the rayon weaving 

industry, now set for July 25, 1933. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933 

In supplement to an application filed for approval of a Code of Fair 

Competition for the Throwing Industry, the applicants have requested 

immediate approval of certain provisions of said Code, with amendments thereto, and after due consideration, acting under the Provisions of the National Industrial Recovery-Act, I agree with the applicants who have filed said Code for the Throwing Industry that the 

provisions of Sections III, IV, V, IX which, as amended, are identical 

with corresponding provisions in the Cotton Textile Code, approved 

by me July 9, 1933, should be made effective as amended on July 17, 

1933, which is the effective date of the Cotton Textile Code, and I 

therefore hereby approve of said provisions of said Code for the 

Throwing Industry, as amended, subject to the interpretations and 

conditions imposed by me on my approval of the corresponding 

provisions of said Cotton Textile Code and subject further to such 

revisions or modifications as I may find proper after a hearing has been 

held on such Code of Fair Competition for the Throwing Industry, 

now set for July 25, 1933. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933 

In supplement to an application filed for approval of a C<?de of 

Fair Competition for the Cotton Thread Industry, the applicants 

have requested immediate approval of certain provisions, and after 

due consideration, acting under the provisions of the National 

Industrial Recovery Act, I agree with the applicants who have filed 

(20) 
21 

said Code for the Cotton Thread Industry that the provisions of 

Title 2, Paragraphs 5 and 6 and the provisions of Title 3, paragraphs 

4 and 5, which are identical ,vi.th corresponding provisions in the 

Cott.on Textile Code, approved by me July 9, 1933, should be made 

effective on July 17, 1933, which is the effective date of the Cotton 

Textile Code, and I therefore hereby approve of said provisions of 

said Code for the Cotton Thread Industry subject to the interpretations and conditions imposed hy me on my approval of the corresponding provisions of said Cotton Textile Code and subject further 

to such revisions or modifications as I may find proper after a hearing 

has been held on said Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton 

Thread Industry. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933 

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by Title I of the National 

Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, and pending action 

upon a Code of Fair Competition to be presented by the Silk 

Association of America, 

I agree with the Committee representing the Broad Silk and 

Rayon Weavers Division, the Converters Division, the Special 

Fabrics Division, the Ribbon Division, and the Woven Label Division, 

of the Silk Association of America, that they shall be bound beginning 

July 17 by the provisions of the Cotton Textile Industry Code as set 

forth in the telegram, dated July 14, offering this agreement to the 

President of the United States, pursuant to Section 4 of the National 

Recovery Act, which telegram is signed by Henry E. Stehli, James 

C. Black, Paul C. Debry, Sol C. Moss, Ramsay Peugnet, George G. 

Sommaripa, and addressed to Mr. Nelson Slater, Deputy Administrator, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C., with the e~ress 

understanding that this agreement is subject to cancellation at any 

time without notice. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933 

. A Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry has 

been heretofore approved by Order of the President dated July 9, 

1933, on certain conditions set forth in such order. The applicants 

for said Code have now requested the withdrawal of condition 12 of 

said order providing for the termination of approval at the end of 

four months unless expressly renewed, have accepted certain other 

conditions, have proposed amendments to the Code to effectuate the 

intent of the remaining conditions, and have requested that final 

approval be given to the Code as so amended and on such conditions. 

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by Title I of the National 

Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, on the report and 

recommenRation of the Administrator and on consideration. 

It is ordered that the condition heretofore imposed as to the termination of approval of the Code is now withdrawn and that the 

Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry is finally 

approved with the conditions so accepted and with the amendments 

so proposed, as set forth in Schedule A attached hereto. 
SCHEDULE A 

APPLICATION TO THE PRESIDENT BY THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY COMMITTEE 

FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON 

TEXTILE INDUSTRY 

The Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the applicant for the approval of the 

Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry, submitted for the 

approval of the President June 16, 1933, and as revised June 30, 1933, accepts the 

interpretations and conditions to the approval thereof set forth in paragraphs 1, 3, 

7, 8, 9, and 13 of the order of the President dated July 9, 1933, and asks the approval of the President to the following amendments to such code as properly 

complying with and effectuating the conditions provided for in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 

6, 10, and 11 of said order of approval, and asks for the final approval by the 

President of the Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry as so 

amended, and on the conditions so accepted and with the omission of the condition in paragraph 12 of such order as to the termination of the approval at the end 

of four months. 

1. It shall be one of the functions of the Planning and Fair Pr actice Agency provided for in Section -6 of the Code to consider the question of plans for eventual 

employee ov:nership of homes in mill villages and submit to the Recovery Administration prior to January 1, 1934, its report in the matter. 

2. On and after July 31, 1933, the maximum hours of labor for office employees 

in the Cotton Textile Industry shall be an average of forty hours a week over 

each period of six months. 

3. The amount of differences existing prior to July 17, 1933, between the 

wage rates paid various classes of employees (receiving more than the established 

minimum wage) shall not be decreased-in no event, however, shall any employer 

pay any employee a wage rate which will yield a less wage for a work week of 40 

hours than such employee was receiving for the same class of work for the longer 

week of 48 hours or more prevailing prior" to July 17, 1933. It shall be a function 

of the Planning and Fair Practice Agency provided for in Paragraph 6 of the 

Code to observe the operation of these provisions and recommend such further 

provisions as experience may indicate to be appropriate to effectuate their purposes. 

4. On and after the effective date the maximum hours of labor of repair shop 

crews, engineers, electricians and watching crews in the Cotton Textile Industry 

shall, except in case of emergency work, be forty hours a week with a tolerance of 

10 percent. Any emergency time in any mill shall be reported monthly to the 

Planning and Fair Practice Agency provided for in Paragraph 6 of the Code, 

through the Cotton-Textile Institute. 

5. Until adoption of further provisions of this Code that may prove necessary 

to prevent any improper speeding up of work (stretch-outs), no employee of any 

mill in the Cotton Textile Industry shall be required to do any work in excess 

of the practices as to the class of work of such employee prevailing on July 1, 

1933, or prior to the Share-the-Wark Movement, unless such increase is submitted 

to and approved by the Agency created by Section 6 of the Code and by the 

National Recovery Administration. 

6. This Code shall be in operation on and after the effective date as to the 

whole cotton textile industry except as an exemption from or a stay of the api;>lication of its provisions may be granted by the Administrator to a person applymg 

for the same or except as provided in an executive order. No distinct_io_n sh~ll 

be made in such exemptions between persons who have and have not Joined m 

applying for the approval of this Code. 

Respectfully submitted. 

DATED JULY 15, 1933. 

THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY COMMITTEE, 

GEORGE A. SLOAN, Chairman. 

(22) 
23 

AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY 

XVII. To make proper provision with regard to the stretch-out (or specialization) system or any other problem of working conditions in the Cotton Textile 

Industry, it is provided: 

1. There shall be constituted by appointment of the Administrator a Cotton 

Textile National Industrial Relations Board, to be composed of three members1 

one to be nominated by the Cotton Textile Industry Committee to represent 

the employers, one to be nominated by the Labor Advisory Board of the National 

Recovery Administration to represent the employees, and a third to be selected 

by the Administrator. This National Board shall be provided by the National 

Recovery Administration with a per diem for actual days engaged in its work 

and with such secretarial and expert technical assistance as it may require in the 

performance of its duties. 

2. The Administrator, upon the nomination of the Cotton Textile National 

Industrial Relations Board shall appoint in each state in which the cotton textile 

industry operates a State Cotton Textile Industrial Relations Board composed 

of three members, one of whom shall be selected from the employers of the cotton 

te~tile industry, one from the employees of the cotton textile industry, and a 

third to represent the public. 

3. Whenever, in any cotton textile mill, a controversy shall arise between 

employer and employees as to the stretch-out (or specialization) system or any 

other problem of working conditions, the employer and the employees may 

establish in such mill an Industrial Relations Committee chosen from the management and the employees of the mill and on which the employer and the employees shall have equal representation of not more than three representatives 

each. If such a committee is not otherwise established, the employer or the 

employee, or both, may apply to the State Industrial Relations Board for 

assistance and cooperation in the establishment in such mill of such industrial 

relations committee. The term of service of each such mill committee shall be 

limited to the adjustment of such controversy or problem of working conditions 

for the adjstment of which the committee was created. 

If the representatives of the employers and of the employees in such industrial 

relations committee are unable to arrive at an agreement and united action 

with respect to such differences of opinion, the representatives of the employers 

or of the employees, or both, may appeal to the State Industrial Relations 

Board for cooperation and assistance in arriving at an agreement and united 

action. . It shall be the duty of such Industrial Relations Committee to endeavor 

to adjust such controversy. In cases where such committee reaches agreement 

with respect to any such controversy, such agreement shall be final except 

that it shall be submitted to the Cotton Textile National Industrial Relations 

Board for review and approval under such regulations as such National Board 

may establish. 

This provision for such industrial relations committee within the particular 

mills shall be without prejudice to the freedom of association of employees and 

the other pro.visions of Section 7, of the Industrial Recovery Act. 

4. It sha_ll be the duty of the State Industrial Relations Board, where their assistance is requested, as provided in subsection 3, to cooperate with employers 

and employees in organizing industrial-relations committees in individual cotton 

t xtile mills and to cooperate with such committees in the development of conf rence procedures and in the adjustment of differences of opinion with respect to 

the operation or introduction of the stretch-out system and other problems of 

working conditions. 

In the event that the State Industrial Relations Board is unable to bring about 

agreement and united action of labor and management in a controversy so appealed to it, such State Industrial Relations Board shall present the controversy 

to the Tational Ind t trial Relations Board for hearing and final adjustment. 

5. The National Industrial Relations Board shall bear and finally determine 

all such que tions brought before it on appeal by the State Industrial Relations 

Boards and certify its decisions to the Administrator and shall pave authority to 

codify the experience of the industrial-relations committees of the various mills 

and tate boards with a view to e tabli hing standards of general practice with 

re pect to the stretch-out (or specialization) system or other problems of working 

conditions. 

0 
•