Business Library 

CLASS _____ _ 

BOOK ___________ _ 


------ ··-· 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 

DIVISION OF REVIEW 

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION 

FOR THE 

COAT AN9 SUIT INDSTRY 

By 

George Gordon Battle 

Chairman 

N.I. Stone 

Paul F. Brissenden 

WORK MATERIALS NO. TEN 

1 , 

J. • " 

MARCH, 1936 

9821 

OFFICE OF liJATI ON.AL RECOVERY ADEHU STRATI ON 

DI VI SION OF REV ~W 

REPORT OF Tl-IE COMlii SSION 

FOR THE 

COAT Alill SUI T I NDUSTRY 

By 

Goorgo Gbrdon ' Batt1e 

Chairnan 

N. I:. $tone 

Paul F. Brissenden 

Ivi.ARCH, 1936 
A A L v 

By W. P. A. 

1 

' . . . 
FO~V!0.3D 

The HationaJ. Recover y Administration Commission f or the coat and suit industry was appointed b~r the Administrator on May 17, 1 93<', , 

pursuant to a r esolution adopted on Ma;)r 4 , 1 934, 

at a hearing before Denuty Admi ni strators Earl 

D . ... Iowurd and i'.iorri s Greenberg, in Wa sl1ington, 

in \""rhich representatives of the s eve ral coat and 

suit mar}cets of the COl).ntry , toge ther rd th r epresentatives of the I nternational Ladi es Garment 

17orke rs Union, ~) artici ated. 

The J. oll0\7ing persons we re members of the 

Commission: 

l.'h·. George Gordon Battle, Chair1aan 

Mr . N. I. Stone , Acting Cha irman 

Dr. Paul F. Brissenden 

The manda te to the Commission was to make a 

study of the conpetitive mar ket condi tions in the 

industry and to p r esent its findings to the Aduini strator, i n order to enable the Administrator 

to de termine ~hat chanees, if any , should be made 

in the code for the coat and suit industry. 

The Comm ission made an eLhaustive study of 

direct and ind.irect l abor costs and other competitive factors in the various coat and suit market 

area s. The r eport of the Commission v:ras printed 

as a supplement of the Women 's Uear Da ily , Volume 

49 , No. 1 9 , Se ction 3, on Friday , July 27 , 1934. 

It is her e r ep roduc ed in order to increase its 

availability to students. 

The renort uas discussed at a hearing he ld on 

Av .g-ust 3, 1 934 on several proposed amend.ments to 

the code for t he coat and s 1i t industr./. The 

transc:::-ipt of t h is hearing is located in the NRA 

Central Records Section. 

At the ba ck of the repo rt vri ll be found a 

brief statement of t he studies undertaken by the 

Division of Review. 

. \ 0 

9821 

L. C. Ma r shall 

Director, Division of Review . 

-i-
Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2013 

http://archive.org/details/reportcomm36unit 
T A B 1 E 0 F C 0 1'! T 1: :1 T S 

Pages 

List of Charts ................ . ........ .... ..... .. . . .......... iii- iv 

List of Ta'bJ.es in t he Text ... . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . v 

List of Ap)endix Tabl es ••••••..•••.......••....•......... . .•.• vi- vii 

REPORT OF THE COMV I SSIO!T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

SECTI Or~ I. I 11 troduction ......................... .. . 1 

S:::::CTI O:N II. ComJ?arison of Costs in Different Mar kets L1. 

A. Analy sis of lliL1-of-Shop 

Cost s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

]3 . Cost of Hanufacture of a 

Specific Garment .................... 20 

SECTION III. Th e Su-'?l)l y of Labor in the Markets...... 34 

SECTION IV. 'Jage Statistics......................... 40 

A. Earning s of Employees............... 40 

]. Earni~ s in Relation to 

Code St 2ndards.......... .. . .. . . . . . . . 54 , 

SECTI ON V. Uni on Organizo.t i on n.nd Labo r Agreemen t s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 

SECTION VI. Volume of Sales Before and Since 

Adop tion of Code.................... 69 

SECTION VII. &unmary of CoQpl a ints and Demands, 

with the Commissi on 1 s Findi 1gs... . • • 73 

.A ~,;> endix. Tables... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 91 

9821 -ii-

LIST OF CTIARTS 

Fig . R-la Run-of-snou co sts a nd ave r a /';e :1ourly earning s in 

mar t:ets outsid e of Ne'.7 Yor k : $6 .75 and $8 .75 houses .•. 7 

Fig . R-lAa Run. of -sho~ costs an d average hc- u rly earning s in New 

York : $6 .75 hous es............................ . . .... .. 8 

Fig . R-ld Run-o f -shop costs a nd ave rag e h0urly earni:i1g s ~n 

marl ts outside of Ne 1.7 York: $1 0 .75 houses .••.......... 10 

Fig . R-lAb Run-of-shOT) costs and a ve rag e hourly ea.r!ling s in 

Neu Yo r k : $1C.75 hous e s • • •..•.•...... ..... ........... • 11 

Fig. R-lc Run-of-s hop costs and averag e hourly earnings in mar-:-

k et s out side of New York : $13 . 75 and $16 .75 houses .••• 13 

Fig. R-lAc Rm1-of-shop costs and averag e hourly earnings in 

Ne\-v York P1a rJ··e t: $16 . 75 houses ............••...•...•. , 14 

l!,ig . !1.-lb Run-of-shou costs and average hourly earning s in 

Elark et s outside of Neq York: $12 .75 houses •. .. . ..••••• 16 

Fig . R-le Run-of-shOl) costs and average hourly ea.rning s in 

r:1arl:et s outside of N e·7 York : $18 . 75 and $20 . 75 houses. 19 

Fig. G-la Cost of proru1ction of a specific g arment in different 

markets in compa rison vrith shou run costs and average 

hourly earnings : C-r a de 1il- .Iinls 11 a nd Grade "1 11 coats •• 25 

Fig. G-lb Cost of urodu ction of a sp ecific garment in different 

oarl.:et s in coml_)ari son Tii t h shop run costs and a verage 

hourl ~r eg.rning s : Grade " 211 coats •••.....•..•...... . .•. 29 

Fig. G-lc Cost of p roduction of a Sl_)ecific garment in differ ent 

mar~::: ets in comoa rison with sho:? r un co sts and ave r age 

hourly earnings : Grade 11 3 11 coats .•.................•.. 30 

Fig. G-ld Cost of production of a sp ecific garment in different 

mark ets in comparison v-.rith shon r u n costs and average 

hourly earnings: Grade "3-4," 11 4" and li4-5" coats ...•. 31 

Fi -; . A Avera.[", e number of o~ker s and t h eir earnings by 

marl{ e t E' ... nd b~,r craft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

Fig. E-7 Average hourl y earning s of cutters i ·l'l tailor and 

section shop s, b;y mark et ••.........•..•..•..••....•..•• 44 

Fig. E-8 Avera-ge hour l y earning s of Iilfl.l e o•)er <'..tors in tailor 

and section shol)S , by ma r 1::et •••...•.........••....•.••• 45 

9821 .-iii-
... 

• • 0 

. . . . 
Fig . E-9 Avera;ge hourly earnings of female op erators in 

tailor ru1d section shops, by market ................ 46 

Fig . E-10 Averag e hourly earninc;s of male finishers 

in tailor and sact ion shons, by marl-:et . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 

Fig . E- ll Aver::J.ge hourly earnin ~ of female finishers 

in tailor an.d sect i on shOl)S, by market .... . . . . . • . . . 48 

Fig. E-12 Average hourly earnings of press er s, in 

tailor and section sho~s , by oar ket ....... . .. . . .. .. 49 

Fig. E-3 Average url~r ea rning s of ma le op erators 

in "inside" and 11 outside 11 shop s , b} ma rket ......... 50 

Fig . E- 4 Average hourly earnings of female 011 erc>.tors 

in 11 inside 11 and "outside" s:10ns, bv market ..... . .. . 51 

Fig. H-13a Aver£.g e hourly ea rn:'..ngs o: fi.nishe:-s, by 

sex and rna1.,l{et .......... ................. ........ . . 52 

Fig . H-13b Average hourl y ea rnings of o·oer ato r s, by 

sex e ... nd mar ~et . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

Fig. H-12- 1 Average hourly ear nings of cutter s in r elat i on 

to code standards, by ma ~et . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 

Fig. H-l:?.r-2 Avere..ge hOLJ.rly earnir.gs of o-per ators in 

relation to 11ei ght ed code st::mdard_s, by 

market ....................... . ...................... 56 

Fig . H-12-3 Average hourly earnings of finishers i n r elation 

t o we i ghted code standards, oy marKet ............... 57 

Fig . H-12-4 Average hourl:,r eHrnings of pressers in relation 

to code standards, by mar ket. . • • • • • • • • . . • . • . . . . . . . . . 58 

9821 -iv-

LIST OF TABLES HT TEXT 

Table G- 2 Condensed summa!'y of cost of p roduction of 

a specific gar ment and of run- of-shop cost s •.....• 23 

Table H- 14a Numbe r of needle workers in various ma r k:et s 

comuared Tii th nu111bers of :10rL::e r s i n the coat 

a.nd suit industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

Table H-14b Number of needle workers in vari ou s market areas.. 37 

Table :S-1 Summary of average hourly earnings by marl et and 

ma jo1., craft..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 

Table H-lOa Percentages of manufa ctu ring employee s 

whose earnings, for week end.ed March 9, 1934, were 

(l) below the code minimum, (2) between t he minimum and the code n averag e'' ai.1.d ( 3 ) above t he code 

"average , 11 b~r craft a.nd mar ket area. • • • . • • • • • . . . . . 60 

Table B-X Percentage of manuf e ctn ring en:9loy e e s •.;hose 

earnings f or ,,:eel: end.ed 1\'In.rch 9th, 1 934 , equalled 

or exceeded t h e 1)rescri bed code standards, by 

sel e cted craft anc1. me.r :·et area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 

Table B-S Co mparison of co de mininum and_ "average " hour ly 

rates, by craft and Inarket area, wit h eastern 

Table B-2 

Table K-1 

Table K-2 

Table C-1 

9821 

and ':'Testern differentials. .... . ................... 64 

Estimated proportions of coat and su it norke rs 

in tailor and section shop s, in week-work and 

piece-work sho ~9 s, in 11inside 11 and noutsidell 

sho~s, in union and non-~~ion shop s and of each 

sex, by market. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 

Dollar sales volume of coats and suits, s~ring 

season, 1933 and 1934 ..••••••••••••.••.••••...•••• 70 

Schedule showing number of sales inquiries and 

replies received.................................. 71 

Number of er..1ployees and their earnings in each 

major craft in Baltimore tailor and section 

shops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 

-v-
" 
Table :rt-1 

Table R-lA 

Table G-1 

Table H-14c 

Table H-l2a 

Table H-12 

Table E- 7 

Table E- 8 

Table E-9 

Table E-10 

Table E-ll 

Table E-12 

Table E- 3 

9821 

LIST OF APPEhDI./ TABLES 

Run-of-sho1. costs and e.verag e hourly earni ngs 

in the various mc. rl~ets.. .. ........ ... ...... ... .. 92 

Run-of-shop costs and average hourly rnin s 

in the Ne\7 York marJ':et .•.•.....•.•••••.•.•....... £'3-97 

Summary of cost of p roduction of a s·oecifi c 

garment in different mar)cet s in COli11)ari son 

witi1 run-of-sho J costs....... ... ........ ... ...... 98 

Numbers of needle norkers in various rrtarl-::ets , 

bJr age groL.lps ..... . .......... . ........ ... ...... .. 99 .... 101 

Sumnar_r comparison of number of emDJ.oyees, 

Jeit;ht eel code st c=mdards and. actur.l average 

hourly earning s, by major cra ft and marl;:et ...... . 

Comuarati ve tl:'.ble ~1 011ing 17eight eel code 

mininmms and EWel'a.ges and. El ctual averap;e 

hourly earnL1g s by P.le.jor craft and narl:et ..•..... 

lium-ber and averar, e hourly earni '1~~ s of cutters in tailor a"ld section shops, by 

102 

103 

market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 

number and averag e hourly earninc;s of 111ale 

operators in tailor a _1d sect i on sho >s , by 

marl{et . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • 105 

Numbe r ood averat; e hourly earnL1gs of female 

0:9erators, in t a ilor and section sl1ops, by 

marke t... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 

Humber and aver ac;e hourly earni 11t;s of rt1a,1e 

finishers in tailor ancl_ sect ion shOJ?S, b~r 

marl-c et . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 

Number and aver a g e hourly earning s of female 

fini sher s in tailor and section sho:,)s , by 

marlcet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 

!lumber and aver a,ge l1ourly c.:~- int:; s of pre ssers 

(male) in tailor ane_ sect ion shops, b:· me.rl:et •.••.. 

NuJ:J.b er a"ld average h')urly earnings of male 

01)e r a tors, in "inside " and "outside ll shops, 

109 

b3r m.:::tl--ket. • • . • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . . • . • • • . . . . • 110 

-vi-

Table E-L.1 

Table H- 13 

Table F.l- lC 

9821 

umber and averag e hourl y ea rninc;s of fe1nale 

operators, ia "inside" and"outside" shop s, 

by mnrl<:ct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 

Number and averA.E, e hourly earning s of cutters, 

nale cmd female op erntors, male cmd feT'lale 

finishers, and p r essers, o~ me.rl:et ••.•.•......... 

:Numbers and neroen tages of manuf e.oturing 

ertrpl0;)7 ees in the several craft classific:1t i ons, 

'7ho se earnings for ,:,eek ended ~arch S't h , 

1934 , ere (1) below t ho code mini~1rn , 

( 2 ) bet ,:een code minimun and code "average ", 

112 

and ( 3 ) above the co cle "average ", r ma rket ••.••• 113-142 

-vii-

- 1- . 

SECTION I. 

I N·r F.ODUCTION 

The Commi ssi on f or t he Coa t .and Suit Indu stry wa s appoint ed pursuant to a r e solution a dop ted on Iray 4 , J 934 , r.t a h earing before Deputy 

Ad.mini strato rs Ea rl D • . How::1rd and Morris Greenb erg._ in "7ashington, D. C., 

in uhich r ep r e s entative s of t h e s eve ral coa t and suit ma r kets of t h e 

country, toge t he r Tiith r epr esentative s of the International Ladies' Garment 

rlork·e rs Union , participa t ed. · 

The r esolution settinG forth t he ncope of .the Commission's investigatio11s follows: 

"The Ad.ministra tor ·shall f orthwith appoint n. commission of t h ree 

p erson s, one of nhom shall represent labor, to investigate all markets enga ed in the manufacture and \;rholesale d.i stri bu t ion of 

wearing app:.rel included in the Co a t an d Suit Code . 

The comm ission shall study the following situations a nd conditions 

in the va rious lo.ca li ti e:: s and all markets: 

I • . Labor con~itions: Available labor supply, male and female; 

rela tive ski 11 of l abor in the ma r ket; me thod. of operation; existing labor ag r eements; cost of p roduction. 

II. Availability of me.r ket s; 'r w na t e ri o..l s, finished p roduct. 

III. Competi+-i ve irregul a rities. 

The Comni ssion s..'rJ.all study all petitions and demands filed since. 

the adoption of t he Coat and Suit Code by pa rticular localities and. 

markets r elative to nag es and l abor classi fica tions. 

The Commission shall report its finding s to the Admini stra tor by not 

later than July 1, 1934. 

Upon receip t of the report, the Administra tor shall hold hearing s af 

the interested parties to consider and determine on such changes in 

rates and differentials betTieen. markets as m~r be indica ted by the . 

report of the commission and the hearing s. 

The decision reached by tile Administrator sa result of said hearings shall be eff ective as of the date :9 rov. d by the Ad1 inistr~ tor. 11 

The Commission was a pJlOinted May 17, 1934 . ... After some preliminary 

discussions with the Deputy Admini stra.tor and \ i th several of the l eading 

members of t he industry, of t he -:_J r ohlems cornmi.tted to it in the t e rms of 

reference quoted above, and after making an e~ min tion of the available 

payroll data on file at the of fices of the Coa t · ~d Suit Code Authority, 

the Co~uission mapped out three sepa rate lines of i nvestigation to be carried on simultaneously with the hea ring s in 1e several rk t~· These 

were:· 

(1) A statistical analysis of ea rning s and costs ba s ed up on pay roll 

9821 
-2-

duta re{;Ularly submitted to t e Code Authority on "Wliforrn 

payroll .h.aets by manu DCt .rers throughout t he country·. 

(2) .A study of the 11 run-of- sL op c sts 11 of co~pet i tive firms in 

1 e several m ... r"cet s. 

( 3) A stud,y of t- e co --~t of production o: a spoci fi c coi!lpar ble 

~arrnent in tne several coat and suit market<-. 

In addition to tlese three lines of inquiry the Commission, in accordance Tiith its instructions, visited and held. hearings in all of the important coat and suit markets in the co1.mt:ry. r.Thile t hese investigations nere 

bein~ conducted the Cornmission had the oppo rtunity to ac q aint itself at 

first .::.nd ,..,i th t he problem~ of the industry and to give full opportunity 

to all membe rs of tl e industr, - er'lyloyer end labor alike -- directly 

or thro~h their rep Asent~tive~ , to presert their claims, grievances and 

r ecommenc.;:.,tions. Tl e Commission also has e .. :amined the nUJnerous letters, 

petitions a d briefs cubmi tted to the Admini stra.tor or to the Code Authority 

b:r members of the industry 0r their [1.ssociations in various parts of the 

countr' since the e-dop tion of t he Co?.t and Suit Cod.e . 

The Commission left i.en York on J"ay 3("l , 1934 and held its first hear ing 

in Cleveland, Ohio , on r·ay 31 , 1934 . Thereafter it visited the other markets 

in the following order: Chicago , St . Loui s, Kansas City, Los Angeles, San 

FranciscJ, Portland, Seattle, Baltimore , Ph ilade pnia, Boston, Nenar k and 

l e'\'7 York . 

The Cleveland hearings covered all of the Ohi o markets; those in Chicago 

took in .·inneapoli s and St . Paul , I i:m., Batavia, I llinois, and Cra~rfords

ville and LaPorte , Indiana; those in iladelphia included Scranton; in 

Boston, the Commission also heard representatives from other to•ns in ;assachusetts, .rhile the heari ngs held in len York included testimony from Connecticut. 

In each of these mar~~ets , loading rep resentatives of the manufacturer s 

and the norkers p resented thei r claims and made thei r suggestions for r evision of the Code and suJmitted statistical and'othe r documentar.y mate r ial 

in support thereof. 

T'ne Commission uas accompanied by l.ir . Leo Rosenblum , C. P . A., ~ho Tias 

in charge of the llrun- of- shop costll st-ad,y , and .ir . Frank A. Garvey , Indust r ial Engineer, of Cleveland, Ohi o , nho carried on the cost study of the 

specific compar ab le garme'1t s. The Commission also J•etained r.rr. Vincent J . 

Coherour, statistici n , n~no nas res:;_:JO. sible for an important pert of the 

anal sis of paJroll re )Ort s. 

In sor1e of the rna. ~.;:ets vi sited,· t l e Corni:l ission tias accompanied br 

r . Ale.·ande r Printz , of Cle ela d , 0:1i o , ~na irman of t he iiestern Council 

and 'r. ·il ton Rosenfeld of St . Louis, I.:i ssouri , I ember of t 1e 7lestern 

Council and both membe , of t e Coa t and S ·it Code A t ho rity. The labor 

member of the Corr1r.1i ssion rra s accomp[l.nied by :ir. Cha rles H. Green Director 

of the Codes Observance Bureau of t l e Int e rna tional Ladies' Garment 

7lorkers Union . 

Because it t;I['..S hig..h.l.., desirable thet t he Administrator should be in 

a position to mare i s d.eci sion on di suuted points before t he fall season 

9821 
'-'3-

reached it<"J height , t ho Commission \/E'G obl i ged. to ca rry on its nork at top 

speed. Tho Commi ssion rec ret r. tho t i t ,. ;, <"J unc.blo to spend more time in most 

of the cent e r s nr 1icll it v isited hu~ i c i ..; satisfied t hat the presentation 

of the cln.ims and su.c::c__., e stion s o.t' each of J..; he ma::-ket s \7as comp rehensive • 

Tl1e Com.,iss.;cn ta1-:cs ]Jl eLs·· u ·e in eX'Jl'E' SGi ns i t r l tvJly o.ppreciation 

of the hos:--it<-li+-;y r-xt:;nd·Jd to i t thr ::n1,~'1c-rJ.; ·t.".te ·:J ..'l.o .. e co,~ rs c of i~s hearings. It is :.ndobt..;d in thi s m.J.y to so . .1ar . ..,r L jr'\.j.vLc _ l.c"..:s thrv\:. it i s impossible to men tioll t l1e1n a l l ~r name . The 1mifor:nly f!o·.u · ;cous C0 0p31'e tion extended to it and t~ its steff at ev e ry st< .ge of ~ t .~ ·.r.Ye sti6ations has immeasurably f a cilitotcd its .7or.<: . The - Comn1 i ssion f eels ;hPt it is under an 

especia J l y het'V.f ciebt 0f obl igation to Mr . Sarruel Kl ~ Executive Director 

of t he I nd r s t.rial Council of Coa t, Suit and Skirt Mt. 1u!':J c'Surcrs of Nerr 

York; fi:r . I:al'ry Uville r, Executive Di:i.~ ctor of tl,e A.ne:· ~can Cloak and Suit 

Manufacturers .P. ssoc::..a.tion of l1Te,, York; M::.~. ~.1r>..x:7Gl l ( c:puloJ.', outgoing ,. and 

1 Mr. Jo seph L , D·,l};r·."' , incoming, i:J ,_,_ ti ve fir c c t.or of tl:c l.;erchants 1 Ladies' 

Garment Mamh'n ct~J. rs 1 Associ a.t icn; Dr,. rth·~rr ..J~ a. R1 bin, of the University 

of Chicago, Dc·put~r 2)iroc to r of the Co c:e A.ut:10 ri t y for the Cnicag o market; 

Mr. Alexancer Pr~.TI.tz of tJ-:.e Prin tz-·Bi .o.e ::-nan Comr--any of Cleveland and Mr. 

Mil ton Ro se:1feld of the C<.'..rdui s 1Ia~n.1f:wt u.r:.nz Compar.y of $to Louis for the 

long hours w~i. h t '"ley ge"lerousl y devot e d i'o ,".ssistirg the Commission in 

the fo rmulation of its plans c..r d the urosc cu-:; ioil o: i t. inq-L1iries. Finally, 

the Comm i ssion mu st eA}Ire~ s its sen se of L.e·-,_vy obli €_'3:~i on for t he ir invaluable assi stauce t•J J r· .. Ji'., .NaJ;- a:1 Wo:...r.'. Sc cr·a t2.rv of t he Co a t .and Suit Code ' c 

Authority , l:Ir . c..-.1-~!s n :olla.nci of t :1e .=.ta.bor 3-·lreaL:. of tl ... e Coat and Suit Industrjr, Ne'l: _ c r k! to other mer11J0rs of the stJ.ff of t ?l.J .A u thori tJ and to the 

code enforcement o:f:::'ice rs and t!le Cede .Autho:~ i t :r 1 s d..e~ ut:r direct~ra i:f:m 

the out-of-torrn ma.~.·ket Se 

The Commi ssion i s keen ~r cor_scious of the sL.ort- comings of the report, 

made inevitable by t he exJv r ·3mo ·u resrlli~e U..":de~ rrh ic~1. t 11.e ·.-ro r k has been done, 

due to the lir.1i t at ion of t'i:ne set :fo r the compl e ti on of its rrork. It has 

undertaken, in a v e r y f e-..·t r. e~L:s . t o cover. B g rea t dea 'L of ground, both 

geographiccll"'r ar.d at c:t ic·'. ll · •. Tno r es1; l.ting figures are therefore both 

loll" comprehensi ve , !10. more f r aomenta::.7 than it could \-:- ish. It ha s been 

at g reat pLins, ho·.•ove:·: "G O ·erif y , s o f a r as it :w s bee::-1 possible to do so, 

all o.f the fi ur e~ snbr,ti t tsd i n th.i s j)r eli:-r.lna:r;:r r f;po rt . The Comr.1i ssi on 

does not flatter ~ J~ self t;1at ~1e r eport i c f:-ee from e rrors of calculation 

and estima ti on. It G..ares to ho:;_:Jc that. t h....::y a re not numerous. In any event 

it does not beli e"'re ~1.ot. such e!'rors :1s ma r .b e f ound Td.ll prive to be of such 

magni t'ude r.s to inv~.. li (htc ~-:e finC.in.:::;s of fact ,h3 rein made . 

· ~E 

A l arge part of the st a tistica l ma tter embody in.g the r esults of the 

Commi ssio11 1 s inves·cigations isprescmt e6. in chart fo rm in the ta1:t of this 

report . :b1or thi s r eason 7 on:.y those ntB.ti stical ·tables rrhose si gnif:i,cant 

figures hav e 1 ot b9Em g:raphec_ appee:. .. r in tl"e t ext , the other s be ing p resented 

in the p~')end.ix. The c:ht.:rts are nur.;"'Jl·rod and. C['.ptioncci. to cor::-es) ond rrith 

the m.1.11bers alld ca:ption s of the tables from .:ho se figure s t :1ey n ere drarrn. 

9821 
COMPARISON_ OF COSTS IN DIF..PEBENT ~ARKET S 

Ba i of Cost Studi.Q§_ __ 

Two indenenden t examinations of the cost of ur oduction of coats a nd 

suits in different arkets, ere conducted simultaneously by differ ent 

exoerts, under the direction of the Commi ssion . One , cove r ing ll run-ofshop11 costs, ~ Rs in charge of Er. Leo Rosenblum , C. P. A. , V>Tho t r avelled 

with he Co1mission , attended its hearings , noted the special l oca l 

conditions gove r ning the manufactur e of garments in vari ous di st r icts a s 

broug!t out at the hear ings by local r enresen atives of the industry and 

then inaugurated the study from the books of the concer ns , leaving a 

local C. P. A. , who was in several instances the local Code Znforcement 

officer, to comulete the studies for that locality . These studies ~e e 

based on the Spring 1934 production . 

1he average direct labor cost pe r garnent ~as obtained by dividing 

the total direct labor payr ol l fo r the manufactur ing season by the t ot al 

garments produced. The manufactur ing nar t of the season commenced with 

t" e fi rst week of production after the complet i on of the sa pl es a nd 

continued until Easter ~reek or unt i l the com::_:>leti on of product ion of 

suring garments . The indirect labor and shop ove r head we r e obt a ined in a 

similar manner . 

A compa r ison of these 11 r un- of- shop 11 costs by dif f r ent shops i n 

different cities is based on a common range of sel ling pr ices of t hose 

shops. It is based on the theory that f r om a market uo i nt of vi ew these 

concerns a r e in direct competition with one another on a similar pri ce 

basis and disregards differences in construct i on of the gar ment on the 

theo ::::-y that on the average or by and lar ge they a r e comuet ing ith one 

anothe r and , in the eyes of the buye r , the garments they pr oduce though 

differ ing in detail of construction , a r e essenti ally simi lar . I t is 

fully realized by the Commission that the diffe r ences in cost ma.y be d.ue 

to variRtions in construction; be garments , neve r theless, are r egarded 

by the t r ade as comuar able bec~use they com~ete Pith one another in price . 

In the selection of comua r abl e co~ueting f ir.ms in differ ent ci t i e s, 

the Commission had the benefit of the adv i ce of Mr. Samuel Ylei n, Executive irector of the Industr ial Counc i l of the Coat, Suit & Sk irt 1frs . 

.Ass ' n . (manufP.cturers) ; r . Harry Uviller, xecutive Dir ector of the 

AMerican Cloak and Suit ; .. tfr s . Ass 1 n . (con t r actor s) ; l r . (axvrell Copelof, 

before he relinquished his post of Execut i ve Director of the 1 er chant s 1 

Ladies Garment Ass 1 n . (jobbers) ; fr . Alexande r Printz , of Clevel and , 

Chairman of the .. ester n Council and Member of the Coat & Suit Co de Aut hority; r . Hilton Rosenfeld , President of the Car dais Cl oak Company of 

St . Louis, r epresenting the estern Counci l on the Coat & Suit Code Autho rity; r . iiax V"einstock, of Shen ~e r, .ichell & 11einstock, Pr esi dent of the 

Chicago Association of Coat and Suit Tanufacturers and Chicago Deputy of 

\ he .estern Council . 

ith the aid ~nd advice of these gentlemen, a master list was made 

up of com arable firms in the coat and suit manufacturing center s in the 

United States. This list uas modified whe r ever found necessar y by 

9821 
- 5-

additions e~nd subtroctions of J O CA 1 fj. ·m~ u·)un tte advice of leading 

members of the iLdlsh·-- i.:1 e~c~ C"ic:;r ' ln _·h ~he Go"'nrniss~0"'1 vis ited. 

The othe r cc•:::t inveJt:i.fh.i.. 2."'r w.:-s C"lCJt~+f-:1 hy .~ . :.·anl~ A . GA.rYey , 

an Industrj -1l -r-: .1 --~"' ' :, 1:10 .he.. .· ,· : :: E- i:"l l+; \.c·::. ; , 1J:c>>-]-r._1.te settlements 

in the C:itr uf Gl !Sv•:lc."·· •~'t' n ..... ,..,~ i·j,_ ,., & tC''.(:rJ ··~ ·:..-s c: .r< \"~10 i.;:; t horoughly 

farni1ia~ 1"1i'\.rl rnr c~ ,_;~_.: . t!ll C.eL. iL·:; L"" c,.•r-··· c.1.:. ~ rt ll .S' 1t.u -=tc~nre, especiall:r as it 1eR:;:s en -'Jh"' la"'u('r co 0t. r. nd. !•,5 c1 od <J o ,. i c s ··c.jns c'llen t . 

As a ·bElcis f01 his sr.ud.if.s , there ws.r ~, .ec: te ·_ l1T::.t:C t.:1.e aJ.vice of 

l eacU ng manu i'::1 c)curers iL a nu;:Jber of cit ie.s . arr:c ll'( t · 1crn Ule ·v\~o members 

r elJlE'S•"nt:t.ng tl:le -:-ast ern Cou.J c:i:l on the ud~ P,J_t'(lr;· i \l, a sp riag sport ty:9e of 

doul.> J e -brec st ed m~ :r1n i sh oc:lo coo.t !l1ad3 in L1e Sp r i :t,g l ?~~L± s nr:.sun . 

Hr . Garrey, t0o, ac A,m;)anied tbe C'o ~•1Jl1i SG ion i r. i + s t.ra7els and 

a ttendeo d t1 ·e :hearings <-'Tl i, nJted. t1J.e rE'n. Jes of : ocr·.l nanufactur ers t o 

their competitive <iisa0van tage s as ag.~;. lnsG othe1 marK:·~ts . 

At the cl ose of the heR::-ing i~1 e:tch ri ~y , Mr. ~rvey Yi~ited the 

r epr es8nte.t ive sl:01Js i:1 tL t ci ~,y Gr d.~strict wJ i~h ivera cho~ n through 

consultatiol,_ ith the e~l e:JE."'~~c't ive s 0f tb e maT'uT.:-ctr.r e ::s 9r"d -thz Uni on 

in ea~~ m~rk~'t , wi ~h the n.il o.: the .J"'l.ster lj st cf c0:.rr'3.:- CJb~e :'ir:-Js 

menti0r...ed abuve . 'l1he c:oho:rs so selAc co ~, it t,as <.i~ .. :ee~ . p resenc e d a fai r 

oss-secti~n in Ac-tch marl":et .. J' .c;c"'mu u. iti~=>cl ·-:;y- one r epr·Pser:tative ee.ch of 

the manufec t~J. :rers . end Jf the U:.:.io. 0. .1 tl:e :c·ca.' ·):ri .. o r.rr njttee , r. 

Gar vey visi t 3d t~ \e sho1 s sel~c ssl<.. c.n d rid'Ld f: .. ~om ~tJ ·: k ?. g:um"'nt identic a l or co:--pa-.r.::..ble "..n s-v .:/::. e w:iL:1 :-:.is c::c.t.r'-~) le cc9.t . :l!t rs;v l'o,...k ':.'ity , 

l·ir. Garvey· was c:a.c c::;-rpal.l.: c; d o.: a repr2sEntative fr0r1 tl_e Labo r Jur eau which 

is maintalneU. jo:i.n~Jy by the e~n~lo~rers &"'1.d the Unicn . 

After the Comrn2. ttee r.cccr.Da nving ~ITr. Garvey ~ad e.g:':'eed t hat the 

gar ment sela~ted w~ s iU.c-. 'ltical o r co:rmc--::-uh1_9 i n st:-le . >" e:::am~ ned i t and 

as c ert&incd the actua 1 nt~c~ ~ic2s ~aid fsr op r r nt inc, ::in~sh~ng and 

p r ess i ::1g by ~he ma :~.-L f act c:rs:- o :':' con t : -. e; ·l· .-)y :-':sited. · r::, 1 s be in,:; compl eted , 

a ullysical e~:amina~i on '"~'~ ·~~1.? 3!100 na<~ W'll e <o n~. the e;tl ~o<~ of manufacturing 

and the pro,..ed.ure ~·<'3d. t·J e·i'ri ,r...; ~-~ t.~:e 1. ~e ::-a.tc;s ·wer3 r:otei. Tte - .L • 

fi gur'3s f o:r indh t"~J.: 1_.::.0 -: :i.' n'!: L:":: :..r g :rn.(~. .:nlo:~i.w ·anc. for shop ove r head 

we r e -Geken f:.:-om t.i'<= accv'.ll1ku1t 1 s rul' -Jf- shop cort stuc'l::.a s . 

Tabl e' R- 1 is a st1.'c1.y of 1inm- cf- shop 11 costs in the vc.rious ma r kets 

out si rie of ' :'J c;v; York :or t _e S-pr~ n.c; s ·3 .... sG~: 1934 ani of 0.7f'r'afl"5 hourJ.y earnings fo r the eight- week nericd endcf ~erch ~l , 1934 , by indiv:i.~ual fir ms . 

The "run- of-·shor: 1

' cost sJcudy w:1s me:1de -.._J l occ: l tJ un 't::J.nts in .::.11 e~te rs 

other tha n ir: l k ',IV :."c)rk . '.rLJ.b1e R- lA is a s t11G.y 'of o.irec..t tailo:.~ ing l abor 

costs a nd of <:nrorqt;c; I10lJ.L·ly earr i. ·:J.r,s 7.o r s e· ctec1 :i. r~,:s i n the New Yor k 

market f o r the ei ~1t -weeK pe io~ en~~d Marc~ 3! , ::.934. 

rhe labor cost f i gu,... es for Nen Yo r k V''ere tE1bulated by t h e Labor 

B.ur eau. fr om :p3;y-rol _,_ · shen :· s subr.1i t ·t. ed. .cy the New York shops. ·rhe at ter 

i ncl nd.cd two c:o::;tlT .. ct sr"..;ns i n New: J e r sey and or.e in Conr~ecticu t a nd one 

insid~ shop in Con~e ticut . 

9821 
r -o-

_ ... , r.rt of the or.uni ..,inYl 1 ... inquirieo , in cc. tors out~idc :row 

York , t .. o avern.t...c sales 1ricc r,f . ·1rl 1rnts sold b.f the firms studied 

ms ~ ... c"' :lined . ~y rca"'on of the i1 :1bili ty or unwillingneGs of a 

numbe 1 o the : c•;· Yor): fir nG to mal:e their rccordo avai labl e at the 

ti :1e l)f t. Lc visit b' the ommiosi on 1 G accountan ts , t1 e .r~ew York firms 1 

co~t arc )ed ~ c~rdin( to tle )rednr.in~nt price of the gar~ents 

dold ~- tl 2 firr-" . This 11rice \'las f·i.l.I' 1ished to the :::ommissio:..1 by the 

execa ives of tl...e assuciations of r· cv,r York contract ors , jobbers and 

rna.nuf"ct·~ rs .,rd the officers of the Code Authority. A chock of shops 

fo::- r1~:ic.1 both sets of figl.l.I'es a r e avai l able shows t hat in most instances 

the ··" re<lJmi. ant sales :)rice by Vll icl.1 each house is l;:novm is fairly close 

t..) t~c a ·eraL e "rt.lc~ :.1rice , althO'll[;ll in a feVT case"' a Hi de divergence 

is no ted . It io l)')Ssi l e t::at tnere majr be some mis- classification in 

r '!.ble R-lA 't..,- reaso!1 of the fact th1.t t:1e ave rage "'ales price was not 

ascert<:tineblc . .1erc tl i"' infJnlation v1as obta.ined , however , it is· 

inc'icated alont;"'ide the cocled name of the jobber in Table R-U. 

J:l'te labor costs , tabulated in the rnanner outlined above , show the 

follo 'ling : 

$6 . 75 :-ious e s 

Payroll.figuTes for thirty shops in :Tow York and the 1' ow ·_-ork 

distr· ct 7lel'e stuc ied . Four shO}JS outside t:ne ! 7 ew Yorl:: market were 

stuC:i ed . T21e di r ect lSL-bor costs ra.J.ged fr om under $1 . 00 to as high 

as. $2 . OS , the d istribution being as foll ows : 

Uncer $1 . 00 

$1 . 01 to $1 . 25 

1.26 t o 1 . 50 

1 . 51 to 1 . 75 

1 . 76 to 2 . 0 

2 . 0 1 t o 2 . 25 

Jew Yort: -----

1 

6 

9 

6 

7 

1 

3 

Othe r 1ia r ke t s ·--------

2 

1 

1 

4 

ith r espect to the direct labor costs in shops outside the .ew 

York marl;:et , it v1i ll be cb .... e rvcd that a section "hop in Camden a nd .a 

sectio:1 ~i1op in Baltimore eac~1 show 6.irect labor costs und.er $1 . 00 ; a 

,.. ec t ion si1op i:1. Ka n sas oty shows a c.irec t labor cost of $1 . 07; a 

~ailorinc shop i1 Kansas shows a direct labor cost of ~1 5 • 

L1 the 'i·TeH Yor:c group , t!. e l owest cost was f ound. in a occti on shop 

in on:1ecticut . One sectio11 nhop wa,.. included. among t 1e six shops whose 

direct labor cost was tetr,reen $1 . 00 a nd ~1 25 ; one section s~op was 

i cluei.ed. arnoT~ tne nine shops w~ osc G.i r ect la o r co st was between $1 . 26 

and ~1 50 . It is t0 be e~•ected that in a section slop , the r atio of 

ind.irect labor to ~irec~ labor is greater than in a tailoring shop , since 

some of the functions.included in di r ect l abor a re trQnsferred to indirect labor in the rroces .... of sub- divi c:ing the tailoring functions . 

, r .. en he t"rrec section shops outside Jew York in t he $6 . 75 c;rou:-p a r e 

considered from t1 e point of view of t~1e t ot al lab0r cDst , i . e ., both 

direct arC: indirect it is found that t11.e cost i n the Baltimore section 

9821 
RUN-OF-SHOP COSTS IN VARIOUS MARKETS FOR THE SPRING SEASOll, 1 934, A::D A'IERAGE HOURLY EAR!IIUGS FOR THE EIGHT .. ~r..K PICD E!JDED 

MARCH 31, 1934, BY INDIVIDUAL FIRMS 

FIGURE Rla $ 

- 3 50 

P1 ~ IT -3 00 1---

21 21 

(22 f--

- 11 )JJ 21 ~ F.!! ~ ~ ~ p; 41 

26 IS - ~ ~ ~ ' 19 -2.50 

.U! ~ 28 ~ 

~ ..,..:.;; f.:.- 15 lru ~ f.;.:.: ~ )l IT! 27 

"'IT. 59 

~ 20 rfit Ts 25 

~ ~ ~ t.....- -2,00 

i , 76 11[ 21 

~ 68 D1 ~ 1b 29 fri ..,...... 

j II Tis Tit 29 ~ 

Total Cost~ 69 

rrw 

12 

I 

)9 ~ 

~ '1 ffi YW m .!4! - 1.50 I 50 :1t TI6 IJ1 Factory Overhead-----._.:..:,;. ffl ~ 1 '"'"-- Ut 

15 I 

~ <B 12 

--' 1h II 'li Indirect Labor fro7 ~ i1l'4 rW Ull ~ -- JO 

n~ Ul 

'91 1.00 

Cutting 

~ " - 07 .IJ 

··~- It .12 

,. .14 , I 15 

Ta,lorir.g ... AI 

.II .12 .II 

AYOAGl IIOURI. Y fARIIII&S 

.50 

0 

f1rm Code 38280 I C40011 

70090:.1 70010 70020 ·170110 70110 8G430 90440 

1

90360 I 91)430 90240 1 soll4D 40020 I C401J3 C40131 I C401&1 I C38092l C31211 C36351 

Ci<Y CAMDEN BALl, KANS. C. KAHS,C KANS. C. KANS. C KAHS.C ·I LOS AIIG. fRISCO fRISCO fRISCO fRISCO IPORTlAN D BAll, BAll. BALl. BALl. PillA PillA lOS lOll 

Type of Hou~ SP SP TP SP SP SP SP TP TW TW TW TW I TW SP SP TP TP TP TP TW 

House Cla.sstficac•on $6.75 HOUSE $8.75 HOUSE n.~o- c. ..... v ... 

S..Sootlon Shop 'f-Ta1lor Shop lf..l!ook !fork P-Plooo !fork C-Preooodillj; a ti,... oode u-.ber lndloauo a ooutraotor 

• tnolude• h:w1ireot labor oo1t1 •• well •• direot labor ooet1. 1, Thlo tlr;ure IIUot l;>o oupp1o100uUd by ft&O 4otlol.,..,loo paid to Codo .luthorlq.-ppro:rl.,.U17 10% ot dlroot lobor ooot, 

2 " • • • • • • • • • • " • 'I per garment. • • !I • • !: • Sl " 

&, • -. 36/ • e. n 21 • 1. " tray eaeee~erMDt pendin& 6/ " e. • liiU•t " pai d to Codo Author1 ty- lOI " 

e. " " " " " 21 .. 1 o. " 81 • l 1. • 31 • l 2. • 121 " 

TAILORING COSTS AND AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS IN THE NE'i'T YORK MARKET BASED UPON PAYROLLS FOR THE EIGHT VIEEK PERIOD ENDED MARCH 11 

.. 

g. nGllU_IUAa $ 

- 4.00 

- 3.50 

- 3.00 

- 2.50 

I 

r 

Total Direct Labor ~ I q4 ~ 

r--- - 2.00 

...!.£.. )9 

42 

Pressing )9 1 s~ I ,..1!!... ~ - - 1.50 

m 

1.4(1 Ill SJ 1.41 

~ 35 

J8 t.Jl JS ll5 

Fintshtng ~ 26 

~ ~ ~M r-m- ..,.,.....- I 07 Til F,"'1T' ttl 19 I) 1M ,...-- I 

~ll ~ JOT 19 

~ ,_ I 00 -"!! Operattng- t'rjr 

~ ss .71 ~ r-E13 

AVERAGE HOURlY EARNINGS ~ 

~ - 50 

4} 

0 

Form Cod~ (Jo~r) I 4190 I mo I 1940 I 6830 I 160 I 2950 ·10 I 2091 I mo I lt70 

Hou.e CIAuoficauon $6.75 HOUSES n.w ..... o- c. ..... v ... 

shop ir 86~~ plus n, <:.~.ef ici P:1cy of 0:~ of the cli r ect 1 '1 b or cnar_:;e ; the 

total L:bor cost it t he C<,mc1c.1 scct i o··!. SJ.iO~) i s $1 . 11 and t he cost in 

the K.:tP.sas C::i ty s.Jctior~ d10p is $1 ~-~6 . Of the •-rou;p of thirty :Now 

YorY: shop , fifteen a re foL.mci to have ni r·:1e r d irec t l abo r costs t ha11 

the cor·!b i ncd direct anc i ncli r ec t l< tb")r c ost of the t h r ee sec ti o;.1 .Ghop s 

out~ide New YJrk. 

From thie compar ative study of t}le Few Yo r k figures a nd of a 

limit ed .1.1umber of $6 . 7t. firms in ot her r.1ar~~ets , it appears thn.t in 

this price class the Hew Yorl;: l8:b':lr cost s a r e g r eate r t 1·wn t hose outs ide i.Tcw York . 

$10 . '75 ~1o uses 

Payroll fi [;u.J.~es for xty ix shops L1. t he lTow '"{ork d istrict were 

studied . Thirt ce;1 shovs were stuc:ieC'. in JTnrl-:ets out s i de o f New York. 

The distribu tion of d irect l 2.bo r costs '"!B.s as fo llows : 

Uncle r $1 . 00 

$1 . 01 t o $1. 2[ 

1 . 2 6 t o 1 . 50 

1 . 51 to 1 . 75 

1 . 76 t o 2 . 1}) 

~~ . 0 1 to ', •") .,. i':.J • .::....0 

2 . 26 to ~~ 0 

? . 5 1 t o .? • 75 

2 . ? 6 t o 3 . 01) 

1 t o 3 . 25 

Over 3 . 25 

Nevr 

l 

l 

l 

G 

10 

16 

9 

10 

8 

L1. 

GC1 

York Ot he r Mar kets 

1 

l 

6 

3 

l 

l 

13 

All of t he $10 . 75 fin.s stuJ ied, ~0th i n and outsi de New York, 

were tailoring sh0ps . 'Fi1e l ov1e3 t clire ct l abo r cost Pas found in t he 

New Y':l r k mar ke t . Out s ide ~Tov; Yo rk, t !.'1e l ':lwe st cost was f ound. in a 

Kancas Cit y shop , the coct ·be i ng $1 . 38 ; a San ]'r::mcisco shop was next 

with a cost of $1 . 8 5 . I nc l udec1_ L1 ~1e c r ou-p whose direc t l a b or cost 

was from $2 . 0 1 t o C2 • .(..5 v1as one firm in St . Louis , t wo in Los Anse l es , 

one in Sa n Francisco , one in Portlanc.:. anc. one in Ba ltimo re . There i s 

a defici enqr a::;sesmnent w~1. ch 8-mounts to ar,r r oxi rnate l y thirt y- five 

cents }Jer gar men t penC.ing a cainst ti1e St. Louis firm ; t i.1e ad.d.i ti on of 

this ascessme nt v1oulc.l ·b ring L10 fir~a to the next h i gher cost g r oup . 

In t he c;r ou:p b:wi ne; a diroc t l F.J bo r cost of $2 . 26 t o .:~2 . 50 , t he r e 

were t wo firms in Fortlanc1 ar.c".. o~1.e il1 3altimor e ; one Portland firm bad 

a c ost of $2 . 68 o '.L'~'le hichest csst \'Ias t :nt of a Philadelphi a firm a t 

$3 . 26 . Thus , f or the s rou:p of f i rr .. s outside ~few Iort:, the r ant:;e of 

direct l abor cost s was from $1. 38 t o Ei3 . 26 . It is oi i n terest t o note 

tha.t the Ka:1sas City firm v1itL1 a C.irect l a-0or cost of ~; 38 so l d its 

merc ~.1a d. is e a t c:.n ::vera[-;e ::.:).les '? :cice of :'"ill . C·O , while the Phi l ade l ·-,hia 

firm , whose c'..irec t l abor cost was $3 . 26 , received an avc r ac;e sal es p rice 

of $10 . 40 . 

In brief, of t he t ot c:l of c i x ty- sb: shops iD the New York district , 

9821 
.. 
RUN-OF-SHOP COSTS IN VARIOUS MARKETS FOR THE SPRING SEASON, 1934, AND AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS FOR THE EIGHT WEEK PERIOD ENDED 

MARCH 31, 1934, BY INDIVIDUAL FIIU!S 

FIGURE Rld 

))0 

Factory }S 

· Indirect La.bor 

Cuning 

Tailoring 

AVEIASl IIOUIIl Y ua.m 

Form Coclc 

Ciry 

Type af House 

70110 

ST. LOllS 

TW 

70040 

!WIS. C. 

TW 

10220 103411 

POIT\.W) 

TW 

S-3eot1on Shop t•f&11or Shop lfoolfeek !fork P•Pleoe !fork C•PreoM41.n& a tina oode ..... r 1D4loateo a ooatraotor 

• lnoludea l.D41reot labor ooata •• .. 11 aa 4tr.ot labor ooate. 

1, Th1o tlf"" _..t be oupp1-- by ... e 4et1ol....,1 .. palcl to Code .&uthorlt;)"-pp~tel7 10)( <4 41reot la- eoot, 

z. " " • • • • • • • • • • ~ per , ..... ut. 3. • • • • • • • • • • ¥ • • 

'· • ¥ • 

e. '· " " ~. 21 • f, ~ aueu-nt pendl.n& 61 

8, • ... et " palcl to Code Autllorl ty- 10Jf " 

•• • " • • " 21 " 10. • ¥ • 11. • 31 • 12. • 121 • 

$ 

4.50 

4.00 

3.50 

3.00 

2.50 

2.00 

1.50 

1.00 

.50 

• f 

TAILORING COSTS AND AVEllAGE HOURLY EARN!l!GS IN THE NEI'T YORK MARKET BASED UPON PAYROLLS FOR THE EIGHT YIEEK PERIOD ENDED I!ARCB Sl 

FIGURE RUb $ 

- 4.00 

- 3.50 

- 3.00 

Total Direct Labor~ ~ 

,1.!2.. .22.. - 2.50 

~ .54 

Pressing --=- r21!.. ,.22!.. 55 5) .47 

~ ,El.. .52 - 2.00 

~ ~ .48 

~Ii i ~ 

~ 14 

~ 

~ ~ Finishing .6 .40 

w 

~ .)8 I 

.® Ul I U4 

m 

- 1.50 Ul uo I 1.41 us 

ill ~ Ut 

m uz 

__, 1.22 

Oper&,ting-- 1.1 ill ~ r:l - 1.00 

AYERAGt IIIII&.Y w.ea5 ,- .50 

0 

Fam Code (Jobber) I 400 I 2430 I 5240 1 1080 T 510 I 7110 ·10 I 3310·to·J400 I 1110 t 1380 

House Classlficanon $10.75 HOUSES 

t}lirty-fivc or ~3 ~inc' c~ irect t~ilorins labor costs ::> f E;2 . 25 or l e ss, 

v1hi l C'f t'p t!>.i:ctec:1 !lOJlS i:1 t tC other m.:.rt:c t s , (:ht or f.2~ f e ll L1 

t.1~t cat,'[,or;r. 

It ·;i ll ·oc no t ed in t~lE' C:~ is us o~1 u:.1der tl1e cJ. ffel~en t -,,rice 

(TOUT'l"' L1 J.: ~ el~o rt, t11:-1.t in -~wc.ctical y ev ery J·. a;rket t he re a r e 

v.1.ria ti on in the cost of d irec t l abor l'er [ arment v1i t hin the varioun 

p::icc r,ro U~!!i> . T:lese variati ons rny ·be C'.CCounced fo r bj Lleauali ticG 

i 1 s_ op cfficienct 2.nc. suoe rvis ory t echniqlle , variatio;.,s in the size 

of t11c ..,l'.O)J , v o lune of ~rclc rs r ece hr ed an~ s imila r facto r ::> , as v1el l an 

the ucr:,c ini n~~. c:Ji li·cy of tJ. c ovmers of ~1e d iffere11t shops and their 

C!!!P l oyoes . 'l1nus , for exeJ!IJJle , ~ t iJ.t> ;,510 . 75 .r r ou:-p , San :?ran~inco 

tril'JrLlC, S11o:;s sllO"'' C. i>.·ec t t :, iloria,_· c:1J~ r costs r e.ng ing from $1 . 85 

to $ : . 19 , <:;.ich i" a va ri:tt i ::> !l 01' 9.:·) r o:.i u2.te l y ::::!0~; Port lanc'. tailorL1g 

shoTJc sl1ov1 1:1. rar., __ e fro,n $:=; .2) t o : 2 . 68 , t he diffe r e1ce l-etwecn tile two 

be i::1,_: '~J'=~' l' o::-:iu~. tely 20,:. a11c' .0 · ltimore t a iloring sh-:Jps sllovJ a r anc:;c from 

$G . l ·- t~ ·2 . 35 , t!.:.e o..ria ti )~l ·ue inc ov e r ~~ . 

$1 5 . 75 ?ouc-es 

Forty- four iev-1 Yo rl: shOl)G ~1:1.c tl1irtecn s~1o ,s in !'n _ 1-::.ufacturinr; 

ccDt c; rs outri0_e Tc 1 -~ r~: nGre ctuc'.iccl . Three c f tile l atter we r e sec t i on 

"'~lO~)S . L1 Seattle, the accoLL.lta:tit , ·ho r;:acle t h i s e xamination for t he 

Commicsio~1 (id il )t ~.tten~ t ( e:;:cejJt L:. one ca"'e )) t o se·Jr r a te d irec t tail o ring l abor c ost fr om inc"..ircct il ri r, ,:::: ~. r c ost i:..msnuch as the propriet or::; or e::ec~t i von of 0. :nnnbe r .:;f tJ.1e finnc-· exami ?led C.ev o t ed a part 

of t:wir time to ec .. ch .Jf t~1cse L-.:.-ct i 'J:'ls . The ( istribution of cc irec t 

t a ilo ri n[, l c.:b·Jr cost ce:~ t £' :) r Scc..t tle, f or v/_ic!l i._ fJur cases direct 

and in(i irect l a."J o r c..re CJI!IOi:ilc<l ) i ., t' s fo llov1s : 

$ 1. 51 t o . 75 

1 . ?6 to 2 . 00 

2 . 01 to 2 . 25 

2 . 26 to 2 . 50 

2 . Sl to 2 . 75 

2 . 76 to 3 . 00 

3 . 0 1 to 3 . 2 5 

3 . 26 to 3 . 50 

Ov e r 3 . 50 

~Tew r~: Othe r ::ar i':e t s Ot he r I:a r~.:e ts 

Direct Labor - ------··-- -- --- -

Di 1~~~ _La'b_o_r __ On:UC 

c.i1d Inc'.irect La bo r 

l 

3 

? 

0 

.J 

4 

9 3 

6 l 1 

2 

3 5 3 

<.4 9 4 

ReferrLv:: to the :.1£1.r i:e tn O'\:.tsi(e l'e YT Y') rk , in ~1e :· :r oup ir,cluc' iug 

direct t 2..iloring l J.bo r cJs t s fr om .32. 76 t o ~3 . 00 ::::.r c t o ·lJe found one 

Ka:-1sas Cit~ s e ction ~lop , a '.7or cester (Lass . ) t o.ilorinc; s~ OJl an,·::. O!l e 

Sea ttle t a ilo rinc; shop . T:L1e c ost fr'Jm S"' . 01 t o $~ 25 i ncludes t vvo 

shops : one , a Cleve lanC:. sect i on shOl) , L 1e o t he r, o. Sea ttle tailorin6 

sho11 v1~1icll J.1ad a c Jmb L 1ed direc t am' i nL:.irect t c:.il'J ring cost of $0 . (6 . 

The fi::tms fl...q_vinG ·J. C:i r ec t t .J.ilori:q.;:; l·1.bor c ost exceecli:..1c; $3 . 50 v e re as 

foll ows : one firm in Cl ev e land , o~e i n St . Loui::; , one i~ San Fra n c is co , 

one i~ Philadelphia anC one in ~oston (a l l tailoring c: ~rs . In each 

of two Sea ttl e t ai l o rL<:; shops (1.11..:) i?l one Seat tle se ction "' 1op , 1e 

9821 

RUN-OF-SHOP COSTS IN VARIOUS KARXE'l'S FOR THE SPRI:OO SEASON, 19M, AND AVERAGE HOURLY EI.RlfnUS FOR THE liGHT WEn PBRI OD DDID 

IIARCB Sl, 19M, BY INDIVIDUAL FIRE 

FIGURE R1o 

Indirect U.bor 

a-a..tt•..., t-t'allwlbop 1WieQ Work ~Work c-h1111UIIC a fino .... -~ a •-•• 

• 1-.1 .... WI-' la- --- .. w.ll .. 4~ la-·-· . 1 tb1e rt....- M ...,1-- 19 -• .. n-s-t• ,.U-. - ~~/-•l:t lGII e6 ~ - ...._ • • -...... - - • • • • • • • • • • • ttl,... ~ 

a. • • • • • • • • • • • • • II • • •· • • • • II • • '· . . . ..., . . •• • • Ill • • 

.. . ......-~ ~~· . :: : =· • pa.l4 - CoM ~-- 1<¥ 

0 

. . . . . . ., . • 

.. . . . ~ . lo. • • • • II • • 11. • • .... 11. • • • • ..-p 
I 
TAILORING COSTS .MID AVI'ltAGE IIOUHLY EARNINGS IN TIIE m;;r YORK MARKET BASED UPON PAYROLLS FOR THE EIGHT \'lEEK PERIOD ENDED MARCH 11. 

FIGURE RUo $ 

- 4.00 

- 3.50 

~ ~ 

- 3.00 

71 rE!-

,2!!. ~ Total Direct Labor~ .71 f 

.55 58 ,.112.. r-1!!.. 

I~ 61 - 2.50 

'~ 37 ,22!. • Pressing ...,.. 60 

,221_ 

I I I 51 

'I ' 

II"', I I 06 ' 50 - 2.00 

~ II I 

96 8 

~ 84 

W, 1

1

1 

I Fimshing 1.51 

15 1.47 1.45 

I 140 u• 1.50 1.43 1.44 Ul 

132 IJ5 I 37 I 

132 

Operating~ 

118 I 11 . - 1.00 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS '""" - .50 

0 

Firm Code (Jobber) I 1240 l 4480 I 3510 I 4010 I 3660 I 9070 I 8050 I 3390 -3400 I 2470 

House Cla.sSificat•on $16.75 HOUSES Tho wt.eo. o- c. . ....... v ... 
• 
-15-

combined clirec t a.td L .di rec t lab:>r costs exceeded $3 . 50 . 

~a in oeari!l<, i'a mind. that L1 a secti'J:tl s!1op it is to be eX1_)ected 

tl1D .. t the intlirect l abor cont will be e.reater t han in a tailoring shop 

mu.nufacturing a couparab l e [;arment , it is found t hat when the direct 

and i~G.irect l abor cost of the Clevelanu section shop are combined , 

anC. w"1en L1e same thine, i s Go~1e with the Kansas Coty section shop , the 

r sulting total labor cost of each of these shops r e aches a sum in 

eXCc"'S of $3 . 50 . 

Sur:uning up, it may be said. of the $16.75 j)rice c;roup t hat the 

direct labor cost of t'1e fi rms outs id.c of the !ew York district bear 

a l1iL>:1er rati o t o lTew York l abor costs t !1a1:. in t :1e l owe r })rice groUJJS . 

In no11e ~f tJ.1e firrYJ.s studied outside Eew York; ·lilere the direct l abo r 

c'Jsts u:nder $2 . 75 . I n the l.Tew York district, rver half of L1.e shops 

stucie~ showed ~i ect labo r costs unde r $2 . 75. 

Wi tl1in this c roup, it is observecl t hat the c:ir ect tailoring l abo r 

cost in the Bost on tailoring shops ranGes fr om $2 . 83 t o S3 . 65 , the 

variatio11 be ing 30 ,; in the Seattle tailoring shop s, the to tal of 

direct and indirect labor costs r ange s from $3 . 06 to $3 . 89, the difference between these fi c;ures beL.1.{: ove r 25~; . 

In t:1e abov e d.i scussi 011 , comparison hav e -been made be twe en Jew 

Yorl: firms and those in other cities. :c~~ r e ason of tile narrower 

classifica.tions of non- Hew York firms made ~'J ssible ·oy a scertaining 

t he ir avera0 e sHles ·") rice s , the a.'bove cor.une11ts can be supp l emented 

'Vv i th the fo llowi ng coi-:lparis on amonc; t :i.1e no:1.- NeVJ York marl:ets onl y , of 

firmn sellinc ~~r~ents in t~e $8 . 75 , $12 . 75, $13 . 75 and $20. 75 classes. 

$8 . 75 Houses 

Sixteen firms in this class, l oca t e d i 11 ma r ke ts othe r than New 

York , were studied. The d.istribu ti on of C.irect tail oring lab or c ost 

was as f ollows : 

$1 . 00 t o $1 . 25 4 

1. 26 t o 1 . 50 3 

1.51 t o 1.75 3 

1 . 76 to 2 .00 2 

2 . 01 to 2 . 25 2 

2 . 26 to 2 . 50 1 

2 . 51 to 2.75 l 

16 

Five of the firms ope rated sect i on sho;>s . The ci irect l abo r cost 

in t hes e section shops was l ower i n B::tltimore t ha.i"l in Kansas City. 

The additi on of i ndire ct l abo r to the d.ire ct l abo r f or the fiv e sectio ~1 shops showed t:1e same r e lative ::_)os iti on . 

Eleven tail oring shops in t h i s price t;roup we r e s tudi ed . The 

direct labor co s t rcmge d from $1 . 36 to ~2 48 (the latter fi gure being 

exclusive of a wage de ficiency of ap~rox mate ly 3¢ per garMent paid 

to the Code Aut ho rity ~, Ba l timore anG. Los A:1geles showing th l owest 

cost a:1d. Boston t he h i ghest . The 1,~Jeste rn markets of Portland and San 

9821 
,· 
RUN-OF-SHOP COSTS IN VARIOUS MARKETS FOR TEE SPRING SE.ASOll , 1 9341 AliD AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS FOR THE EIGHT WEEK PERIOD ENDED 

MARCH 31, 1 934 , BY I NDIVIDUAL FIRllS 

Total Cost-----....._ 

~ Factory Overhead ~ 23 L.......... 

Indirect Labor-- ~ 2) 

Cuning------;,....!1 m 

T ailoring _ _ ___ ..., ~ 

AV£AAGE HOURLY URH1HGS .............. 

1'--..u 

~ 18 

) 19 

.)S 

2 OS 

01 ~ 

~ 

.. 

FIGURE Rlb 

1~ 1 2 40 

8f 

~ 

~ 

~ ~ 18 18 

~ f-----< 21 

~ fUr 

48 

r-rr 

~ 

rnnn 

I 

.II 

II 

F<m> Cod• 

Co<y 

TyP< of Hou,. I 

42240 ,

1 

42250 ,

1 

42191 I C50354 I C50352l C521111 I C52017 

1

70030 

1

10770 !10310 

ClEVn.tNO CLEVIUNO CLEVn.tNO DICMO QICAQO QICAQO QICAIO ST UQS LOS AIIQ. 1.0$ AIIQ. 

TP TP SP TP SP TP TP TW T P TP 

$12.75 HOUSE. 

$ 

- 4.50 

~ 

~ 24 

~ 100 

~ ~ )9 

~ 19 

I ~ - 350 

50 HS 

w 

m - 300 ;:;27 46 · 

mill I ' - 2.50 

- 200 

- 1.50 

.111 - 1.00 

.n 

- 50 

0 

10200 ti3IO 

FIISQl POITUIII 

TW TW 

"'" I smt I cstMO DTOII DTOII ..STill 

TW TW TW 

S- S•ot1on Shop t-Tailor Shop W-t'fe ek Work P•P1•o• Work C•'P'riO.ti'IUQ& & rirm oode n~r 1Ddioatea a oo:ntr&otor 

• Iuol udee 1Dd1reot labor oo1t 1 • • well &I direot labor ooata. 

1, Thh t1, ure .... t bo oupp1o .. nt.4 by -co 4et1o10D01oo po14 to Co4o Avthor!.qo-&ppron"'-to17 10llt ot diroot lobor ooot, 2. .. • " • • • • • • • " " • 1 ·~ ~r carmeDt. 

3. " " " 111 " " • • ,. " 11 • " II- " • 

6. " • • Sf. • 

6. • ~¥ • e. • 2(. • 

1. • r.y &3eeaement peodinc 6/ " 

e . • mue t " paleS to Cod.e Author1 ty- 101 " 

'· " " • " " 21- • 1~ • ¥ • 11. " S(. • 1 z. " 12(. " 

..... • 

r 
... ~ -·· # .~. r ' ~'If;\·• 
-17-

Fr ~·~..-ic-co oc tFde0 q 'lliddl ·osi tion . Bri e fl y , t ne :Lastc rn "1arke ts 

shJwe tho highor tailorin~ costs. 

In q "dition tJ tllese va riat i on s i n l a·oor c ost s be t ween mar l:::e t s , 

t 10 r e wan a fur t he r va ria t ion in eac il 1a ~-.:e t be t ween shop and shop . 

Thus , th8 Kansas Ci t r s e c t i on s hi"J,,s showed a r anO'e of dire ct l a bor ~ 0 

cost f r mn $1. 13 t';) $1 . 33 , or a vari at i on of ov e r 15% ; ·the Sa n FranciscJ t~i or in ; s hop s s howed a r a nge fr om Cl. 51 to S2 . 01, or a va ria ti on 

of 33- 1/ 3<;; ; t:1e :i3a l t i mo r e t a i lori r g shop s· fr om $1 . 46 to $2 . 21 , or a 

diffcn·ence ':lf ov e r 0~~ ; the Philacle l phi a- t a i l or i nG shop s fr om $1 . 82 

t o $~ 2D or~ va riat ' on of ap~ro xi ma ly 25%. 

$12 . 75 ~~ouse c; 

if ~n f irms i n thi s s ~e e studied. _The distrib u t i on of 

dir e ct tailor'ing l abo1· cost was as fol l ows : 

$J. 75 to .... $2 .oo 2 

2 .. ')1 t o ,, ? C:: t:;; . _,o l 

2 . 26 't o 2 . 5 2 

2 • ..SJ. t o 2 . 75 2 

. 2 .7£ to 3 . 00 l 

3 (')1 _' t , 3 . 25 6 

·. ~ t~ 3 . 5 1 - - 15 

Trro of t he ve 1'ir"T 1~ ·:e r e se ction shop s, one in Cr a wf ord::rvi l l e -

a c ontract s no·? i n a. Ch i cac; suburb - a nd on o in Ravenna , a s 1op opo r -

ate c. - :··" a Cl cvelami.. manufactur e r . The Cl cvo l a nd d ir0ct l a-bor cost was 

ove r o:1e a 11d one --half ti1:1es ~ r Ch i caeo · c ost . 

. . 

Thirt een t a ilorinc firms wo r E: studi ed. . The dire ct labor c os t 

ra,1ge d fr om $1.77 in [Ul :H.~. a c cm tra c t s hop of a Cl1icago jobbe r to 

ap·.Jr oxi ma t e ly t nicc that s un i !l B')ston . Chicago a nd St . Louis had the 

l ::me st dir e ct l abor co sts - Bot t on a:1d Cl eve l and L 1o h i {;hest . One 

Chicae o t a ilo ri ng shop occm d a n i nte r m0di a t e p osition in t he r a nge 

of di r e ct 13-bor co st - its cost be ing $.2 . 56 exclusive of a n e sti mated 

5¢ p e r ~a !!lc nt wage de fici ency . 

·.7i t h in t hi s p rice gr ou;p , t ne r a nge of clire ct l a-bor c ost in the 

Chic ~ o t a ilor i ng shops was f rom $1. 77 t o $2 . 84 (inc l uded i n thG 

l a t t e r fi gure is t he vra r:;e d~ fici ncy pai G. t o t he Code Authority) or a 

variati on of 60)~ ; t he r ang0 i n t he Los Ange l e s t a i l orine s hop s wa s 

f r om $2 . 31 to $3 . 09 , or a ~e of 33- l/ 3%; in ~ Boston t a iloring 

shops , t he r a.ngo '--,as fr om $3 . 15 t o $0 . 45 or a range of up1Jroxi ma t e ly 

1cc ;. 

It aEJC~a s fr om t J.1 i s study t hat t he mi ddl e we st !.1c'1G both t he lovrc:st 

anc. t he int e r me dia t e clir c.~ ct l <1.b 'J r c ost . ~ Wes t Coast has an i n t r -

mediato and hi t;hc r c ost . I n b oth t l1c sec t ion .:1n' t. hc t a j lori ng shop , 

t nc Cl ev e land firm::; have h i gn c osts. 

_$1 3 . ~~?~PQ...S. 

Sev en . t.:til t) r :·l ng £bup:::: l oc a t ed i n thr c i U C'G wer. ..., tudiod . Tho 

9821 

. . 
-1

l:n t di ~ct la or coste. "\rc f~1m' in Los An{("'ll-s - t he h i G. r st in 

PhiLcl,-l})J.1i a . . ost:m JCCU_)iccl an i.1t...:r .: diat ··n£ti on . 

I n thc: Los A.[,, 1 "' tni ·)ri :~ S!1'JI' , tn· uir , c t tr- ilori ng labor 

cor;t ra ';ed ir0m $2 . 87 to $,-i .-33 , or '1 variation 1i '"JVC"r l Ofo ; in t he 

I3J~to: tailori 1g s!lOps , th,· ri3-nGO ·1as f rom $3 . 26 t o ;;,3 . 55 or a varia ti on 

of a·· )roxir:le t ..:- 1 r 10%. 

$18 . 75 Heus e n 

Si x tail oring sl1ops l 'Jcat c d in tnr r c ci tics Y'" l'r stud i ed . The 

fi._.ur '- s i n t:1i s ,_:;:::-ol..l;.) d::> n.Jt i ndi ca t e a c::> rr c- l ati on b:- h 1ccn c ost and 

{_' ozrt~p1liC l ·::> cati on . St . Louis ~ g~l\S t a s "lOll 2.S L1 a l ow p ositi on . 

B')st:m is in the lcvvc st , middl e ar_cl t:;~ l)Ositi ons . 

L1 the St . Louis t c.'i l orlnt, '?I O:?S , t ilr r anc0 

$0 . 03 , or a vari ati'"Jn of ov rr 25 ; i n t hC" Eost ori 

r~ ..::;r was f rom $3 . 41 t::> $4 . 71, ~ a varia ti on of 

$20 . 7 5 Ibus e s 

·1 s fr om $3 . 97 to 

t a ilorins s ho) , t he 

~J,.wo ximat ly ~ 

Ten t a ilorinr; f inns l oca t ed i 11 fiv e ci ti c s v1c r c studi ed . Los 

Angsl cs si.1orrcd t J.w l owos t d ire ct l ab or ~s t 2."t - $3 . 89 . Excl·u.ding t he 

h i gh- lJri c e d Crli cat::o hous e , St . Louis show.:·d. t he highe st dir-: ct labor , 

t h e fi gure be i ng $5 . 73 . ?"he Cl icag0 costs show a- dc r CJ.nge - its 

di r ec t l abo r co sts bC" ing L1 on · shop $4 . 30 , in a no t her $5 . 10 and. in a 

t hird $5 . 41. 

-. i thin t i1i 8 }'rice (;r oup , t h =- t· •o Cl eve l a nd rin.~ shops , having 

substantially t hr: s3.r.1c ~j- ~i co line , sl oH d. o.irc ct 1~ cost r a ngine; from 

$4 . 14 t o , or a va riati on of 12% ; t~r Chicaco t a ilorinf hops 

sl1 ~ d di r :- c t l abor c ost r a n._;i n[; fr om $4 . 30 t o $5 . 41 , 8r .:. d.i ffc r cn c 

of a~J}) oxil ly 2 5)b ; Ph i l ad.- J.:o.11ia t a i l or il g s hops shoHt:> d a r a ng e from 

$4 . 70 t o 85 . 38 , or a va ri a tion of aJF'r 'J xioat.-ly 15 . 

9821 
RUN-OF-SHOP COSTS IN VARIOUS MARKETS FOR THE SPRING SEASOll• 1934• AND AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS FOR THE EIGIIT WEEK PERIOD EliDED 

MARCH 31• 1934, BY INDIVIDUAL FIRMS 

Tailoring------

AVERAS£ HOURLY WIIINSS 

F1rm Code 

Cuy 

T ofHoos< 

R1e 

67 

S.Seotion Shop T-Tallv Shop W-ft'eek Work P•Pieoe Work C-Preoeedin& a tinn oode number iDd1eate1 a oont,..otor 

• Inolu4ee 1Ddireot labor ooate •• .. 11 •• dlreot labor ooata. 1, Th1o ti~ OIIUit bo oupplo-nt.cl by wa,;o 4et1o1n<l1oo po14 to Co4o Author1 ty-approrlOiatoly 10% or 41root labor ooot, 

2 " • • • • • • " " " " " " tl per garment. 

3: • 21. " • 

' " 31 " 6. • 36/ " 

e: " 21 " T. fii&Y asaeeament pending s; " e. " mu1t pa0

1d to Code Auth~rl ty- 101 " ~ . ~ . 1~ ~ • 

llo • 3! " l 2, • 121 • 

$ 

... 2Q .. 

Accountant's Explanatory Jot e 

In stucJ..yin B" 11 :c L·.:1-of -shop 11 costs in the i:lar1:ets visited b~; t i1e 

CO iill•1i ssion, :9art i cu.lar at tent i':.n "':'las Dai<i to direct and indire ct 

tailorL1g anc. cutting costs and. to shan ov e rhead. Direct tailoring 

labo.L cost 1as cl.efined as i nchtding onerating or machine •-ror:c , fini shing 

or ha 1d ·· ro ~-o: ancl ·Jressi:J.g . Din'!ct cutting labor cost 1f7as definec. as 

i:1cluc.i nb actual nage cost of c-utting as ~! ell as na;.;e s :or adi~1:; fo 

patterns. Indirect labor,. which •7as cla.ssifie<i as bet17e en tailorin __ ; 

oJ~ cu tting, included the follo ~g it ems : Forenan and/or i~strL ct ors 

a l1d. assistants ( includi·1g salar;y of l_Jerson 17ho gives out '-ro r k ); 

e~:aminers or ins--s:>ect ors and/or assistants; factory cl e rical (pE:rt a i ning 

to factol'J' operation) if any; and. an;y other emDloyee v'Tho 11or'·..:ed in the 

tailo:c~in ,s de:9artments but ''rho did not actu8,lly uroduce the garment. 

Su~J:·J le entin g t he cJassifi.cati'ln was the instructi nn tha t ino.ire ct 

l aiJo r Tias not to include any co st of designing , selling , general ad..-

min.istrat ive , stoc '~ or shi:p-y . 

Sho-·J overhea<i ,-;as t o include ( a) rent - or " here the bui -

1

.d.L1g ,~as 

orr.ned ~ the ouerato.r of t he f a ct':\ r y , a uorti n of the building o·Jera,tion 

ch2rges, (b) -~ C1,t, light and -.;o..,•e:c, (c) maint encmce, r e-oairs, machinist 

su~J~J lies , s'le eners, etc. (d) any other e.xoens e ·0 rO r cl a s sified as 

shop ov erhead b;y the manufactu:cer . De -Jre ci a t i n '."Tas not t o be included. 

Sho:;> overhead nas allo ca t ed to tailoring CJJ'l.d cutting rooms on the 

basis of the area occu'?ied J each of then . Shop overhead chd not 

include any:r?art of tJ.J.e rent, heA-t li 1t ,an d-o 'Te r, etc. consu ed.b~r 

selling and shi :J ~J ing ci ~oa ents. J'here executives', officers', 

O'lners t or :r:mrtners 1 sala ries '-rere inchlded i n the co st figures in the 

qu.estion:J.aire, the accountants we r e to indica.te t he ca'!Jtion under 'l ich 

the~' 'l ere inc l uded so that t he re <:l.sonabJ. en ess of such allocation mi gLt 

be ver ified. 

:Tinally, the accountants were instru cted that the ComP1 ission '.l <.s 

int or 8sted in season fi91res only· a.nd that if the season t ape:c' ed off 

or ended ~J rior to April 30, 1 934, direct and indirect l abo r and cutting 

costs nere to be obtained. u p to the dat e '.'7hen p roductir.-· n was coiJ19l ated 

but overnead costs \ ere to be obtained u ntil Aoril 30 , 1934. 

:B . COST OF i .RTUFACTU?..E OF A SP:SCII'I C GAE- ~:EFT 

iJ'hi:l e in the accmm tan t 1 s rLm ni' shop cost study, firns •-rer e 

compar ed according to t l1eir "?rice r 'l,o;e s, t he t ecr.u1. i cal st uc1y of the 

C'JSt 'Jf t !1e identica l garment nra s baseC. on ,- orl-man shi ··) rat r-> ]~ t !lan Gn 

selJ.ing :9ri ce . The same su ort uo lo coat so far as sty3. e is concerned, 

nas il1D.0.e in different ··'Jlant s in d iffer ent cities in "0 r ice ranges rL111'1ing 

all t:1e 1.'8 7 f r om $4 . 75 to $16 . 75 and even ~. :;h er prices. The co st 

com:9arison of the speci -fie gp.rment '~ <3 , the r efore , de be tr•een s~ o·os 

"':)U tting substantiallj' t lle s 2..me wor k:r.1c-:.1s:1ip i nto t his co c t. 

This no r k.r.1anshi ) was grad.ed as to o_:ual i r accord i ng to the 

e st ablished Je~ Yor~- gr P.d.e s set fort l in t he gracle boolc issued by the 

9821 

- 21-

Ne" iork voat Md Suit Labor Bureau, it being found u -.ym very close 

exC'mi·:e t-Lon of the o:u.nlity s ec ificeti.ons and the ty-oe of ?.;arments "'Jroduceo. t 1n.t the arments studi ed naturnlly fell into one of the Ne,.., Yorl: 

gr ades with the follo~ing excentions: 

l. :?our gar:nen t s - t wo N enr York , one New Jersey a..."ld one Bal t i !!lore 

are classified as Gra.de 1 }!linus becau se of t he ex centionalJ.~r 

lou quality in these garments , such l01ill qua1i t y , however, being 

simila1 amon~ these four. 

2 . T\"O garments - one Ne'7 York And one Chicago - are classifiecl as 

be t reen Grades G and. 3 (Grade 2- 3 ) because of addi tional hand 

,..,0 .1. i '1 finishing , mal;: ing its fini shi nf, ··•or1- according to Grade 

3, nhile the operatint; a,nd. p re·ssing a.re ac-corcUng to specificatioi1s of Gr ade 2. 

3 . Ni'18 gar ments - four Clevel and, t,.,ro St. Louis, one ~ Chicago, one 

Se.:'tt l e and one Scranton - a1·e classifiec! .. be t,•re en . Graci.es 3 and . . . 4 ( Gr c:1 de 3- 4 ) because the~.: have t he f ini_shing speci f i cat ions 

of Grac.e 4 '"rit11 the e:·: ce1Jtion pf •.1achine-felled open bottoms -

cloth and. linin · These nine 

tions in the fronts, sleeve s , 

qui ring additional ~o erat ing. 

t"1e same as GraCI.e 3 . 

{;Pr ments have perca1 ine foundacolla r a nd l a·9 els, the reby reThe :o re.s sin,g is substantially 

Ll: . T':ro .:;nrment s, both fro m ·Philadelplli a, are cJ.assifi ed bet'IJ!een 

(:!.r:-, (1 es 4 and 5 ( Grc-·0 e 4 - 5) "because U1ey have a ll the finishing 

s·oecificat ions of Grn.c: e 4 •ni t h the adc1i tion of hand-felled fronts, 

but not suff icient other requir ement s for Grade 5e 

To obtc:dn L1e 51 ~10) S used by r.tr. Garve3r in his comparison of 

cost of manufacture of the s·0ecific garment, it mras ece ssar r to visit 

104 sho··)S , to ob t a in ~1 e V .h shO.')S submitted. for Fevr Yorl{ Cit r, it nas 

nece s s a r y to visit 32 sho )s. The shops -reject·ed either did not manufacture a com•Jarable garment or ,~·o rl ed on a '"'Teek- work basis. Only t 1VO 

sho·q s '.'Tere f01:..nd in 1\Te'1" Jersey ':7hi ch r'lr1.nnfactured the sue cifi c garment 

and 1.-rhose cost ·could ·be· accurately ,as cert a ined. T1"10 r.1a r 1 ·et!;; are not 

re-presentecl , name l y , San Francisco and Boston. These marJ..:ets nork on 

1 l ., • 

a wee or : oas1s. 

No studies of identic ~ garr!lent_s 1:<rere made b;y .the 'oomrrii s sion above 

the ··Jrice L·a·nge of $16.75. 

.. ' 

. : 

9821 
-22-

· ::AL -s- S 0 1' :?RO:)UC-::'10:~ COSTS 0:' A SP~CIFI C GA.l.i ~:·T 

I A.."1I00S l.!AJGETS -----

Table -1 p resents a surna:r <)~ of th.e · cost of uroduction of a coP.Tparable ga... r.1ent in diff'erent markets together with the run of shop costs anc1_ 

earnings of Jorlcers in those shops.l/ 

Colm.m 1 entitled 11 Grade Classifications 11 gives the classification 

of the car:·1ent according to tl e New York Grade 3oo1::. 

Columil 2 designates the fi::cm according to a code ntimber and the city 

in ryhich the firm is located. 

Column 3 entitled "~r:pe of Shop" shous rhether the shop is .a section 

shop (S) o:: a so-called tailoring shop (T), a week-nork shop (W) or a 

uiece ~ror :: shop (P) . By a tail~ri:ng shop is meant a shop system under 

17hich the garr:tent, after :1aving been cut into several parts, is assemble& 

in the cutting room into one bundle . It is the~ tru{en to the tailoring 

depart:.1ent in tH1ich an indivic.ual norker is res )ons ible for the completion 

of the entire oper·ation in his craft; that is to say, a :nacDine operator 

is res~:> o: si ble for all the machine serring -rrhether he does it all b.,r himself or ~ritu the assistance of one or more helpers. The finisher is responsiole for all the finishing , ui1et:1er it is ull done b7 himself or 

herself or Di th the aid of a l eb)er. ""' 

By a section shop is meant a sho:p systeiJ un<ier 11~1icl , after a garment 

has geen cut into ·several parts in the c~tting room , the parts are assorted into several blmdles 11:1ich are distri bu. ted arnone; several rrorkers. InsteaC:. of having one operator do all the machine operatin.J; , each pa:ct is 

seun by an individual m~chine oueratbr ~ho is sl:illed in this operation 

an is resDonsible solely for the operation ~e or she performs. The 

finishing is likeVtise divided anong several he.nd sewers, each responsible 

solely for the operation l1e or she performs, such as felling edges, tacking li~inzs, setting lining to coat, felling bottoms , sewing on buttons, 

etc . 

~1c meaning of Columns 4 to 12 will appear from their respective 

headings. 

Colunn 13 - selling price gives the selling pri ce of the comparable 

garment of each firm. As uill be seen, the grade classification and the 

sellinG price do not al ays coincide; thus, the garments marked as Grade 

1 are sold at $6 .75 by the first five firms, $8 . 75 by the three folloning 

firms and. $10 .7 5 by the t '1ree reBaining firms. They are all , however, 

comparable as to ~orkmanship and therefore as to their labor cost and 

total shop cost. 

Colun:1 14 g ives the 11 run-of-shop 11 cost; that. is, the average shop 

cost for all the garments made in that shop during the Spring 1934 season. 

This cost is divided into t~ro parts: (a) Direct Labor, corresponding to 

Column 8 for the individual garment , and (b) Total Shop Cost , corresponding to Coluran ll for the individua,l garment . 

!./ See :rabl e G-1 in append.ix. For convenience of the reader, a cor. dc;nsed 

able appears on p . 23 .. 

9821 
TABLE G-2 

CONDE •SED SUM.l\IARY OF COST OF PRODUCTION OF A SPECIFIC 

GARM):{NT A N D OF R UN OF SH9P COSTS 

(The complete table appears a t the end of this secti01J. The table. ·below 

wit h the t'olumn numbers t he same as In the -complete table Is prlllteld here .for convenience iD f ollowing th~ text.) 

P-Plece Work; W-Week -W ork ; S-Sectlon Shop ; T-TaUoring 

1 

Grade 

Classlftcatlon 

2 

Firm 

and 

Location 

1 Minus 30 New York 

1 Minus 15066 N ew York ..•. . 1 Minus 38280 Camden . . ... •. 1 Minus 40011 Baltimore . .. •.. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1. 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2-3 

2-3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3-4 

3-4 

3-4 

3-4 

3-4 

3-4 

3-4 

.3-4 

3-4 

8090 New York 

Ha.mmondton, N.J . 38092 P h iladelphia .. . 40131 Baltimore ... .. . 40133 York, Pa . . .... . 40020 Baltimore ..... . 40170 Baltimore . . .. . . 70170 Kansas City . . . 70110 Kansas City .. . 70010 Kansas City .. . -90040 Portland .....•• 

2470 New York 

8126 New York 

3381 New· York 

2563 New York 

3252 New. York . . , •• 303 New York ..... 38261 Philadelphia ... 40160 Baltimore . . •..• 90220 Portland .. .• ••• 90340 Portland .. •...• 3580 New York . . ..... . 50031 Chicago .. .. . .. . 

8200 New Yorli .. . . . 339!> New York . . .. . 7430 New York .. .. . 52010 Chicago . ....... . 50351 Chica go .. . ....• 42240 Cleveland . .... . 80410 Los Angeles · 800-W Los An g e les 

80170 Los Angeles . .. . 80770 Los Ang eles .. . 38160 Philadelphia .. . 90470 Seattl e ....... .. 

42080 Clev elan d . . ••.• 42120 Cleveland . . .. . . 42210 Cleveland .. .. . . 42190 Clev eland .. •. . • 38180 Scranton, Pa .. .. 9.0100 Sea ttle .... . ... . 70060 St. Louis . .••. • 70200 St. Louis .. •••• 5850" Chicago . . ...••• 

3 

T~ e 

Shop 

T -W 

T -W 

S-P 

S-P 

T-P 

S-P 

T-P 

T-P 

S-P 

S -P 

S-P 

S -P 

S -P 

S-P 

S-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T - P 

S -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T-P 

T-P 

T -P 

T-P 

'r-P 

T -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T -P 

T-P 

T-P 

S-P 

T-P 

S-P 

S-P 

T-P 

T-P 

T-P 

4 3380 New York . . .. . T-P 

4-5 

4-5 

38000 Philadelphia . . . T-P 

38250 P h iladelphia . . . T-P 

8 

Total 

Direct 

Labor 

.81 

.92 

.90 

1.09 

1 .84 

1.28(4) 

1.80 

1. 54 

1.20 

1. 21{5) 

1. 23 

1.43(6) 

1.49(7) 

1.54(8) 

1. 91 

2.25 

2.43 

2.96 

2 .85 

2.70 

2.60 

2. 59 

2.18 

2 .43 

2.36 

2. 29 

2.42 

4 .05 

3 .44 

4 .20 

2 .70 

2 .60 

3 .60 

2.82 

3 .33 

3. 15 

2 .81 

3 .95 

3 .55 

4 .68 

4.4Q 

3 .81 

4 .70 

3 .85 

3.40 

4 .14 

4 .()7 

4 .15 

4.40 

6 .44 

4 .96 

11 

Total 

Shop 

C9st 

1.05• 

1.2o• 

1.35 

1.23 

2 .26 

1.76 

1.46 

1.44 

2 .39 

2.31 

2.18 

2.45 

2:90 

2.39 

2.94 

3. 09 

2.77 

2.99 

3 .83 

3 .01 

4 .49 

3 .05 

4 .29 

3 .87 

5 .13 

5.95 

4.42 

6.30 

4 .11 

5 .13 

4.74 

6 .21 

15 .13 

Selling 

Price 

5.50 

6.75 

4 .75 

5 .50 

6 .75 

6 .75 

6 .75 

6 . 75 

6 . 75 

8 .75 

8 .75 

10 .75 

8 . 75 

10.75 

10 .75 

10.75 

8 .75 

8 .75 

10.75 

10 .75 

12. 75 

6 .75 

10.75 

10 .75 

10.75 

10 .75 

10.75 

10.75 

12 .75 

16 .75 

10 .75 

13 . 75 

13 .75 

10 .75 

12 .75 

12 .75 

12 .75 

10 .75 

12.75 

16.75 

16 . 75 

16 .75 

16.75 

16 .75 

16.75 

16 ,75 

16.75 

14.75 

16.75 

16.75 

16.75 

Shop. 

u 

Total 

Run of 

Shop 

Cost 

1.07 

2.89 

1.34 

1.00 

2 .63 

1.81 

1.48 

1.34 

2 ... 7 

2.09 

1.95 

2 .34 

4..28 

3 .01 

2. 57 

3 .55 

~ 

3 .41 

3 .69 

3 .15 

3 .80 

2 .66 

4 .54 

2.97 

4 .48 

4.96 

2~ 

6.81 

4 .21 

6.24 

5 .60" 

5.35 

7 .34 

6.99 

6.23 

(•)-Price paid fo contractor_ . . . . . (4)-Estimated additional cost per gal'men.t" to bring wox:ker~ up to rtummu~ 

code wage r a tes-23 cents. · . (5)-Estimated additional cost per garment: to bring workers up to mmlmum 

code wage rates-30 cents. . (6)- Estlmated additional cost per .garment to bring workers up to mmimum 

code wage rates--4 cents. (7)-Estl~ated additional cost per garment to bring workers up to minimum 

ci'n:le wage rates-15 cents. . . (8)-Estimate<;i additional cost per garment io brmg workers up to mmimum 

code wage rates-25· cents. 

9821 

-24-

T:1is coat was sole'L by tl1e four firms aflryearinr; i n t he t able at ··1l'ices 

ranging from $4. 75 to $6 . '75 but all reporting the same grade of v7orkmanshi:p. Tl1is group contains the only trJO sL.ops working on a ueel:- uork basis 

that a··?::.J ear in this table since they are the only shops visited in Neu 

York Cit~r tur::1ing out a comparable garrne:.1t in t his gr ade . They we re 

selecte& because of complaints of unfair compe tition made against these 

firns to the Commission on its visits to various centers. 

Since t~1ese tno New York shops are o:·_) erated 0!1 a neek-·aorl:: basis 

their le.bol~ cost had to be estimat e<i . It was possible to estinate U1e 

total direct l abor cost accurately by deducting from t he price paid to 

the contra ctor as shown on the books of the job1;er (Colu;"ln 12), 30~ of 

the total direct labor cost alloued in the New Yorl:: market for the contractorts overhead. This left 81 cents for direct labor to the first contractor and 92 cents to the second contra cto:-. The allocation of the 

direct labor cost to oper ating, fini s~in , p ressing and cutting was made 

by alloning the same percentae;es of direct labor f or ec.ch cre.ft as we re 

found to exist in the tr:ro pie Da ~: shop s in the same grD.de. 

As niJ.l be seen from Column 1 2 , t he t wo Hen York shops show labor 

costs l0\7er t han the hvo pi ece- ryor!c shops in Camden and. Baltimore. In 

one of the shops, the s~un receive& from the j obber f or labor and overhead 

is consi derably lower than that paid to other co tractors by the same 

jobber for the sar.1e garment, and. is apparently barely adequate to perui t 

the payment of the Code minima. Another explanation for t he low cost in 

the t11o lJen York contract shops is that both contra ct shops have s:'?ecialized for ~re ars in childrens 1 coa ts v:hich are turned out at great speed and 

low cost uith apparently little regard. for quality. 

Oning to the time limit under \7h ich the Commission ~1as been laboring, 

there 11as no opportunity to find other shops in New York in the same grade 

for study of comparative costs. 

As uill be seen from Column 11, the total shop cost of the Baltimore 

shop is about 10% lower t han in the Grunden shop. As both are section 

shops operated on a piece-rrork basis, and no other reasons 11hich 11ould 

account for the variation are in evi&ence, the difference is apparently 

due to the fact that Baltimore is operating under t he Western scale Bhile 

Camden is paying the Eastern rates. 

It is interesting to compare the l abor cost for the i ndividual a1~e t 

with the run of shop cost (Colu.mn 14) in the same shops a s obtained by the 

accountant of the Commission from the books of t he s e concerns for the 

Spring 1934 season. 

In the case of the first shop the $1.05 price )aid to the contractor 

compares nith the $1.07 run of s:i.1 op cost. The total shop cost of $1.35 

in the Can den shop compares ni th the $1.34 run of shop cost. The $1 . 23 

Baltimore shop cost compares with $1.00 run of shop co st. T:~e difference 

in this case is due to the fact that this concern nas f ound violating the 

Code by paying less than the minimum rates, for whi ch restitution has 

been made. This underpayment is reflected in the average run of shop cost 

for the season, whereas the $1.23 is the present price paid. on the in -ividual 

garment after the firm had increased in the month of I•:Iay the wages pai d to 

its employees. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF A SPECIFIC GARMENT IN DIFFERENT MARKETS IN COMPARISON WITH RUN OF SHOP COSTS 

AVERAil( HO\IRI.T fAIIIIIIGS 

Run of Shop Cosr 

m

ouJ Shop 

otal lnd1recc Labor &.- Shop Ov•rh .. d 

recr L"bor 

Cumng -------'"""' 

Press1ng -----'~~; 

Fin1shtng~~-~-l 

Operaung ----""'~"·· 

Form Code 

Coty 

of House 

SJ'()kTS TYPE fOLO COAT-RACLA!I SU:t:VES-J.o.'Jil:ISJI IIOTCJI 1/l.STER TYPE COLLAR Pl.AIJI SIDE SEAJIS- RAISED TOP 

SLEEVE St:AII-St.PAJIAT£ ALL AROU!ID CllrP-RECUUR ·;:F.LT ~"KETS -TI1l<£ E IWID J,:AD£ BUTTCI!I I!OLES-ALL AJ!OUJID 

BELT..COLUR PACINCS-ARII HOLES-TOP SI.a'VE SF..U:O.CUITS-POCKETS-AJID BELT EOOE STITCIIED 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNIN&S 

FIGURE Gla 

2 89 SPECIFIC GARMENT C~T 

RUN Of .SHOP COlT 

S-Soot1oD Sbop T-Toa1lor Sbop 

1. All haDd pr•••i.Dc• 2, 1Dol114oo ad41t1oD&l hand worlc worth about 26/.o • So ll!ch o.,io 4,_ to uo& of lcD1tt.4 fabr1o uool bto l~ to p...-..Dt lr:D1tto4 fobrio otrotohiD&o 

• ll""'-te4 oad41 ~-1 ooot poor coa..-t to briac wor lcoro up to a1Dim""' oodo ..,... ratoo- 2Sf., •: ·~ • • " • , • • " " " " ,. " " - SOj. 

6, • - ·~-· a. ,. - 1¥. 1. • - 26/.. e, 

T;i;!i~i~ 3\lj ········f···l·· 

I I 

$ 

1.50 

-26-

In the ca se of the second New York shop, the relation between the 

individual cost and the run of sho-p cost is revers ed, being $1.2·1 in 

the former case and $2.89 in the latter. This was found upo n investigation to be due to the fact that the individual garment was sold by 

the firm at a loss in small quantities as a l eader, while most of the 

other garments which were made in the shop were made at much higher 

cost, showing a total run of shop cost of $2.89 as actua lly ascertained 

from the books of the company. 

Grade 1 Coats 

Eleven shous in seven cities are cover ed in this cla ss - eight of 

them working on the section system and t hree on the t a ilorin5. The 

dire ct labor cost varies from $1.211 in the York ContrRct shop, working 

under the Western code scale for Baltimore , to $1.84 in the New York 

tailoring shop and $1.91 in a Portland tailorin6 shop. The York section shop shows a 14.8% lower unit cost than it had for a substantially 

similar garment at the time of the Ba ltimore investigation in January, 

1934. It has be en found in violation of the code because of the earnings 

of some of its workers being below the minimum. To what ext ent this 

has been adjusted, the investigators of the Com~iss ion have been unable to ascertain. Its lower cost may in part be due to the increase 

in eff iciency of the workers since the shop had been in operation approximately eight months at the time of the J anuary investigation and 

the additional five months which have elapsed since then may account 

for the added efficiency of the workers as well as of the management. 

The first Baltimore shop (#40()20) is estimated to have an additional cost of 3;")¢ per garment to make up for deficiencies in earnings of 

some of its workers which were found to fall below the minimum. This 

would bring the cost up to a total of $1.51. The second Baltimore shop 

(#40170) which shows a cost of $1.23 per garment is a highly sectionalized and efficient shop . Its workers have developed a degree of speed 

and skill which is unsurpassed in this type of work. The management is 

very alert to take advantabe of any manufacturing economies offered by 

special machines and equipment. The third Baltimore shop, (#40131) a 

contract shop, operating on the tailoring system, shows the highest cost 

in that city, viz. $1.54. 

The section shop at Hammondton, New Jersey, shows a direct labor 

cost of $1.28 to which should be added an estimated adcli tional cost 

of 23¢ per garment to cover deficiencies* in wage s of workers earning 

less than the minimum. It is interesting to note that while the firm 

complained of its difficulties in securing competent labor for its 

shop which had been set up less than six months before it was investigated, and the necessity of training the help and difficulties in developing its shop organization, it has been able to produce its first 

garments at the comparatively low cost of $1.51 (including the estimated additional cost to cover the deficiencies in earnings of inexperienced help. ) 

Turning to Kansas City, the ~ower difect labor cost shown- $1.43 

- should be augmented by an e stimated additional cost of 4¢ to allow for 

the deficiencies in earnings below the code minimum, (voluntarily added 

(*) These .deficiencies have since been paid to the workers. 

9821 

-27-

to the rvork rs 1 payrolls by the manufactur er) making a total cost of 

$1 . 4 7. The $1 . 49 cost should be E!.Ut.~ented. for the same reaso.ns by . 

15¢*, making a totc .l cost of $1 . 64 and the h. 54 should b8 augmented by 

25¢* , making a total cost of $1 . 79. The first mt=:mtioned shop is the 

most efficiently managed shop in Kansas City. The costs in the other 

two shops reflect their relative efficiency. 

The next higher cost is that of a Philadel phia contra.ct shop which 

is operating on the tailoring system and shows a cost of $1.80. The 

New York inside shop, operating on the tailoring system, shows the 

higher cost of $loC4, , while the highest cost of $1.91 is indicated for 

the Portland. sho-p, although oper a ting on the section system. The latter 

has the highest. ·cost of any ·of the shops visited, apuarently as a result 

of problems peculiar to this shop and not o.ue to generE1.l market conditions. 

By comparing colu.-r:lns 8 and 14, it v.,rill be seen tha t the run of shop 

direct labor costs for the different sho-ps in the Grade 1 class coincide 

very closely 'llllith the direct labor cost for the individual garment. For 

shop #40131 in Baltimore~ the direct labor cost of the individual garment was $1 .54 as co~ared with thr::J run-of-shop direct labor cost of 

$1.59; for shop #40133 in York $1 . 20 as compared with the run-of-shop 

cost of $1.22; for shop #70170 in Kansa s City $1.47 as compared with 

run-of-shop cost of $1.51; . for ·shop #90,040 in Portland .$1.91 a s compared with the run-qf-shop co st of $1 . 20 . 

As the two costs - one f or an · individual garment and the other an 

average cost of a group of similar garments - were arrived. at by different persons ro-orkL1[: independently and by different methods, this close 

agreement on cost ~ is a strong indication of the accuracy of both sets 

of cost figures. 

Grade 2 Coats 

T~n shops are . assembled in this grade, of which nine are tailoring 

shops and on8, in Portland, a. section shop. The lowe st cost is again 

found in a Baltimore shop which, although operating on the tailoring 

system, has the advantage of the lower Vestern wage scale as against New 

York and Philadelphia. The lowest cost New York sho-p is a close second 

to Baltimore, although it, too, is oper a ted on the iloring system and 

on the higher New York wage scnle. 

The six New York shops in this gr ade shov1r a r ange in clirect labor 

cost from $2.25 to $2.96 per gar~ent, (i.e. a variation of ~puroximately 

33-l/3%) which may be larg0ly due to differences in efficiency and in 

bargaining power as be t Tieen workers and employers u..'IJ.der the piece-work 

system. The Philadelphia, shop shows a cost of $2.59 which is in close 

agreement with and within the range of the New York costs. The two shops 

in Portland, one a section shop and .the othe r a tailoring shop, show a 

close agreement in cost, which is $2.36 for the section shop and $2.45 

for the tailoring shop. 

Aga~n the r1L~-of-shop direct l abor cost given in Column 14 is in 

close agreAment with the direct labor cost for the individual garment. 

For the three New York shops whose run-of-shop costs are p r esGnt P.d, it 

will be observed that each of the latter is within 109& of the direct 

(*) These deficiencies have since been paid to the workers. 

9821 
- _.8-

l abor cost of t c i ndi 7id al 5 anncnt . The sa e is true of the Baltimore 

shop . For sh p #38261 in Phi l adel phi a . t he two figur e s are within 5cb 

of each ot er. 

Grado 2-3 Coats 

Gr ade 2- 3 is r epr esentee?- by one ~ew Yor1c sho'9 · and one Chicago shop, 

showi n5 costs i n close a&r eement wi th tl:e Gr ade 2 costs analyzed above. 

Grade 3 Coats 

! wel ve shop s are a sse bled in this gr a de, all of them tailoring 

shops . Of t he s e , t hr ee are located in e York Cit , two in Chicago, 

one in Cleve l and, four in Los An el e s, one in Philadelphia and one in 

Seattle . The s el l i1g price of mo st of these e;arments ran0 es from $10.75 

to $12 . 75 with t he excep tion of one CnicaGO a nd one Cleveland shop 

selling a t $13.75 and one ew York shop s e lling at the '9 rice of $16.75. 

The lowe st costs i n t h is gr a de are found in Chicago, being $2.60 

for o~e shop and $2.70 for t he ot her. The next higher level of costs 

is t hat for two shops in Los An5eles -with costs of $2.81 and $2.82 

respe ctively. Tne other two Los Anbe l e s shO')S show costs of $3.15 and 

$3.33 respe ctively . This ra nbe of $ .52. be twe en the lowest and highest. 

d i r e ct labor costs in the four Los Angeles sno s represents a natural 

vD.ria tion whic~· can be accou...11 t ed for by differences in piece rates. for 

t he different ouera tions, rib~t~ble to the relative bargaining powe r of the r e spective parties, as well as to the d.iffer :.nt conditions 

prevailin5 in the four shous. The variation between the Los Angeles 

shou avin~ the lowest Qirect labor cost and the one having the highest, 

is thus seen to be 8~ . 

The e~ t hi bhe r cost is 53 . 55 i n a Seattle shop, which is natural 

because of the smaller qua~ ti s which ar e cut in Seattle, resulting 

in higher cutting costs. Ah e cost i n Clevela nd is only $.05 higher, 

being $3.60, while the three \eVI' York sho:? s show costs varying from 

$3.44 to $4.20 which are t he hi hest costs in this grade of garment. 

The range within the New York market is 22 . 

The run-of-shop direct l abor costs shown in Column 14 again indicate close a 0 reement with the individual oarment direct labor costs 

given in Column 8. For shop #42240 in Cleveland, there is a variation 

of only 3¢ betwe en the two; for shop #80770 in Los An0 eles, the variation is only 8¢. There is a variation of ~ between these figures for 

shop #381611 i n Ph iladelphia and of approx.ima tely 6% for shop #50351 in 

Chicago. 

Grade 3-4 Coats 

Th is grade is r epr es ented by nine shop s, six operating en the tailoring s rstem and t hr ee on the s e ctional sy stem. Of these, four are 

in Clevel and, two in St. Louis and cne each in Scranton, Seattle and 

Chicago. The lowe st cost f or t his grade happens to be in a Seattle 

shop i h nas e spe cially insistent on lowe r wa6 e arrangements. It 

must t e added, ho~e r, that this firm has been charged with code violations and i t is difficult to determine what its cost would be if it 

9821 
COST OF PRODUCTION OF A SPECIFIC GARMENT IN DIFFERENT MARKETS IN COMPARISON W!TB RUN OF SHOP COSTS 

Run of Shop Cost 

G

TOI&IShop 

TOI&l lnd...ec:c L.abcw 

&.. Shopo-t-1 

O.recr L.abcw 

S11lkTS TYPE r-oLO COAT-RAGLA!I SLI.T/Ea-lWil:ISII IIOTCH ULSTER TTl'!! COLUR PLAlll SIDE SI:AliS-RAtSED TOP 

SLEEVE Sl::AJI-SLPAIIATE ALL AIIOIIIID CUFF-REGIILAII ·:;P.LT Pl'"r.tTS-TrtkEE IIA!JD L:ADE 8\n'TOII I'OLES-ALL AIIOI/IID 

BELT..COLLAII FACt~GS-AIIU IIOLBS•TOP SLIZVE SE.UI-CurPS-POCII:ETS-AlJD BELT EDGE STITCI!ED 

FIGURE Glb 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNIN6S 

w~~~f~!i€il~,q .•...•.. 1··-:-: SPECIFIC GARMENT C~T 

RUN OF SHOP COST I I 

S·SeotioD Shop T-T'a1lor Shop P·Pieoe Work W-lfeek Work 

1. All hand pr•••1~. 

2. Inoludea edcllttonal hand ')fOrk worth a~ou~ ::s(. 3. ll1ch ooot due to uoe ot lrnitted tobrio &114 1nterl1.D1JI& to pr ... ent lrnitted febrio stretoh1Jic. 

'• lat1M.te4 a441t1oDIIll ooat ~r ,a,...nt to bring worker• up to 1111nimum oode wqe rate•- 23/. 

6. " • • " 1111 " " " " " • " " " - SCI. s. • - 41· 7. " - 161· e. • - 251. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF A SPECIFIC G~ IN DIFFERENT MARKETS IN COMPARISON WITH RUN OF SHOP COSTS 

Si'OkTS TYPE POLO COAf-RAGI.d SLEn!I-1WIUSH .OTCH ULSTER TTPB COUJ.R PLAIR SIDE SEAJAS-RAISED TOP 

SLEEVE SEA»-SEPAIIATE ALL AROIIID CUFF-RECI/l.AR l'I'ELT POCIIXTS-TIIREE 11A1m I:ADE BUTTOII I!OLES-ALL AROtml 

IIELT.COUJ.R FACINGS-ARII ROLES-TOP SLDVE SE.UI-CUF!'S-POCJarrS-AND BBLT EDG! STITCHED 

Run of Shop Cost 

G

To<aiShop 

T ocal Indirect i..&bo< &.. Shop Overt-.:! 

Dtrccl Lab« 

FIGURE Glo 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNIN&S 

SPECIFIC !Wit«NT C~T 

RUN OF .SHOP C~T 

8-$oot1oD Shop !-Tailor Shop 1'-Pieoo llork 

1 • .Ul band pr .. •I.Dc• z. lDolwloo odditioD&l band work '"'rth about· 251• 

a. ti&Ja ooot dlao to uo of kDittod tobrio ODd 1Dwrli.D1Dc to --mi._ tabrlo •-tohi.D&• t ••U..tod ad41t1~ ooot por ca..-t to brill& worbro Qp -., 111m- oodo ...,. ratoo- 25/. • • • • " • • • " • • • • " " - '1101· 

'· • - 41· s. • - lljl'. 

:: • • - 211. 

COS'l' OF PRODUCTION OF A SP!CMC G.&RKERT IN DIP'FERENT IIARXETS IN COKPARISOI WITH RUJr OF SHOP COSTS 

Run of Shop Cost 

G

TotalShop 

ToW lndor«< Labor 

" Shop Ov-'-d Ou'e<l Labor 

Fonn Code 

SKJKTS TYPE POLO COAT•RAGLAII SLErVEI-IWIIIISll IOTCB \ILST!R !TPB COLUJI I'IJJI SID! SEAMS-R.USZD TOP 

Sl.llf:VE SEAK-SEPJJUTB ALL AJIOIIJID CUPF-IUXIULAJI liEJ..T POCI'XrS·t'IIRD: !WID IIAD! 8\ITTOW I!OIZS-.U.L AJIOIIliD 

IILT..COLUJI FACIMOS.AJIII ROLIS·TOP IILDVI: SIWI-Ol7ri'8-POCQr8,.JJID BELT !DO! STITCIJED 

FIGURE Gl4 

AVERAGE HOURLY URNIN&S 

....... ~f~ . '

?~•"·1\q ·: SPECIFIC GARMENT C~T 

RUN OF .SHOP CO.S T I I 

S- Seotion Shop T-T•llor Shop P-Pleoe Work W..Week lfork 

1. All hand prou tJ>t;. 

z. l ooludea ad41tl ooal ha.nd wort worth abou .. "'6j. 

a. Bich 001t chM to U.ll ot knitted fabri o aDd lotorl1..D.1.rlc to pr1-not knitt.d tabrio StretohiDc• 

'• Botbat.4 ..Ultlo-1 ooat por «•n.ot to brlor, worlaoro up to aiolmum oodo -.. rotoa- 23/ • .6. • • • " " .. • " " • • .. " : - 301. 

e 1. .. -- 161. ·~ 

s: . - 26/. 

$ 

-32-

paid the full rates called for ~n the m1n1mum scale of the code. The 

next hisher cost - $3.81- is shown by a Cleve l and shop, operating 6n 

the sectional system and pr obab ~y one uf the most efficient in the 

country. This shop shows the lqwest cost in the United States for this 

grade of product, outside of Seattle, in spite of the fact that its 

finishing cost of $1 .05 is the highe st of all the shops in that grade 

) e cause of additional hand work which is worbh about $.~5. The other 

Cleveland shons, operating on the tailoring system and under union control, show costs varying from $4.40 to $4.70. The non-union sectional 

shop in Scr anton, Pa., shows a cost of $3.85 which is very close to the 

lowest sectional non-union shop in Cleveland. This shop would show 

a considerably lower cost if its cutting cost of $1.13~ whi~ is the 

highest of any of the shops in this group, did not provide for a knitted fabric, (which is more difficult to handle on a cutting table ) , 

and for an interlining (used to keep the knitted fabric from stretehing,) 

which is cut separately. The two shops in St. Louis, both operating 

on t he tailoring system, show a higher cost of $4.07 and $4.14 which 

compares well with the tailoring shop in Chicago, showing a cost of 

$4.15. 

The individual direct labor costs in this grade check closely with 

the run of shop direct labor costs in Column 14. In shops #42080, 

42210 and 42190 in Cleveland, the variations are only 11¢, 21¢ and 6¢ 

respec t ively. In Cleveland shop #42120 the difference between the 

run-of-shop dire ct labor cost of $5.26 and the individual garment direct labor cost of $4.40 is accounted for by the fact that the average 

s e lling price of the garments made in that shop is $19.70 as against 

$16.75 for the individual garment. The wide divergence between the 

run-of-shop cost of $6.43 and the individual garment cost of $4.07 for 

the second St. Louis shop is in part explained by the higher average 

selling price of the garment~ manufactured in that shop , viz., $21.91 

as against the $16.75 price of the individual garment. 

Grade 4 Coats 

Only one shou located in New York City anpears under that grade 

and its total direct labor cost of $4.40 falls within the range of 

costs of the shops in the 3-4 grade. 

Grade 4-5 Coats 

This grade is represented by two Philadelphia shop.s whos e total 

direct labor cost for the individual garment is $4 . 96 and $5.44 respectively. The $4.96 cost compares very closely with the $5.06 runof-shop cost, while there is a greater diver gence between the $5.44 

individual cost and the $6.22 run of shan costs, although this diverge nce is not very great when the average selling price of $23.30 for 

the garments made in that shop is compared with the selling price of 

$16.75 for the individual garment. 

CUNCLUSIUN 

Summing up the cost study of the individual garment, it may be 

said that Baltimore leads in low cost for garments of the first and 

second grade represented by the price range s of $6.75 to $10.75; that 

9821 
. . . 

I .. 

•I ; t 

• J 

., 

•' 

. ~, ', .. 

l .. 

.. 
Kansas City i s a close second i n +'1e sa!:'1c p rice r ange ; that in Grade 3, 

repres ented chi8flv ·by th..c u.l.·:lcc "l:a:L ~-;t. Jf $1 1).75 to $12.75, all the 

shop s be in5 operatoci on t!1c 'n1 ..•. ~~.s s_,;s t en , Ch icag o is in the lead, 

followed closel ;)• :·y :L )'; ~nb3.1.c::.. c-.::1-i ~ru ·, t r9~c .. rd.: e ss of price range, the 

secti on sho9s \'ll1ich ".'>~G c,OSLi.. !:'1:-~:la _,cmei.! t L:rn<l ~u s how lower costs than 

tailoring ~J s i rrosp0c t ivo of t he c ity a.n1 n:tae i n ·rh ich they are located. 

The Commission is not unmi ndfu1. of the f a c t. t h3.t a comparatively 

limited number of sh01JS , n a:r t i ll lal~ly for tho no ·l 0p oli tan district of 

New Yorlc, has bee n ~s en te d in ttis. c.os'C study. l1his is due to the 

time limitations impos e d upo~ the Commission. 

However, in ~iew of the close a 5Teement of the results of the two 

independent cost studies ·COnd.u cted by the Conmission, it believes that 

amplification of the field of s tudy would. only have added to the volume 

of the data without affecting the net results. 

A study of New York's p roduction costs is incomplete without including costs for New Jersey contract. shops wor~cing for New York jobbers. An effort was ma de t o a scertai n these costs tut it proved impos-

·sible chiefly b e ca.usr; a t t he ime of the investi6ation most of the shops 

were closed becau s e of lac:~ of work , while the sh ops visited' had not 

worked on the cca t rep resent ed by the specific s ample, or worked by the 

week. 

A statement with rege,rci to lack of enforcement of the wage provisions of the code in the Stat e of New Jersey and its effect on costs 

will be .found on Page 90 of Section 7. 

9821 
' ·1 - ~·-

I t ,-,ps ren erEmtFd t o the C01:unission by t l e r.1n.nufPc ture r s f rom 

n r a cticRl ly Pll of t~e -estrr n mAr kets , rn~ from the s~tellite to ~ns 

in the Eac: t e rn Dr ec. , t htl t the sun"?ly of l Ab or, e nec i Rl l y of skilled 

l abor , •vFts inad..e ou.c te . It wAs eue::=~ tedl y < sse r ted by emn l oye r s t h<'. t they 1 ere un b l e , uflrticulr:rly At tl1e neal · of t~1e se::tson , to seeur e Hn E~0 eauf1 te su.,..,ryl:· of e .:nerienc erl l ....,·oor . . In r E'uly t o this contention it '"'as 

u r ged by r e H efent,. tive ~ of t:1e T nion thn t insof.8 r R.s shons so loca teCI. 

ere sect io nA li ze~ . l Dbor nossessed of the k ind of skill inv olved in the 

ab ility to 111?ke a comn l e te g.q rmen t, no lonse r 1.as r eoui site , <'~ nd t bat 

wha. t as r enui r ed was a tyne of l a bor more or le s . skilled in t he sen e 

t hc=t t it is Pble t o 1"\T Or:.< rith ~mee d uoon r e l a tively simnle C~nd sneci? li zed 

ope r Ations i n the mnkin:~~ of a ga rment. The sur.mly of such l "l bor, the 

Union men cont endcel , wDs eve r ywhe re .'=' bunda nt -- even super-abundan t . 

The ep re ent~. tiv s of the Uni on contended, furthe r mo r e , thA.t there ~~Tere 

a t hc=t nd fo't' the staffi ng of t a iloring sho,')s ac.eoua.te sunnlies of l nbor 

skilled in t he a1~ing of c omn l e te gRrments . This, they insi s t ed , was 

pa rticula rly true of the o l d , long - es t ablished coP. t 8 nd suit c ent e rc: in 

New York , Josten , Philarle lDhin , 3 a ltimore, Chic ~g o, Cleveland a no St. 

Lou is, a nd even in t he tra nsnla nted t a iloring ma r ket in Los Ange les. 

Any slortage s of cr::tft-sk illed l nbor thF~ t emnloyers may have found in 

the newer m2rke ts in ~qnsas City, Sa n Fr a ncisco , PortlRnd a nd Sea.ttle, 

were due, the Union men c ont e nd.ed , to the f a ct t h8 t the skilled craftsmen ha d gone into other ino.ustries becF.J.use the emoloyers in the c oat 

a nd suit inoustry in thes e c en ters ~auld not nay them the ~a~es of fullfledged craftsmen . 

It is im')Ortan t to note t ha t t he kind of l c=tb or reauired in t he coa t 

and suit indus try turns v e ry l a r g ely unon the system of nroduction follo ed 

in the work-shory . The d..evelonment of the scc tion<'~l zed shan , l a r gely 

irrespective of its loc<' tion , re sults in making a va ila ble to the emuloyer a tyoe of l cbor w:1i ch ould be quite in denuate fo r a n establishment 

wh ich oryer!.:l tes on t h e tr. ilori ng b?sis. The l c:> ttr r tyPe of shon reauires 

E~ bor eauiryn ed with t he ab ility t o me.ke a. corrrolete g?.rr.lent . It reauires , 

in other words , cra ft skill of the tradition" l s ort. To the extent, 

t he r efore, tha t the ir~s in Rny ma rke t a re secti ona li zed , ith theresult t ha t e<:.ch wo rker m, kes only a very s:nal l p[1 r t of the ga.rG'lent, it 

be comes much less imoe r a tive, if not entirely unnecessP. r y , to secu re 

h i ghl y ski l led craftsmen for the 111 ork. 1l'lw t is needed , is a. tyne of l a bor, 

vrhe t he r it be ca lled sk illed or semi s~ ed , hich has the a bility t o 

De rf orm !'\ nPrticulr. r ope r a tion a cc ording to inc: truction , CJ nc1 ith t he reou i site ~meed . 

In t he ligh t of these considera tions, it ' auld seem not unfa ir to 

co ns i 0e r t ha t the n re sence in a ny mar ket of considerable numbers of 

orkPr s in other need le tra des would nrovide r n Rnnronria t e suunly Qf 

l Pbor , a t lea st fo r the sectionA li zed sh o 1. In Tab le R 14a, we u re sen t 

s t a tistics which should f c> cili t a te the formul c:i. tion of c onclusions on this 

subject . The fi gu ~" s i ndicAt e , fo r ea ch 1~1a ke t n r ec , the total number of 

needle or ke r s r eTJo rted by t he Fe ero l Pory ~ tion Census , toge t he r with 

t he number of orker s i n t he Co..: t ::tnd Suit I nr1 us t r y, A.s reported. for ~~a rch, 

1934, in t he enforcement office rs' reno t s t o the Coe t C~nd Suit Code 

9821 
Autho ity. The fi.:;u "'~ in t l'e firrt rol 'u·.m, r f"nrese"'lti'l"lg the nu..'Tiber 

of needle ,,..o rl-er "' in t1 e " ev erR.J. <' .'eHs , -i_ncl ud e workers in the followi ng inrlustries: 

Co'\ t f\ ·tn::1 ~'J.i~·s 

Ov .. ? •'c. :.. \ s 

f'bi ..,.t .;. coll· rs r~nr~ cn::.'fs 

Ie L ~ h< ts 

tn 01. '.?s 

rl'a.i. lorc::: 

Dr!:;:--~ ~ke rs ~nd 

Ct~1e r clo thing . 

In t he t l:iro colur.m , are .g VP.~ t:1e r D tios of neec1 l e worke rs to coa t 

<'lnd suit \!I! Or}{'e r '> . Tr ..P:-;e r ati os , indicc? t ing the YfJ.doer of ne edle worke r s 

in the different loca lities to one wu r ke r in t he Coa t anc'l Suit industry, 

~Tumbers of Need l e Vo rke;·s · n Vfl >'ious }_~; r l{'e t Area s Comn? rec with 

NumbPrs of Wo rkers i n the Cor-' t .:-1 nd Suit I n0us try~ 

New York City 

N. Y. State (Exc l. 

N. Y. ~ ty) 

Connecticut 

N. J. (Excl. ~~den) 

J oston 

Phil arl el~hi ~ & CPmd en . 

Baltimore 

ClevelElnd 

Ch~c go 

Kansas City 

St. Louis 

Los Angeles 

San Fra ncisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

~ot l ~orkers 

~Teerl -~ e Co? t c.: Suit 

"o~t (* Indus tri( ***) 

194 , Bos 

3SS ) 

10. ~ ~r)) .J : .L bt', 

4-=,15:::>) 

11,'302 

. 19,672 

11,618 

40,416 

4,294 

11,181 

14 , 945 

6 ,976' 

2 ,462 

2,937 

4:2 , 604:(**) 

2 ,'342 

550 

l, 254( **Y 

1,024 

2 , lL.i:l 

l 1 ~ 86 

505 

L_t 74 

1,~72 

580 

411 

175 

53 ,£~20 

. " 

1-' o. of .:.Te edle 11 o~'ke:c s to 

C"11e Wo:rke r in 

Cor t & Suit 

I no us try 

54.: . 0 

20 . 4 

29 .8 

19.2 

5.4 

~91. l 

8. 5 

23.6 

ll. 8 

12.0 

6.0 

16.8 

(*) From bi~ ~-l4b feedle ~orkers include t he following industri6s : 

Coa t a nd Suit, Shirts , Col·l :=trs & Cu..ffS, Overa ll, Cors ets, 

Fetlt Ha t e:: , Gloves, Other Clothing , Tailors, Dress ~~kers. 

(**) PE~rtly EstimFi ted. 

(***)Workers in MRrch 19Z4 . 

9821 
- 36-

P"~- s.:orvr-> P."' a l'C'J i1 T1E' s~. e o Le ·v1.il ·ulo l-,·J or fUT)' li s _n thP Clf'-

fel'e t l:.n·':r~ts . I •i 11 be obr-ervc::d t :1"' t t \ e r-.tios r··m ,P fro:" "'OO.l 

54 ne edle ~orkers to one coat a.nd suit "orker in un-Stn.te re~r Yorlr, 

C'lnnec icu and ~ Jers e , do111 to a . inimum ratio of abou 5 to in 

eT7 York City and in Cleveland, Ohio . It i 1 be s een, the r efo r e, that 

in all of the !'lar<:e to:: except Cleveland, the ratios of ~orkers in other 

needle industries to vrorke rs in the Cort and Suit industry, are higher 

than in e~ York. In eve ry market exceut Cleveland, Portland and Kansas 

City, they are very much hi~h r. It should be notec, howev€r, that the 

highest ratio of all is thAt for the terri tory surroundins New York Cit . . 

The market totals of Table H-14a are broken dol"!l some-what in Table 

H-14b , the .hole of which has bean assePlbled fro the Federal Census of 

Population for 1930, referenc es to which are attached to the table. 

The fiP.;Ures reporting the number and Dercent of the needle orl-::E:: rs 

in the several markets . ho '1'ere unemployed on April 1st, 1930 , are sugges ive. April 1st is in the busy season of the Coat and Suit indu3tr,r. 

The number of unem~loyed needl e ~orkers on ADril 1, 1934, prob~blyqas 

not less than it was in J930. At any rate, it seems highly proba~ 

th?t in Auril last there we:e in many of the coat and suit m~rkets large 

numbers of ue rsons, ~ith expe ri en ce in the needle trade, amon~ thee 

p r esumably many male tailors, female dressmakers and male ana. female 

clothing oneratives. 

It is significant, in view of the tyne of ~bor emnloyed in sectionark shops , that more than half of the clothing operPtives are ~omen . 

The fi gures for 11 Tailors 11 , of course, prob~blv renresent 1J~ le "ork:ers 

al rrost entirely. SoGle ide~ of the available sut)T)lies of labor i1 classified ae;e grou:os is e; iven for each market e.rea in TRble F-14c ("' , the 

second part of ~hich sho~s the per cent distribution of eqch ma ~et suuuly . 

A ord may be said of the relati6n ·"' of labor suuuly to secti0na.1 i7ation of the m~rket. It has b een su~e;ested tha t to the extent that an 

ma rket is considerably sectionalized, it h?s the less e;round for complaint of inadequate labor sunnly, so long as there are resi ent in that 

market consider::>ble num-bers of men, and esneciallv, T"'Ol11en ~orkers attached 

to other needle trades, Refe rence to Table H-14a sho~Ys thAt IPnsas 

City, sectionalized 93~, has at hand eight needle '~"Orkers to ev,.,'ry coat 

and suit worker in the P1ar~et, a ratio slightly in e::-:cess of thPt for 

e"' York City, which is only ~ sectionali7eEl.; that St. Louis, 64~ sectionali~ed , has at hand t~enty-four needle wo rkers to each coat and· suit 

l'orke r; th:::>t .Cleveland, 8~ sectionalized, ha.s a.t hand five needle trade 

'"Orl:cc r s to each coat e.:1d suit Porker, and that Bnlti ore, 051 sectionalized, has at hand ninet een needle ~orkers to each coat and suit \'!O r 1-: er . 

In the rk ets which are primarily on the teilorine; basis, the r a.tios 

of ne edle wo r kers to coat and suit worker s a r e as follo~s : Bost 20 to 1, 

Philadelnhia 30 to 1, Chicago , 34 to 1, San Francisco and Los Angeles, 

12 to 1 and Seattle, 17 to 1. 

( * ) See auDend_ix. 

9821 
-37-

Table H 14b 

Number of Needle Workers In Various Market Areas, April t, 19W. 

City or State 

1 

New York City .... .......... .... . New York (exc. N. Y. C.) .... .. Connecticut .. .. . .............. .•..• New Jersey (exc. Camden) .... · .. Boston ...........•........ , . ..••..• Springfield .... . •.... ..........•... Worcester ............. . .. ...•..•.. Philadelphia and Camden .....•..• Scranton .... .. .. .. ....... ... .....• Baltimore ...••............•....•.• Cleveland ...................•...•.• Cincinnati .......... .. ......•..•..• Toledo ...................•.......•• Chicago ......................••..• Minneapolis and St. Paul .......••• Kansas City, Mo .................. . St. Louis .... .... ............••..•. Los Angeles .....•..•..•.....•..•.. Sa.n Francisco .......•..••...•••... Portland . .•.... ..........•..•..•.•• Seattle ........................... . 

Dressmakers Total 

Clothing Operatives (.Not in Needle 

Male Female Total Tailors Factory) Workers 

2 

M,t77 

9, 782 

6,893 

7,272 

1,526 

185 

&,821 

3',ooo 1,~7 

.988 

163 

6,721 

585 

265 

1,645 

1.~ 

&82 

132 

156 

3 1&,:,~) 

28,275 

8.328 

23,723 

•• 265 

1.()62 

13,596 

9,033 

5,730 

2,388 

85() 

14,128 

3,.215 

2,468 

6,24.1 

6,598 

2,211 

873 

1,327 

141• ,202 

38,057 

221 

30 ~ 

5,731 

700t 

1,237 

22,417 

700t 

12,092 

7,197 

3,376 

1,013 

26,849 

3,800 

2,733 

7,886 

7,867 

2,793 

1,005 

1,483 

5 

41,824. 

ll,iOO 

2,3Tl 

8,188 

3,944 

250t 

350t 

11,402 

20&t 

5,651 

3,205 

2,579 

600t 

14,739 

1;437 

705t 

1,718 

3,311 

2,375 

659t 

715 

6 

11.843 

8,389 

1,564t 

4,969 

1,527 

160t 

240t 

3,546 

130t 

1,929t 

1,216 

7001' 

320t 

4,-868 

1,722 

856 

1,577 

3,767 

1,808 

798t 

739t 

7 .194 869 

58:356 

19,162 

~.152 

11,202 

1,160t 

1,827 

37,366 

-l,OSOt 

19,672 

11,618 

t,655 

1,933 

40,~6 

6,961 

4,294 

11,181. . 14,945 

"6,976 

2,462 

2,937 

Total above citk!s . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.28,8M 117,689 52,658 499,201 

•Based on l!. S. Ce~sus of Po.pulation, 1930, Vol. II Unemployment Table 5. tEstlmated. 

9821 

Unemployed 

Operatives 

Number % 

8 9 

18,64.2 13 

3,963 10 

1,774 12 

3,424. 11 

663 11 

75t 

167 13 

2,941 13 

70t 

546 5 

820 11 

'261 8 

91 9 

2,M9 10 

283 7 

1:i3 6 

892 11 

560 7 

1M 1) 

130 13 

60 4 

37,709 11 

-38-

It rnay very -·ell b ~ true that the manufacturers, esuecially those 

running secti0n work-shops , tend to ove rstre e thP necessity for cra t 

skiJ 1 i'l- the local l~bor suuul;r on '"hich they deuend. For the iection 

shop c ertainly it is not vital to staff the shop ~ith tailors.l I t 

would seem that t he rnost that the p ropri eto r of sue~ a shop could, i n 

reason, ask is for an adequate supnly of comnetent wo k~ s with exne r ience in one o. the related needl e tr~des . Indeed, r-r. "Sllis , of 

the Inde-oendent Cloak Comnany, Inc. of New Britain, Conn., snealdn.e; 

at the Ne,~ York hearings before this Commission, stC'I.t ed th~t his company was p r epar ed to t ake 11 f emale help ~: ith no experience, usUC'I.lly fro·"'1 

the metal industries, the hc:> rdvrar e industri e s . . . 11 and 11 throue.-h constant ter-ching Pnd effort 11 to t ec-tch these worke rs 2I)e sinfSJ.e onerPtion 

and devel on 8dequate nroductivity in a f ew months.~ 

!/ ~ve n the predor.1i nan tl y tai 1 oring marl:ets, nos tort, :Philadelnhi<'l, 

Chica,e;o , Los Angeles, Port1and and SeAttle, cAn:1ot fairl·r be said 

to be ~holly dependent unon unskilled or semis il1e(l l Ab or. In ed-

' dition to l a r ge numbe rs of dressma~ers nd clothing worke rs shoMTI by 

the Census stAt istics to be r esident in tho e cities, there are , or 

at any r ate , ~ere in 1930 , thousand s of tailors r esident in them . 

?J Tr, nscript of he::trings in He~"'"' York, June 27, 19:S4 at n. 9. 

9821 

FJGURE A 

\\ HAC t; >'iDIH~ H Cll'" '\\ UHKt:RS A:\0 Tllt:IH E \H:\1:\t;!-

8) )IAJIKET \:'Ill BY L HU'T 

Prepared trOD peyrollo f1led with the COAT AIID SUIT CODE AUTPO!!ITY 

NUM&R Of' WOI'IIE:IU TOTAL EARNINGS 

BY CRAI'T BY MARKET OR AREA 8Y MARIIU OR AR[A I Y CRAFT 

I 

f 

OP'!M.'I'OD !11.&1 

ntJ::ar:M .,,.., •• 

P\!'.SRU t6t,tcM ... 

rt'DIIIM ll,~.a 

PR11SDS 11e 

6, 41 U.IJ"j 

TOUL 'll(ltrtlt.S 50, 1" ~ 1 .O.QC 

nnnra hlt,w.w 

........ . .. 
• 
- 40-

SECTION IV. 

WAGE STATISTICS 

A. EARN!NGS OF EMPLOYEES 

The wide margins of difference between t he lev el s of earnings of 

the workers in the coa t and suit industry in the various market are as, 

as well as between major crafts are reve a led in the figures of Table B-1, 

which shows the aver age hourly earnings in each market of cutt ers, 

operators , finishers, and pressers, of the fo ur cr afts combined and for 

all employees on payrolls (i.e., including floor help and other nonmanufacturing workers.) All of t ne figures which are broken down by 

craft are based upon payroll returns covering all market areas, for the 

week ended March 9, 1934. (* ) The figures in the last three columns are 

bas ed upon a payroll analysis of the out-of-town markets for the same 

week . Examination of the totals shows that the hourly earnings of 

wo rkers in the Western area are considerably lower than the earnings of 

those either in the Eastern area or New York City. Except for Chicago 

and Los Angeles, the earnings of workers in the Western area appear to 

be on a level, roughly 25% lower than the earnings of their fellowworkers in the Eastern area, and some 40~ lower than the earnings of 

New York City workers. Earnings in Boston and Fhiladelphia wh ich, 

apart from the New York market area (**) make up the Eastern area, are 

on a level intermediate between Western area earnings and those of New 

York City. 

As noted, among the cities in the Western area, Chicago and Los 

Angeles appear to provide their workers with earnings more nearly 

approaching those received in Boston and Philadelphia. No data are at 

hand to show the earnings of the several crafts in the suburban areas 

adjacent to Boston and Chicago. However, general averages are given for 

these areas for all classes of employees combined, and sub-divided only 

as to sex. They indicate in striking fashion the enormous differences 

in earnings that exist between metropolitan centers and the outlying 

districts surrounding them. Thus the average hourly earnings of coat 

and suit employees in the Chicago suburbs were 73¢ an hour, while in 

Chicago proper they were $1.05 an hour. The corresponding figures for 

Boston are: Boston suburbs 84¢ an hour; Boston proper $1.03 per hour. 

Further illustration of the relatively low earnings in suburban as compared with urban areas is found in the earnings figures derived from a 

(*) Except that the figures for the New York market area in the second 

and third lines are for the eight-week period from Feb. 5 to 

March 31, 1934. 

(**) New York City, up-State New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, 

except that the few shops in southern New Jersey, including one 

large shop in Camden, are not included. 

9821 

-41.-

TABLE B-1 

COMPARATIVE TABLE ~OWING AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS 

by MARKETS and MAJOR CRAFTS y' 

(Except where otherwise noted, figures are based on payroll - week ended Mar. 9, 1934) 

~ew York City 1.4S 

-~pstate N.Y., N.J. 

( and Conn. 1.3S 

Boston 1.27 

Boston Suburbs 

Philadelphia 

Baltimore 

Cleveland 

Chicago 

Chicago Suburbs 

St. Louis 

Kansas City 

Los Angeles 

Sen Francisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

1.50 

1.14 

1.21 

1.27 

1.00 

1.00 

1.20 

1.16 

1.16 

.90 

1.25 

1.1S 

.91 

.so 

.so 

1.09 

.S5 

.s5 

.ss 

.79 

.Sl 

.Sl 

.66 

.65 

.79 

.63 

.63 

.66 

.60 

.60 

.60 

1.10 

1.34 i 1.11 1.05 

-·· ---~·- ·---·-·----··- 1.13 I .90 • .S5 

1.13 .92 .75 

1.2S .9S 

1.01 .so .74 

.so .74 

1.10 .96 .94 

1.03 .S2 .s3 

1.03 .S2 .S3 

1.03 .S2 .S3 

i - 1.03 i 1.14 .77 

I 

.S4 11.06 .63 

' 1.06 ' 1.23 .7S 

.S5 1.07 .71 

.86 1.11 .96 

1.05 1.1S .74 

.73 .97 .60 

.S4 1.13 .60 

.66 .S6 .61 

.94 1.13 . 67 

.S9 1.11 .70 

.79 1.07 .61 

.75 . 1.37 441 

----------------------· ---- ----- -- --- ------- --- -------------

9821. 

Fram Table r -12a, except where noted. 

From payroll analys is of all market areas - eiGht weeks 2/5 - 3/31/34. 

From payroll analysis of out-of-town roo.rkets - week ended 3/9/34 

Data base-l on 70 section-\vork shops of which 36 are in New York City)for 

period 2/5 - 3/31/34. 

Based upon analysis of am ple of 598 shops. 

special examination of 78 section-work shops in New York City and its 

out l~ ing nrea. Tbe dat:=~ DT'Jienr in the second nnd third lines of the 

t able. Here the earni nt;s in t l1 e suburban areas run from 10 to 25~ lower 

than in the central urban area. 

In the last two columns t here iG a break-down by sex of the earnings figures for all of the markets except New York. There appero·s here, 

for each of the markets shown, a wide difference between the earnings 

of male and female employees. The margin of difference seems to be 

wider in the Western markets and re~ches a maximum in t ne Seattle market, 

where the earnings of women employees ar e less th8n one-third of those 

received by male workers. 

As is to be expect ed as a resu lt of the reg ional differentials set 

up by the Code, it ap ~r s that, f or each of the four m3jor crafts, earnings are highest of all in New York City, those in the 3astern area somewhat lower, while earnings in the West, with an occasional exception, are 

markedly lower even than those in the Er~st rn area outside of New York. 

These inter-rela tions amo ng t he 11arke ts ar e brought out graphicall;.r 

and on a somewhat different basis in Figure A v•h i~ h shows, by market or 

area, the absolute and rela tive distribution of the number of workers and 

their aggregate earnings among the severa l market are~s. and, within 

each area, by major craft. It shows, apart from the very obvious general 

predominance of the New York mArket, thRt New York's wage bill in the 

industry is not distributed in close proportion to the distribution of 

workers, but that New York workers get proportionately more, and workers 

in the Western, and other parts of the Eastern, ma rkets get proportionately less of the total wage payments maoe by the industry. Thus, New 

York workers, constituting 82% of t he work-force of the industry, get 

87~ of the w?ges, while Western area workers, (*) making up 13c;~ of the 

industry, get 97b of the earning s; Br~ ltimore workers constituting 2~ of 

the personnel of the industry get only 1. c:'~ of the {ndustr~,, s wage bi 11 

and Eastern area workers, (**) making up 3~ of the indu stry 's personnel, 

get only 2. 3~ of the industr~,r 1 s wPJge bi 11. 

The rensons for the wide regional differences which have been discussed are traceable to a number of causes, the more import r. nt of which 

are: (1) the unorganized character of the labor supply in outlying areas; 

(2) the relatively lower skill (in the sense of craft skill in making a 

whole garment but not necessarily in terms of productive ability) of the 

available workers in those areas; (3) the more general tendency in such 

areas to resort to the sectionalized method of operation, between two and 

three times as large a proportion of the Western as of the Eastern shops 

being sectionalized; (4) the much higher proportions of female employees 

in the suburban and Western areas; and finally, (5) the existence of 

Code differentials. 

(*) Excluding workers in tne Baltimore m3rket. 

(**) Excluding workers in the New York market. 

9821 

There is set out in Fi ~res E- 7 to E-12, inclusive , a s eries of 

gra_hic comparisons of the aveYage hourly earnings of cutters, ~a le 

~ r aters , f emn le operators, ~a le finish ers, e~ale finisners. nnd 

ress rs, in t ai lor and section shops, r esnectively. They are bnsed 

upon the dat a of appendix t nbles E-7 to E-12 , i nc l usi ve . A ~i lar 

comJ:arison of t he earnings of mo le oper a tors nnd fe~ le ope r ntors in 

11 insi de 11 <mfl 11 outside 11 shops, r espec tive ly, is shown in Fi?::Ures -;_3 nnd 

E-4, drawn from the figures of a;:mendix t ab les E-~ and E-4. FiM'lll?, 

an inter-market comparison of je earnings of ope rptors ann finishers, 

by sex, is given in Fig-u.res -1 a and 3-13b wh ich are drawn from the 

data of appendix table H-13. It sho J.ld b e noted thnt, as explained in 

the footnotes t o the t abl e s, t !1e craft cl ass ific tions here are inclusive and embrace the auxili ar y cu tting, fi nish ing , operating and 

pressing groups as well as the full-fledged crnftsmen. 

9821 

FIGURE E-7 

COMPARISON OF AVERAGE _HOURLY EARNINGS OF KALE CUTTERS IN TAILOR AND SECTION SHOPS BY MARKETS 

NUM8tR ~ 

[MrLOYft.J' 

(FOR WEEK BEGIIDIING MARCH 6, AND ENDING MARCH 9, 1934) 

l..fJ 

• Number ot workers eetimated on the basis or 381. actually studied. 

LEGEND 

I I TAllO~ 

~SECTION 

• 

.,. •.. 

~ I i I i I I I 

• 

_, 

·- M•lltON1. li!l 

~ 

~ ID 

• ., 

LJj 

~~ 

Jf ~ 

: o 

~ ... 

.f· 

/fJ ·. ' 

,., i 

. 

• BOJTON a § ~ 

.eof lsosTDN .SV/Jl. t 6 Ill ~ 

i·. ii 

Iii C/) 

-qPHIL~Dt'LPHIA I li 0-l ~ 

., . ! ~ 

·r E 

g ~ 

!. l Cll 

I t . ... '

111 I IBALTIMOR! I & 

.. 

: 

&. c.e I « JTly . . ~ . ~~EVEL~ND I I~ ~ 

l ~#y • 

t s I ~ · CHICA60 

I ., lo4 

.... • · 

'HI&A80 JUBS. .... ·

...., 

I ~ 

~ C/) 

t=.1 

(") 

~o~ ~ 

J' 1-4 

LOJ ANGELES .... 0 ~ 

ltH[ r.w: FRANCI.Scoj 

Cfl 

I~ a: 0 

~ 

:N q PORTL·AND l 1\ ~ · ~ ttl 

~~~ '"< 

II I I JEATTL~ ~ a § ~ ~ 

en 

·. 

.igt- ' 
-------~- . 
te86 

~~ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ n ,.... Ill i\, ~ ~ 0.. ~ ~ ~ 0 

() "' ....... ~ ~ ~ .... td ~ ~I C) <:> <:) <:> C) () 

~ () r;; VI 'l\ H 

en 

0 

" ~ 

~ 0 :z: .,.J 

~ f#6t/' :X.. 

" t;j ., 

0 ~ 

., ~ ~ Cl 0 

., 

t· J ~ ._, 

" ....... "1 0 co 

:i3 .. 121 " co t"' ~· >-< s 

.... t<1 

0 

" "' ~ II ::1 g 

~ ~ 

H 

:Y 

<t- ~ .. ~ Q Zl ~ :'!"J en :Y X p ~ 0 ... " :-1 

" '-,:j "' 78 I IPHILAD[LPHJA I I~ ..... 0 ~ OWl OWl .... .... 

~ H 

"" ~ 0 ~. 

"' a g 

~ ~ g 0 tzj ..... (II '1j I ..... Z. I O . ~ lO '< 

"' /09 i': co 

c: a 8 

~ 0. J/!.1 !.3 .... 0 

::0 " 0. t:J . en C9Z ..... 

~ H 13 ,.... 2! <;.: 

60 !i> 

g 8 

> 2,9 U) H . t"' 

1-17 ..... 0 <D ::0 "' ,. ~ 49 a 

en 

244 t'1 

0 

~ 0 

8 

117 H 

0 

~ 

104- ~ en 

N FRANCISCO "' ~ 

0 

~ t't1 '1:1 

en 132 .. ~ .. C\ 

I"\ t:"'1 tD - >-< ::::! ,... 51 

o~\\SSS~~~ ~ SEATTLE ~ 1: ~ ~ ~ ~ 

a 

en 

FIGURE .. 10 

COMPARISON OF AVERAGE HOURLY EARIUKGS OF N.A!JE FinSJIERS Ill TAILOR AND SECTION SHOPS BY l.'.ARKETS 

(FOR WEEX BEr. ImllliC l.IARCII 60 dD DI'OI'IIC 14ARCR 9• 1934) 

~ 

~ 

~ 

..... ;; ., 

'0 ~ 

• Number of workers eotlmated on the baa1e or 38.1- actually etud1ed. 

LEGEND 

I TAILOR 

:;;1%0;;~:;:;~:;:! 5 EC T I ON 

~ ;::: ~ ~ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ ~ 

~ ..... 

~ ~ ~ ~ 

' 

tO 

a 

FIGURE E-11 

COMPARISON OF AVERAGE BOURLY EARlUNGS OF FEMALE FINISHERS IN TAILOlr AND SECnON SHOPS .f~KETS 

I 

Utlr 

'~ 

.84 

.60 

:fd 

Nt1MB£R ~ OF ~ 

C!YtPLOYEI!.'f· 

(FOR WEEK BEr.INIIHIC MARCH 6, AND ENDDIC JIARCH 9, 1934 ) 

.S, 

63 

~ 

~ 

~ 

<\l ~~~~~t~t\~: -..;,. <\1 ") ..... 

• Number or workers eotimated on the bnaia of 3B;. aotu&lly studied. 

1 

LEGEND 

I I TAILOR 

El%7~ 5ECT,ON 

~ 

~ ~~ 

f 

FIGURE E-12 

COMPARISON OF AVERAGE HOURLY EAH.NHJGS OF PRESSERS ('MALE) IN TAILOR AND SBCTICH SHOPS BY 1.:AR.KETS 

<0 

' (FOR ;"lEEK BI:r. INJ/11/C lf.ARCH 6• AJID ENDING MARCH 9• l9J') 

LEGEND 

I I TAILOR 

~SECTION 

~ 

Nftl~••• ., • iW £,..,.._•UE~ ~ 

• Number or workers eot1mated on the basis of 3~; aotually studied. 

I • f 

FIGURE E-~ 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNitJGS OF MALE OPERATORS IN INSIDE AliD OU'J;SIDE SHOPS BY lf.ARKETS 

(FOR WEEK BEGINIIING MARCH 6• AND EJIIDING KARCH 9• 19:54.) 

lEGEND , __ ____..JI h"tOE 

00T510E 

I 

~ 

1.16 

~ ~ ~ ~ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ .2/J 

"""" " 

NuMt5Eif oF ~ l ~ ... "\ 

~ ~ c-. ~ ~ .., c-. 01 It) '(I ..., 0) ..... ... ..... ~ CMPl..OYEES 01\ 

• Number of workere estimated on the basis of :581- actually studied. 

TZ8G 

~ 

:.... :-.... i: i :-.... 

~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ I - ~~I I ~ 0 

c... " 

6.5. 

~ M 

~ 0 

:.: t<:J 

::!:1 

0 

li 

§ 

a' 

(t 

t-1 

.. 

0 

.... 

• >-< 0 

t<:J 

~ 

.. 

;-

.. 

.. 

z . H 

-;:;; z (t 

0 0 

.. :0 (fl 

<T 

i ~ 0 t".. 

~ 

<T 

:... 

(t 

0. 

0 

~ '-=1 

tj 

:1 

f7111LA ..; . !§ 

~ 

<T 

;:r 

i 

(t 

t<:J >zj 

a' 

I H 

,. 

0 0 

.. 

... 

'"'j 

~ 

.. 

t:l 

0 

dt ~ 

.... 

. CA 

~ 

I >-3 

~ r 

I 

0 

::;;l 

,. #.JO, 

r.r; 

0 

I ~ ~ H 

... z 

l< 

I 

H 

.. 

E I 

z 

<T ' 

C/) 

c: 

0. 

Q H 

... 

t:l 

.. ID I ~ 

!"' 

.. I 

i e 

s -- 0 

~ C/) 

H 

t:l 

t<:J 

C/) 

::X: 

0 

~o ~ "0 

C/) 

txl 

>-< 

t 

o · _,..,., ~ 

~ e 2 ::z - Cit 0 C/) s ~ 

S£ATTJ.£ ,., 

-'19-

= 

~ .. 

... 

0 

.., 

:E 

0 

... 

,... 

.. 

... 

" 

.. 

" "" ... 

5 

"" .. 

0. 

0 

:s 

"" ,. 

.. 

a' 

II> 

.. ... 

" 

0 

.... 

{'\ "' 

" () 

:! 

II> 

.... 

... 

'< 

" "" " 0. 

I .... 

(t 

~ 

~f ~ Ct It\ 

Q lJ ~ ~ l!l ~ 8 ~ ~ 0 I I I ' ' I 

\II "'t 

MAN. I BHOIIIX 

28 

~.JAN F.«NCI.SCO~ /91)SS$S~~ 

9-' ~ POHTLAND -- \SSSSSSSSSS\' 

~-

~D~ C) 

... :I rl 

1"'1 

~ .l> z 

)> ~ 0 r 

"" 

'tZ86 

> 

~ 

~ t'l 

.., ::r: 0 0 :::> 

1;1 

"' "' ~ "' M 

~ :> 

... 

~ 

~ 

z 

H 

~ 5 '"'!! 

H 

n 

C/) 

:c 0 e 

."" >-rj 

>-rj fS 

§ H 

z 

(A 

H ~ 

~ C/) 

... ; = (') 

C/) 

n 

~ txl 

::tl to< 

.<D C/) 

... 

<D ~ "' "" ~ 

~ 

a 

C/) I 

/'IUM6~ OF 

£"1PI..O YE: E: S 

FIGURE H-13b 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS OF OPERATORS BY SEX AND MARKETS 

(FOR '1/EEK BEr.IIDilliG IAARGH 6, AJID ENDliiG MJ>..RCH 9, 1934 ) 

,_,., 

IJO 

I.ZJI IZS 

/./7 

• Uumber of workers ect1mntetl on the basis of 38/; actually studied. 

LEGEND 

::;:;:;::;:;::;:1 M A L £ 

~ fEMALt. 

1.16 

1 8 ............ 

~ 

- 54-

WAGE ST.~;.TI STI CS ( Co rj t inued) 

TO CODE ST.rt ill~DS 

The relation between the nve r age hourly enrnings actun ll ~r received 

b~· workers in the various TT'nrke ts and the Code minima and aver ages is 

shoy.•n in the accompr.nying graphs. ( *) The earnin~s dnta set out in 

them are derived from an analysis of payroll re ports for a ll of t he ma r -

ket areas for trte eight-weeks 1 period from Februar~r 5 to !If arch 31, 1934. 

In order to wo rk out a tol ab ~r simpl e and underst r1 ndable tabular 

stAtement of the relations subsistir.g be tween the code minima and averages in t he several mAr ke ts on the one hand nd earnings actuAlly received on t h e other, it has been necessary not only to repo rt earning s 

in the summary f or m of single market averages for each major cr aft; it 

has also been necess ary to construct for each cr a ft a single marke t 

series of code minima and a similar series of code aver ages. Each such 

code mi nimum (or cooe average) is a weighted average of the minima for 

male and fema le workers, respec tive l y , p rescribed by t he code for the 

particular mar ke t and the particul ar craft, the we i ghts used being the 

number of male and fema le workers, respec tively, of that crnft in that 

m;.rket. The fi gures include only the skilled cr aftsmen in each of the 

four categories, the occupations i nc luded and t he ap~ roxima te number of 

workers covered in each being as 

Cutters 

Operators 

Operators 

Finishers 

Finishers 

Pressers under 

Pressers upper 

Pressers machine 

Pressers non-classifiable 

follows: 

male 

11 

female 

male 

fema le 

male 

" II 

Total 

2,983 

18,643 

4,704 

4,827 

8,489 

1,986 

1,729 

1,105 

2.592 

47,058 

----

It is obvious that t n ese figures comprehend the great bulk of the 

54,000 workers who make up the dir ect labor personnel of the coat and 

suit industry. The steps in the derivation of t he weighted minima and 

averages, including the we ights u sed for each cra ft are indicated in 

Table H-12 which sets out in more elaborate form the data of Tabl e H-12a. 

Examination of the latter t able and of the charts bAsed thereon, reveals 

the fact that average hourly earnings in practically every cpse exceed 

the prescribed code minima, and in many inst onces the,.' apr;r oach the 

code averages; in no case do the~· drop a.p ~- ciably below the minima. 

Average hourly earnings of cutters a re in excess of the code minima except for several Western markets whe re they show small deficiencies. 

However, a check of the pnyrolls indicates tha t t hese defici encies are 

more nominal than real, being l argely attributable to f a ilure to distinguish on the payroll reports between full-fledged cutters and tho se less 

(*) 3ased upon the data of Aprend ix Tables H-l2a and H-12. 

9821 

FIGURE H-12-1 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS OF CUTTERS (MALE) IN RELATION TO CODE STANDARDS BY MARKETS 

/.60 

.. 

.60 

.40 

.20 

NuMB£12 oF 

LMPLo Yc E"' 

(FOR THE F:IGHT WEEK PE'I!IOD EliDING tWlCfl 31,193~) 

l60 

150 

"'"----

l27 127 

~---- --- 1.2/ 

---- --- --- ------- L/41 

100 100 

)..... 

....... 

<:} ~ 

~ a: ~ -.I 

:>;. <: ~ ~ ~ II) "" 

~ 

~ C) 

Q) ~ 

~ 

).... 

lU 1-.... 

~ "' C) V) \::5 

~ _.J ~ s V) 

~ ~ C) ~ t-.: l) -.I lU - -J ~ "" -J l: 1--..: Cil <..) \,.) V) ~ 

~ <:) 

- -~ ~ 

- -- • Number of workers e stimated on the baeie of 381- actually studied. 

1.20 /./6 ----

c:) 

II) ~ ll..J 

tj ~ ~ 

~ e: '"' ~ e 

-.....1 ~ 

<:) 

--

LEGEND 

----- CODE MINIMUM 

1./6 

'·" 

~ ll..J 

"" ~ ~ ....... 

~ "' ~ II') 

16() 

NuM4Eit oF 

CHPLOYECJ 

FIGURE H-12-2 

!:VERAGE HOURLY EtJUfiNGS OF OPERATORS IN HELATION TO ·:iEIGCITED CODE STAIIDARDS BY LiARKBTS 

(FOR THE ElG!IT WEEK PERIOD EITDI!IG l:A.RCn 31.1934) 

LEGEND ---WfiGHTf.D COOf AVERA6E 

(31 , ' MINIMUM 

t-------

IZS 

1.18 

1.09 -- 1.0/ IOJ 

t---- -- ------- .9/ --- ~---- ~--- ·"s 8S .~s 

f---- .80 .60 -- -----t----- r-----1---

~---- ---- --- )... 

" C) 

\:) ~ 

~ ~ ~ 

~ ij ~ q 

S:: ~ 

C5 ~ 

~ CI) ~ 

::..... ...., '-lJ ........ ~ ~ 

~ ~ ~ ij ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -J <::) ~ l..J 5 V) ~ 

i=::: ~ ~ 

~ ~ ~ !.( ~ ~ -J ~ ~ ....J ~ ...... 

ti ~ 

~ ~ ~ ....J ~ to..: 

~ V) ~ ....J ~ 

iri 

-

• !lumber ol' worlcere eot111\1lted on the bo.sia of 31r,; 11ctuo.lly studied. 

Nfl/tlf/IER OF 

fl¥~1. 0 YE£3 

FIGURE H-12-3 

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS OF FIJ:ISHERS I~ RELATION TO WEIGHTED CODE STANDARDS BY MARKETS 

(FOR THB EIGHT WEEK ~IOD ENDING MARCH :51 0 1934) 

LEGEND ---Wli6HTED CIJfX AVti£. 

----- • • MMtMUV 

106 -----

---- .81 .&I ~. --- ---------- ~--- ---

••• . u ·'" ~J .c • ~~- ~ .• p_ -- - ~- ..... - --- -

~ 

~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ \:) 

~ \4J 

~ ~ t:: ~ ~ 

~ ....J 'C 

~ ....... -.I 1&..1 

~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ .... 

") ~ 

~ ~ 

it: 

~ l;j 

~ q :>::: ~ 

~ 

..,:;:: :;:::! 

~ ~ ~ 

liD 

-- I a ..... 

• Number or workers eot1mated on the basis of 3B;. &ctually studied. 

co 

CD 

~ 

FIGURE H-12-4 

AVEIUlG E nOURLY EARJJIJWS OF ?RESSERS (rf.ALE) IU Ro;;LATION ?.'0 CODE STANDARDS BY JLA.Rl~TS 

1.751 

~~~ 

I.Z5 

/.()(} 

.7.5 

.2~ 

NUMIJ~Ii' OF 

~MPLDYeEs 

16Z 

~--

~----

:::...... 

K 

~ 

~ 

~ >:: 

:t: 

~ 

t---

/J/ /.J4 

--- ---

~ 

):: 

a... 

-.1 

~ ~ ~ ooq: 

~ ;:::::! 

co ~ 

(FOR THE EIGHT WEEK PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31.1934) 

------ ~---.=,;;.;.;;; 

/./.J 1.~ 

~--- f----1----

L4J 

~ ~ ~ <;:) 

~ ~ \,!) 

~ :s 'oct 

....,J l4J 

"a) 

~ -J 

~ 'J 

~ 

-

1.0/ 

~---

., 

5 

<::) 

....,J 

....,; 

., 

---

1.0/ 

---

)... 

~ 

\3 

~ ~ 

I./() 

---

~ 

~ ~ 

a 

_, 

0 

• ..... 

• Number of workers eotimeted on the basis of 38.1- actually studied. 

LEGEND 

---CODE AV£RA6E. 

-----~-CODE. MINikfUAI 

- ---·-

/OJ /.OJ /.OJ 

--- --·-I---

a 

~ 

~ ~ I&.J 

~ ~ 

~ ~ ~ ...... 4!::: 

~ ~ 

~ "--

Cl') 

01 • 

f 

-59-

skilled . Average hourly earnings of operators f a iled to exceed the minima 

in only one market (S t. Louis) and there they drop ed below by only . 

Average hourly enrnings of operators equaled t he code average in Cl eveland; in six mar kets t hey c lose l y ap roached the code 11 ave rages'', F.J nd 

in only five of the twelve markets, viz., Kan sas City, St. Louis, San 

Francisco , Portland and Seattle, wa s the difference between the eF.Jrnings 

for "workers of aver age skill" as set forth in the code ;:~ nd the Fl ctual 

average hourly earnings mo re than 15%. 

Actual average hourly earnings of finishers were at or above the 

code minima in all but three cities; San Francisco, Fortland and Seattle, 

where they f ell below by slight mar gins. They fell belo w averages in 

every one of the ~arkets, the amount of the difference with one excep tion, 

being ap reciably greater in the Eastern and Western area markets than in 

New York. 

Hourly earnings of pressers r anged above the m1n1ma in every market, 

Flnd in New York City and Chicago they even exceeded the prescribed averages; in Chicago by about ~ and in New York City by about ab. In all of 

the other markets, the average earnings of pressers were below the code 

aver ages; in the Er stern area by small margins, and in the West by margins 

of from 13~ to 20~. 

The proportions of workers whose earni ngs (l) reFlched or exceeded 

the average, (2) were betwe en the average and the minimum and (3) dropped 

below the minimum are shown in Table H lOa which sets out this information 

for eaoh craft, by market area.(*) Thus, in the ca s e of cutters (**) 

95~ of those in New York City, 83; of those in the E;:~stern area outside 

of New York City, 60~ of those in Baltimore and 86~ of those in the 

Western area exclusive of Br-1itimore received earnin~s above the code 

minima for the week ended ~arch 9, 1934. (***) 

Of the male operators in New York City, 52.8~ reP.eived earnings at 

or above the average, 42.81o between the minimum and the average, and only 

4.4~ below the minimum. In the Eastern area 36.3~ of these male operators 

received earnings at or above the average, 57.6% earnings between the 

minimum and the average, and only 6% made less than the minimum; in Baltimore, 58.8~ were at or above the average, 40.8% between the minimum and 

the average, and 5.4~ below the minimum; in the Western area, 41.1~ were 

(*) The figures are drawn from the much more det a iled portrayal in Table 

H 10 which shows the individual markets and shows the absolute numbers from 

which the percentages are derived. The percentages in Table H lOa which 

are marked b~,.. asterisks are those bnsed upon groups of workers numbering 

less than 50. 

(**) Cutters are week-workers and no 11 averages 11 a.re set for them in the 

Code. 

(***) As a matter of fact the actual situation is probably even better. 

Cf. discussion of cutters' earnings on page S4 above, and note 1 to 

Table H-10 in the appendix. 

9821 

I 

Below 

Code 

TRADE SEX Minimum 

CUTTERS Male 5,lx 

" Semi-skilled " - " Canvas " - " Apprentices " - • Cloth & Lining Pilers " - " Pilers " -

OPERATORS Male 4.4 It Female 22.6 

" Semi-skilled " - " Apprentice Male - " " Female - " Skirt Male 8.0x 

• " Female 32.0x 

FHHSID:RS Male 9.0 

" Female 7.5 

" He lpers Male 4.lx 

" " Female 9.4 

" Button Sewers " - " Apprentice Male - " " Female - " Skirt Basters Male - " • " Female - Plll>SSERS 

Under Male 8,3x 

" Part " - " Upper " 2.9x 

" Apprentice " - " Waohine " 16.3 

" Non-classifiable " 2,7x 

" Lining I ronera Female - It Skirt Under Male 88.9x 

TABLE B-10& 

SHOWING PERCENTAGES OF MANUFACTURING EMPLOYEES WHOSE EARNINGS FOR 

THE WEEK ENDED l!A.RCB 9• 19M• 1fERE (1) BELOW THE CODE MlliiWIJ)(J 

(2) AT OR ABOVE THE MIND!Ull. BUT BELOW 'l'HB CODB "AVERAGE" AliD 

~S) ll OR ABOVE '1'HB CODE "AVERJ.GB". 

(Baaed on Payroll Analyaia of all Market Areas.) 

New York Ci:!:;l 

Code 

Minimum 

and above 

94.9 

-

-

-

-

-

42.8 

71.3 

-

-

- 68.0x 

68.0x 

53.5 

70.0 

56.5 

62.8 

-

-

- 66.7x 

-

2e.o 

- 23.0 

- 23. 0 

24.7 

- ll.lx 

. Eastern Area Baltimore 

Code Below Code Code Below Code 

Average Code lo!illilnUIJI Average Code Minimum 

and above Minimum and above and above llinimum and above 

-

-

-

, -

-

-

62.8 

6.1 

-

-

-

24,0x 

0 

37,5 

22.5 

39.4x 

27.8 

-

-

- 33,3x 

lOO.Ox 

63.7 

- 74.1 

- 60.7 

72.6 

-

0 

17,5x 82.6 - 40,0x so.o 

- - - lOO,Ox - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6.1 57.6 36,3 6,4x 40.8 

13.5 85.7 . 8x •69.8 29.5 

- - - ll.5x 34.7x 

- - - - lOO,Ox 

- - - - lOO.ox 

44,4x 44.4x ll.2x - 20.ox 

38.6x 61,5x - 71.4x 26.0x 

26.7x 56.0 17.3x so.ox so.ox 26.6 62.8 lO.Sx 24,4x 51.2x 

ll.Sx 74.4x l4.0x 50.0x 35.7x 

9.6x 84.5 5,9x ll.lx 76.5 

- - - 5.3x 94,7x 

- - - 62.5x 37 .6x 

- - - - lOO.Ox 

20.0x 20.0x so.ox - - 23. 0x 38,5x 38,5x - -

5.0x 78.4 16.6x 26.7x 33.3x 

- - - 7.7x 76.9x 

3,8x 46,2x 50 ,0x - 53,8x , 

- - - 33. 3x 66.7x 

39.4x 38.0x 22,6x 37.5x 26.0x 

13.3x 25. 0x 61 . 7 23,lx 30,7x 

- - - - 50.0x 

- lOO,Ox 0 - -

x - Indicates that fewer that fifty workers are involved, 

• - This figure probably should -be somewhat lower beoause 

of the tendency of employers to classify i ncorrectly 

many of their semi-skilled female operators aa fullfledged operators. · 

Western Area 

Code Below Code Code 

Average Code Minimum Average 

and above l4inimum and above and above 

- 14.0 86. 0 - - 34.2x 65,8x - - 23.1 76.9x - - - lOO.Ox - - 30.8 69 .2x - - - 100. - 53.8 s.s 52.3 41.1 

10.7 31 . 3 53.6 15.2 

53,8x 5,7x 80.6 13.7 

- - lOO,Ox - - 0. 8x 99.2 - 80.0x 6,9x 65. 5x 27.6x s.sx 19.lx 66,6x 14.3x 

0 9, 5x 75,3x 15.2x 

24,4x 12.3 63.7 24.0 

14.l5x - 44.x 56, X 

12,4x s.s 87.1 6.3x 

0 7.4x 84.6 8. 0x 

- - lOO.Ox - - 7,6x 92. 4 - - - - - - - - - 40,0x ll.2x 58.4 30.4x 

15.4x 8.9x 71.1 20.0x 

46,2x 6.2x 44 , 3 49.5 

- - lOO,Ox - S7.5x 3.lx 56.3x 40.6x 

46.2x 5.0x 56. 39. 

60.0x 54.0x 13o X 33. X 

- - - -

-61-: 

at or above the averqge, 52.3d bet"eer. t he minimum And the average, and 

only 6~ be').ow t he mi11 irnurn. 

The foregoing discussion of the reln tion of nve C~ge earnings to 

code standards, as well ns h~ tables on ~tc h it is based, should be 

read in connection with t he r J :::..:-'.1~': ,J,'l :!. _ 20c tion 7 of the differences 

in the hourly earnings of ope:-n:J:·s 'J··· ~n<:::'1 tal:orine:: and section shops. 

It is there pointed out that e~l·:1· gs i n t<>l}) ... 'lTl"'" sl ops closely Approximate code 11 averc=~ges 11 while in sec '-.:•.0.'1 shops they gene rally clo not much 

exceed minima. (*) 

In order to simp lify t he ~1r>ta , a SUJ:"rna ry of the material presented 

in Table H-lOa is given in tl~ B-X for the crafts represented by the 

largest number or workers. 'InP eleven Cl'r>fts here shown account for the 

great bulk of t he worY:ers in t l1e ind,.1stry. 

In ge;neral, it aprears hat. u;· f:,r· t.ne hi;;hest. percen t ages of •ro rkers 

having earnings above the mirinCt are :hose in ..:r ew York, although the proportions of the Western area workers outside of Bnltimore exceeding the 

minima range so high as to make that re ion a close second. In the 

Eastern area, outside of Few York City, the percentages of the workers 

earning above the minlma are srunewha t low<:-r, al tl.101.1gh even here the percentages were above so{:, r'or e:.gnt of the eleven c~~afts. Earnings in the 

BRltimore market are low b;r comparison not onl; with the New York market, 

but also alongside the Enstern and Western a rea groups of markets . It 

shov•s appreciably lower proportions of its wo rkers re~~n;ng ~r exceeding 

code standards tha1 do most if not all, of the other mar ~t s. Even in 

Baltimore, however, it ,q·t>:re~l :.-·s from the fi6UI'es of TF~ule 3X that six of 

the crafts had from 70 tJ E'l '1 of their ~· o:cl-::ers e nrning ab0ve their minima. 

The figures in the lower J;a:··· -u of t he -~able shovling percentages of the 

workers whose earnings we1e ? G or above t he 11 average 11 reveal less clearly 

marked alignments bet .rr:;en r_ ~,:ke t areas, ex:ept that in general, larger 

proportions of lew York VJOr~:e rs have pushed their earnings up to or 

be?cnd t h;:; code 11 averages!' ~han have the wo rkers in the other areas. ( **) 

~lthough these figu~~s conv ey highly significant facts about code 

enfcrcement, the CommissiGn is not concerned with that problem except 

insofar RS it impi nges upon the other ~~o rtant problems of regional 

differentials and of the comretitive ir~ gularities precipitated by the 

system of differentials. The question of code enforcement, as such is 

ou~ s~de of the scope of the Com~issio~! s instructions. But the three 

problems of ( 1) the relation of actuRl ec:.rn in?;s to code standards, ( 2) 

the s~rstem of differenti e1 ls and (3) the r-esultant competitive irregularities are so intimatel:,r L .terrelated that the first cannot escape consider-

( *) A tabular comparison of code mlnlmurr: and 11 averag e 11 hourl:r rates, 

by craft and market area, with the Eastern and Western differentials, 

is presented on page 64. 

( **) The fi g1...re s gi ve11 in ap:r enc.ix Table H-l2a conve~r some idea of the 

rnagni tucie of vhe r.aj-gins u.- whic.h average earnings in the several 

regional and C:['sft classifications fell below the minima or ran 

above the "averages 11 • 

9821 
9821 

TA:JLE E. 

FERCEl,ITAG:C OF LlAPUFACTu""Rr-G El.lt' LOY~S . -.i OSE E.A.lli I lJGS FO:rl ,lEEr 

Zl:Jw ~ !...JlCI~ S, 1934 , ~QUJ..LLED OR E:CC:SR'JED TE:C PRESCRL9RD CODE 

STAiJ)AliDS , BY SEL:bCT£::D CRA.F?S Ai::TI 13-:{ ; .A~1l3r:i: Ar.::J:~S . 

Esti w .. ted. Eester n Area ~!estern Area 

F1.T"'.)er i n !ie·-, Y0r1

-: (::>-s1.ur' i .,.1g · (:.:>ch,_(L G 

__ ·c . __ s. --------=---- . -_--_-'_C:..::_i ~-----. ----=~:...:...~ •::.._ . --~ :=-. C'~~ L __ _?L'.l_t i 10=::L:::O===l=c:=l=t=i=c=:..=~r=)====....:=-=== 

(?t-rce!1tu.::;c of ::: .:91oyces at 0r .Above Code :iini:.ro.n) 

Cu7.te:;:s 2,S33 95 f2 60 sG 

o-.,erato:::-s ' ./'1e 13 , 643 ( I'" _.~o 9L~ os 93 

o-_ cr-tc·· >, :'< ~c1_e 11 ' ) T'4 '- 77 86 4o* 69 -;-:,· . -. l 4 r-'?"7 ~l1..lC~ILf•J S~ c :. <....~ j 91 :3 50 90 

-,i . : s:1c "'-.f' 1 r,"' .. .. <.. I.e 3 40g )2 73 76 8G ' ~ . . •- I : ;c: l o 3 ':3 96 62 (:)Q 100 . . .... ( ,.- ...! ..L.l_ .. .. , !.- r J:. :-; 

"" -'- i ~;1. "':l(;J.'f; i -- ' -- :-e 1ale 4 1 4' q • so <"0 -- - . ~- :::,. ' ,- ... 93 --- ......, 

O''':>Pl S, 1' ,. -c:::- osS 52 o• 73 E:J ' - /) 

F ~·c.:; ,...e_·r, .,C Jl 1t729 c; 7 96 101) 94 

?re <-, ,-;,,r·::. , ( <....~ i !_e 1, ~G) 

,..,. ,, 

o·" S1 S2 97 

Prc!"'scr:; , ~o~ clQssifi~b e ~92 97 37 77 95 

( :t e:ccei1 t cJ;o . ' :8: 1:91oyeec E1 ~- c. v or .h.J'JV 8 Jc G..e ''A-r cr.:!.Ge ") 

Oye r ato-r:·::, .1c:.le ~3 36 (:)4 -' 41 

O"')C ... ":- ~·-·J S' v ~1e 

,.. 1 11 p::; -'- \) _./ 

:'i .1:.s: ~~:~~ , ~: .. l G 38 ·17 0 15 Fi nis!-.:.::.~::- ) :.:'e.1.:.le 23 11 24 24 

Fini shers I !:el :pers l:ale 39 14 14 56 

£inisllers 1 Hel pers, Fe.1ale 28 6 12 6 

Pressers, under 64 17 4o 30 

Pressers, upper 74 50 46 50 

Pressers, ma chine 61 23 38 41 

Pressers non-classifiable 73 62 46 39 

* This figure probably should be somenhat higher because of the tendency of employers incorrectly to 

classi:f'y man.v of' their semi-skil.1ed :female aperators as fu11-:f'1edged operators. 

I 

0 

tJ 

I 
-63-

ation here if the other two are t o have rea listic consideration. 

~ow this inter- relationsh ip betw~ n the competitive cost situation 

among individual firms in different markets And the system of differenti a ls 

affects the issues with which this Commission is concerned is we ll exemlified by figures in Table H-lOa. They show that 23~ of the femal e 

o erator in Ne ' York City r ec eived in the peak week Jf the last season 

earnin~s in amounts lower than their code minimum, while onl~ an inap~reciable number of wo rkers in other cr afts dropned below their respective minima. At the New York hearings be fore the Commission it was 

strongly contended -- and the Commission believes the contention to be 

fully justified-- that this situation was ge l~,r, if not wholly, the 

result of the competition of sectionali~ed Western-area plants (including 

Baltimore) employing mostly semi-skilled f emale oper a tors at a much lower 

rate than the Eastern area rate for female operators. Since this situation is largely the result of a system of differentials which is ~usceptible of improvement, it may b e expected that, once the differentials are 

rectified, the industry ~r ill be able still further to improve its already 

enviable record of code enforcement. 

The wage statistics summarized in this discussion are the best 

indication that the va rious interested parties will wish to iron out 

the inequalities that produce such conditio~s. In this sensitive 

industry, so complex, so beset with vexing problems, so dependent on 

the vagaries of trade and on the shifting whims of the consumer, a Code 

of Fair Competition has been so we ll enforced that only a negligible 

percentage of its workers have failed to earn the code minima, and a 

very high percentage have earned above the code 11 average 11 • 

Openings for competitive inequalities in the code may in a large 

measure be accounted for by the haste with which it wa s drawn up. ~ut , 

with such a proud achievement in industrial self-government a l ready to 

its credit, the Commission is confident that all elements in the coat 

and suit industry will cooperate to make the code an even more effective 

instrument for fair competition by closing up these openings, and for 

industrial recovery b~r maintaining the code wage levels. 

9821 

-64-

TABLE BS 

0 IPARI 0 OF CODE . 11 - HI M A . D AVERAGE HOURLY RATE, BY ~IARKET AREA . •• 

(J-.Jarket: (.' - oa.t; R-Reefer; D-Dress; M-~lale ; F-Female) 

Eastern Western 

(10% Percent 

Diffe rential Differential over over No. New York New York) W estern :'ll'ewY01k 

of M F M F M F M F 

Employes Cr~t 

M 14 Apprentice Cutters .63 

6 Mo . Min. M 2983 Coat and Suit Cu tt l'rs• Mm. 1.34 1.20 1.17 13 

M 4() Semi- Killed Cutters Min . 1.11 

M 13 Cloth IIi1d Lining P1lers Min .94 

M 13 FileT'S Min .80 

M 13 Can\as Cutters Mm .H 

Samplemakerst Min . 1.14 1.03 1.B 

Examiner t Mm. 1.03 .93 .93 10 

D re.perst Min. .83 .75 

B~graders on kirtst Min. .91 .82 

Bushelment Min. 1.03 93 

M 18643 Oprs. (.JCRD) Min . 1.00 .90 .90 .81 .85 .75 15 l7 

F 4704 Av. 1.50 1.50 1.35 1.3() 1.26 .95 Hi 87 

F 629 Oprs .. semi-skilled (1) Min. (.90) .81 .62 31 

CJCR&D) A v. (UiO) 1.35 .88 41 

M 136 Oprs. ( k1rt) Mi n .90 .80 .81 .72 .75 .70 16 17 

F 179 A v. 1 40 uo 1.26 1.26 1~ .90 18 36 

P iece Tailors (2) Min. .90 .81 

t Av. 1.30 1.17 

M 4 27 Finishe rs (RJ&C) M in. .85 .85 .77 .77 .75 .63 12 26 

F 849 Av. 1.25 1.25 1.13 1.13 1.10 .84 19 3d 

M 363 Finis hers H ips. (3) .1m. .63 .63 .57 .57 .53 16 16 

F 4141 AY. 1.00 1.00 90 .90 .70 30 30 

F 181 Button Sewers (4) :\lin. (. 63) ( .63) (.57) (.57) .53 15 15 

A v. (l.OC' ( 1.00) (. 9()) ( .90) .70 30 30 

M 1729 Upper ,Pr. (J CR&D) Mm. 1.00 .90 .85 15 

Av . 1.35 1.22 1.26 7 

M 1986 Under Pr. (J CR&D) Min. .90 .i1 .77 14 

A v. 1.25 1.13 1.15 8 

M 36 Upper Pr. (Skirt) (5) Min . .90 81 (.77) 5 . Av. 1.25 1.13 ( 1.15) b 

F 17 L ining Ironers (6) Min. (.90 ) (.81 ) .60 J3 

Av . (1 .25 ) (1.13) .82 34 

Under Pr. (Skirt)t Min. .85 .77 .77 8 

Av. 1.25 1.13 1.15 8 

(Basters (Skirt) (7) Min . .60 .M (.53) 10 10 

M 57 ( Av. .80 .72 ( 70' 12 12 

(Finishers (Skirt) (8) Min. .60 .M ( 531 10 

( Av. .70 .63 -;n, 

M 1105 Machine Pr. (9) Min . 1.30 1.17 85 

Av. uo 1.62 :..6 

M 116 Part Pressers ~ ·~ (JCR&D) (10) Min. (.90) (.81) !I') .r; . 

Av. ( 1.2:1) '1 13 1 ,r 

M H : Apprentices (11) 

F 2t() ! ~ I - .•. - -- - 53,290 

t No special study was made of t h is rraft classification because f th e sma ll n umbe r of worl,en; in 1!. 

• Such classifications as cutters, semi-skiil ed, canvas cu tte r , e tc .. are r. Ot prov ided for t he Eastern ll rea . Their 

work is generally done by full fledged cutters. · •• Some ctaft classifications are p rovided for the East ern a rea on ly. Others a:e pto\'tded for t he \Vestetn area only. The Commission has made inquiry to ascertain t he cra 'ts which pe rform t he w ork o r the non· d 'l<sifi ed 

crafts in the Eastern and Western areas, and the wage rat es of the d assi fied cr <1 ftS ap pear in this ta<Jie 1n par- entheses. 

(1) Operators, Semi-Skilled, Femal e, a re not classified for t he Eastern a rea . T heir work Is perfo: n, <l by ()perators, Female, In the · East. 

(2) Piece Tailors a re not classified for the Western area. (3) Finishers, Helpers, Male, are not lassified for the Westerr• area. (4) Button Sewer:;~ a re not classified fo r the Eastern area. Their work is performed by Finishers H elpers in the 

East. 

(5) Upper Pressers (Skirt) are not classified for the West ern area. Their work is performed by Under P re<>l - ers in the West. (6) Lining oners are not classified for the Eastern area. Their \VOrk is pe rformed by Under P r essers In th e 

East. 

(7) Basters (Skirt) are not classified for the Western area. Their work is performed by F inishers H elper in th e West. 

(8) Finishers (Skirt) are not classi f1ed for the Western area. Their work is performed by F in ishe rs Hr-lpers. (9) Machine Pressers are not clas sified for the Western area. Their wo rl< is performed by Upper Pr~s . PI''> in 

the West. 

(10) Part Pres!'':lb are ~ot classified for the Eastern area. Their work is performed by Under P r<> !>er~ 111 the East. 

(11) Apprentices are not classified for the Eastern area. Because ot the variation in the ra t<!S fGr t 1-J St>H'ra l 

crafts into which an apprentice may graduate at the er,d of the apprenticesh ip period, no attempt is here mad e to estimate the differential. 

9821 

UThTI"T . RG·--I-: :·rr -rrJ A.l-, I ·-,r-) G...,r~·E-rTc' _J_, _::f._~ -- :...1._L_;;~ ..!:__.L'-" ~- .l_ LL..CJ __ :_:!::_...!:!_ 

It is 1 ell l:r ... o··rn +-:lt.t siL:o the ~,:.La'.:.-~,.,o ... ~t cf the 1';-atioilr-tl I ndustrial eco,re .... ,. Ar>l;! t h'J:..O Le.s C" 1.l"C_'('~ ~-1 "C~10 fil~.· .. .._.(· s·~a .::s,, a t r enendous rr o,.t~' i:1 t-..·aC.r; UJ.J0'1 or·c;liz':..L,~"'"lHo ':'~10 c; <··~ rr:.'l. suit iJ.c:.nst :.·y 

has r;~1n.:.·ed. in th~" inc:C'r~se . F-''"'e'tjc.._ 11 .. : lJ_ of:' 1, 1t. i.r:prE·t.-,r~-:: 1.;arl.:ets 

have r1c.:..·eC. L1 t:_;_s inc:&o.ce of C':..·~ .. -l.,. l~~P.~;.Oi1 st::-E'LL_::,t.l. a.:.tnoug'1 the 

gai:1s ~e.ve r.':tt1.aa~ ly e:~.:ieC:. sc::1e·.·hat 1:.'01:1 me .... }:e ~~ "cv .:l~.:i.·l-:'3C· n 'l''1e Intelnational Lr-.C:.ies ' Go:-rJa11t ·.ior1

-::L.:i.'" : 1Li/')ll i o L1e C_on::.Y'!:'\..-... t o1·-;.:mi zP tion 

having jur.;_s cti ction ovo:i.' tl e 11o·,,1:ers in tlw inrinr ~·;.:- , Jn Ne·· York City, 

rrhi c ·,_ is b,~ a:.l o ctds, t;:, e nv-:; t io:;o :..·t o;;1 t r.Lo..r 1:::c: t , ··J;:.i s L: .ion !.1a s non or- v -

ganL ;ed. 89i; c:f t:lG nc:m·..lf3.c turinb w1its., In U};- st;-."7.e :Tr:,::r "';o _·L m1d in 

t he Sto.tes c:..' Con:-;e ..... ti ;'l'.t end !~en J ·r soy , al~- t~ ~l'e:: of -.-,''llC~l a:..~e tributary to the ::Je t:..·o ~J oli ta..'1 1T0'.7 Y'o :-1: JJo.r1:c '.; , r8~ o: t.;l e sho:J s o.re uniona 

ffili l e e::o.ct .:-5.{;urcs ind_l cf' ti:!'lg tLe ~J :., 'J/Jr~i0 ~ls of t he ·--o .. .'l ~e :..~c in the 

indunt.1.y in these t·.:o jur:.so_ic;tj ems r'1o 'l.L'E> o:.. g&~izcd £':re nrJ t availabl~ 

to t~1c Cor:rr.: i scic:~ ~ ~he:;:e is )_~ t ':) c or .1bt t~-<:'..t t ile ·noreen t;_ :;en rcn somewhat hic;he:..· t~1an V1e ~9.JTc.:mt, 1._: es nl '8 o.c".~· ~,.. :_ -r· m fu:..' r.:a1'u£8.ctu:ci:'lt; u.'1i ts. 

In T<...b le 3 2 }J<:'r ce:J. GD_:;e!.~ a.:.., a 1-;;.·c ~·.en teJ.~ s} l:)~.7;_ng t ho e-.:t eat to ·rll h t h e 

severcl rr.ark"' ts are ort fl.n..i. zed., :L'o r all o~· t::e ,:eTi ~et ~ e:.;.cc::_Jt :Jen Yo r k 

and EeTI York subu.rbs t lw ·_1e :rccm.-l:,aGe s .::;ho•-r oistrihntion or clr>.ssif iable 

emp l cyees ( L1cl udj ns · :.ndirect l P.bor) a ccordlng c.s t 11.ey a:..·e GID1Jloyed in 

union o :..· non- union sho:._Js , res::ectivel y . 

I n c;e11eral, it ni.Ll oc n otec. tLo..t the t- of to~m ma r kets are not 

as \Tell ort:2~1ized a.s t he Fen Yo:-L Cit~,.. c:-cea , c-l tbTu.gh IPall~' of them a r e 

as \7ell anc'_ sone of thc..-1 evc·1 'J.Jl'O co ·1::1 l etely ort:;.J..n izec~ than a:i. e the 

Ne':7 Yo.d: st~bm: an a::-easc The t'l:)st co:J:l ete l~r t:;-:;.n iz G. nc r~:::o s among 

t l o se out of tom1 a;Jpeo..r to bE. the three r·r; st i rF)]::-ta.l:G Pc:..cific Co ast 

~:ets ~ l ·Ds An~els s, 8.-u:.. r..,_f3 HC scJ~ aaC ?o rt lar.c:~. , ·--he:.,e the perc enta;es of ,:-o rl:::ers o r_;;flni :38d. are g,:;, 96 ru~c:. '=. 7 :..·es::_)ec tivc l y , and the Ch icago 

ar~.:Pt , ··:llPI·e the l nCi.u·::;tr )r 1 'J ·1~; org··mi zoCl , T1.1e Ch icc- .:;o suburb s , lil: e 

tho se adjar:er:t t o Ncn or ;:A 38 ve'i.---:_r .: '.C~l Jes L co:u,1 ete ~r u.nioni zeC. t h an 

is tl e c enl:.r2.l it~r a.r Ge .. the :) ... 0-l.Jrcl n ('f the inc.ustry or~en5. ecl the re 

being abot'.c lG~ o !.n :Bal ~lr OTe .~ I:Mra:3 Ci ':.y <".ncl. Clc e}.a.n~,_ , tl1e I!Orli:ers 

in the i nd.us"t:i.J' o.:~~=> :..'es:ce0 t; ive:l;r 35 9 40 ar_O.. 69;b u:n.i ono :;: n :Josten 72? 

of t he rl~e:..·s a;·~ o::. g;~J1J·6ed in the JJstun sub·..1rbs 21;-b cf thei..1 rW-ni ng 

true t o t he sv.bur1a'1 nu:: .. u.n i on ten clency; and. i n ~1i o..de nhia 69% of 

the -:-r r~: rs a:::-e orgt'..tJ. i ::j s G..,l 

I n mo st of the ma:.,l:ets, t he lte tr..c.ti nA.l -Lc;.dies' Go.rnen t \J o:i.~J.: rst 

union ap}Ja:ce:1 t l y fac e s n o co ·e i tion :.::'r ~1 rl va }_ nb :L~ o ga:'liz::l tions. 

Almo st t he onl.Jr e:::c ep t icn is the Kan san Ci t~r ma:i.'l'::et , :Zo ur of 1.-ho s e shops 

are organi zed in t.J.18 Inter nat io·J.Cl.l : a·'lC_ ~.e :..,e!Jaining tl1. ee i n a l ocal 

organ iz c;. ti on ~ a curn an~r ·u:1ion., ~:r.o--711 "J.S tile: LLdicst ~l. :."T!lent Crafts As- . .... . I" - , socl av l on. ' .•e on_;_y ~ ...,er ID.:lrLJ r. ·.:he:..· e a.'l~- l abor orgn1 i zation othor 

than the Int e:;.'nD.t ioaa.l "as :.. ~n'ef'e~ te d. b~r a sp ~:e :1 an a t the heu.ring s 

uas Joston 1+.c; re 2. re1J:i.'O sen t a: i vc o:: tl: e l~eecli e Tr o.Ci.e ~i l:er s! Industrial union (CO!Ili"JIJ"J.l S-t ) :J- 1)ea.::e~l anC. "1<.1.de a sta·c ement t o the Corunission. 

1. In t e r u s of sho·)s o rg3Jli zed, ~1e ·.)e re en t uges of o r gani zn.tion 

naturall y are someuh a t d ifferent. 

9821 
:arket Area 

United St o.tes 

eTI York . 

- bo -

::s ... I i . .A 'r!'JD P ~ l CE:?•'n --;.· : t ·:'"' v-. <' <:- 1 . .:. oLE E" ?LOYEES ------- - --- --·- - · - ---- - ---

L..,_ r;,_ i:!. c, r 

-:l .. 0 1 ~ 

~ 93 

y 

f,r., :_"'IP" ~h'-J I S - - --· . ... .. ·-

'§} 

In ~;.::: · c.~ e 

s~ .. , 

.. 

5: 1 

44 

1.1 

42 

11 

In Union 

o ;s 

ll 

89 

11 

New York suburbs 10 

21 

Q./ 

40 15 78 

Boston 

Boston suburbs 

Philadel :fh ia 

Eastern .Area 

Excl. • Y. City 

Baltimore 

Clevel and 

Chicago 

Chicago suburbs 

St . Louis 

Kansas City 

Los Angeles 

San Francisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

Western Area 

100 

100 

100 

65 

52 

84 

30 

36 

7 

100 

lC·O 

1(0 

79 

82 57 72 

80 91 21 

21 82 69 

27 51 35 

31') 54 69 

29 69 84 

76 56 10 

53 1)0 68 

16 100 40 

49 99. 6 85 

94 100 96 

91 100 97 

86 

·;mo ar e 

r.1 en 

'±} 

65 

!/ 

70 

if 

34 

69 

48 

62 

4 5 

38 

43 

71 

35 

46 

19 

57 

46 

37 

27 

46 

l/ Percentage of shops based on ~n anal ysis of 1987 shops , i . e . p racticc l ly 

all of the shops in the ~ew York n:=t.rket area. 

2/ Calc1..llated from Table H 16. (PGrcentage of s hop s) . 

Y Perce~ta e of s h ops (To.ble H 20) . 

4/ Estin ated fron Table H 1~ . 

pj Pe reen t age of s_1ops. Based on distribution of tailor shops only ; section 

shops 10t classified as to methou of ryagB payment (Table H 20) . 

9821 
-G7-

The terms nf r eference im}. os "'d ~"l o;1 t:1e Co1111ni s si on have specifiei ... 

ally laid upon it the ch ty of ir~C:Ui,. :i Dg into the factS with ega~d to 

labor agre enents .Ln t1~3 G.if1e:.:;~ "'nt !".>::t .. :L:o t s. In co!l.fo:·rni ty with this 

phase of i tn ins~ru c tion:; t t:.•e Corru.1i ssion lK.n cecur eO.. from one or anoth--

er of the p<:rtl .s copies nf a 2 2. of e [\.:;roeuents now in force in the 

seve raJ. mnrkot So 

Uri tten collect.i ve ac,r e<:!TJ8nt.s .:1.1'0 in e:':fect j_ n the majority of 

the m"..rl::ots . In f0ur of the m~1J::::e t s cll.cil nc.;ra c:- ~~J a re no t now in 

forc e . :i.lo agr eement .~.:..po ars non to be ir. :"o r so il! ~3.: :...-Lir1oro although 

in the p[l. .... t, coJ lecti V8 n.gr ement s h::we been in 8:· f : c.~ t1lCre :from time 

to time . Anothc:..· i::npc.rG[L"Ylt exce"Pt io 1 is t: e Chicc•.r;o ·r.QJ'ket , who re 

C()ll ecti ve bareai ning hr:~. s bulke d l arge in t>e l a·oc, r l"'i story 0f the market, but nhere a t prese~;.-c no 'Jri tten 2.6r ee,lcnts sc 2 . .1 !l·)\7 to be in 

force . It cppoal' E. .. ney .; rthel oss~ th'1.t collective bcU'Gc'..J. ning is not 

absent from tho Cld cac,o m!:lrket: l~hE' locr'.l uni on offi ~ir!.ls explaining 

that t h e a ... greements are merely ve r bal.., It is a l so r eported that the 

lo.st nri tten ap,r .::· ~men t, d_:ted De~cnbe'r 30 , 19.)0) Vl:hich r1ns between 

ttle local· union and ind:,,ldual :lir!i:S instoo.c1. of Hith 3rnpl oye rsf assccio,tions, is ·cyp ical, a.m't .J.CCJI'\Lng to loc 1 uni nn offi cials, continues even nor1 to have general ap::r.Jl icn.tion in t he mo.r ke t. 

SoBeTiha t the same si tue.ti on p r cv;:J.il s in 'Cl e veland, Ohic. In that 

market it appears, accoTC::.ing ·tu testimony offere<l at the hearings, tha t 

the inp r ossion prevails in sol!le ci:':·cles i:::-t the Cleveland rna:rkct tha t 

the me.rket is to some ~xtent at l east ntill govon·.ed o:r the terms of 

the contim.1.ing a e:: eement s et. u:;-- i.n .U0cenber, 2~, under a B0ard of 

Referees, and r e-;r1se d ln 192'-~ a:!.•i 25., At . any r::tte, oral collective 

barga ining p revails in t.l-:..e C1 sv8:and. mark8 t, Hith t he l.~)ntinuing agree-

•ment11 as the only written inst ru:nent . · 

The fourth market of the t welve in n:1i ch the Comrni ssi on held he a r ... 

ings 1 nhere no writ ten agree'Uent s are in e:.::.:ect, is t h;=tt of St. Louis, 

nhere the l cal union nf fi ci:=:tls repo r t eG. b~. t all agreements were oral. 

Ir:asuuch as the ·figures alreo.dy e.;i vf!n l'eg ..... rding the propor-tions of t h e 

shtJp s organized in the. va r ioll.s m: ts i nU.c ,'.te that Baltimore is 35% 

organized, Cleveland g~ , Chicago 84~; cmcl.. ·st Louis 8~, "there seeins 

good reason to b elieve that the abse~ce of nritten agreements does not 

necessa rily indicate t he .absence of collective ·bLrgaining with indi viClual firmss .. without formulation 0f the terus t~1ereof in formal written 

contracts. 

AnonG the eight markets in which there t.'..re either individual firm 

or marl;:et ngreement s with the Union, Ner1 Yorl::: nahually occupi es first 

place and boasts the most elaborate ~1. tt rn of .contractual agreements. 

Nen York agreements are cr!llecti ve ba r c;ains i;n tha co~ te sense ()f the 

uord, that is t(' say, they are agreomeEts bet·:reen ass,·, e;iati.ons on both 

sides and nr'lt typically contracts to nhici1 the e::nployers are parties as 

individual firms~ The New Ynrk agree 17tent s ;.1ay be di v:i.d.ad into two groups: 

First, the agreements to which the Union is a dire ct pa_':'ty. They are · the 

agreement bet,~een the I.ierchantst Ladiest Garne:c1t Association and t he Union; 

betneen the Industrial Cf1uncil of the Coo..t, Suit and Skirt Hanufactu::.·ers 

AssociD..tion and the Union, and between the A.. !e rica n Association of Cloak 

& Suit l.larru.facturers and the Union. T':..e second g roup of collective agree-s 

r1ents betneen the Uerchantst Ladiest GarJJent Association and the ArJerican 

9821 
- GJ-

.t r-;;ocic-tion of Clo<'k · Suit J :a.nufo.cttu.·e::..·c ::>.it bet ~Jeen the Indust1 ial 

Co·uncil of the Coat , Suit and Skirt ; :ant,. 'c.ctul·ers Association and t;1e 

A. 1eri cc-..:.1 Association. 

In Los Angeles, a marl:et a.greeP1ent ic; i:l force bet 1een t he union 

anc' ~:e ~os Anr; eles Association of Coe.t c:.j~r". St:.i t ianufactur e r s . In Snn 

Fra.J'l.cisco , a similar market agr ee::tent ir. in force . In _ ortland, t;lexe is 

not onl~r <. mc:>rket agr eeP1ent bet•1een the u:,lion o.nd the Association o: 

Cloe..!: ~:1t Suit ·anufacturers but also sor1e c ·;r eements between the union 

and imh vidual firms . In Boston, t~1ere i::; ().. :-Jarke t agre ement bet Je cn t 1e 

Union o.n(~. tb.e Boston Cleek 1:anufacture::..·s .A-sociation. 

:;;'or t :1e Phi l adel phia market, the Co: :ni ssion was supplied with t·.7o 

printer: b:t<.'..nk forms of agr eement , one for contracts with t he i1anufe.cturers 

A ssociation and the other for agr eerr1en.ts -r!i th t he jobbers. The l oc.:tl 

union officials r epr esented to the Co~ issioil that these agreements , apparentl:- sicned with individual firms , are still in effect . In addition, 

thei·e ~Jp enrs to be a special agre ement in forc e in Philadelphia, bet'.;een 

the Union nnd. Adelman and Sons. In Seattle , t_le re is a market agreei1ent 

betqeen t l1.c Union and the Association of Co2.t e.nd Suit Uanufacturers. 

FL1all;y·, in Kansas City , there is fil·st a se ri e s of four individual 

fir, a:;reenents betxveen the Int e r national ana. c-.s many individual er.:·oloJers, anc-:. se cond , a ser-ies of three marl:et c:.c;:;.,1

eeaents bet,veen the Lafuest 

Go.r !ent Cr2.fts Associ a t ion a nd each of ~u·ee firms which have reco{5nizecl.. 

it. 

The trade union agreements non in foi·ce in the industry ar~ of four 

general t·~ es : (1) oral agr eements , cniefl:r o..s to wage scales, (Be.ltiL10re , 

Clevela:~t , Chi cage rtnd St . Louis) ; ( 2) Til' i tt~en 2.gr eement s of the conveiltional sort IJet··:een the Union and individual fir: :s or between the Union 2vnd the 

ertplo;;'ers associati on, containing p r ovi siOi1S covering union re.cogni t i on1 ove:.:ti· ~e , Tiac;es and ho:urs, etc • (:ao stan, rcnct:'.s City and Philadelphia) ; 

(3) ·:·ritten agr eements 0f the convention:->.1 sort , but which, addition2.lly, 

incorpor."'.te ~ either explicitly or by r eference , the minimum and 11 average 11 

scales of t~e Code~ (Los Angele s , San Francinco , Portland and Seattle) ; 

2.nd ( l.!.) ·.:ri tten agreements of the tr2.di tional sort which incorport1t e the 

sce.les of rd!1ima and "averages'' of t he Coc'.e :i th the addition of a pl·oviso t 

})er;:!i ttin.; any emplcye r party to the coLtr2..ct , llwi th the consent of t~1.e 

Jorl:ers and of the Jnion" to substitute for the Code 11 averages 11 a sco..le 

of 7ee.:l ~ ~~ inimum rates running about 02 . 00 belm7 the Code 11 averar:es 11 ~ 

(FeD Yor_.:)2 • 

1 . ~1e Boston agr eement carries a scale of ::ee~ wo rk mlnlma for presser:s, 

oper2..tors, finishers, etc . Vlhich is 11iL;~1cr fo r all of the crafts t:1an 

t!le Co d.e 11 averages 11 for the Eastern :-.:;.~ea . 

2 . T .. 1i s arrangement appears in the sene fo:;.·;:~ in each of the Uni onf s a.~r.ee

ments ;·i th the Jvh.tee employe rs' associ[),tions in ew York (see P . 9 of the 

printed agr eement bet Jeen the Union 2.nc. t :1e i.:e rchants Association) . 

9321 

At t~1e Commissi on ' s hearings in l e\: iol·l:, the representatives both of 

the Union and the manufacturers st.:.teC. t~l~'. t p r a ctica lly all of the 

.7o r _ce rs in Ne•.-, York -,eek-·-,o rk shops c:..ctu.c..l2.y earne~ considerably more 

than h~ agr~ement inima and the refo r e apprec i ably more than the Code 

1 averages 
- 69-

SECTiuN VI. 

VOLUME uF SALES BEFCJRE AND SI NCE ADCJ?'riON OF CODE 

The data p res ented in this reuort not only indicnt e the r elative 

advanta5es in respe ct of l abor and overhead co sts in different mar ke ts, 

but also will disclose the fact thnt there is a 0 reat deal of variation 

between firms located in the sar.'le market. It is next to i m·0ossible to 

r educe to a simpl e formula or p ositive statement the net result of the 

r el a tive advantages and disadvantas es of differences in labor costs, 

shop overhead, selling costs, l abor ef: iciency, eff iciency of mana6 ement, etc. There is one figure, however, in which all of these factors 

find their ultimate reflection and which in the long run, g ives a conclusive answer to the question of the relative competitive advantages 

of the different markets. The figure is the volume of sales, for whatever advantage or disadvantage a market has, will find its expression 

in the competitive price and resulting volume of sales in that market. 

Insofar as the Code affects the markets unevenly through wa,q;e differentials, its influence upon the markets should be reflected in the statistics of sales. 

Owin~ to limitation of time, it has not be en fea sible to utilize 

the Comll1 ission 1 s accountants to assemble the fisures for the number of 

garments sold in each market. 

The Commission was, there fore, oblised to resort to a short-cut by 

sending out a questionnaire to all the manufacturers and jobbers in the 

coat and suit industry in the United States askin5 for the dollar volume of sales in the first 6 months of 1933 and for corresponding months 

in 1934. It has not been possible to check thes e figures on the books 

of the concerns, but there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the 

figures reported. 

The representative characte r of the returns on sales volume is indicated by the figures of Table K-2. 

Out of a total of 1328 firms in the United States to which the 

questionnaire was sent, 908 or 68% replied. In nresenting this report 

of increase s and decreases of sales in the severa l markets, only comparable figures for the two periods have been used.. This means that 

only firms which were in business both in the Spring of 1933 and 1934 

have been included in the tabulation of sale s given in the first two 

columns of Table K-1. If a firm was in busine ss only during a part of 

the Spring season of 1933, its total sprinc 1934 figur e s were not used, 

and only the figures for the months of 1934 corresponding to those 

which it reported for 1933 were taken. The fi gures not included in the 

two year comparison are given in the l a st two columns of the table under the heading "non-comparable figures.n 

While the data presented in Table K-1 are incomplete, the comparable figur es for the United States as a whole are based on more than 

49% or almost one-half 'Of all the concerns in the industry. This is a 

reliable sample of the country's ousiness, since it includes large , 

medium and small concerns and represents a l a rge section of each market. 

Thus, the percentabe of firms fu~nishin6 comparable fieures is 100% in 

9821 

SALES Comna.r&~ioruree 

1934 1933 

DISTRICT Dollars Dollara 

New York City and N6W York State 61,570,370 51,645,518 

New Jersey 375,752 429,856 

Connecticut 719,195 514,508 

TOUL I.!.I!:TROPOLITAN AREA 62,665,317 52,489,881 

Boston 

(inol. Ma.aaaohusetta) 1,241,793 1,081,846 

•Philadelphia 

(Inol. Scranton) 1,180,216 1,181,626 

Baltimore 1,228,822 694,337 

Cleveland 

(Inol, Ohio) 2,418,113 1,931,786 

st. Louie 624,103 577,719 

Kansas City 882,579 651,770 

••Chicago 3,591,014 2,686,603 

Loa Angeles 1,612,983 1,616,433 

San Franoisoo 946,146 859,600 

Portland 664,665 457,183 

Seattle 204,161 188,199 

TOTAL 77 159,911 64,416,982 

-(:xxx) Indioatea decrease I 985,303 964,606 •Philadelphia -City So rant on 194,912 227,020 

••Chioago District includes Illinois, Indiana, 

M1ohigan, Wisoona1n and Y1nneeota 

Chioago - City 3,358,458 2,537,540 

District Outside of Chioago 23~,556 149,063 

TABLB X-1 

SALES OF COATS AND SUITS 

SPRING SEASONS 1933 and 1934 

(January 1 to IIUDAt 30) 

~of Total Sales Increase 

.ill! 19~ ~ 

79,80 eo.o2 lO,OU,852 

.48 .67 -( 54,103) 

~ ~ 2041687 

81.21 81.48 10,175,436 

1.61 1.68 169,948 

1.63 1.84 -( 1,411) 

1.69 1.07 634,485 

3.14 2.93 486,327 

.eo .9.0 46,384 

1.16 . 1.02 230,809 

4.66 4.18 904,411 

2.09 2;51 -( 3,460) 

1.23 1.34 86,546 

.73 .70 107,482 

~ ~ 151962 

100.00 100.00 12,742,929 

- - 30,697 

-( 32,108) 

820,918 

83,493 

SALES 

N on-co!!!_Ear'i:'bleFi~e or Deoreaee l934 1 33 s 

Per Cent ~ Dollara 

19.45 7,287,417 49,126 

-(12.58) 54,446 

39.78 31815 2,116 

19.38 7,345,678 51,242 

14.78 213,722 

-( .11) 140,297 100 I 

76.97 139,323 ~ 

25.17 669,244 622 

e.o2 

35.41 

33.66 669,051 1,793 

-( .21) 186,880 

10.08 111,770 2,053 

23.50 120,069 

~ --- 19.78 9,496,034 56,710 

- ~ 3.21 

-(14.14) 

32.35 

56.01 

-71-

JlAL.L ~ K- 2 

SCHEDULE SHO JTNG ruU ~R OF S.,.L S I ;q,UTRI -=.; S .AND R~LI S REC IVED 

]'U.L h'E SPRH'J ~. 81J O.c' 19::3 3 and 1934. 

·--- - ·-- ---------------- --------NLl~" E! !' cf _Ro ~, ' .' os c 1i ved - - ----- - __ ._ __ _______ --'---------- IJ.'otn1 

)Jo uf 

I n r-".rie s ------ ----~= 

N.Y. C. 

N.Y. State 

New J ersey 

Connecticut 

Total Me trouolitan 

.Area 

Boston 

Philadel uhia 

Baltimore 

Cleveland 

St . Louis 

Kansas City 

•Chicago 

Los Angeles 

San Francisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

TOTAL 

% of Replies 

*Chicago - City 

" District - Outside 

TOT.AL of Chicago 

9821 

915 

7 

8 

4 

934 .. 

68 

• 36 

21 

25 

12 

7 

91 

·79 . 

39 

10 

6 

1328 

77 

14 

91 

Cu-:: .' C.. :Lau ... ·' Nu r-\.,orroara.b1e No Figure s 

'::ota1 }'e:•'l •JJ.s Per-] c., ~s Submitted 

610 

.. ·Ll 

4 

622 

55 

25 

17 

20 

9 

7 

59 

51 

29 

8 

6 

908 

68 

50 

9 

59 

:;:;- -1-: -- - ---., 0 ;:-;,, - ----:-1..9 33 _ .. et' ~ '= s .. " . -'----=-=-:;;:....;;:._ _____ _ 

444 49 

1 14 

2 25 

.1. 100 

451 48 

33 55 

2() 56 

12 57 

13 52 

9 75 

7 100 

36 

39 

21 

6 

5 

652 

30 

_§_ 

36 

40 

49 

54 

60 

83 

49 

39 

42 

82 

1 22 

2 

2 

126 

14 

2 

4 

17 

7 

7 

2 

183 

15 

2 

1 7 

2 

1 

3 

. 3 . 

42 

42 

8 

1 

3 

3 

6 

5 

1 

1 

70 

5 

1 

6 
-72-

Connecticut and Kansc=ts City; 3;~ in Seattle; 75;6 in St . Louis; 6 % 

in Portland; 57'~ in Baltimore; -6~o in P iladeluhia; 55 ~ in Boston ; 

54;" in San Fran isco; 52;i in Clevelantl; 49:& in Los Angeles ; 49% in 

e" York; And 401 in ChicPgo. 

As ill e seen from the igures in Table K-1 the country as 

a whole shot11s AA increase in sales volume nearly 201 , viz 19. 781. 

'le York City sho,··s a some hat snaller increas e in dollar 

volume , namely , 19. 45(; , and has almost though not quite, held its 

r elati e uosition in the country , its urouortion of the total having 

drouped a me e ction of one percent i . e ., from 80. 02 in 1933 to 

79 8~ in 1934. 

The l eA.st favorable showing is made by the State of New Jersey 

~hich suffered a loss in dollar volume of lc . Horyever , this loss 

involves chiefly one concern. Next to Ne Jersey , the least fa.vor::tble 

showing is made by Los Angeles which shoqs a fRlling off in dollar 

volume of business of one-fifth of one percent. 

The most successful showing by any single mar ket was made by 

Bal imore which enjoyed an increase in dollar sales volu~e of a lmost 77%. Sales increased in that market from $694. 337 in Spr ing 

1933 o $1 , 228 , 822 in Sur ing 1934. In this connection it should be 

stated that four among its largest firms failed to furnish their 

sales figures. 

The next most favorable shot11ing is made by Connecticut with 

an increase in sa les of 39. 787j and Kansas City with an inc r ease of 

35 . The increase in Kans a s City ~as less than one-half of that in 

i3al t imore . 

The follo~ing markets , in addition to those just mentioned , 

show a pe rcent age increase in excess of the countrJ as a whole : 

Chicago, 33. 66%: Clevel p~ , 25. 17%; Portland , 23 5~ . It is interesting to note that the cities which 'ere most insistent on increased differentials in their favor , both at the hear ings prior to 

the apPointment of this Commission a s ~ell as at the Commission ' s 

hearings , shon l a rger increases in sales than the country as a 

whole . Among these are : the outlying district of Chicago , incl uding St. Paul and Unneauolis, Hinn., Aurora and Batavia, Illinoi s , 

with an increase of 56cb ; Connecticut , nearly 40 ; Kansas City , 35%; 

Portland , 23.-5~. Among the other outstanding comulainants , Seattle 

shorys an increase of only 8. 481, hile Scrro1ton suffered a loss of 

over 141 . . 

9821 
SECTH :r VI I . -------

The reso lut i on creating +he 1act-~~nd1n~ :J~ ss n p rovided 

among other matters thnt 11 t :ne. (., o;,.;nilssi on .:O.all .}·:_;udy Ri l petitions 

and demRnds file~ since the adc-o·cion of ~le C0a·c and. Snit Code by 

particular localities <.'l.ncl Jil<'.r ke ts r e l ative to wage s and l abo r classificc:ttions". 

In pursuance of this Mandato , the Conmissi on held hearings in 

thirteen of the l a r gest cente rs of the co t and Suit Industry and 

studied the co m~ in s and deBRnds of the .vari ous f a ctors in the 

industry throughout the countrya 

These como lain t s and demp;1ds a re surnma ri zed herewith tohether 

with the Commission's findings ~'1d conclusions ith re_erence to them. 

1. Competi t~on of Sect_ion Sho·os Against· Tailoring Shops 

The tailoring sho·o s com-o l.p_in th8,t they suffer f rom the com-

~etition of section shons. The comDlaints Bgai nst the section 

shop are based not 0:1 t h e f orm of its sho-p orga...11 i zat ion but on the 

fact that it emp~oys l argely de~~le l ao or at conside r ab l y lower . 

wages than the workers in the tailoring shops. The•-ooint was made 

th"' t while it is.'1true that these lowe r-DR.id worke rs are less ~killed in 

terms of their ability to TTJake a coMp lete g;o r nent , they n.re , nevert he less, more skilled in t e rms of thei~ ability to produce with greater speed than the higher -on id skilled ·torkers who ma ke the entire 

garment in the tailoring slop. The re fore , it was maintained that the 

section shop has, .a cost -differential in its f avor , · of a purely 

economic nature and not a rising· from an;)r -orovision in the Code·. 

2. Competition of Western Section Shops .A ainst Eastern: 

The Eastern section s hons, such as Ellis of .Nem Britain, Conn., 

Seitchick of Camden, N.J., and Linder Bros., of Scra nton, Pa., contend thE\ t the . .\{estern section shop s offer them unfair comp etition 

because the Western sect ion shons enjoy the benefit of the 11 semiskilledrt and "ap-or.ept ices" clp,ssifica.t ions in t he Code. These ·classifications do not ·an;9ly to the ECl.st orn a rea. The· con-tention of the 

Eastern \_shops, broadly speaking, is that a section sh op c an be run 

with about the same degree of effici en c~r in one marl'::et as in another, 

They contend that the length of . time required to turn an inexperienced 

O't'Trke r into a fast iiTO r ke r on sim-ole o·oerations is the same , regardless of the terri tory i n which t i1e sho-o is located. 

Ellis, for exampl e , stP.t e d thRt in his New Britain shop by far 

the overwhelMing majority of the emnloyees ~ve had no previous experience in any of the needle trades but ha d been drawn from the 

hardware and metal f a ctories in thFtt to1.'Tn and that, nevertheless, 

9821 

.· ... 
~i hin a fe~ mon hs he was a l e to turn out five thousand to six thousand garmen s a ~eek Pt the peak of the season. 

Some of the stern section shou r.1anufacture rs stated that they 

ere uerfectly villing to continue to nay the present Code uage r ates 

for skilled operators to their section ryorke rs urovided that the 

ilest e rn section shons nere r eouired to uay similar wages. mat they 

want is enuali ty rou1;;,ht about through the extension of the 11es tern 

"semi-skilled" classificat ions to the East or through their abolition 

in the est. 

FINDI: TG ----

The ouestions dealt ith under ComplPints 1 and 2 cPn be best 

discussed by grouping them together. The Conmission finds , as a result of its studies , that the section sho"9 enjoys a favoraole differential e s against the tPiloring sho"9, due gely to tvo important 

f a ctors; (l) the natural technologic:1.l advantage nh ich the section sho-p 

has through its gre[1.ter sub- division of labor, vrhich enables a girl 

of litt~e skill and experience in tailoring to acquire the skill of 

doing a sim-ple oPeration , after a ·orief period of training and to 

perform it with equal or even greater speed thnn the old time all-;-

around ouerator is capab le of; (2) tha t these section operators, most 

of them -r.romen , are em-cloyed at lowe r '.'Tages with the result thnt the 

preva.iling earnings in section shops are close to minimum code rates, 

hile the tailoring shops em·oloy chiefl~r male operators who are pnid 

clo.se to the Code ave r ages. 

The Commission finds tn0t in addition to the forillal differential provided for in the Code , the liestern section shops enjoy lower 

costs than Eastern section shops because of the special classification 

of "seMi- skilledll 'TOrkers provided for in the Co de for the Western area 

but not for the Eastern area. The minimum rate for a "semi-skilled" 

operator in the Western area is 62¢ uer hour. A female ope rator of 

sirnilnr skill r~ceives a minimum of 9 ¢ per hour in 'Jew York and 81¢ 

in the remaining EPstern area, naking a differential of 23 - 30%. 

The Code thus g ives the Hestern section shops manufacturing the lower 

grades of merchandise a competitive advantage over similar shops in 

the Eastern .area • . In the cr-.se of pressers, the 'differential due to 

differences in classification rises to 4J~. 

In addition, the \iestern area is allowed the classification of 

aPprentices TVho can be hired P.t 47¢ an hour and kept at that rate for 

a ueriod of six months, while the Eastern shops must pay at least .minimum r ates of 90¢ in lJel"7 York and 81¢ in the remaining Eastern a rea to 

female ouerators even if they are only beginners. This is equivalent 

to a differential of 421 to 48~ in favor of the West . 

It is true , ho~ever , tha t this aPPlies only to not more than 5;h 

of the workers , and theP'l only toward the l atter part of ~e period 

of eir apprenticeship after hey have reached com-parable speed or 

skill. 

!ben ':7e compa re the Western section shop :vith the Eastern tailor9821 
-75-

ing shop . wh i ch is the p r e d.ominant typ8 in the En.st, t h e d iffe r e nce 

become s e ven g r en.t e r w 

Th e Re l at i ve ~ren ~ of t ho Se ct ion Shop 

____ R'11L Ta i 1. (') r 1," .g; _) ll 01J •3 'i ·= -!: e r, .- __;,_, _ ____ , __ _ _ _ _ o.._ - - - - - ... - - - - -------

The Commission fi Y).r: s th .t ~1e sec t Lm !'>:Jst 8.-: · ..1 d. t h e t a iloring 

system in t he Ccat antJ •. u it i.n c1u-; : r ;;- :..f ..;:_~ s o ,... e1.~ .r J,h:<.t e!lch 

n r es ents a d isti··1ct prob lem frcr:1 a technologica l AJl.d. a Wn i n istr ative 

uoint of view. 

I n the past, full-f l edged il rs, both i n t he men 's a nd women 's 

gn.r me n t i ndustries , came ' h e r e fr om Eu r o"De a n countries. The v i r tual 

c e ssA.t ion of i mmi..grA.ti on hp,s el.:' t C'fi this su-ou ::i..y of k~. ll d tailors. 

In Europe the tr '.ining of a tn..Ll o:.. beg i n s in h is boyhood \7hen he is 

appr ent iced to a Mast e r t::d lor f or R pe riod of f rom fi ve to s even· 

y ear s . In thi s c ountry , inciu:; t:::-i n.l .?.nJ psycholos i c A.l ors do not 

favor the t r ain ii1c; of ful]_ - f l Gir;;ed t p,ilors, .;;.s exuc1·i en ce in t he 

t r a i n ing of such persons has ·de "'luJ"ls t :· ted ~ The p,enius of Ame rica n 

industry , t he i m:oati ence of t he ;roune A::eric::t!l worke r to make r n.p id 

progress has f orced the b reak ing up of tl~e t ailor 1 s c r a f t i n t o s eve ral spec ial c r afts su c:1 as Cllt t 8rst :r: r e s :crs , h< ·nd"7s evv-e r s , machine 

ope r a tors , etc. Su ch i s the divi.s :i.on oi' n.~ r anJor.g dif fe r ent cra fts 

in t he t a iloring sh op o The ~t i nn s h ::ru hc:>.s c c:r :ried. 'vhe spec i a li zation p roc ess still fur t.-J.e r C?)1d. hc..s s,_:.b - d i 'V·i<ied e?..c n of these c r a fts 

into s eve n '1.l sub--d j v i s 1 )T' S or o·'Je :-::.c· ions , each or e r r> t i on b e i ng s.i mple 

enough to enabl e P. youne wor:.;.2 r to l Garn it .rapio.l y in a few dA.ys or 

we eks and to a t tA.in i n a fe' .' Tlon~n s the n ec.essc>ry s p e ed to e nRb l e 

him or h er to e a r n an a 6.equ.at e w:,_g e a c c ord inc=; to -p ev ing sta ndards_. 

It s h ould be a dde<l , huvr'3ve r, th<t t h e sec t i on system eRn b e 

o~er ted most ecOYlSJm i c a l l y ,-hen a , g 1 rea s·c.-·:e i s n rodu ced in f p_ i:r;ly . 

l a r ge volume . Ot h er•,is e , it is 8:tt reme ly d. iG lt t o m~ in a 

urouer b a l ance of u rodu ..:: t i on -Jet "Teen l. e S''Wer Rl s e c t ions i n t h e shop , 

which re sults in f r e ouen t int errun tions o.: '70rk , c n.using in t u rn n.n ·· 

increa se in s hop overhe r>d pe r u_li t of out ·,Jut, and t her e1.Jy 1 t ending 

to of fse t the ec on or'lies e f f ec ted. 1 d ire c t }.A.b or co st. For the se 

rea sons, the s r o .. •th of s ect ion sh o,Js i s n e ce ss nr y ily c onfi ned to popular priced me rc ndi e in r.<h i ch t h e le t 110"' l a:t g e l y speci n.lizes. 

These naturn.l e conoM ic i iro ed iei1ents in the '"F( T of the gronrth of 

section shop s may serv e to x- l~in ,:,tv the s e ct i on sho-o in the coa t - ~ -· 

and suit indu s try h1..s no t g r J'.vn to tr.. e extent it has i n the men's 

cloth ing ind.ustr ~ Out of c. t otP.l of 9 , 2c 0 "'Tork:e rs errrpl oy e d i n the 

industry outs i cle of t.he Met r o··Jol i t R"l ,qr e a of 1Je'·r or ~ only 2 , 337 

work ers, or 25~ of the t ot a l --·o r '-:: ed. ln s ec.;t ion sho:? s, while t he r e -

main ins thr-e e - fourths of t he -r;or:: er s n.r e e;'Tln l oyed. ln t a iloring sh op s. 

In the metropo li t P. n Rr e a of 1 e"' Yo r k ( incluiing J'Te'7 J ersey and Connecticut) of an n.ppro.ximate to tal e:f nen.rl:r 44 , 000 or rs, 3 , 800 or 

less tha n 9% a r e wo c in s ec t i on sh0ps . ·the na in g mo r e t han 

nine-tenths b eing emp l oyed in t a ilor i ng shops . The worke rs m~ lo ed 

in all the secti on sh ops of the ent i r e count r v t hus con st itu te out 1 v 

11;.=- ;6 of the total. 

9821 
-toIt is necessary to bear this fundamental fact in mind in weighing 

the ·,)ro le!"ls of he industry cre;=~ted by he sec io:1 shop and in considering the remedi es for pny 0 1 t he existing evils. 

3. Code \ia5e Rates for ~~"lorkers of Average Slcill 11 : 

That clause in Art icle Fifth of the Code which provides hat "in 

fixing niece-wor k r a tes on gar Ments , the same shall be computed on 

a iasis to yield to the 1:wrker of R.verAge skill of various crafts for 

each hour of continuous wo r k 11 certain s-oecified eR.rnings , has been the 

source of much comulaint. 

Cor.mla ints of non-enforce'lent of the clause came f rom the East 

against the Hest and from the ·,fest a :;:: .. inst the East. Chicago and 

some of the \estern mar l:e ts complain that they a re no longe r able t o 

nroduce $6.75 ru1d similar merchandise on account of corn-oetition from 

?e'.'T York becR.use of t e ability of Ner.r Yo rk jobbers to avnil themselves 

of the services of contract shous in te~ J ersey, where it is cla imed 

the code r ate s are not enforced. Some of these Weste rn jobbe rs i nformed the Commission thFLt they we re ab l e to ryrocure their merchandise direct f r om New Jersey contrR.cto rs, or from Ne~ York jobbe rs who 

ernuloyed 1e• Jersey contractors , f or less money than they could get 

it manufactured at home . 

Cleveland had no complaint to o .fer against the claus e other than 

the fact that othe r ~arke s we re not enforcing it Pith the same s rictness as was done in Cleve land and the re·oy Cleveland manufacturers were 

pl aced at a great disadve...ntage. 

Those operating tailoring shops comula ined that the Code "FLverages11 are not being enforced in section shops. 

Other markets asked thPt the above quoted orov1s1on for ~orkers 

of average skill be eliminated fro~ the Code altogether, leaving minimum rates only. 

The Commission finds that the Code naver ages" are being unevenly 

enforc ed in the various markets and that they tend to be enforced chiefly in tailoring shons and e suecia lly in tailoring shops loca ted in 

communi ties ".Vhere the Int e rnational Ladies' G?.rment Workers Union is 

a strong fgctor. 

The Commission finds th2t one of the reasons for the difficulty 

in enforcing the Co de "averages" in !:lany section of the country is 

that he te rm 1 orker of ave r age skill", as used in the Code , although 

sound in urinciple ?.~d in theory , is too vague and e l astic to pe rmit 

of exact and uniform application. The meFLsure of outuut of a 11 worker 

of average skill" will vary not only from city to city , but from shop 

to shop in the same city, deuending uuon the skill and speed of the 

orker s , the efficiency of the shop management and last· .. but not least , 

uuon the resuect i ve bargaining poqe rs of the wo r ke rs and em·oloyers. 

9821 
-77-

The last mentioned factor u robAbly l 8rgel y a c c ounts for the fact 

that the averag0 e[l.rnings of ·o er::~.t ors in t~i or ing shops tend to b e 

close to the Code averC~ e while in tne section shops t hey t e nd to be 

close to the Co de Min·~um, The roaortion of worke rs eBr n ing Co de 

averages in sect ion s>.; -.s is 7ery irree,'tl:8r fror1 city t o c i t y and even 

from shop to shop in the sa~e c~~Y~ 

Due to the vagueness of t:1e tp.·c;J '!'m:>:"ke rs of o.v ·,ra.o.;e ski l l ", t he 

enforcement offi c ers :ill the se ;rrn.:. Ji~t.· _;_8~ s hL •n 8!1/;::_-, used ·~ he ir own I 

judgment in inte,·p retii":g- the 8lr u sc . e hr-o. £' bl~E.n T.!.O , ttem"9 t s o 

fn.r by the C(:de Au.tho · i t y to lny do..-m a u.nifor m iL.terpr etation fo r the 

guidance of enforcement ·office.,..s. 

This has r esul ted i n lli~fair comue tit i on not onl y be t ween marke t 

and mar ket but 1.mtt..re8n (!Oncer'!.S in the S['me mn.rket . The consc i entiou s mcmufo.cturer \olho trjes t.-;. li1e up "L o the Cocle i s nut at a disadvnntage by his less c~:rr.·3cientious r.01'1'0t:: titor. A n r erniu.rn is thus 

s e t on code violations· an<i tr ... l..'':e '"'!Lo ubserv8 it are pc>ying a penalty 

i n the for m of highe r wages thnn t~ose Tiho disregn.r d it ~ 

The situation i s tou unsound t. o contL1ue , and should be r emedied 

in such a manne r as t o c reate cla r i t ;r and er ... abl e t he Code Aut hority 

to formulate a uniform "'Jrcc-edure f or a ll the marke t s . 

4. Diffe r enti['!.ls:' · '• 

Some o-P :the ·We 3te!'n wn.rke t s a s ked for g r eat e r diffe rent i a ls thn.n thos8 ·ne-w nrev11i l L1g in their favor on t h e g round 

r~ t t heir· : abo r is m"!.lch l ess skilled than the or availa b le in He\lr Yor·k ar..'i that f:O.ey· 3-re uut to nn i tiona l expense i ::1 trai ning ap-o:..·entices G..1d sunervising t he work of 

t he ir s emi-skilled '!Or:mr s, ' < 

F:!:!JS!NG 

With t he e:x ~""Otio n of Ka~sas City, no p roof based on the book s of 

the concerns WP.s ;~:bnitted t.o the Co:nmi ssi ono No r does it anpear from 

the Commission r s vl""n invc s t ga:~ion that inr1.ir e c t l ab or costs in the w·es t 

are higher than i n t he Ef'st when coH:oar ing shop s manufa c t u ring simila r 

garments. As a rule , sec t i on shop :3 r_a v e high&r :.ndi rect l abor costs 

than tailoring sh op s in t he s n.rr.e p r lce a~ge a l though exc eptions occur. 

Kansas City s the highe st indir ect l abor t~ mostly i n its section shop s; St . Loui s i s P..no-:her hiph ind:i.re c t l abor cost c ity although op ern.ting on t h e tailorin5 sy s t;.;rn , thu s c onfir mi ng the contention of its r epr es en t Rtive s t he.t it l HiS h1gh su n e rv i sory costs due 

to the nec essity of tra i n ing and e:rr·)l oying i nexne r i en ced he l u . Baltimore shows the lowest i nd i rect l rroor co st fer sect i on shop s and is in 

the low co s t g roup f or i ts t a iloring shopso 

Owing to t he lin ita ti ons of t i r:1e , it 1J'Tas i wp ossible f or the Commission to obta i n c orapareb l e det n.iled i nd irec t l abor c osts f or New York 

inside shops. Its c ontra ct shop s have a u nif orm allowance of 30 to 33% 

here 

9821 
'/~

of the direct l~bo~ cos • 

(b) Selling Costs 

In nract ica lly R.ll of the \1/es tern centers at which the 

Commissi on held he;'!.rings, it was maintained by the manufacturers tha t t• ey ryere c>.t a ctecided disadvantage as against 

, New York Ni th respect to selling expenses. It hR.s repeated 

in center after center tha t the local manufR.cturers were 

cornuelled to send salesmen on the ro:::td to obtain business 

wherens the Je•. Y0 rk manufacturers were· in the 

uostion of having the customers come to them. 

ed J.~ ew York attracted buyers from all over the 

therefore did not have to empl~y salesmen. 

enviable 

It was claimcountry and 

It nas maintained in Kansas City and Baltimore that 

the selling exuensos loca lly rve re 6. 09"6 and 6.07;~ of sales, 

respectively o They believed that Ne\'7 York's cost "1as only 

a third of th:~ t. 

The Commission undertook a study of selling expense 

in each of tho markets visited. Through its accountants 

in the V?r~ous markets, detailed analyses of selling expenses were reauested and ere obtained by the accountants 

directly. Inasmuch as the accounting records and systems 

VFtried considerc.bly from manufacturer to ID.?nufacturer, in 

the renorts rendered selling exnenses have not been itemized under uniform classifications; nor have all the manufacturers included the same specific items in their figures. 

Some of the analyses presented are obviously incomnlete. In 

~nny cases, officers' and executives' salaries were included 

as selling exuenses althou5h it is to be observed th?-t these 

items frequently are more nearly in the nature of fixed overhead chR.rges r ather than i terns which vr-try ',v i th the volume of 

sales. 

FINDilJG 

earing in mind the above qualific, tions, the data presented to 

the Commission do not bear out the claim that 1Je•"~ York selling costs 

are exceptionally loq. It fl.PPears from the following surFnaries of 

e highest and lowest selling costs derived from the statistics obt~i ~ed in each market tha t the variR.tion of selling costs in each market is as great , nnd often greater , than the difference between market 

and mo.rket and between :Je' York and '{estern mR.rkets: 

9821 

. . . ~ 

, . 

.. 
SE~LTG ;r ~ -T S::!: 

(P r~ e. t _;_~ _._ ~- ~~_ri.ce) 

Clevel.::md 

Chicrgo 

~ Louis 

(For t· e fi ,.. .1 he1xing 

14 4%~ n~ ~~&te y t:: _, ~ l ' u;" was 1or rave 1ng 

ru1·l e!'l t e r t a:i.n L '·G· 

Total ·r.> i ng voJ urne 

foi.· t ll:;. s firo ""as 

$47 , 00C ) 

Kansas City 

Los Angeles 

San Francisco· 

Portland 

eC~tt le 

Boston 

Phil1.delnhia 

13altiJl1ore 

(*) 

r.owe st ---

7o8~ to 

G o ~. nJ d 

4 20: • 10 to 

3 31 0 I to 

2 . 2% to 

3 - (1 .._ • b,o to 

5 . ~ ' to 

.lc~ to 

4 . 6:0 to 

4 

- • I ~ to 

4 4d - · . ? to 

Highest 

l 5'b - I 

9.7% 

14. 4% 

8. 5% 

~ 

9 c"' • 3,o 

6 . 3% 

16. 6% 

1 7 . 5~o 

l0. 3;b 

5 . 6% 

New Yor k - A cost study- was undcrt<ke:l oi' approximately 25 New Yo r k 

firms. Selling e: ... uerlse ::'iE;tues in G.etail were obtained f or 

thirteen of theser Ir. the $6~ 75 v:ho J. e sale nrice cl~ss , the 

selling 'eX..Jense rClnbeC. :!: ru:TI ~ to 5o 75c6 with four of the five 

firms cited. cet\>lcHm 5 . 5C~ Pr.d 5;) 75~., ·In t he 0~ 75 price 

clc?.ss ~ the sellint; e~erse r a"lged from 3.47% to 8 , 69;6. 

In t h e $16<75 wholesa le ice class, the selling exnenses 

(three fir:1s nrhose fl g.:J.r~ -3 Tie r e availab le) ware Ll~;-; ~ ~ and 

10};0., It iR inte:re3t-ing t.o observe that t l:e selling expense 

percentage '.""as hit:hc:st for the f irm Tii th t he smallest volume 

and l owest for t he :fir m l'" i th the largest volume • 

.Anot'l:ler gr oup of selli11g e:x-penses l'ras submitted by one of the 

Ne\7 York rr.anufa ct-uring .g,s sociations .· It i nc luded tern firms 

and 3howed sa llLw; ancen.ses r rmgi1 g from ~ to ll '1o of the 

sales volUipe . 

(*) Exclu s ive of cost of selling done by executives - amount not 

available. 

9821 
From tho small samolin obtained by the Commission, covering 

23 houses in e ·1 Y0 rk City, it v.ras found thnt nll the houses employed 

sa lesmen . Their sa laries and selling comm i ssi ons ranged from less 

than ~ of sales to 7 b. fhile relatively fe of the out-of -town firms 

reported sho. -room renb=1.ls as an exuense , this was a substantial item 

with the Je ~ Yo r k fi r ns . 

The Commiss i on is not abl e to stf'!,te ':Vhn.t nercentage of New York 

houses employ or do not employ tr~veling salesmen. However, where no 

salesmen are emulo ed , the firm membe rs or executives who take care 

of the sales dr a a fixed salary •7hich constitutes an overhead selling exuense , which exuense in ne rcent ages . ill vary inversely to the 

volume of business do ne and, as a rule, does not mean a saving in selling expe!1se . 

It is anparent from the figur es gathered by the Commission ' s accountr:mts that the method. of SC1.les uromot ion varies from fi rm to firm 

within a marl-:et , 111h ich st iuat i on obviously makes it imprc c tical to 

comnar e selling exuenses of one market as a whole ~ith those of another. 

So nuch for the Conr11 issi on 's o:vn study . As regards tha claims 

thn.t selling expenses a re lone r in Nen York than in other markets , 

those making the claims have f n.iled to uroduce figures f rom the books 

of their firms to urove t he ir case . 

5. Overtime: 

1:any of the markets of the country, particularly the smaller 

markets , asked for a linited pe riod of overtime of four to eight 

weeks at the peGk of the sea son on t he ground tha t they have a small 

suupl y of skilled labor and limited plant space , and are , therefore , 

unabl e to expa~d their forces at the peru{ of the season. They are thus 

compelled to lose a certain amount of business hich would otile r Nise be 

theirs. 

Those opuosed to 0vertime pointed out thgt overtime should not 

be allowed to one market when othe r markets ':'!ere not working at capacit;r. They a lso we r e confident that the maintenance of the present 

uolicy against over t i me would mean a flattening out of peak production. Ti1ey claimed that there has already been an appreciable change 

in the r etailer' s method of placing orders, and that , warned by the 

ex-oer ience of the Fa ll season , when the retn.iler found himself unable 

to get im . ediate delivery at the height of the s eason , he anticipated 

is requirements hen u l acing his orders for Suring 1934 to a much 

gr eat e r degree than in fo r me r years. 

The ouuonents of overtime be lieve that t his trend will continue 

as the retailer l earns from expe rience th~t he must distribute his 

orders over a mo r e e tended neriod of ti~e if he is to ge t deliveries 

under a 35-hour week. 

(I 11 
- 81-

The Commission finris tht't the uresent p olicy of refusing permission for overtime to i.nd i.·ridunl concerns o:r. WlrhJts , results in great 

gains to the innu.st:-y a s a wr .. oJ e . It beli F; Ve~ thn.t these gc=dns 

out-weigh any di sadvc=111 tac;es til:1t r-1ay be su. :'ie~ed by indi vid..ual firms 

or markets. 

6. Apprent jces 

1.-iost of the We stern marLets want an increase in their present 

ap-prentice allol'c:mce of 5~ of the total nu!nber of empJ.oyees provided 

by the r egul a t c~s of no Cc F.~ t ancl fi'.:<.i t Co de Authority, They claim 

that because of the l ack of sk:J:ed l Rbor in the markets outside of 

Nerr Y0 rk, it is neces!Se.r;y- to trein c ontinually large nur:1bers of 

workers 

Union repres entative s in these markets insisted, however, that 

employers de sired more ~~prcntices , not because of a shortage of skilled labor but bece:~ e tht?,y rished to reduce costs by employing apprent ices who very quick ly lWuE.:mB:d to perform the simpler operations in their 

craft as speedily- as a full-fledged wo r ke r 1 yet are a llowed lower wage 

rates under the Code. 

FIN.DING 

The Commission finds tha t some of the ~ar ets in the West in which 

the develoument c:~ the Coat c=md Suit I:!'ldus t r y is of comparative ly recent brigin and w~E ch lack a l r.,r g e supnly of worke rs in other needle 

industries, are -u)_ig o~ t o r e.:;o rt to continuous t raining of new help 

in order to maint a ::.n an c.:..dec;uate f orce of skilled. worke rs to take the 

place of those who le a~.-e the lnd.ustry. This cir·cumstance is further 

aggravated by t he fact tl:r:tt thE:: majority o:.. the employe e s in this industry in such centers consists of women who ea~r e the industry in 

larger numbers than men bec"tU..3e of m2.r-riage &"'ld other family reasons. 

For deta.ils as to availability cf needle worke rs in the several 

coat and suit rr1 a r 1:ets 1 reference i s made here to Section 3 of this 

report. 
- 82-

Or, tJle 

a t i o s oulc'. 

f or a lar0 er 

t o lo\'1er t. e 

thc r ~12 n ' • the Cor:unis!:ion believes that se ri ous consid.ere t:i e:1 to the ;~. v reheilsion of tl e Tnion that a }Wovision 

1 UJ'Tlbe f'J f ap- )rentices may lend itself to abuse~ in efforts 

1f:J.ge level of the .,orl::crs . 

The CO! U.tissio .. believe t'l' '.t it is fe :l.si' le to r;ive due \7eic:;ht to 

b ot l conside r a tions in modifyiiG the present Code provisions 1it~ reference t o 3 o-rentices . 

7 . ontrc:c tors 

Article intl of the Code , referrinc; to t'1e contr act s;rstem of 

manufa ctu:cin& , s tates : 

"It is :recot;·nized. t:w.t in the Eastern and .ie. tern Areas 

ti. e u eL ods e,.1?)lo,red to a verJ larce e:::ten t in t~ e produe tior: of (;C".r r.-ten ts i:1 tne coat :.:me'. suit in': us try necessita te ~: e 8iTi-·)loyment of contractors a :l<-. sub-r.1r::mufacturers • 

AccorC:.i:1gly , all firins engac:ecl in tile coat anc'. suit incustry :1ho cause their (':p,r ;e 1ts thus to be >7l.::tc'.e by contractors 

and sub- rna ufc-.c turers as aforesaid , sh~.ll C:.esig"1ate the 

contractors actually required, sl1all confine and distribute 

their v1ork equitably to anc a:":'lo:'1G t:1em , and shall adhere 

t o the ayme~t of rates fer such production i~ an a~ount 

sufficient to enable the contractor or sub- manufacturer to 

pay t e errrployees t :1e Wa[,es anC.. earnings :orovid.ecl for in 

thi., Code , tcuget-ler 7i th an allowance for the contractor' s 

overi1ead . 

In pursuance of this p::ovision , the associations of the ;1anufacturers , the jobbers J.nd t11e co;.1tractors of 1·etropoli tan :re··; York have 

d.eter:11ined by J:rutual agreement that the allowance for t~1e contractor ' s 

overhead shall be 30'.~ of the lCI.bor cost on all gar ments the labor cost 

of v;j icl C:oes not exceed $2 . 50 . an( 33- 1/3% on all other garments . 

This ar.rangenent is 

t hose three a sociations . 

oC::. e Aut:1o ri ty. 

in force in the area UJ."'lcler the jurisdiction of 

I t l~s not been officially recognized by the 

At the :tearins held by the Commission in Be.l timorc as v,re ll as in 

Phi lade l ynia ru cl some of the other centers , tl1e representatives of the 

l ocal COj1tractors 1 associations complained of the lack of an arrangement in their cities imilar to that prevailing in _ ew or.~ and. reu.c~te G. t hat t 11e Col'!llnission recommend to the Code Authorit~r t .:tt it 

tal:e st eps for effectuating the provision of Article _Tinth of the Code 

s o tnc:-. t a ll the otb.er cities may l1ave the benefit of an arranc;ement 

::.:imilar to t he one in force in ' e., York v1here about 85% of the contractLlL; usinecs of the cou...'1 try is said to be <., one . 

9821 

The last parae-rap of Article ~iinth of the Code provides that : 

"To ir.s1..1.re t h e obseTvance of Lis -)rovision , the 

Corm:ri. ttec named. il t.1is CoC:.e , o·~ et 1er \':i th the Ad.-

rninistra tor , shall formulat e provisions to carry into 

effect tle purp ose and inte~t hereof . " 
-'83-

Re}re entatives of the ··c ;r vo ._·,. Contractors nave asl-:ed for the 

strengthenin[, of t:1e provisio~· :leT E' "!ujta-b le distri- ution of wo r k amorg 

a jabber ' s rctistcred r. tr ··v~tors, t:~r rovid.i ~ hc t in the event of 

f a ilure to obrerve t :1ir Jruvi ~i · " L 0 11 1e ··Jert of t~1e ,job-ber or manufactvrer , the Coc.e _.._u':'lority 't.~ i·cs c.' cni ;n'ltec.l re)re'"'ePtat ivo shall be 

vestcJ with t:e _.o•·tcr :. o orc.kr :,)?.y •. tt~nc , <1.3 :cet>+ ·_tution to tl1e contract or, 

of an amount eaual to the overl1ead El llor1ance set i'orth a.bove on t·he number ,_ . of garnents vrhich ~1.e failed to rece ive as his eCluitable share . 

FI~TD ~T G 

The Comminsion fL:ds Lut the co~1tr ..lC tor is re que:..1t l y caught between tv..ro fires : on t 1e one J.wnC:. , ~lE' mns c •)ay the CoJ.e FEI.ge rates , 

rrhile on t!1e ot 1er , L 1 t'1e au'"O!lre of c~1for ceme ::.t r1ac:hi nery w1c,_e r the 

Code, l::ee11 compotitio."' f:com h.:..s fellow C011tr<:·.ctors frea_uent l y leaves 

h i m at the l.1ercy of t~lP j:)bbt'r ,-,i t :1 t~1€. -xl ter11ative a: violating the 

wace )rovisioEs of t he Coc,_e or of ::'ailin.:c; to earn "i1is o•·m living , let 

alon~ his overh0ad ., T~1e !' or: .• al b11sin08S mo 1.·tali ty auong cont r ac tors , 

which is notorious , i s L1crsased b tnis lacl: of ~~Jrotection promised to 

him under ~he Code but not effectuateQ so far. 

8 . Unfair Compo ti tion f:om Other Industries: 

The Commission heard comuL:ti ~1ts in evei''f narl-::et of unfair com- • < 

petition sufferec1 by the Coa t m1c' s-l".it I nclustry from the raincoat , 

cotton garme:\1 t .;mc1 6.r ess L1dus tries. It Y7as s t a tee. t l1a t firms in t hese 

industrie s were nanufa.c turin:_<J; ganrPilts t hat in the pn.st nere manufactured. a~most exclu._s;vely lJy t_.le Co:1t ::mel. Suit l ilc'ustry . '!'he com-

~) eti Dg i n(ustri es 1 codo ~7age sto.ndu.rds a re l oner t il£.1 t:1ose for t he 

Coat and Suit Industry a·nc... a.., a re::;ult t~1eir e:1try L1to t!·.Le fi.eld as 

com~)e t.i tors ~1as been disas t..cous , it war a!.lec;ecL 

T~1e complainants askcC.. tLat fi:i:rns r11'1l;;: in~ ~'-" "B:nts ~;r:l ich a re 

normally mr"de in t he Coat an S _.:;_it L:us+;ry -De re:J,uired to p2 y Coat 

and Suit c ode waces . ~}Je~ a::.l": s~ ~ed tt.o.t the f i elds of t he compe ting 

industries be clearly ine , so ac o orevent t~ese industries from 

taking unfa i r om~;eti tive adv2.ntage of L 1e Coat anC'. S1.•.i t I nc.ustry. 

FLJIJL1G 

The Commission finds tr..at t here is Ge rit in these contentions . 

It is aware , however, that gr eat p r ogress a l ong these lines has already 

been made by the Admi nist r at ion, a ncl ca lls t he situation to the attention of the Acininistrator for such further action D.s he may deem necessary. 

9 . . Baltimore 

No issue in co:c!.nectioi1 vii t h tn~ Code has ar0Y.Sed ' s11ch bttter con

troversy in the I ndustry as t he question of the alloca tion of 5altimo re 

to the Eastern or Western area . Ii1 spite of Baltimore ' s tieographical 

positi on on the Atlantic seaboard , Baltimore ma11ufacturers took the 

position at the time of the adoption of the Code t hat in respec t to 

labor cond itions i t was in 1e same ]) ~ ition as cities in the Weste rn 

a r ea. :Bal timor e manufac t urers , espc: cia.lly t h ose operating se cti on shops , 

claimed that they had the srune problem in training he lp as the West and 

9821 
- £4-

t_ crefore 'r-ud to ~1rvc the · este r n clc"' ification of a;JHeatices nne.. of 

11 • emi- s :i lled11 ope r a to~ "' . Llcj [tlso ch.i med ti at , i~ e t 1 e est , t . ey 

·1cre a.t a clico·' <:~.:'tace os a:ainst .!e•.7 _ork i a the mntte r of sc lline , 

purc.1~sing "'.::'!( ·csi":lin.:_ al1<l :1.'?.d to r.o::e frequen t t1·ips t o } e a _orl,.. 

and evc:1 .kl.i:".tc>i ·1 s·•)CCial "'ellin::; a.1d ·i.nwin() offices t.1e r e . 

As ag,.,i·1::t tl e i r <...sscrtions , '7i th r ec;c.: r d to L::.uo , Je :1 Yor l: 

poi nted out· thc~'G unlil-::e some ')f tl e ·:estern c ities, B-:l.l t i more ''las an 

old coat :>.:.C. suit l"lar':et c-nC. '"J.l..d em·) o~red thous::>nd of sldlled cloal: 

"'1akcrc ir: tJ.1e -·as t and , in adcJ i tion L e r e to , 7as t"1e me of several 

:wedlc inu.ustries Ul)Oj: 'L'lich t}le coat =l .. ".d sui t i ncl_us t nr coulc, dra :v for 

s 1:illed ;or~~en; ; it r.ras u r r,ed , tnerefor e , t hat unlE e some of the Western c i ties :bc. l t i mo r e r1as not i n need of a·Y)rentices. :·ew York furt her 

co: te:.1ded t1u·.t En.l t imore i s only a sho rt distanc e ft'om New York as com-

"r)ared :1i th t he este r n c iti es , s catt e r ed E'.ll the vny f ro:-:1 Cleve l and to 

the Paci fi c coas t a nd that L'le eX'18jlse of ma inta i niw.:; a selling office 

in :. e ~ Yorl: 'las i n si[;ni f ica..."1 t a s c ompared r!i th t he sa v i ngs i n wa'-.es 

,·;hich Bc: l t i mo r e e f fe cts because of t he , .. estern a rea d i f ferential s . 

The Cocl.e \-las ac3.op ted vi th · :ar .,rl a ncl in the Bas t e r n a rea . Because 

of tile strone; objecti ons raised. by Ba ltimo r e :nanufacturers , a }•rOVlSl On ' 

nas fi nal l y L1se rt ed i n t he Code t hat "The ::Sal timore r.lc'lr::et is i nclucl.ed 

in the .ua ter n ::~. re a v:ri th the --.rovis i on tffi.t emp l oye rs t association t he r ein may r e quest t he ['.~~11 oin tmer!t of a. Conrrni ss i on by the Administra tor to 

CLe te r mh te a ft er Lwes t i c;ati on v1~1a t mo~-- i fica tion si.1oulr-. be c.ra:1 ted , if 

ai1Y • 11 

Act i ng Uj)Oi.1 ~1e r equest of tl1e :Be.ltimore Manufa cture r s , the Ad.mini s t r at olY ~.pp d s uch a Commi ssion 'fti th Professor .Ja cob 5 . 'So l l a nder 

of Jolli1 s p1 ~ins Unive rsity, Baltimor e , s Chairma n . Assoc i ated with 

?rofe s s or ::o ll c~e r · s the ot her n en bers o:ff t he Comr:1i"'sion nere : i'.ir . 

:-iathan l-13.mburger , Counsel f or t he Ba lti:r.10re manufa ct··- ers and r:r . Charles 

Kr e i ndler , Vice- Pre sid ent of t :1e I n ternational Lad i es 1 Garment Wo ::"< ·Fs 

~1 . Si nce t :1e o the r .Jemhers of t ile Cmn::.1i ssion •/ere t he C. irect repr es entatives of t he c ontending i n t e r e st"' , t he de cision re s ted entirel..r 

\"ti t l Professo r rtollander a s t he s ole i m_::12.rtia l m3mber of the Commi ssion . 

The Commiss i on resolv e d t :he que stion in f a vor of t he :baltimor e 

manufa.ctur er"' a:.1.c~ all oca ted Bal t i mo r e t o the est e rn a 1·ee.. I 1 vier1 of 

t:1e i m?10rt2.:1ce of tile c onsi d.erations 11!1i ch led Profess oi~ :-::o ll nder to 

ma:..:e t:.is C:.i s:::)Qsi tion of t he me~ tter and L1 o rder to -,re s erve co-ntinuit y 

in the consider ati on of the s ub ject , it may be v1ell t o quote from his 

G.ec isi o;.1 si~,i.1 ic nt passages 1hich wei c:;hed !wavily i n t ne scal es i n 

"' .:1r3.p i n£, i~ co:1clusi ons . 

I n revi e vL1,:: t he historic2.l bac!.:gr ound \'/1 ich led t o t he p resent 

condition of the 3al t i mo r e marl~t , Prof e ssor Hollander sai d : 

9821 

"The Ba ltimo r e mar!:et 11a.s been i n E?Xistence for mo r e t han 

t r1e!1t y- f ive ye a rs. :Uuring t h i s time i t has unde r gone 

successive CI1B.:1ges s o COIIIl} le te a nC. spasmoc ic as to d ive st 

i t of r eal cm1 tinui t y . The i ndustry has been in t urn 

f l ourishL1G 0..nd prostra t e , i t bas been a t t i nes l arg e l y 

1.:·1i oni zed am' at ot he r t i me s 1 redominantly B.L"1ti- UL"1ion ; it 

.nas sonet i me s ope r a ted on ~e enti r e - gar ment p l an and. is 
9821 

at present larce 1,, 11 ·~P c ti o.l' li zed. 11 ; male 011erativcs 

11::tVe u(.'"!!l ::rl.lccec cl.J(' u ·.•nt!IC:tl •.t• C.':. Cirl 11 hands 11 ; at one 

time ~t ic l-'.' ic1 c L t :e re lliu,_: a:::-ea , it ru:tG now a 

rest.t1ct ec, r:.~..l l L.1 · f -i " lcl. 

Del· n~-.. , c: 11·o .. t t l1e H.l GC- H ,Lt" ~..lf'..:l tJ.o ·,'l - ·J. r:t"'tter 

roU[)ll~' of te -~1 ·e :c s ~ I:i.., t Li s o.,. e '~-·v":. C• .r · .. period 

t~1e inC:.ust1-y .1as pc:tGsccl ., o ·.10'.'' lmnt:Q, 't.! .i1lon~mtion 

has been shot to )ie ~e , 1 s cct.ionn.l i:.:·-.tLol1'! ·:1:1" been 

introcuced. , male ·ror' ':3 1' ~ ~r c ee11 d1 '"" ">12 ced. b;y- \T07!1en 

anc:'. e;irl s , :;:cal earnL1:·,s J. .. .t\t C b-.; e n :c e c' ..1.ccJ E~ "ld 1i/O l':?5ng 

hours le:1ct ~e:1ecl , co.:1net:i tive :no·wer h:.s 1 0e 11 .f-'8C'u·ed by 

unu.e:rse ll L.r~ "11lC e :t e si o:1 o·1 n on- pre-fe::-:rer' cred:. t.. All 

of t :"!.is is co De ·· ll' O, ie cd :J.{'a:..nst n ·o':tcl:r;::..·ou.1d of a 

Bo.l tir1cre ir~ r~ic . ,~.s~ noGs ': ntin1e~1t a:..1c' ove11 pub lic 

opinirn :1ac; teen c}:.lll to 1.n~r effectiv e orc 211ization 

of lc1."cor wi 1 .:'l.t·vm~J "" t ccllecti re bal"t>;aL ling, and in 

whic":1 the ~'lt..titU!l l ' H "'• ct:i.ce of rilUl1iclpal m.1.thori ties 

a:1G. cot'T.lercit: l c r. ·:;J.i.z '.l tiolls lY.s been to ··~· ::-oc m to 

:r;:>ros:1 gct ive • .::t l11Ai' ct re:c ~ c; J.~ing nen l oc0.ti o;1 the 

a.'-1va~1t £ .. c es of ~Sc: l timore "s a t~' of ~1e8: > labor c:md 

freedom froi"1 l::'.bo:r 11 tr iL :!.:;s • 11 

11 Tl1e indust~-y ~1e s no\l - r l most overni t,ht - been conf:;_·ontecl \Jit£1 :1err and r:1cJ.ica lly d i ffer ent cnnc'itions . 

T:1ere :uv ( ocen rn::_.IJ sc~~ 1.. 2" : i t o~- :~:u ve i.' Yl..! cn. te. l aut ho rt~, , b;y ·>ut:::.. ..:.c opin5.o ... ~~ · y- ac~min str iv e s u•)ervi c ion, 

fundar"'e n ts.J.

1

.y c'.i ·~ e1· :. t c c:1C.i t ions of ·:races ~ hours , oversight, wor1

::c rs 1 o:.:-. ·-"'.11i z:'..tion - a ll of the ;.1ev1 familiar 

f eatm·es of 'L i1e :Jc..Lt:. u;, a:!. Rerovr;l y Acl:ninistration. The 

fir"'t :;;J~'k"l£e o f tl: is tl·a:.1:::.fonn;-;.t ion wLts the 11 blan;;:et 

code 11 to \::1ic.n 1 .:1 . a··>J: e !"'l..::ed. f rom aj_)~)C l p r oceeclii1{; before 

the local ~i e7al1 '.":f' CODHli ctee under t'n.3 1a irm2.ns ip of 

Colonel ·.7 . t. A. ~', i' Y'S lr- : Jv'te Llc·."l·stry D.fter a brief 

period acljusted i ~s'3lf. 'L1e 3( C0!1C.~ :•1hase C:.a teG. from t he 

a:?pr ove.l of t ::.e "!c~ u.str? code by President Roosev e lt on 

August 4 , Yhlereb y sU:os ~_ ti ll / more d r astic p rovis ions 

weTe i mr>Osecl_ 11 •••• •• 

11 It t hus a p:_! ea rs that v·i thin a pe riod of four weel:s 

t he Bc.l t i mo:re "Jarl:e t has suffered t wm shoc~-:s . It 

seems to t he Cormniss 1on ine~ )eche nt and even dan.::;e r ou s 

t hat it shoul d L'1 q_'Llic:c uccession ·oe exposed to a 

t h ird . Th i s on t 1c counts : first, on t he sco re of 

jus tice it i s not f a.i r t J.1a t e. g roup of man.p.facturers 

who c: ve l apsed into sociall y unsm.md :p r 2:ctices with 

the to l erance a nd ev en a:oproval of pub lic op ini on 

should. be mad.e in scareg1at f a t:b i on the victim of a 

ne w- born com:cience 8 I n t he :::;econd 1)lace, it is at 

variance v:i tl t he spil"i t of t he Nati ona l Re cov ery 

Adminj_st:ra t ion h~t t~1e rna j cr and.s of lessenint:, unemploymel1t .:'.nd. elimL1a tin€; sfl'eat- s h ·p conc: itions 

shoulC. be e;1de:~l [.;erec1 by t oo s nift and. too clr a s tic change . 

It means little ~12 t the op erat ion ·be successful if t he 

patient d ie . To e nda 1l(Ser t he p ositive gai :1s of mar :ed ly 
- 86-

otte r l"'Or~: in.:; t erms a 1r. of :_J l'OS '~ec tive i nc r eased emlllo;yi :cnt IJ~ t:1e :.. 5~ : n.: t l"i ess su~r ensio •. co.1se quent 

u:~ o·1 t oo ,·.,r-ut ,.cti cn , se cns to tile Cor.unission un 1ise . 

11 Th u.:m. . ,j ClH h;: J t_,i vCi.1 ce:r £'f u: c o11 iC'.e l'.:> tion to the 

ar().lr'r:lt'J -,·c r- ent~·d .it.~.,_ ~.L' e'L i '1 ll il.,;,t ~,- (.y t :1e re~"

c::. c~ tl78" of t 1 ~ r J: :e:·:::: ...,L .~J ,. o1 c: .n.::1 01. in'l!lor t a n t 

Ec ,r,tL.r:1 a r c'"' .V'11J.fa ctlL'(' r :... ~.:..t t JlC _ .... ·; r.o · e •:ar1 :e t 

rho"J.l c ·ue r c t .L1e :' L-. ti· e :::'ar .L c n1.. a ··s2. : s ·.r wi .... io·1al l y 

e.s siGr.o0. to L1e C(.de . ::he · r o ~-·)o ct .):· '· ) ·J ·i .{' .;o;1·.! 

G.i ti<''!S u.a:i f o rnt ti.roU£ •10Ut t 1e cc;_, ·1t :c; , ~ j -:: ct to tile 

d.iffcT e~ ti .ls ;:-. vi C:: e~.~ ir~ ~:r- Code , i s e:t . ...,cti ve in 

t l e e.': treme ; Lut j t secF.s to t :C.c CoiT'J:in rit:J. L1 ·G: e 

"& Ul~c o f a -=: l_ , e.~.·· :_ .1~ ~)-.:- t o be at ta.i. ne ~..t. , l'"'tncr tha:1 

of a ·-- roject i r. nec'.~.ats to ·o e real izec.: o r.;.nr; ~K~. a(t jus tE:tents of t f'"'l ysa:J. ::: CC'm.lu: :. i.~ ·. Ytly be limi ~'='tcd c::.t one 

strole o 1:1e funj _Li n.r :n·i:c .. ~i lle of 1e t.hy cvclu.ti.on 

r c- t i1c r t ha;.1 o:<: 1)•'r 1.Jr· us r )vc hltion mi;;ht te ncre i:w oked . 

I f ~e ~ L i T!lo rc ma:d-et c 1 i1 be .torthr·i th raised a'Jove 

submcr::;ed •:ror:.:in[, cc.md i t ions to re L:-· t i ve l y ece n t l iving 

c onch t iuns r:i l;h t1 e l i ' .:E' l.l.J::oof. of j nc:ceas cd 0rr~J loyr1ent 

o r a. t l e ast e~'.. sor •. ::-.:ol e .: ss --. .rR.i. ce a r;a ins t l~ed· .... ,_ced enp l oyment - a n 2.c.'.r,..., r.ce .1''.S bee --1 .~1·"'. G.e of suc h c.e!Oi r abili ty i n 

i t se l f :'nd. of su.c~1 ·1a ~'Hl acco1·:i v;i th the r}~O s of 

the ~- onc.. l :~e ve :.. ~ .. _·_ c:m ::..nisti.~ tio .. , t:b...:lt a r.ol de r a nd 

mo r e iu·<.zBrC:.o us c0u.rs e cl c- e.:J :1ot .:o r.l!. t-':lr1 ~ i~re . •. non 

~1ese :~a i:..1 s ,_·.fill }~:1 '110 ue '3!l conso lid tec , t h e wa:· lies 

2fel1 fo r flu· CJ1e r ::! l'OC resc ~II 

From the f or ec;o i:'.g c i tat. i on , i t i s c l ear t h...... t in · eco lving the 

G. oub t in fav or of t h 3 :B 8.lth c Et'..m.:>.fac ~11r0 rs , P:.:of crsor :iollF.mde r 

rec ob'11 ize cl t he tub ~£"''Lle YJ.t 'Jo f wor~.:in .~ c o::.di t i o:-:.s 'l'.:.li;'or n t h r oughout 

the c ountry , subjec t tc t he ci::.'fer c:;.YGial c- T ::·ovidr:G. i n -~ !e Code 11 a a a 

goal l1e r ea fter t o be a t taiaed·1 2 110. t '1at ~1en t:le ,,a i ns of t he v10rl:ers 

uncl.e r t he feE ter n re . ;~ .~ e s c- le 1 .c'lC t e en co:1colid.?.t ecl , 11 t he v1ay lies 

o:)en for f urther 1J:Logres::; '' • f? in'1.~J y.1 h e s~a ed. ·cha.t tl1e dec i~ion v1as 

r eached with t hE. t~:..OlJL,h t i:i.1 mi.11C'. :r t:l<:.. t the f unct:i. onirg of t ha Co e 

Autho r ity permits a later rev 0rsal [OllOu.ld devel ouments o 7arra n t 11 • 

The Ba l t i mo r e mar ::et ~U'. s bee:a o·')e r e.t efl nov1 unde r t !1e 7estern 

wage scal e of t he Coc.l..e fo r p r ac ti cal r .,_ year . T'1e ma :·1:e t s ic h hav e 

fe l t ~!e c orrrpetitiln 0 f t i1e secti on .. l !:~ 0"9S of B ·· ltimore c lai m t hat i t 

has had sufficient time 11 to C')llSO li i ::. te 1e gi.:.dns 11 , i n the l ::...:1guv.{;,e 

of tile rio lle.nde r r1_e c ision , a~-: .i. t:1.:·.t t. :: time hc.s 2.r r i veG. 11 :'or furt he r 

p r oc;;re ss 11 • 

, .aen the que:;t i or. ne.s firr t c'eor:. teo. beio re the ::ollande r Commission, 

t !1e on l - op--)oner. t s of :s~ 1 t i no·cc c, Pe from ow Yor k Ci ty . During t he past 

y ea r , tJ.1e r a k " of tne ').uJect o J.·s . ..eve been reii.;for ced u:.' the a dd iti on of 

ti.1cs e East ern :'l'lar' -:etc . :nc~ r_.,_,,e .t'elc t lC Cf'JTij)E'ti ti o:·. of Baltimo r e , 

o··)e r a t i n[; u:1G.e r t :1e .es~er.1 sc:~ le . 'l':::.ir; c nr, '1 etition ic; f elt .p articularly 

by co i.·~cer s cat e r,;.r .-; to t l".0 rr~B. l "'rJrr tra0e . T>ese i :1c l ude manufa cture r s 

ancl j obbe r s in i ~ York Cit~ , in ;;on b r i ta:.n , Co:m ., a:1d Camde n , N. J . 

All of thc.n a r c o"uliged to C) e: a te eithe r ·.L1de r t h e Eastern na ge scal e 

o r unde r t :ne s t i 11 h i bhe :c scalE.; ·1 _ p l ic'"l.b l e t o New Yor k City . 
-87-

This disp:;.ri t in l r bor cost i s flli~t el' a::.;( r ;_:.v ..... tcd by the f a ct 

that , in adJition to raltimore City nroper , t he Destern 2 llocation 

1as been extenclecl to t llree Pe,1nsylvc.'·.1ia to·. rns in wh ich are located 

plants wor:!:.:ing, 1.mder contract .~.o r :S ltimore ma:t1ufn ctnrers : ~1n. y1 es

, oro , Yorl: and ;ian·isburc; . Tites e tu'.ms n re locateC.. onljr a s~1ort 

clistc.:1ce frm;1 c1 c~ en , 1r . J . e nd SCI:mton , Po .• , C)nt '.inL1c; sectioi.1-

Dlized 1ops nhose ormcro c s.n:i1ot s ee t y \'h8.t l of'iC t :1ey are c1ei.1i ed 

tne sruae treat:.1ent t11:-' t is a ccorc.P C. t o t :.cs e to,.,:1s -, w-: L1 t i1e 

n::ttter of l a bor concl.i tio11s , the ne ce ssi t ; of E' L1i ·1,::- .F"l\7 nelp anc"'.. 

nvail<>tili ty of sui table l ::.t.bor th ~r a re in all r e sp ects in t :1e same 

position . 

The conpla int of e comp eti nc conce rns in t:1e j~aste rn area is 

th:!.t they are lo ·in('; busL1ess to ::-'· 1.1 t i more so l ely be c2.use of the unfc>.ir 

com:?et i tion r· 1ich :Se.l timore is able to of fer because of t he exce:9t i onal 

treatment e re.nted to it uncler the COCLe . 

As has ·been .:p oi nted out L1 Se ction 2 of t l1i s re·1 ort L1 discussine_: 

product i on costs L1 different .le.r':e t s (See Section;} ... pe.c;es 11, 23 , 

34 , 36 , 37, 39 and 46) , Ba ltimo re se.ct ion shops Qre consi stently in 

L1e lead e: s low cost proc~uce;rs , both vrhen com~_Ja in{. costs of a s~oe cific 

:::_arment i n d.iffere11t i:lo.r::e t s , .o.s '"Tel l as ,on a com•1arison of 11 r un-ofshop 11 costs for COEll)e titive houses in com:.lara-ole •_""~ rice ran(_'es • 

.b..;.:.othe r wt to be bo rne i n rainci. i 11 CO!!si de rL:.. t~1e J=k.l t i more 

situation is that the car Let i s com:oosed of t r10 c.i s tL1c t c r oups : (1) 

the sectional shops wnose ovmers nav e ·be en t:t1e sole conte:1c1e :c s f or t he 

a llo cation of B2.ltimore to the Western <..>.rea , and (2 ) ~1e ol G. s t y le 

tailorin:?_; shops wl1ich eml)l oy i1early two-thirds 65 ) of all t n e vwrl,:ers 

L1 the marl::et . The l a tter are , for the mast part , Ui1de r Ui1ion con t:col 

witD the result that the average e a rnings of their operators an~ pressers 

a re c.istinc tly a bove Eastern Code minima , and of the finishe rs one cent 

above the Eastern Cod e minimum. On t he other hand , t he se ctiona li zed 

shops are Jarc;e l y no:;.1- u.nion and t J.1e ir ovmers 1'1ave t a l:en full ad.vant ace 

of L1e opJJo rtl.mi ties offered by t he classif ications a:-.d lower r a tes 

of the i'Jestern scale , with t l1e result t ha t t he enrnings of t ·heir emp l oyee s are far be l ov7 t he earni nt;s p rovided · for 11 war: .:ers of aver a c e 

s~ill 11 even in the Wes t e rn co de s ca le. As will be seen from Ta ble C 1. 

t"i1e averace hourly earninc;s of tne piecevrorl.: operators in the sec tiona l 

·shops a re 85¢ as a c;a ins t .::i l.03 in t he t a i l ori nc; shO})S ; o:f finis he rs 63¢ 

as a c ainst 68¢ in the t a ilorine· s h o:)S ; of resser , 96¢ a s n{ ainst $1.16 

in t n e tailorinr; shops . The que s ti on of a llocat i on is t hus a matter 

of co:;.1cern chiefly to t he sectional part of the t ra<,le v;hich is c;iven a 

tremendous a dvant ace over t heir competitors il1 t he Easte rn a r ea . 

Just as the nanufac turers compe tinc Hitl.l. BcJ.l t i rnore f e el t he ir 

business menaced b-ece.use of what they ref:ar d as an w.1fa ir aclvantage 

w~ich Ba ltimore has cained l.ll1de r the Code as a r eult of the dec ision of 

the Holla nde r Commission, so does l abor f ee l its i n terest menaced because of t h e ,--.ra ["e disparities poin teet out in t he J) recedinc par ae;r aph. 

In t he opinion ·of the · Union, t he ll oc~tion of Baltimore to the 

Western area unjustly clep rives the wo rl::ers of B: lti ore of the wae;e 

cl.J.ssification wnich i s rig3:1t1-y t J.1eirs. In t he second lJl a ce , t h e Uni on 

contends t h:>.t the continl.lrince of -... l ower war;e sc '""~. le in one part of the 

9821 
- 86-

Zast ·r!lich is l. r.. ., tur n l l·co ·:.1 ~1 ic u.11it , m~ c' e U: "' of .i : ly co.;~ etitive 

~ :trt s , c nn t f "' il t 1 cxP rt ' h.~. L· hly • e~H e s"~ t e.lfec t "L ... pon t~1e e "' r:li l L ·s of 11 t 11e \lorke r s i n t :ue '~ t "'ncl Suit L'lC' .1s tr: .. i n .~L" t r e.r;ioi.1. 

~ ... L TG 

Tne onuni nsJ.on fi:~s : 

(J.) r'l." t - lti more 1 S "~ OSi ti o:l "' S TP " r ds "'V il .b ility of 1 .bor , 

ne c es"' i t y fo1· tr ~L1 in · r•or::c r s , ".:1c C: i t •nc e ::ror'l t : e center of t ' e 

i nc:un t ry , i s nu' st n ti "' U.y t he s·"'ue . t e · Jsiti .n of ot her :- ~ter1 

w·'.r1.:ets o~At "'i de of ~ e r.' _or 1: City ; 

(2) Th:-. t 9 s sl o -rn i !l thi R r e1 ort , :D ~ l t i more s e ct i on :.;hops enjoy 

t he l o•:•est 1--Dor costs Je r : ;" r!nent L1 t l e c ou·1.try, t ! e c:ifference in 

c ost be i n._ subst "'.n ti ... lly in e xcess of ~1e b " sic -:-~ iffere: tinl between 

t :1.e E-1.s tern :: nd Vestern sc'l.les; 

(3 ) T::.. t is follows, t herefore, tlY·. t B .l timore section shops 

h·w e bee:a ".ble to :.djust t h emselves to t lle n e·e cl'l'"' n, es broucht l..bout 

by t:O.e Code ; 

.. (t .. ) Tn,-.t the 13.".1 ti or e t .ilorinc· sho"Js ·.-v:·tich e!"'ll)loy tr1o-thirds 

of c".ll· t ' e 'IO :ers i:1 Le '1::>. ~: et ".re :~ n ~Y"' Yii1C \!'"'.('e substai tia lly 

h i Li e r r:. t~e 'l.~ tern rninimurn sc: le ,anc~ , therefore , 'lOUl · not be 

rn:\t e ri £•.lly a ffect e6. · by· ~. tr !'> i. .~sfer of J),:,,lti rnore to e 3n.stern C'reP. ; 

(5) Thr.t ltin re f '..ileG. to '-rove its c onte1:tion tbP.t its sellill['' c osts :->. 1~e hi cher t n\;,. ws e of Se\J r:~ , .-.,_nc: th.'l.t t ,1ere is n<Jthi ng 

in t le ricu.re obt2.L1ed thrcru.::;h t i1e Col"llnission ' s orm Llvesti -,:: --tion to 

susta in B ltimore ~ cl,im; (* ) 

(6) Th-:-. t L \ ltimo re ' s ·i :atirect "~ bor cost s ~·IJ. tiC 11 i nclud.e the cost 

o f s u:-•e rv i s i on ·:'.nd tr-.in inc; 3-re ~ra on,· • t l1e· lowest in the country , tbus 

d i sprovi nt, t i1e a sserti o~ nn.cle ·v:r t he spol:e sm "'.n of t }1e J l t imore mnuf -...cture r s "'" ~1e Commission t s J.1e "'.l'L1C J.'l ~ t :L> 1 timor e rns e:: titled to a 

diffe r enti J.l to offset its hit2;'her cost of su:pervisi od 1.:1d tr .... inL1g; 

(7) T ".t B ·ltirnore's shop over.1ea d i s 1L;:e·7ise . one; t :1e lowest 

in ~ e co1.mtry; 

(8) Th01.t in t h e 111'1 tter of buyi:lC costs :a 1 timore h".s fC~..ilcd to 

submit :tn. r f i c,ures ~ , t nould ~·• rove th• t it h.'1.S • i t;her costs t !l"'..n q,ny 

tl1.e r m"'.r ::e t in t...1e ~.s tern ::>.re:.l. , :- n -' the Commi ssion lns no ther .r round 

fo r ·be lievinc t h--. t B-":.1 tir. ore is n.t ::1. d is.:'l.dv?.nt8.g e L1 1is re _:c=:trd c:.s corn-

!1 '..r e:d 7i t h rtn y othe r ce·t1 ter ubject to the stel~n Cod.e r J..tes; 

(9) T n t t he s.?.Jne co:1cl1.1sion -..pplies to t !1e i tern of freight 

c '11: r g e s on ? ieee goods , since Bl.l timore 1 s ce e; ;~.: )llic l :position is such 

• s t o put it OJ.1 s ub st · 1 tia lly t l e s-"'J!le foo t inc; .?.s ot her E.1.ste rn m~ r~:ets 

----~------ (* ) It --~~--------------------~~ sh ohl-i be st ted t n:·.t not a ll ------~~--~---------- t·1e B...,ltimore concerns ~~ --- Vlerd ~ 

21 

\'/i l li:1c; to furnis1 t. c fi:::,u.res c.:-- lled f or by t l e Commission . 

L.mo::1e t ' .ose \7 ich refuse(.. rJere t '10 of t he .':l ~· est concerns in 

· 3 c:tl t i rno re . · · 
-89-

TABLE C-l 

BALTIMORE MARKEr 

Week Ending March 9 , 1934 

NUMBER <F EMPLOYEES, HOURS AND EARNINGS FOR EACH MAJ<R CRAFT 

and the 

Tar AL FOR WEEK-WORK TAILOR - PIECE WORK TAILOR OR SECTION 

--· z 

WEEK-WORK 

TAILffi 

---

WEEK-\'IO~K 

SECTION 

PIECE-WORK 

TAILOR 

PIECE-WORK 

Ma1or Craft 

1 - 1 Cutters 

1 - 2 Operators 

1 - 3 Finishers 

1 - ·4 Pressers 

1 - 5 Floor Help 

1 - 6 Other Mfg. 

1 - 7 Non Mfg. 

TOTAL 

2 - 2 Operators 

2 - 3 Finishers 

2 - 4 Pressers 

2 - 5 Floor-Help 

2 - 6 Other Mfg. 

TOTAL 

3 - 1 Cutters 

3 - 2 Operators 

3 - 3 Finishers 

3 - 4 Pressers 

3 - 6 Other Mfg. 

3 - 7 Non Mfg. 

TOTAL 

SECTION 4 - 1 Cutters 

4 - 2 Operators 

4 - 3 Finishers 

4 - 4 Pressers 

4 - 5 Floor-Help 

TOTAL 

NOI' CLASSIFTA BLE AS TO 

W.W. or P.W. or TAILOR 

Total No. 

Employeqs 

16 

25 

7 

5 

6 

4 

28 

91 

104 

35 

28 

10 

1 

178 

10 

341 

128 

80 

3 

1 

563 

6 

115 

42 

12 

1 

176 

9 - 2 Operators 1 

9 - 6 Other Mfg. 1 

9 - 7 Non Mfg. !,! 

TOTAL 16 

TtT AL BALTThi<R E 1,024 

9821 

Total 

Hows 

507 

700 

217 

168 

210 

150 

1,071 

Total 

Earnings 

$ 626 

467 

132 

139 

88 

98 

_i77 

3,023 $2,029 

3,510 

1,132 

962 

356 

35 

$2,336 

612 

828 

164 

33 

5,995 $3,973 

337 

9,506 

3,264 

2,325 

105 

23 

344 

9,827 

2,223 

2,&9.6 

112 

35 

15,560 $15,237 

210 

3,486 

1,204 

414 

35 

239 

2,950 

754 

398 

19 

5,349 $4,360 

40 14 

35 65 

530 304 

605 383 

30,532 $25,982 

Average 

Earnings 

Per Weqk 

$39.12 

18~68 

30.99 

28.00 

14.66 

24.38 

17.07 

$22.24 

$22~ 46 

17.67 

29.57 

16.40 

32.50 

$22.31 

34.43 

28~96 

17.36 

33.71 

37.33 

34.50 

$27.06 

$39.81 

25.65 

17~96 

33~14 

19.04 

$24.77 

14~00 

65~00 

21.70 

$23.93 

$25.37 

Average 

Hours 

Par Week 

31.7 

::B .o 

31.0 

33.6 

35.0 

37.5 

38,3 

33.2 

33.8 

32.3 

34.4 

35.6 

35.0 

33.6 

33.7 

27.9 

25,5 

29.1 

35.0 

23,0 

27.6 

35.0 

30.3 

28.7 

35.0 

35.0 

---

30.4 

40~0 

35.0 

~ 

37.8 

29.8 

SEC. _ _a. P..~ 

Average 

Hourly 

Earnings 

$1.24 

.67 

.61 

.83 

.42 

.65 

.45 

.67 

$ .67 

~54 

.86 

.46 

.93 

$ .66 

1.02 

1.03 

.68 

1.16 

1.07 

1.50 

--

1.14 

.85 

.63 

.96 

~ 

.82 

.35 

1.86 

--!E1 

.63 

.85 

~ith r espec t to frPi eht co ts; 

(10 ) That Ec-•.ltimore ~lEts f'"l.il cC:. t. o subst .:t.ntiate its cl ~. im of highe r 

ost s under a ny of the i t erns mentioned. b y its spolce s1n.? n, a nd 

(ll) ThJ.t , Els shor.rn by tl-1e firur es Gn s< .. lA s volume' p resented in 

Section 6 , the :a,-- ltir11ore :1ar:':et enjoyeC:. '"l. much c re;.1.ter L1crec.s e i n 

do lla r volume of sale s from 1933 to l 'J34 t h1.n did rny other m:.rl:et il1 

t he i ndustry. 

In vi ew of t he f or ec·o inr.; , the Commis ior .. find s th"'. t the enj oyr:1ent 

by t he B".l timo re m:1.r l'::et of ., ciif eYGi1t ~. l h i t her· t:·c '.!"- t hr,.t ~l.. ccorde c:t to 

other r:. r~::ets in tne East with 1r.rhi ch it i s in direct C0!11\1e ti tion c;ives 

it a n unL1.ir competitive n.d.v •nt:-'.['e . 

l Hew Jersey: 

The Commissi on heard sever'"l.l c omp l _, i nts on its visits to (')ther 

m2.r kets of t 11e com~J eti tion of l·! ew Yor::: jobbers in t n e l o1if price a. ::~ es 

due to t '1e ir utili zing ~1e service s of New Jersey con t r'"l.c t or s . From 

its i nqui r ie s , L1e Cemmission i s convinced t h ..... t tlleBe comp l 1.ints were 

l .J.r t=,ely justifi9ci due to t .l.le f :·1.ct t b .... t t here h ::t.s been :->. vrholes::U e disre ~a rd of t he Code ~tes by lle7 J e r sey CGl ct . 

This vras C".use d by ~.1 e f.1.c t t .1::.t t i..,_e Stt.•. t e C' f lTeH Jer e~r <:lf. optcd 

a code of its ,., vr.l for t :1e Co).t :mC Sui t I :t1c'.us try , c re.1.tinc its own 

Code Authority , v1 itl1 i -cs O'-m Ci rect ol' • I t '.'re·,1 t .-.... e~.., furt:1er ancl 

provlded for a l a bel ·w:lici1 mic;l1t e."lsilv ·u(; mi f.t ·1.l:e:1 f Gl' t "i1e ~1;;. ti .'t l 

l a bel a nd t hus set t i.·_e ;.-:at ion .1 cod_e -~ t n ·'.u.::_;ht so f· r ·'.s New J e r sf'y 

w-:> s conc e rned . While some jobbe r s were '-lble ~ o t ..,.l:c -:".c~ m ta::.;e o f that 

situa tion, it vms C!Jmb '1.t e d by t he NeH Yor];: m:.1.:cke t C'l'lC vigorously f ought 

and denounced b y Mr. George W. Al c:er , Dire ctor of t~:e Co 'l t and Suit Code 

Authority. 

As J. r esult of t he eff<nts m:-·.C_e oy ~1e officers of' the t h ree New 

York ansociations in the Cor> t cmc1 Su it L 1ci.ustry :~. nd of t he CoG.e Authority, a sett lement 0f t he conflict r:-3.s f i:Y.l ly re.".ched n.t t he encl of 

Apri l by the te rms of Vhlich t 1 e New J ersey CoC.e Autlwri ty has ::tf_;r eed 

to withdraw its s t a te l 1.be l . 

In t he meantime , ~vt t;es hn.ve ·oeen ·n refe::red ... 1.~ 'J.inst contr8.ctors 

found p::tying wages bel0 7 t :1c: Code minim.:-'.. More t ha:"l $2o ,roo ht'.s been 

c "" 1lected by the Co de Authority f o r waf e de fici enc ie s ·>.nd cinr ges for 

more t m n 30 /~ 00 :::;.r e ~)G! C·. ne; . 

The Cor..mission is -:.ssured b y 'lll t he r es_!)onsi b l e officers of t he 

Co<ie Autho rity, \ho h.') ve been d irectly conce rned in Lds na tter, t bat 

they a re confident t hat 3.11 t hese o·ust::tc l es t o code e :·1forc ement have 

been r e;noved ancl t ha t they l ook f o rnn.rd t !J effective e:1forcement of the 

Co de i n t h e cominG Fall ~s on . 

9821 

Resp ~ctful y submitted, 

COWU SS I ON ?OR THE COAT MTJ SUIT I NDUSTRY 

N. I . S trme 

Pa u l F . Brissenden . 

.APPElilliX TABLES 

9821 

- 92-

TABLE Rl 

tRun-ot- hop 'oot In the Yarlouo \1 Rrktto tor the "prlnr '>eaoon, 1934, and ,.rnre Ho 1 E 1 h Elrht \ 1 eeko' l'trlod £otled :>larch 31, 1934, b) lnd h ldual t 'lrmo, l ur v """ "" tor t • 

"nrk Lt-ttf'r "C''' prf't•f'dlnk' a flrm rode numbt-r lndl<·alea a contractor'" 11hua,, Code tor t~ pe of a hop : P-Piece 

hourt' ':a7~~~";1ik o'b~~"n·e,.rtr!::.!'~'~"~•~ ~.op . '-""'f'cflon ~hop . Run of t.hop costs obtslntd b,· ~c ountants ; ., erac• 

U) tU 13) ( f ) 151 !7) (8) 

\' rra.,.e T)pe ,. ... ~. 

p rice nt,- u .a HO \ bE 

Firm of -Dirtct labor- Jn dlrtct Factory eode shop Tallurl nK (utlln~t la bor O\erhettd 

4 Camd•n ..... ~.280 PS ~ 18 Baltimore . .. CfO,Oll PS 6 23 Kan. as Cit 70 090 PT 6 4 70.010 PS U .76 H OI.' 1:/ Kan as City 

9 21 

7 7~ Loa Angelts 7 83 an Francasco ~ 

.82 

8.89 8 34 Portland ..... 7 40 Baltimore .. , 7 97 

7 97 

937 

1 38 Philadelphia . 8~ 

875 B~sto n ....... 110.75 R O \ SE 10 09 St. Lou1s .... 11 60 Kanoas City .. 10 ~ Los Angeles ..• 10.16 10 02 San Francisco . 1007 

9 6 Portla nd 10 32 10 42 

70,020 

70.110 70.170 &0,430 90,440 90.360 90,430 90,240 90,040 40.020 C40.133 C40,131 C40. 161 C38.092 C38.261 C36.:151 

70,180 70,(\f() 80.820 so.uo 90.4~ 

90.520 

90 3~ 

90,220 

90.340 10.42 10 82 Baltimore C90,3U ..... 40,210 C40,001 Philadelphia .... 38.160 10 7~ 

10 40 

Sl U6 HOl' SE 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PT 

\\'T 

WT 

\\'T 

WT 

WT 

PS 

PS 

PT 

PT 

PT 

PT 

WT 

WT 

WT 

PT 

PT 

WT 

WT 

WT 

PT 

WT 

PT 

PT 

WT 

PT 

11.85 Cleveland . . . . 42.2-10 PT 12~ H~ PT 12 75 42,191 p 127~ Chlrago . ..... C~.35f PT 12 ~ C~ :\52 PS 12 75 C52.011 PT lm st: Louis ..... c~~ ·g~ ~ 11 6:5 L. Angeles . . . 80.770 PT 12 75 80,360 PT 11 97 S Frar c;sco .. 90.200 WT 12 49 Poll land . . . .. . 90.390 WT 12 00 Boston 36.510 WT 12 53 37 010 WT 12 53 C36,340 WT $U.76 H OI' E :: n L Angelts 

13 75 Phlladelpht& 13.66 Bo ton .. 13.68 13 66 13 66 

80,460 tlO.OfO . 38.230 .C36.57f C36,575 C36.571 C36.572 PT 

WT 

PT 

WT 

WT 

WT 

V."r 118.15 H Ol' E 16 ~ Cleveland 16 ~ 

17 12 15 75 15 85 15 ~ 

)~- ·2 16 76 16.6f 17 24 

Sl. Louis ... . Kan as City . . S. Fr a. n~l co . . Seattle .... ... . 

16.76 Philadelphia . 15 71 Bo•ton 1724 

42 210 PS 42.190 PT 70,190 WT 700~ PS 90.120 WT 90,130 PT 90.470 WT 90.500 WT 90.090 PT 90,100 PS 38.100 WT 36.310 WT 36.590 WT 

bl 

79tl) 

I~ 

107 

I 19 Ill 

I :1.1 I 46 

I ~I 

I 70 

2 01 

1 &1 I 51 

97 1ro 

146 

2 21 

I ~2 

2 26 

2 4& 

2n 

I ~6 

Hl9 

211 

1£.5 

2 19 2 46 

268 

225 

2 48 

23 

2 If 

3U 

;1 23 

3 19 3 17 177 

2 112 ? 'oG 

~ r. I 7& 2 31 J 09 

226 

2G3 

3 15 

3 317 ·~ 

2.7 

323 

3 79 

3 26 

3~ 

3 43 

3 26 

314 

3 79 

1!-2 

2&3 

~ 21 

2 95 

3. 9 306 

3 79 380 

4 98 

263 

lG5 

1 ' ) Included In li gures for Dorect Lob~" 

$18.76 HO t: , E 18 1~ St. Louis .. .. 70.100 PT 19.00 70,060 PT 18 17 San Francisco 90,160 WT 17.57 Boston . . .. .. 36,400 WT 17.46 C36, 170 WT 17 46 C37.010 WT SUU6 .'lSD l ' P ROt:SJ': 19.70 Cleveland . . . . 42,1:10 PT 19 75 42.080 PT 20.19 Chica go . . . . . . ~.6~ PT 21.14 50,360 PT 2l.89 0 PT 21. 91 St . LoUIS • • • • 70.:100 PT 19.75 Los n~:elts .. 80.110 PT 23 30 P hiia . . . . 38 ~ PT 25~ 38 ~ PT 30. 19 Chicago ...... ~.380 PT 

508 

3 97 

4 38 

471 

4 08 

3fl 

463 

414 

430 

541 

5 10 5 73 

3 89 

5 38 

4 70 

Hl8 

08 

07 

40 

24 

32 

.16 

I 

17 

15 

26 

24 

59 

29 

If 

13 

13 

15 

25 

.. 

23 

42 

47 

:15 

36 

42 

36 

00 

36 

36 

36 

00 

32 

.sa 

61 

38 

~ 

17 

~ 

w 

.32 

u 

42 

34 

~ 

46 

31 

~ 

.38 

42 

48 

52 

51 

48 

2t 

.34 

46 

85 

66 

42 

M 

85 

75 

.&6 

66 

109 

93 

fl 

57 

68 

39 

107 

36 

38 

.00 

63 

.6:1 

80 

92 

9f 

70 

78 

Sf 

36 

129 

30 

07 

25 

.39 

76 

.69 

68 

11 

29 

20 

07 

09 

21 

.11 

.12 

.12 

10 

.27 

2~ 

.24 

~ 

14 

07 

22 

17 

:15 

.31 

42 

23 

32 

20 

~ 

.23 

I 

35 

liT 

ll 

21 

.18 

48 

11 

~ 

.39 

2f 

19 

49 

19 

24 

H 

.56 

.36 

38 

99 

63 1 t2 

08 

.20 

. 

31 

.71 

.52 

.59 

.59 

.36 

.39 

.55 

.24 

.Sf 

.27 

.:15 

.57 

.38 

.67 

.21 

.59 

.22 

.15 

07 

.13 

25 

.u 

.13 

28 

07 

.09 

14 

15 

.21 

33 

12 

B 

10 

11 

19 

07 

17 

22 

45 

16 

12 

18 

20 

.22 

.20 

31 

23 

26 

10 

09 

23 

00 

30 

nt 

OS 

18 

17 

23 

13 

19 

27 

17 

18 

16 

17 

.H 

34 

18 

20 

.22 

22 

11 

23 

61 

.38 

.83 

36 

32 

32 

31 

.28 

71 

23 

17 

34 

.32 

40 

70 

.34 

.28 

16 

.61 

18 

34 

.32 

43 

2f 

.19 

18 

17 

f1 

(8) !10) (II) (Ill 

Total hop 

cost per --~A\tra~e houri> ~•rnlncw·­

Garm e nt Oper~Ltlnr t lnl oh lng Preoalng Total 

l 34 ° 97 71 9 92 ! ~ 69 61 .74 .69 68 53 .64 6( 

I 95 61 57 70 .61 

2 53 <21 62 60 .69 62 2 0913) .61 ~7 70 61 2.47 .76 .61 &0 7f 1.81 .99 .61 76 83 

~-n ~~t -~ I~~ ~ 2.70 .78 ~ : ~ .74 

Ui· 121 n :* t~ ~ ~ g~ l ~ .74 130 I 06 

2 ~ 66 ~ ~ I~ 3 01 1 21 70 1.28 1 06 3 12 (4) 1.24 .66 118 P.~ 

l~ f5) ~ ·~ 1 g~ ~~ 2.66 l· ~ . 63 .94 .97 

2 67 Sf ~ ~ ~ 2 92 1 31 .58 1 6( 1.00 

3.53 .71 ~ ~ 13 s~ 79 57 ·8 ·n 3 34 .76 58 71 !5 ~~ ! ~~ ,D 448 l 40 S8 I ~i L?l 

43() 

3!!0 

4 37 

2 05 

2 40 t61 3 15 <7' 3 41 ( ) 

2 75 

2 91 3 62 

303 

3.76 

403 

4.:15 3 91 

a 43 454 

468 

f 21 4.89 

4 45 

f .07 

4 21 6 24 

6 49 5~ 

551 

4 32 496 

4 23 f 73 t9) 5 60 110) 6.45 4 12 

508 

6 67 

5.35 6.;1 

5.80 

~27 

4.31 

6 81 5.2t 

79 

722 

6.83111) 

7.34 507 

6.99 

5 23 

7.80 

I 73 74 1.48 Incomplete 95 fl I 13 79 .66 .98 77 61 7~ 

91 .71 1.03 :"ot A\·allable 10 60 100 1 3P 62 l 13 1.2$ -~ 1 34 1 02 .86 I 36 74 ~ .82 I 43 1.05 I 29 1 40 .to! I 25 

l.U 

1.25 

1 45 1.21 

133 

1 27 

1 34 

:'lot A ' 'a ilable 

.72 

.69 

87 

93 

88 

.63 

.78 

102 

I 53 

166 

146 

I.U 

1.47 

~ 

82 68 1 :15 I 34 .6:1 I 05 97 61 1.10 68 82 77 I 12 .63 l .H 70 5f 103 76 52 1 10 89 58 1.11 Inromplete 

Not Available I 36 .85 I 6ol 1.24 .82 I 27 1 41 .90 1.26 

I 10 1 If 

99 

1 38 

81 1 40 

147 

I 43 

100 

116 

1 26 134 

1.22 1 40 

I 21 

I IS 

1 73 

78 

.53 

.86 

.92 

.94 

6:5 

.H 

89 

.90 

.78 

.70 

81 

92 

109 

93 

1.18 

1.98 

I 19 

I 38 

100 

125 

110 

1.08 

I 13 183 

1.45 

156 

I 18 

1.82 

2 05 

!.Sf 

1.24 

so 

.78 

.73 

.89 

70 

100 

106 

93 

.71 

129 

1.18 

90 

!Of 

1.27 

I 18 1.15 

1.16 1.1 ~ 

.ss 

!Of 

.M 

68 

87 

67 

.72 

79 

1 15 

88 

1.18 

.94 

1.11 

.Sf 

1.12 

.91 

1.18 

1.09 

1 15 

1.00 

l lf 

1.10 

1.10 

I 02 

1.22 

1.27 

1.13 

:SOTE . til-This direct labor. 121-Thls per garment. 13)-Thls 

figure must be supple men ted b; wage deft,' lenci•s paid to Cod• Author>tr-approximately· lO% of 

tlgu r e must be supple men ted by wage deftcienclts psld to Code Authority-approximately 4c 

figure must be sup ple metll•d by wage d eflclenciu paid to Code Authority-approxlma.tel v 2c 

per lr (;j ::~kts tlgure m ust be su pple men ted by " ·age deficiencies paid to Code Authority-approximately 3c 

per garment. )-Th s figure may be su pple mtnttd by ""age deficie ncy assessment ptndlng-approxlmately 35c pe r 

garme ~--Th s figure must be su pplemented by w a ge de!lclenci .. paid to Code Authority-approximately 2e 

per g~ "~¥Ls figure may be supple men fe d by wa ge deficiency a,.u11111ent pending-approximately 5c per gar· 

~nt . (81-This figure m ust be su pple men t ed by wage deficten ciea pald to Code Autborlty-approxtmately ltle 

per (~)~!}~l s figure must be supple men ted by " ·age deflcienclea paid to Code Authority-approximately 2c per 

me ~) -Th is tlgure must be supple m en t ed by wage deficienci u p~id to Code Authority-approximately Sc per 

garme -Th . fi gure must be •upple men ted by -..·age deficlencle• pald to Code Authorlty-approximat<ly 3c per 

arm~~~-) -Th s figu r e must be supple men ted by wa ge d eficiencies paid t o Code Authority-approximately 12c 

per garment. 

9821 

TABLE R lA 

Sec. 2 - p. 34 

( 'r;._ILORIVG COSTS A. u AV :!?.AG?. :-10 _;:--u,;:: B.IWH(GS I:~ THE .3 - YORK i,:.ARf:E'l' 

BASED U?O;~ FAYROL:..S FCR TKE E-G:i'l' YiEEK ?ERIOD EliDED L:ARCH 31, 1934) <D 

CD 

... 

1\) ---------- Details of ~ia -. >e ef~ctencles no~ yet available 

Cod.e for Type of Silop : P-?iece ·.iork; ·.r-:.e ek \icrki S-!Jection Shop 

1 ? 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 

1......a._J.....L.Q__r_1__ll__£_ __ _9_o~ A_:!_~~ H o u r 1 :L. !:. o. r n 1 n 6 s Firm Type ·.-:et.y.ted. 

',16. 75 HOUSES Code# Grad.~ of ShOJ2 OQerat1110 F1n1sn1n6 ?res~ Total Ooeratinc; F1n1sn1..£l.5 Pre ssing Total 

Jobber 4,190 

Contract r 4,193 1-2 ? lJ.l .40 .40 1.91 1.28 .84 1.34 1.17 

4,192 1-2 p .94 .42 .38 1.74 1.70 1.19 1.93 l.S8 

4,191 1-:' p 1.11 .42 .41 1.94 1. 22 1.31 1.60 1.31 

Aver abe 1.01 .42 .39 1.82 1.45 1.12 Lo9 1.40 

Jobber 6 ,260 

Contrac t or 15,037 1 p 1-25 .25 .36 1.86 1.17 .69 1.35 1.09 

1;. ,066* 1 p 1.09 .43 .45 1.97 1.51 1.07 1.97 1.45 

Avera:;e 1.14 .38 .42 1.94 1.37 .96 1.76 1.33 

Jobber 1, 940 

Contractor 1,941 1-2 p 1.05 .14 -37 1.')6 1.43 .82 2.30 1.47 

1,943 1-2 ? 1.10 .16 . ::;7 1.63 1.53 .95 1.65 1.47 I 

15,203 1-2 p 1.07 .18 .38 1.63 1.33 1.02 2 .01 1.39 <D 

1,942 1-2 -r .e.o .27 .26 1.33 1.14 .99 1.40 1.15 ~ 

Avera " ge 1.01 .19 -35 1.55 1.36 .95 1.84 1.37 

Jobber b,930 

Contractor 6,934 1 rr .76 .10 .18 1.04 1.45 .. 94 1.42 1.38 

6,931 1 \7 .74 .21 .22 1.17 1.25 - -97 1.49 1.22 

Average .76 .12 .19 1.07 1.42 .95 1.43 1.35 

Jobber 760 

Contractor 7ol 2-3 p 1.13 .53 -39 2.05 1.57 1.16 1.41 1.41 

Jobber ,9 -bO (Average Sales Price 6.12) 

Contractor 2,952 1-2 R -91 .27 .25 1.43 1.06 .92 1.47 1.08 

2,953 1-2 p . 84 .25 .25 1.34 1.17 .96 1.48 1.17 

2,954 1-2 p .80 .24 .26 1.30 1.08 .75 1.18 1.00 

2,957 1-2 p 0 " ., o .25 . 29 1.52 1.05 -93 1.45 1.09 

2, 958 1-2 p .92 .26 .23 1.41 1.18 .91 1.42 1.15 

2,951 1-2 p .71 .22 .24 1.17 .95 . 97 1.45 1.03 

2,962 1-2 p .92 .22 .28 1.42 1. 25 .80 1.30 1.16 

2,963 1-2 p .98 .so .36 1.84 1.66 1.99 1.80 1.77 

.; ,955 1-2 i'l .60 .21 .15 1.02 .95 .68 1.01 .88 

2 ,959 1-? p • '(1 .40 .26 1.37 1.08 .99 1.08 1.05 

2 ,956 1-2 p . 88 .30 .30 1.48 1.06 1.01 1.27 1.09 

Average .85 . 28 ·26 1.39 1.14 .97 1.35 1.13 

* Subject to correction. 

TABLER 1A - p. 55 Sec. ;:. 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 

ID T a 1 1 o r 1 n B c 0 s t A v e r a B e H o u r 1 :i E arning.s CD Firm Type rlelg.nted ~ Code# Grade of shoE OJ2erating Finishing Pressing Total OJ2eratin0 Finishi1'!5 Pressing Total 

i6 ·1!2 HOUSES CO!JT 1 D. 

Joooer 2,091 1 VIS .43 .n .1j .6"f .81 . 57 .97 .{0 (Connecticut.) 

Jobber 5,3?0 (Avera0e Sales Price 5.38) 

Contractor 5,351 1 TIS .83 .22 .lc 1.1 ( .94 0 "(13 1.11 .~2 (Broo:tt1yn, N.Y.) 

n 5,352 1 ws .88 -22 .18 1.28 1.01 .84 1.08 .99 (Broo~~:lyn, N.Y.) 

Average .83 .22 .13 1.18 .95 .79 1.10 .93 ... 

Joooer 1,970 

Cont-ractor 1,9"72 1 p 1.013 .43 .4Q 1.91 1.23 l. 20 1.28 1.23 II 15 ,055 1 p .79 .113 .27 1.24 1.05 .ljj 1.22 1.04 

1,973 1 p .96 .32 .36 1.64 1.03 .13? 1.12 1.01 

1,974 1 p 1.08 .35 .42 1.8::> 1.07 .98 1.35 l.ll 

Average -95 .31 .35 1.62 1.09 .9o 1.22 1.09 

s!10. "(.'5 HOUSES 

Joboer 400 (Averai$e Sales Price 10.0 ) 

Contractor 401 2 ·P 1.32 .85 .61 2.94 1.52 1.27 1.93 1.50 II 407 2 p 1.113 .69 .57 2.58 1.55 1.2"( 1.50 1.10 

" 408 2 p 1.::>2 . 56 .56 2-59 1.51 1.31f 2.09 1.5o I 

400 2 p 1.1"7 .82 .ol .2.78 1.50 1.13 1.62 1.48 ID 

4o9 2 p 1.20 .38 .45 2.13 1.40 1.03 1.96 1.40 t 

405 2 p 1.14 .70 .58 2. 56 1.26 1.09 1.64 1.28 

Avera;;e 1.22 .67 .47 2.36 1.49 1.18 1.46 1.313 

Jobber 2,430 

Contractor 2 ,431 3 p 1.63 .51 .63 2.92 1.61 1.55 2 .41 1.73 II ;:. ,432 3 p 1. 34 .52 . 57 2.57 1.84 1.46 1.77 1.73 

2,433 3 p l. 72 .39 .o, 2. M 2.12 l.l.9 2 .s·r .83 

2,454 3 p 1. 73 .59 -59 3.03 l. 72 1.01 2 .23 1.57 

2 ,435 3 p 1.62 .oo .~4 j.09 2.05 1.24 2.93 1.75 

2,436 3 p 1.132 .31 .o4 2.86 1.89 1.27 2.96 1.94 

2,437 3 p 1.54 .65 .57 2 .8o 1.69 .82 1.83 1.37 

;: ,439 3 p 1.83 .62 .st: 3.15 1.95 1.16 2 .32 1.76 II 15,204 3 p 1.39 .54 .48 ? . 52 1.77 1.35 1.73 1.65 

Avera;;e 1.61 .51 .54 2 .66 1. 85 1.19 1.18 1. 52 

Joooer ::, , 240 

Concractor 5 , 249 1-2 p 1.13 .30 .49 1.92 1.36 1.12 l. 72 1.39 

5, 246 1-2 p 1.32 .47 • 2j 2.02 1.33 .91 1_.42 1.21 

5 ' 24if 1-2 p 1.11j .45 .49 2.12 1.49 .85 1.57 1.30 

5,24.5 1-2 p .99 .48 .40 1.87 1.39 .97· 1. 86 1.32 

:J ,243 1-2 p l.lb .65 .47 2. 28 1.40 1.23 1.55 1.37 

5 , 242 1-2 p l.0o . 57 .47 2.10 1.51 .87 1. 55 1. 26 

:J , 241 1-2 p .72 . 22 .41" 1.35 1.25 . 82 1.08 1.10 ::> , 248 1-2 p :!.. 31 . 41 .so 2 . 22 1. 21 1.02 l.oo 1.23 

Ave a; e 1.12 . 47 .44 2 .03 1.40 .96 1. 58 1. 29 

TABLE R 1h ~ 

Sec. 2 - P. 36 

1 2 3 4 5 6 '( ~ 'i 10 1.1. 12 

~ 1. a i 1 o r i n g C o s t A v e r a 6 e H o u r 1 y E a r n i n g s ~ Firm Type ·.~eignted 

Code# Grade of Shop 0Derating Finishins ?ressing Total Operat~ ~~~1ea1ng ~reseing Total 

$10.7> HOUSES CONT 1D 

Joboer 8,090 

Inside Shop 8,090 1-2 P 1.10 .51 .42 1.83 1. 85 1.10 1.92 1.67 

Contractor 8,093 2 P 1.04 .3tj .3o 1. 18 1.42 .97 1.89 1.31 

" 8,094 1-2 P .91 .36 .46 1.'(3 1.19 .97 l.o9 1.23 

tj,091 1-2 p .88 .42 .34 1.64 1.22 1.07 1.42 1.21 

1:>,021 1-2 p .56 .08 .20 .84 1.05 .70 1.42 1.06 

Average .97 .36 .)8 1.71 1.39 1.03 1.69 1.35 

Joboer S60 

Cont.ractor 561 2 P 1. 30 • 40 . 52 2. 22 1. 51 1.12 1. 48 1. 41 

Jobber ·r, ·roo-·ro (Averag~ Sales ?rice 11.00) 

Contractor ·r, ·too 2-3 P 1.22 .42 .48 2.12 1.50 1.02 1.41 1.35 11 ·r,7o7 2-3 P .87 .41 .34 1.62 1.48 .93 1.31 1.26 11 7,761 2-3 P l.co .43 . ?2 2.21 1.50 . 93 1.06 1.37 

7, 774 2-3 P 1.57 .o;, .43 2 .45 1.63 .95 1.98 1.40 

7,765 2-j p 1.21 .49 .:.3 2.23 l.j9 1.18 3.88 1.:;)'( 

" '(,'(b2 2-3 p 1.19 .39 .43 2.01 1.37 1.01 2.03 1.37 

7,777 2-3 P 1.51 .u1 .:;)0 2.70 1.35 .60 1.45 1.06 1 7,764 2-3 p 1.32 .59 .54 2.45 1.51 1.29 2.09 1.54 ~ 

7,769 2-3 p 1.24 .53 .51 2.28 1.56 1.05 1.87 1.45 

7,773 2-3 p 1.15 .so .so 2. 15 1.13 1.09 1.29 1.15 

7, 768 2-3 p 1.48 .49 .58 2.55 1.44 .97 1.49 1.32 

7, 772 2-3 p 1. 30 • 62 • 50 2. 42 1. 77 1. 21 2 . 35 1. 66 

Average 1.20 .49 .48 2.17 1.48 1.02 1.87 1.40 

Jobber (3,380-90-3,400) 

Contra.ctor 3,40 1~ - .... 2-) P 1.16 .42 .54 2.12 1.52 1.10 2. 09 1.51 

II 3, 386 2-3 p 1. 25 • 77 • 55 2 • 57 1. 58 1.13 1. 73 1. 44 

3,385 2-3 p 1.31 .68 .64 2.63 1.54 1.19 1.78 1.48 II 3,382 2-3 p 1.30 .61 .50 2.41 1.63 1.04 1.54 1.41 

" 3,388 2 p 1.07 .51 .46 2 .04 1.30 1.15 2.11 1.37 II 3,391 2 p 1.27 .62 .59 2.50 1.54 1.0} 2.19 1.46 II 3,387 2 p 1.45 .98 .61 }.04 1.96 1.18 1.91 1.61 

3, 399 2-3 p 1. 55 • 73 . 53 2 .81 1. 45 .98 1.93 1. 34 

3,395 2 p 1.21 .77 .54 2.52 1.23 1.12 1.52 1.24 

1.28 .66 .ss 2.49 1.53 1.11 1.85 1.44 

Jobber 8,110 (l.vera,ae Sales Price 10.00) 

Contractor 8,118 2 P • 72 . 28 . 22 1. 22 1. 57 . 91 1. 63 1. 35 

II 8 ,121 2 p 1.14 .50 .42 2 .06 1.12 1.00 1.60 1.15 . , .. 

8,111 2 P 1.1.7 .31 .45 1.93 1.17 .73 1.73 1.15 (Passaic,N.J.) 

15 ,053 2 p 1.14 .32 .45 1.91 1.71 1.09 2.33 1.66 

8,112 2 p 1.06 .43 .)9 1.88 1.40 1.24 2.16 1.47 

8,115 2 p .99 · 39 .35 1.73 1.55 .99 2.05 1.44 

8,116 2 p 1.11 .41 .44 1.96 1.41 1.03 1.37 1.30 

8 ,124 2 p 1.01 .46 .41 1.88 1.52 .75 1.57 1.22 

TABLER lA ~ 

1 2 3 4- 5 6 T 8 9 10 11 12 

T a 1 1 o r 1 n g C"o s t A v: e r age H o u r 1 z E a r n i n g s .., Firm Type Weighted (I) Code# Grade of Shop Operating Finishins Pressing Total Opera tins Fin1ah1ng Pressing Total ~ 

i l O ·12 HOUSES CONT' D 

Contra ctors 8,125 2 p 1.10 .22 .27 1.59 1.31 .71 1.18 1.15 (NorTTalk, Conn.) • 8,123 2 p 1.09 .24 .39 1.-72 1.21 .95 2-59 1.32 • 8, 122 2 p 1.13 .47 .43 2.03 1. 26 .92 1.50 1.20 (Lodi, N.J.) 15,184 2 p 1.42 .76 .51 2.79 1.35 1.15 1.45 1.30 

8 , 117 2 p 1.06 .47 .45 1.98 1.4-6 1.22 1.47 1.40 n 8, 126 2 p 1.19 .4-4 .46 2.09 1.80 .93 1.79 1.51 Average 1.08 .38 .40 1. 86 1. 39 .95 1.70 1.32 

Jobber 1,360 (Average Sales Price 11.85) Inside Shop 1,360 3-4 w 1.20 .70 .52 2.42 1.49 1.04 2.03 1.40 Contractor 1,361 3-4 w 1.18 .63 .57 2.38 1. 55 1.12 1.43 1.38 Average 1. 0 .69 .53 2.42 1.50 1.05 1.88 1.40 

jil 6. 75 HOUSES 

J oboer 1,240 

Contractor 1,241 2-3 p 1.15 .72 .59 2.46 1.53 1.04 1.77 1.38 n 1,242 2-3 p 1.25 . 81 .70 2.76 1.73 1.22 1.86 1.56 1,243 2-3 p 1.29 .93 .67 2.89 1. 59 1.24 1.88 1.51 1,24-4 2-3 p 1.20 . 69 .52 2. 41 1.74 1.46 2.12 1.71 1, 245 2-3 p 1.21 .62 .63 2.46 2.01 l.O'l 2. 31 1.69 I 

1,.246 2-3 p 1.00 .60 .53 2 -13 1.68 1. 21 2.56 1.63 co 

Average 1.18 -72 .60 2. 50 1.71 1.20 2.05 1.58 r 

Jobber 4,480 

Contractor 4,486 3-4 p 1.66 1. 21 .77 3.64 1.43 1.26 1.96 1.45 " 4,485 3-4 p 1.42 -97 .76 3- 15 1.4-8 1.06 2.09 1.41 4,481 3-4 p 1.42 1.14 -72 3 -28 1.69 1.15 1.99 1.50 4,482 3-4 p 1.36 .63 . 64 2 . 63 1.58 1.09 2.06 1.50 Average 1.45 .93 .71 3.08 1.55 1.14 '2.02 1.47 

Jobber 3,580 2 p 1. 42 .69 .37 2.4-8 1.60 1.10 1.79 1.45 (Average Sales Price 13 . 23) 

Jobber 4,060 

Contractor 15,014 2- 3 p 1.4-4 .72 .61 2 .77 1.68 1.05 2 .34 1.54 II 4 ,063 2- -"" J p 1.49 .82 .64 2 -95 1.38 .96 1.42 1.24 4,061 -3 p 1.34 .63 -59 2.56 1.55 1.11 1.33 1.37 4,064 2-3 p .99 .52 .47 1.98 1.50 1.01 1.86 1.39 4,062 2-3 p 1.11 .so .47 2.08 1.55 1.10 1.45 .l. ..);t 4,065 2- 3 p 1.25 .?C . 57 2.38 1.72 1. 22- 2.02 l.o2 Average 1.23 . 59 .54 2.36 1.57 1.08 1.65 1.43 

Jobber 3 ,6co 

Contractor 3 ,662 2-3 p 1.4o 1.14 .68 3.28 1.60 1.14 2-03 1.46 " 3,661 2-3 p 1. 34 1.04 .74 3.12 1. 28 1.01 1. ')/j 1.23 3 ,oo4 2- .:> p 1.4.5 1.0( • (4 2.24 1.4.5 1.0.5 1.41 1.20 3,6o3 2-3 p 1. 39 .97 .69 3 .05 1.66 .94 1.71 .l.j4 Average 1.40 1.06 .71 3 .17 1.'+7 1.04 1.64 1.32 

TABLER lA 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 tl 9 10 11 12 

T a 1 1 o r 1 n E!i c 0 8 t Avv e r a e; e H o u r 1 z E a r-n 1 n B s <D Flrm Type Welc;hted a> 

~ Coae# Grade of ShOJ2 02erating Finishing Pressing Total O:gerating F1n1.shing Pressi!:JO Total 

il6.15 HOUSES CONT 1D. 

Joober 9,070 

Contractor 9,o·r1 3 p 1.22 .93 .59 2.74 1.37 1.22 2.01 1.40 

" 9,072 5 p 1.44 .73 ,()4 ~.ell 1.37 .90 1.97 1.28 

Average 1.52 .84 .61 2.77 1.37 1.06 1.99 1.55 

Jobber tl,050 l.j'( .90 ~55 2.8tl 1.72 1.12 1..::>9 1.44 

(Average Sales Price 1o. 32) 

Jobber 5 ,390-34QO Contractor 3 ,402 2-3 p 1.34 .83 .61 ?.78 1.41 1.04 1.53 1.30 

" 3,396 2- 3 p 1.79 1.23 .95 j-9'/ 1.88 1.19 2.04 1.62 

3,408 2- j p 1.28 .66 .:;6 2.50 1.8tl l.Oo 1.'(2 1.53 

3,398 2-3 p 1. 56 1.32 .72 3.60 1.72 1.04 1.82 1.40 

3,384 2-3 p 1.48 1.19 .so 3.17 1.49 1.14 2.14 1.44 

3,401 2-3 p 1.70 .73 .o8 3.11 1.50 1.25 1.78 1.48 

5,381 2-3 p 1.38 .89 . 59 2.tl6 1.45 1.10 1.40 1.32 

3,392 3 p 1.29 .84 .53 2.oo 1.42 1.18 1.62 1.37 

3,393 3 p 1.42 .9'( ,If( 2.80 1.58 1.39 1.61 1.52 

3,406 2- 3 p .77 .38 .38 1.53 1.29 1.38 1.95 1.43 

Average 1.38 .89 .58 2.85 l.b2 1.13 1.90 1.46 I 

~ Jobber 2,470 (Average Sales Price 20.00) I 

Ins1de Shop 2,470 2-3 p .83 .46 .56 1.85 1.92 i.07 1.87 1.60 

Contractor 15,007 2-3 p 1.0'( .72 .36 2.15 1.33 .93 1.37 1.17 

" 2,472 j-4 p .tiS .51 .43 1.79 1.16 .98 1.43 1.15 

• 2,474 2-3 p 1.14 • 72 .62 2.48 1.50 1.10 1.69 1.39 . 1~,091 2-3 p 1.04 .n .54 2.29 1.68 1.04 1. '(3 1.42 

" 2,475 2-3 p 1.12 . 67 .45 2.24 1.55 1.06 1.98 1.42 

" 15,179 2-3 p 1.28 .63 .47 2.38 1.66 1.30 1.79 1.57 

2,476 2-3 p 1. 03 .bb .41 2.10 1.56 .94 1.39 1.27 

2,477 2-3 p 1.51 .39 .?1 2.21 1.09 .96 1.54 1.14 

" 1~,017 2-3 p 1.50 .99 .64 3.13 1.61 1.08 2-53 1.47 

Average 1.14 .63 .so 2.27 1.53 1.10 1.76 1.41 

_,._ 

'WILl 0•1 

0Y COST OY PllllDIJCfiOII OJ' .t. SP•CIPIC ~r lit DIPIDDT IW\Drl 

Ill CCIIP.UUSOW 'lrlr& RIJll OP CP cosrs 

Sport !'yptl Polo CO&t - liA Shu•• - MIA11b ..JOitob 011Ur ryp. Collar 

Pla.i.D Side S-... - a..t .. d fop Sloen S.U. • Sepa,..t• All Around C~t - R•&ul&r Welt Poot.te ., 

3 8&Dd Vade Bvtton Bot .. - lll &roUDd B•l t - Collar Paoilll:• - ..,.. lot•• - 'Po) u .. ..,. s. .. ... CuN'a - Pocket. &D1 Belt ~ tltotwct. 

• 8 10 11 u a u 16 18 epo .... Piniob- Pr. .. - foto.l Total fotal Rua or Sh~ eon .... ~. !O'IU'tz &w!!!6!; Grado Typo tin& oil In& oil In& IW>d Total llld.ir- Shop T<>to.l Pe..ld to Sell- (o) (b) .lftra&l (o ) b) (•) (d) cta .. l· rt .. ot •obia.• Blmd """ Cut• l>iroot ••• o.,.r ... Shop C011trao- In& Dlnot Total hllln& epo .... P1A1•b- .... .. t1•tioa a d LooatiOD ~ .!!!:L_ ~ ll!ohi.Do .!!!!& ~ ~ .!!!!!.!.. £2!!... ~ .l!:1!!. ~ ~ .l!1!!_ .!!!:!_ _.!.!:!.,_ ~- .!!!!!. •• 67 

1Mil>uo 30 Wn' York , ... .61 .09 .12 ,25 •• 09 •• 81 e.u $1,06 $5,60 t .82 $1,07 • ,88 . ·" tl.ll • .n 1 k.iDUA 1&088 w Tort , .. .58 .II .13 .10 .92 .28 1.20 8,75 2. 22 2.89 6,4S 1.11 loOT l.tT 1.4t I Mil>..- .s 280 Ot.ad•.o •P . 59 .10 .IS .08 ,90 .l!O .u l , S6 4.T5 ,8t 1.3< •.eo I Mil>..- 40011 Balt. s-P .n .u .IT . OT 1.09 .01 .01 1.23 5.60 , 88 1,00 6.18 

1 80SO J., To.rt f·P 1.06 .n .s5 .19 1.84 8, 75 z.o8 1.11 1.10 1.92 1.81 I ~ton, I.J. S•P .TZ .21 .zo .15 1.%8(4) 6, T6 

1 38092 Ph.llo. f -P , 96 . 25 .• ss .25 1.80 . Z? .It 2.26 8.75 2.oT 2.53 7. 58 ,86 .51 . 88 .86 1 40131 llalt. T• P .94 . IT .so ,IS 1.54 .12 .10 1.76 6. T5 1, 59 1,81 T,9T 1,01 ,74 I . SO 1. 08 1 401SS York,Pa. s-p . 68 .u .25 .IS 1 . 20 .12 .u 1.48 8, T5 1.2! 1,48 T, 9T . T8 .59 . 89 oT5 1 40020 8alt, - P . TS .15 .19 .u 1.21(5) .u .u 1 ... •• Tli loll 1 . 34 T,40 .Tt ,6S 1.01 ,11 1 40110 Balt. s-P , 72 . zs .18 .10 1.2s 8.76 .12 .81 1.22 .75 I T0110 lalulu 

~t7 S· P .eo , 28 ,IT .18 1.43(6) .68 .u z,, 10.76 1,51 2.47 e.u . 78 .81 .eo ,,. 1 10110 S- P . 81 .26 . 20 . 16 1.49(T) ,69 ,IS 2. Sl 8.75 1.2T 2.09 8,ST .61 ,57 .70 .61 1 10010 S- P . 10 . 25 .35 .24 1.54(8) . S9 . 25 2. 18 10.T5 l,SI 1.95 6.Bt .64 .63 .82 .86 1 90040 Portl...S S· P 1.00 .40 .22 . 29 1. 91 .:E. .ill 2.45 10.75 1. 80 ~ 8,3< ·" .8s 1.22 .88 ..--- ft10 lw York f-l' r.oo :10 :E :10 T.26 Yo.76 T:'n zo.oo 1:92 i:ol T.T'f 1:60 z ett6 1 .. York T· P 1. 25 .45 .40 .ss z.ts 8, 75 2.34 10.00 1.80 . tS 1.79 1.n 2 5381 w .. York T- P 1.60 , 65 .55 . 26 2.96 8. 76 S.21 •·ze 1.45 1. 10 lo48 1.32 z 266S 1..- York T- P l , S6 .eo . 60 . 20 2. 85 IO.T5 

z S262 1 .. York r - P 1,46 .so . 60 .25 2. TO 10,75 

z 303 1 .. York f..P 1. 40 .50 .60 .20 2.60 12.75 

z 30261 Philo. T• P l . SS .so .60 . 44 2.69 .24 .07 2.90 6, T6 2.10 3,01 8.50 1.21 .TO 1.18 1,06 2 40150 ! olt, T•P 1.s5 , $S .s6 .15 Z.18 .10 .11 2,39 10. 15 2,36 2.57 9.37 

z 90220 Port1...S T• P l,ZZ .so .ss .s6 Z.43 . 31 .20 2.94 10.75 3,04 3.55 10.32 .19 .5T .89 .n z 90340 Port10lld · P ,99 ,58 •• s , S6 2.35 .!!! .ill ~ 10.75 2. 61 ~ 10.U .T8 . 68 .87 .n r=-r- SS80 '¥ .. York f-l' 1.10 ~ ~ :09 2.fi -ro:n 2.89 TI:2! 1:60 1:10 l.7i r.u z - s 500Sl Cb.i!!5o f ·P 1.10 .so .40 .32 2.42 ill ill lill 10.75 ~ !:.!! 1~76 .- 8200 x .. Tort. f-l' 1.65 , 85 ITs (1) :10 '4:05 10. 75 

3 ms Mew Tork r -P 1.80 , 85 . so • 19 3 ... 12. T5 2. 7T S,69 1,2S 1.12 1,62 1,22 

3 74SO In York f ·P 1. 75 1. 26 .10 . 50 •• 20 l6. T5 

3 62010 CMoaco N 1.40 , 65 . 40 ,25 2. 70 10. 75 

s 50351 c.tdoaco 1'-P 1.SO . 70 .40 .20 2.SO .21 .18 z.gg 1S, T5 2. 76 S,l5 12.75 

3 422.0 Chnl&Dd. r-P 1.72 . 72 . 78 . 58 3. SO .18 .05 S, 8$ 13,76 3,57 s.so 12.60 

3 80410 Loo · f · P 1.SO , 66 , S1 ,56 2,82 . oT .u 3,01 10.75 2.47 2.66 IO.T5 1.20 .6S ,lie .tT 

s 80040 Loo r - P l.SO , 75 .so . 48 s. ss . 82 .54 ... , 12.75 5.n 4.54 14.75 1. 20 .69 1.6$ 1,04 

s 80110 Loo ~- T..P 1.40 . 60 ,65 .so S,l6 12. 75 

3 80710 Lo• ~· f..P 1.40 . 67 .sz •• 2 2.61 .u ,IS S,05 12.75 z . Ts 2.97 U.65 l,S9 .62 loiS 1,00 

s :181SO Philo. f.P 1 . 80 , TZ .ss , 88 ,S,95 . 25 .09 4.29 10. 75 t.U 4. 48 10.48 1.40 .88 1.61 1.16 

~ 

3 90t70 S•tt1e T•P 1.40 , T5 .65 .75 S.65 . sz 3.87 12.76 4.64 4.96 16.42 ,T6 .52 1.10 .12 t2080 Cl.nl&M T-P 2.60 :78 -~ :&5 T.6i 727 :n s.n 'I6.1S T.79 T.R 19.76' 1M -;n T;01' roll 3 - • 42120 Cl nel.&Dd T-P 2.15 . 86 .76 .63 4.40 . 94 ,61 5.95 16.75 5,26 6, 81 19.70 1.47 .65 1.10 1.09 

3 - 4 42210 Cle~1acd. S..P 1,85 1, 05 (2) .45 ,46 s. 81 .:18 .zs 4.4-Z 16.75 s .so 4.21 16.50 ,82 .68 loSS .es s - 4 4-2190 Clenhnd T- P Z,S5 .90 .so . 85 4. 70 , 99 ,61 6,30 16.75 4.64 s.zt 16.75 1o34 ,65 1.06 1,06 

3 • 4 $8180 So~oa.. 

~. S•P 1.46 , 82 ... 1. 1S(3) 3.85 16. 75 

s • 4 volOO s..tth S..P 1,15 , 80 .50 ·""" ......,. .?I. •• u l&. f6 

- ... 60 lf.u3 - 4 T0060 st. Lolli• , _, 2.20 .eo , 75 ·" 4 .14 ,59 .40 5,13 16.76 4.36 5.35 19.05 l.U .18 1.n loll 

) - 4 70200 st. Lollie T..P 1.95 . 75 ,85 .52 t.OT .so .11 '·'' l6.T5 '8,43 7.34 21.91 1,34 .To 1.68 1.10 

s - 4 5850 ChiO!!O f.P 1,T5 ,85 .eo ,T6 4.15 14.76 

..---

..,-:-r- !18080 

D80 1.-

Phi r •• 

York r:p f.P 

3.60 

2. 05 r.so 

1.26 ~ 

:m --:23 

-:8i 

4.iO 

r.ii ~ :!8 6.fi i6.f6 

~ 

6.ff T.i9 ~ 

- - 4 - 6 :182SO Philo, f.P 2.45 1,SO ,85 .ss t . 96 .17 6,13 16 . 76 5.06 &.zs 25.09 

P - Pieu Work 

W- Week Wort 

S - Sect1an Shop 

T • Tallo~ Shop 

~ 

(I ) lll buld pre••in&· 

( 2l lnoludee •ddit1oDAl hand work worth about 25 oente, 

(S Ri&h Co..t due to u .. ot brltted f'abrio &r&d of a.n interli.n1J:&& to ktep the mitted h.brlo frGD ftntob.iJ:l.&, 

(4 Rstiaated. additio.a&l ooat per p.raeat to b~ worker• up t-o Jd.n1.a\a eo4e ~o nt.a - ~. 

( 5) Lati.at~ • d41t1cinal ooat per prment to bf"in& workers up to a1.ll.1.a1.a ooct. wac- nt .. - '!Oj. 

(6) &n:bate4 a4dit1.oJI&l oo.t per t•rmeut to brill« workers up to .m1.nhnar. ood.e Wll.&• r.tu • 4{. (7) btU.ted additioaal ooft per p.rasnt to brillc: worbtr• up ~ a:1..n.Un.m oode ~· rate• • 1¥• 

(8) •rt-1..ted additional oo•t per g&J"'Ilezrt to br"i..D« worftra UJ to III1..D1mD. ood.e a&• rates - 2$1. 

r ) - .,..,. - ,.,. 

l. J L.F. 1: 1 :. c 

Jwn11Lr s of i·Te eC..l e Horl:ers 

I n Va.~.·ieus l.:arke t Areas 

B.>- ~e Groups 

1~epn.rec... fr m u. s. Census of P•pu1 oti on 1930 

(Data Inc om~ te) 

._ . ...,..._ _,. .....- --. 

10-1'1 18-19 2C- -::-· 25-- 2>4 35-- 114 4&-54 55-64 6&-74 75 t Tot :::; 1s 

';/ y,.,rk City ( 1) Over 

w y rl- City ( 1) :s27 ~)734 11230 22803 34107 28051 10334 588J ()," 2 130656 

Tw York ( .w XCl. .~ • Y • C • ) 

( 2) 

Cnn ecticut ( 3) 237L', 1615 2643 3015 3754 2660 1807 763 31 10712 

T J 0 (:C:xc1. Cfl~ t.eD) 

( ._,) 170 934 16G4 3332 <±557 3481 1.;'13 ?'1 7 10 ~ 18090 

.:stan ( :) 1<·9 ' .··'.~1 e ,, 1 1822 1747 1137 465 67 . 6873 

fi1a(And CrunC.en) ( 6) 932 1152 2245 3872 518[3 3909 ,~453 782 89 20617 

I1 tirnore ( 7) GOB S69 1173 1970 2746 2089 ·~ 2 469 66 10932 

Ceve1and ( 8) 178 376 779 1051 1795 1396 606 156 ':>t' t:j .: 63b1 

Cica5o ( 9) 777 1222 3G23 91C8 12745 7949 3780 1175 101 . 4:0380 

Ens as Ci ~r ( 10) 2~ 42 167 31.::4 601 51C 346 127 20 2181 

c . I.ouis ( 11) 185 215 547 1132 1372 11C'1 726 274 28 j~~83 

l•s. Angeles (1 2) 43 ·127 . . 4-81 ,~ 45 2:331 2Lb19 1348 4.7 3 £~4 J911 . 

ttn Francisco ( l3) 4 39 169 707 '12C'O 133< 719 ·281 35 440 8 

},rt1and ( ~) 2S 52 111 30'? f>37 633 4.15 137 9 2326 

~3a t tle (.15) .16 65 191 4:G7 'l't5 7¥.c 410 104 14 27?G 

12312 12376 25~ 2 30~ 24 73827 58026 33196 11871 1342 278G86 

9821 
NeD York 

City 

New Yo rl: 

(Excl.NYC ) 

-100-

TABLE H 14o 

Percentage of eedl e 'f.To rkers 

In Various Har Y:et Areas 

~r Age Groups . 

Prepared from U. S. Census of Population 1930 

10-17 18- 19 20- 24 25-34 35- 44 45- 54 55- 64 65-74 75 & 10- 19 55 & 

Ove r ver 

4 . 46 4 . 40 8 . 60 17. 45 26 . 10 21 . 47 12. 50 4 . 51 0 . 51 8 . 86 17 . 52 

Connecticut 12. 69 8 . 63 14 . 12 16.11 20 . 06 14. 22 9 . 66 4 . 08 0 . 43 21 . 32 14.17 

N. J . 

(Excl . 

Camden) 

Boston 

Phila. 

(And 

Camden) 

Baltimor e 

Cleveland 

Chi cago 

Kansas City 

St. Louis 

6. 47 5. 13 l 0 . 3n 18 . 42 25 . 19 19 . 24 10 . 35 4 . 30 0 . 56 11 . 63 15. 21 

2. 17 3. 11 5. 69 12. 82 26 . 51 25.42 16. 54 6.77 0 . 97 5. 28 24 . 28 

4 . 52 5. 59 10 .88 19. 79 25 .15 18 . 96 11. 90 3. 79 0 . 43 10 . 11 16. 12 

5. 56 5. 20 10 . 73 18 . 02 25 .1-2 19 . 11 11 . 36 4 . 29 0 . 60 10 . 76 16. 25 

2. 80 5. 91 12 . 25 16. 52 28.22 21.95 9. 53 2. 45 0 . 38 8. 71 12. 36 

1 . 92 3 . C:3 8. 72 22. 56 31. 56 19 . 69 9. 36 2. 91 0 . 25 4 . 95 12. 52 

.L . l O 1 . 93 7. 66 15. 77 27 . 56 23 . 38 15. 86 5 . 82 0 . 92 3 . 03 22 . 60 

3. 31 3. 85 9 . 80 20 . 28 24 . 57 19.77 13. 01 4 .91 0 .50 7 . 16 18 . 42 

Los Angel es 0 . 48 1 . 43 5. 40 16 . 22 28 . 40 27 . 15 15 . 13 5.31 0 . 49 1 . 91 20 . 93 

San Francisco0 . 09 0 . 87 3 . 77 15. 75 26 . 74 29 . 72 16 . 0 2 6. 26 0 .78 0 .96 23 . 06 

Portland 

Seattle 

1otals 

9821 

1 . 07 2 . 24 4 . 77 13 . 20 27 . 39 27 . 21 17 . 84 5. 89 0 . 39 3. 31 24 . 12 

0 . 58 2 . 34 6 . 88 16 .46 27 . 92 26 . 80 14 . 77 3 . 75 0 . 50 2. 92 19 .02 

4 . 41 4 . 44 9.15 18. 08 26 . 47 20 . 81 11 . 90 4 . 26 0 . 48 8 . 85 16 . 64 
-101-

T.ABL:W H 14c 

1. u. s. Census of Popul a ti on, 1930 Vol I V 

Occupati ons by States - Tabl cz 12, Pages 1134 , 11 36, 1138 , 1139 ' 

1141, 1143 , 1144 , 11,_', 6 , 11'17, 

1149 

2. " Tabl e 11 , Par;e s 1120 , 1122 , 1123 

3. " Tabl e 11, Page s 272 , 274 

4. II Tabl e 11, Pr1ge s 1023 , 1025 

5. " Tabl e 12 , Page s 728, ?30 

6. II Tabl e 12, ? age s 1027' 1029 , 1413, 1415 

7. Ill Tabl e 12, Page s 674 , 676 

B. " Tabl e 12, Page s 1285 , 1287 

9. " Tabl e 12 , Page s 447 , 449 

10. II Tabl e 12 , Page s 900 , 901 , 902 

11. It Tabl e 12, Page s 904 , 906 

12. " Table 12, Page s 199, 201 

13. II Tablo 12, l' age s 208 1 210 

14. II Tabl e 12, Pages 1370 , 1372 

15. II Tabl e 12 , Page s 1709 , 1711 

9821 

MARKET CUTTERS 

Number 

--- Code 

Min. 

New York: City 2192• $1.34 

Boston 41 1.21 

Philadelphia 53 1.21 

Baltimore 32 1.17 

Cleveland 146 1.17 

Chicago 113 1.17 

St. Louis 28 1.17 

Kansas City 10 1.17 

Los Ange l es 110 1.17 

San Francisco 43 1.17 

Portland 39 1.17 

Seattle s 1.17 

UBLE H-12a 

• SUMMARY COMPARISON SHOWlNG NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, WEIGHTEIJ CODE MINIMA. 

AljD AVERAGES AND ACTUAL AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS BY MAJOR CRAFTS A.ND MARKETS 

(For eight-weeks perio~ from Feb, 6 to Ma.roh 31, 1934) lJ 

OPER.Cl'ORS FINISHERS 

[Number Wel£jht&<1 Code ~er We ifjhted Code 

Aver, Hrly Aver, Hrly Aver, Hrly 

Earnings, Min. 

-- ~ Earnings. ~ Aver, Earninfj•• 

$1.60 20,592• .98 1.50 1.37 14, 509• .as 1.25 1. 06 

1.27 239 ,89 1.35 1.25 233 .eo 1.12 . 81 

1.50 469 . a a 1.35 1.18 333 .77 1.12 ·~ 1.14 576 , 77 1,00 ,91 220 •'65 .a a ,66 

1.21 919 .eo 1.01 1.01 709 , 63 .as , 65 

1.27 873 .82 1.16 1.03 581 ,66 .89 .79 

1.00 1S3 .e1 1.14 . eo 118 . 63 .as . 63 

1.00 162 .75 ,96 .eo 79 ,63 .84 . 63 

1.20 S36 . 83 1,18 1.09 425 .63 .as ,66 

1.16 220 .eo 1.10 .as 214 , 63 .as . so 

1.16 182 ,77 1.01 .as 109 ,63 .as . so 

1.1S 84 ,J77 1.01 , 85 so ,S3 .as . so 

PRESSERS 

~uml>_er Code 

Aver, Hrly 

Min, Aver, Eaminge, 

6,178• 1 . 00 1.50 1.62 --- -- 99 . 90 1,35 1.31 

1~1 . 90 1.35 1.34 s,; - ·-·· --· --· 116 .as 1.26 1.13 

268 , 85 1.26 1.13 

230 .as 1.26 1.28 

56 . as 1.26 1.01 

32 .as 1.26 1.01 

160 .as 1,26 1.10 

74 .as 1.26 1.03 

45 .as 1.2S 1.03 

24 .as 1.26 1.03 

Based on analysis of payroll reports from all markets, Figures include only (1) cutters, male; (2) operators, me.~e; operators, female; (3) finishers, male; finishers, 

female; (4) under pressers, upper pressers, machine pressers and non-ola.ssifia.ble pressers, All workers in these crafts are i ncluded in the out-of-town markets, but 

in the New York: !.a.rket area only those in the 598 selected shops. 

For explanati on of method ot deriving the weighted code minimA and averages for operators and finishers, see text and Table H-12 on which this table is based. 

• Estimate based on sample of 38% of employees. 

-

--

Cut tin .. On era tors 

Aver. .Male 

Code Hrly. I Code 

Market ~ Engs. Z, Min. Aver. :1 

New York City 1.34 l.so 63 I 1.00 l.SO 17 

i 

Boston I 1.21 1.27 as ,90 1.35 12 I 

Philadelphia 1.21 1.50 77 ' .90 1.3S 23 

Baltimore 1.17 1.14 17 I 

I 

.as 1.26 63 

Cle"Veland 1.17 1.21 50 .ss 1.26 50 I 

Chicago I 1.17 1.27 68 [ .flS 1.26 32 

St. Louis 1.17 1.00 60 I .as 1,2S 40 

I os I Kansas City 1.17 1.oo 2 .e5 1.26 I. 

Los Angeles 1.17 1.20 75 .as 1.26 25 

San Francisco 1.17 lolS 49 .as 1.2S 51 

Portland 1.17 l.ls 21 .as 1.2S 79 

I I Seattle 1.17 lolS I 19 .85 1.2S '61 

TABLE H 12 

COMPARATIVE TABLE SHOVIING W!!.'IGHTED CODE MINIMUMS 

.AJ>TO AVERAG ZS AND ACTUAL AV!!JlAGi:.'HOURLY l:.ARNINGS 

BY MAJOR CRAFTS .AJ>TDJ,:A.RKETS. 

nit• one do. Lar 

Finishers 

Female Weight Weight Aver. Male Female 

Code Code Code Hrly. --cOcfe Code Wei15hted Code 

Min. Aver. ~ ~ ~ ;£ Min.~ 2! ~ ~ ~ ~ 

90 

.Sl 

.Sl 

.7S 

.76 

.76 

.7S 

.75 

.. 

.75 

.75 

.75 

.75 

1.50 .96 1.50 1.37 33 .as 1.2s S7 .as 1.2S .as 1,25 

1.3s .69 1.3S 1.25 20 .77 1.12 so .77 1.12 .77 1.12 I I 

1.3S I .a a 1.36 1.16 20 I .77 1.12 so .77 1.12 .77 1.12 

I 

I 

I .96 .77 1.00 .91 16 .7s lolO 64 .63 .84 .6S .sa 

.9S .eo 1.01 1.01 2 .7S 1.10 98 .s3 .84 .63 .66 

.95 .62 1.1S 1.03 18 .7S 1.10 82 .s3 .84 .ss .69 

,95 .Bl 1.14 .so 4 .75 1.10 96 .63 .84 .s3 .as i 

.95 ,75 .9s .so - I ,75 1.10 100 .63 .64 .63 .84 

.95 . 63 1.18 1.09 1 I .75 1.10 96 .63 .84 .63 .es l 

I .95 I .eo 1.10 • 8S - .7S 1.10 100 .s3 .84 .s3 .64 ' 

.95 .77 1.01 .as -

I .75 1.10 100 .s3 .64 .s3 .64 

.95 .77 1.01 .86 - .75 1.10 1100 .S3 .64 .63 .64 

1. The figurss showing average hourly earnings are baaed Upon an analysis of payroll 

reports for the e1&ht weeks period from February 5th to Murch 31, 1934. 

The weighted oode minima and averages are weighted averages of the oode minima and 

averages for males and females respectively, the weights used being the percentages 

oft he employees of eaoh sex in eaoh market as shown in Table H-10 for the pe.yroll 

week ended March 9th,, 1934. Figures include only {1) cutters, male (2) operators, 

male; operators, female; (3) finishers, male; finishers, female; (4) under pressers, 

upper pressers, machine pressers and non-classifiable pressers. All workers in 

these crafts are included in the out-of-town markets, but in the NEI'If York 11a rket area only those in the 596 selected shops. 

Seot. "4' P. 13 

Preeaera 

Aver. Aver • Hrly. Code Brly. 

Ernga. ~ !!.!!::!. Erng. 

l .os 1.oo 1.50 l.S2 

.61 .90 1.3S 1.31 

.Sl .90 1.36 1.34 

.ss .66 1.26 1.13 

.66 .66 1.26 1.13 

.79 .as 1.26 1.26 

.s3 .as lo2S 1.01 

.63 .as 1.26 1.01 

.66 .as lo2S lolO 

.so .as l.2S 1.03 I 

.... .60 .as 1.2S 1.03 0 

\"' 

.so .as 1.2S 1.03 

-104-

T.ABLL E-7 

7

Ui,B::::2. _,~:""J A ~GE HOl.TRLY hz._:::t.-IrGS 0:!!' HALE CUTTERS'·' * nJ TAILOR AHD 

s:;cTIO:- s::ops (:ii'or neek beginning ~ .. iarch 5th and Emding March 9th , 1934) 

~'ianha t t o.:.1 (.; Bronx 

Brook1~-:.1 C.:, Q,ueens 

Ne1r Yor::: Stnte (E~: ce t 

1~ . -_:- . c. ) 

Connect ic1.1.t 

Nerr Jersey 

Boston 

Boston Suburbs 

Phi 1acie1phi a 

Ba1 t i:·Jo j_~ e 

C1eve12.i.1C 

Chicac;o 

Chicago Suourbs 

St. Lonis 

Kansas City 

Los Ailgel e s 

.San Frailcisco 

PortlcmcL 

Seattle 

Nunbe r 

1930* 

137* 

(a) 

(a) 

14 

3 5 

(a) 

53 

26 

115 

81 

19 

(a) 

10 

110 

43 

39 

(a) 

- --- - -- ----

TAILOR 

Aver. Hr1y 

Ear nings 

$1 . 64 

l. 52 

1. 25 

1.34 

1.27 

1.19 

1. 53 

1.15 

1.26 

1.39 

1.18 

1.11 

1. 05 

1. 21 

1. 23 

1. 04 

1.51 

r1unber 

(a) 

39* 

(a) 

(a) 

21 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

30 

(a ) 

12 

20 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

SECTIOi_:_ 

Aver. Hr1:r . 

Ea rninr;s 

$1 . 58 

1.47 

1. 10 

1. 23 

1. 20 

1.14 

1.19 

1. 40 

• 85 

1. 06 

1.11 

**Inch_ding in addition to coat and suit cutters , worke rs in the fo1lo\7ing 

classif ications fom1d in the estern a r ea only: apprentice cutters, semiskilled cutters, cloth and lining pilers, pilers, and canvas cutter s. 

*Estimate based upon sample of 38% of employees. 

(a) No data. Numbers negligible in most cases. 

9821 

- 10[}-

TA:BL"S E-8 

NUMBER AND AVERAGE HOURLY EAP .{HTGS OF Ivi.AJ!l!: OPEPATORS*"' IN TAILOR AliD 

SECTIOli ShOPS BY UARKET ( ror \'leek beginning l\ arch 5 and ending March 9, 1934), 

--------·--·-----

J-Tumber 

----

Manhattan & Bronx 12089* 

Broo~lyn & ~ueens 1674"' 

New Yor~: State (Except -- v c ) 10 -· . J. . • 

Connecticut 23 

New Jers ey 86 

Boston 181 

Boston Suburbs 20 

Phi lad.el i)hi a 269 

13al timore 156 

Cleveland. 372 

Chicago 454 

Chicago Suburbs 23 

St. Louis 46 

Kansas City (a) 

Los Angeles 358 

San Francisco 104 

Portland 36 

Seattle 11 

TA!10}1 

Aver.Hr1y. 

Earnl~ 

$1.57 

1,34 

1,33 

1.31 

1. 24 

l. 23 

1.40 

1.28 

1 . 25 

1,19 

1.30 

1.10 

• 86 

1.17 

1.12 

1.14 

1,11 

(a) 

4?6* 

(a) 

36 

183 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

30 

47 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

SECTI ON 

l!.ver . Hr1y, 

~arni_!1 r· s 

$1 . 46 

1, 22 

1. 52 

1. 27 

1, 09 

1,61 

1.16 

• 97 

. 89 

1.37 

• 88 

• 61 

1.20 

lii*Incluo.i ne in adclition to jacket, coa t, r eefer and dress operators, v:rorkers 

in the follon i ng classifica tions: skirt operators and for Western area on~ 

appr eatice perators 

*Estinate based on sample of 38% of employees. 

(a) No data. N1~bers arG negligible in most cases, 

9821 
-106-

l'A:.> LZ E- 9 

"iUi•iJ:H }U.:j) AVT:,i ' G-:L n01:.-LY .:.,.ru""li.I!Tt.TS OF l?I:::AL: P~~lAl'OR S•* H I'AILOR AiiD 

s:crr O:i SHO?S :3' . ~-n~:l' (7or nee!-: ·ueg in·.,ing i larch 5 end endinc ; i<:'rch 9 , 1934) . 

- -------------------

J rookl ya L Q)leens 

iie Yor -: StC'.te (:~:ce t 

u . ... . c.) 

Con1e cticut 

!Jew J e r sey 

Fur·lber 

550* 

00. r •) '* 

32 

18 

103 

TAIL O~ 

Ave r . nrly 

_::or ;1in.·;s Eumber 

'P1 . 0S' 3.50* 

1 . 0 7 . 965* 

. 79 245 

. 02 121 

. 83 330 

SECJ.1I Oi; 

Aver . Hr1y . 

i:['.rnin -rs 

' • 83 

. 94 

. 84 

. 32 

. 84 

---, - ---- ------·-----------------------------!-

3oston 

3oston Subur b s 

Phila.deJ.·)h ic;, 

'3a l ti:;ore 

Sleveland 

ChiCClf;O 

ic 't~o Su'Jurbs 

St. Louis 

Kansa s Ci ty 

Los iill::;eles 

San :?ra.Yloisco 

Portla.1d 

Seat tle 

11 

21 

78 

210 

121 

13 

29 

( e ) 

( (').) 

11? 

104 

132 

51 

. 79 

. 84 

. 37 

. 30 

. Cb 

. 78 

• Go 

. 7 6 

• 01 

. 31 

. 83 

• ub 

. ,.. • oJO 

( t'.) 

( a) 

( a) 

109 

292 

00 

147 

49 

244 

( «.) 

( !"~ ) 

( a) 

10 

• 71 

. 75 

r • • 0 <) 

. 63 

• 69 

• S8 

. 81 

• 38 

• 54 

** I n clud.in ; L1 e.ddi tion to jac~:et , coat , reefer ;:md d r e ss o )e rptors Por::e rs 

in the f oll 011 in ··; class ifi CC' t1 on: sl~i rt o· )ere'. to rs, e~1i skilled O•)er::o tors 

( .. estern :- rer>. only) R'1d <'-·,nrentic.es ( .estern area onl:r) . 

* :;:;stii12.t e o a.sed. 011 sp·1 Jle of 38) of ern·,J.o•rees. 

( a) ~io dete.. Ew1'oe rs are i:1 nost CC'.ses neglig i~ 1e • 

9821 

.. . . 
-107-

NUl1'illER Al~]) AVE:hAGI.: HOt': J..,Y .C.:i1~' ;r ,J:) OJ' J [JiLE r L ·r SH:EJ.1S** Ii. i J.·AI LO?.. A:TD 

SECTIOI: SHOPS \Y i . .i.A:: ~CL T O'o1· , .. ,881: bet_," i:l. r~ inL:; iiL.rch 5 end · endL1g B() rch 9, 1934). 

---- ·---·------

ilar1hatta'.l ('; Bronx 

3rooldy'1 & Q,u~er.s 

Neu Yor ~ State Exc~J t 

. l~ . y . c .) 

Connecticut 

Uel' Jersey 

:8os ton 

'3os ton Suburbs 

Philadel·)hie 

Bal tirnore 

Clevelai.ld. 

Chicac o 

ChicA-g o Subu;r·bs 

St. Louis 

Ko.nsas City · 

Los An ?;eles 

San li'r ancis c·o 

Porth·' .. 1d 

Seattle 

11:000* 

318* 

( a) 

( a) 

1 8 

39 

10 

58 

Ave r. Hrly . 

:Cern i _n,; s_ 

$1.19 

J.. OO 

• 79 

1.03 

. 98 

. 90 

. 8G 

. 32 

-------------

38 

( n.) 

37 

(., , . - 1 

( n.) 

( .. ) 

1 . ..... o 

• G5 

. 73 

. '32 

• 32 

• 33 

. [3 7 

( e.) 

4 7* 

' 22 

( a) 

11 

( n) 

( a) 

( [1,) 

( n.) 

61 

5J 

( a) 

( Cl.) 

( a) 

( 1-) 

( ) 

( ... ) 

( a) 

SEIJTIOli 

Aver. Hrly. 

E<.1.rnlngs 

1.18 

• 82 

• 69 

• 61 

.88 

• 61 

. 97 

.74 

.92 

, 53 

·- -~- ------------------ ** Including in aclc'.i tio11 to re e fer, jLc 1

:e t '1c1. coat finishers, ~~rorkers in the 

following cl c.ssifi cG.ti.ons: fL1is:.1er:J ' :1el Je rs, sl~in; 1)asters (1..'1d finsihers 

(Eastern area o?·,l-r) , a nd p-,)re::.tice i' !:.s:CJ.~ Ts (Ueste r r. a rea only ). 

* Est i rrw.te be.sed U)On G. s:1;.r !le incluc. ,~:· 3r;·_; of the erY_Jloy ees. 

(a) No data. ITunbers nre neglir;ible il1 :10st c::tses. 

9821 
- l OBTABLE E-ll 

NUMBER AND AVERAGE HOURLY EAID INGS OF FEMALE FH ISHERS** IN TAILOR AND 

SECTIO SHOPS BY MAR.IG:T (For week begi ni ng 'iarch 5 and nding arch 9, 

1934) . 

Number 

Manhattan & Bronx 7026* 

Brooklyn & ~eens 1234* 

New York State (Exc e:o t 

N. Y. C. ) 11 

Connecticut 

New Jersey 

Boston 

Boston Suburbs 

Philadelphia 

Baltimore 

Cleveland 

Chicago 

Chicago Suburbs 

St . Louis 

Kansas City 

Los A-llge 1 es 

San Fr ancisco 

Po r tland 

Seattle 

13 

65 

136 

47 

204 

10 7 

260 

198 

25 

38 

(a) 

352 

1 81 

99 

41 

TAILOR 

Aver. Hrly . 

J.:Jarnings 

$1 . 09 

. 93 

• 61 . 

• 68 

. 75 

. 81 

. 59 

. 83 

. 71 

. 72 

. 86 

. 65 

. 62 

.86 

. 66 

. 63 

• 58 

• 57 

SECTION 

Aver. Hrly. 

Number Earnings 

195* 

647* 

111 

58 

154 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

77 

329 

14 

50 

68 

74 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

13 

$ . 79 

. 78 

~6 

. 60 

. 70 

• 59 

• 58 

. 71 

• 54 

. 62 

. 58 

. 63 

. 56 

. 52 

** Including in addition to r eefe r, jacket and coat finishe r s , wo r ke rs 

in the following classifications: finishe r s ' helper s , button sewers (Western area only) and apprentice finishe rs (Western area only) . 

* Estimat e based on sam~le of 38% of employees . 

(a) No data . Jumbe rs are negligible in most cas es . 

9821 
T.A"3J...: :J-12 

ER AND Av~ ;~ E Llf\URLY .',_ ~.Jt>i~ G GJ' PJ• ~'.3 ~2S CtA.LE)** I'T TAILO~ NiD S:::CTIO'T SHOPS 

BY bA~~::'T (:To ee~ .: bec lnniHC ivic:1rch 5, a.rd. .·r1<ling ~.ia:v-ch S, 1?:34). 

TAT.LOli. ---- . r-rrly. 

,.- " .1.4\J.muer E.:>r.r1ings -----

Manhattan ~ Bronx 4421* $1.73 

Brookl ~rn f- ~l.e8P.S 682* 1.55 

·ew York State (Exce"9t 

:::T. y. c. ) (a.) 1.02 

Connecticut 10 1.1? 

New Jersey 45 . l. 22 

Boston 79 l. 28 

Boston SubUrbs 13 l. :.'6 

Phi ladel-.Jhi a 103 J. .-49 

Bal tim<Dre 79 1..1 8 

Cleveland. 74 1.16 

Chicago lll 1.~5 

Chi ca;o Su. b-u.r b s 15 l. 22 

St. Lonis 13 1.10 

I Kansas Cit · (a) • 74 

Los Angeles 133 1. OS 

San Francisco 66 1.15 

Portland 40 04. • .J -

Seattle -'------ - 17 • 87 

Number 

(a) 

311* 

68 

39 

104 

(a) 

(a) 

( a) 

. 39 

. 159 

25 

27 

2'1 

23 

(Cl) 

(a) 

(a) 

( a ) 

SEGT I Of ----Aver. f.Tr l~r, 

Earni:n "'S 

$1.20 

1.30 

1.16 

1.02 

1.17 

• 88 

1.11 

·• 83 

1.27 

.95 

1.19 

**Includin:; in addi t io'1 to jacl: et, coc..t, r eefer anci.. dr e ss nn Je r and unde:c esse rs, 

rorkers i n the o~lo~i ~~ cl assi i~Ations : skirt llDDe r n re ssers, (Eastern a r ea 

only) machi·1e :_) r ess ers (:F;este:..~n arcEt onl: ), jac': et , coA-t , reefer and. dress iJart 

press e:cs C::.rest ern e. r ea only ) and ar~pre.1 t ice press e rs ('\'Jest ern area only ). 

*Estimate based on sanple of 3s;b of em'_;)J.o yees . 

(a) No d.ata. NL.mbers negli:;ible in '.10 st cases. 

9821 
- 110-

TABLE E- 3 

NUMBER AND A ..;RAG-: HOUPLY EA. ·r · GS O:i? i.' LE OPEl.ATORS* * I I1 SI DE AND 

OUTSI DE SHOPS BY iviARK.ET (Fo r ·:reck be.~ inn g 1 arch 5th and endi ng !"arch 

9' 1934) 

,;an;. attan & :B r onx 

l:lrooldvn & Queens 

Upste.te _.Jer.' I o rk 

Con:r.ecticut 

re'.: Jel·sezr 

Boston 

Phi lade1•')hi a 

Baltimo r e 

C1evel an ct. 

Chicago 

Chica.go Suburbs 

St . Lou is 

Kan sas City 

Lo s Ange l e s 

San Fr ancisco 

Portland 

Seat tle 

1~UJnber 

5734* 

( a) 

12 

( a) 

45 

102 

193 

7 0 

153 

252 

30 

93 

( ,,,) 

357 

1 4 

3ts 

( 11) 

rrsrnE 

Ave:: . Hrl~r . 

~ . =<.'.rn1ngs 

$1 . 59 

- 1. 40 

. S9 

l. 41 

1. 2 

-----

1. 21 

1. 37 

l. 31 

1. 39 

1. 30 

.97 

1, 25 

• 87 

1.18 

1. 13 

1. 10 

1 . 22 

OUTSIDE 

Aver . Hr l _r. 

J umbe r Ea r nings ----

6495* $1. 55 

2158 * 1. 31 

80 l. 58 

54 1. 29 

224 1.14 

77 1. 30 

7 3 1.17 

91 1. 28 

2,±::_ 1.14 

167 1. 02 

19 . 97 

( a ) 

( a) 

( a) 

( r.) 

( ['.) 

( a) 

**-Inc:luding in <:!.cf iti on t o j c>c!-ce t, c o0 t, r e e fer [Inc: cress ouerators the 

fo1J.ol7ing c1 .::tsf:'e~ of ·ror,-.:ers i n the M<'rl':e t s ·-here such e.s •> ic ation s 

e~ st : Skirt o~e at or s an{ mJ~ en ti ce ODerators. 

* -.:~ timnte bDsec uDon a sa.m')le of 38 · of t he er.rp1o•rees. 

(·a :ro catc.. The num·oers c:r~ ii__ most c c.c:e s ne ~; .:; b1e . 

9821 
-111-

TABLE E-4 

lMffi~R 1'-JD A~T -?.AG:;: HC'U:iL Y :;: ::tri(GS 07 FE; J1.L.iij O?'!!jJATO:'i.S** I P NS J~ A:m 

OUTSID.!: SdO?S BY i:.APJaT (?or · eel.: begi nn ing i;a rch 5t h and eno.ing 

J.·ic- rch 9 , 1034) 

; ~en:1a t tan & ::3 r o'1x 

J roold7 n ,,c Q,ueens 

Up stete e':'" ·.:ark 

Connecticut 

.{e-:i J ersev 

3oston 

Phi lad.el-pl1ia 

Baltimore 

Cleveland 

Chicago 

Chiceg o Suburbs 

St. Louis 

Kansas City 

Los Angele s 

San 7 rancisco 

Portl .md 

Seattle 

l'TUP.lber 

653* 

( ) 

25 

( a) 

(a) 

( a) 

( a) 

209 

99 

(a) 

74 

69 

254 

116 

106 

140 

22 

n ;srDE OUTSIDE 

Aver. grl·r. Ave r. Hrly . 

Ea rnings Number Earning:s 

... 

:p . 95 247 * $1. 09 

2158 * 1. 02 

. 81 252 . 84 

139 . 82 

. 88 410 . 83 

.63 ( a) 1. 02 

. 87 77 1. 23 

.79 210 . 72 

. 8'5 203 . 72 

.7 6 (a) .79 

. 64 52 . 65 

. 59 ( a) 

.68 ( a) 

. 82 (a) .65 

. 83 ( a) 

.66 ( a ) 

.58 ( a) 

**IncluC::.ing in a<3.(it i on to acl~e t, coat, reefer and_ cLress Je ato s the 

follo':-' ing clnfses of ·.:orket's i n t l1e ar~c et s · ·}ler e uc h clasfific3 ti ons 

exist: Semi-sk ill.ed oue rators, slcirt o·oe r v,tors a nC. 8.-o·.Jrentice QlJe r at ors. 

* Estimnte be: se6 u·oon a ~c-~_m -· e of 38~ of the emp lo~ree s . . 

(a) No data. The nu.;·nbe-rs e,re ir. most c e.s es r.ee.: lic i ble. 

9821 

TABLE H-1! 

- NUMBER AND A~E HOURliY EARNINGS OF CUTTERS, .MALE .lND FEMALE OPK!aTOR.S, 

loiALE AND FEMALE FINISHBRS, AND PRJSSBRS BY MARKETS, BA8to ON WEEK ENDED KARCH 9TH, 19!4. 

CUTTER s (1) OPERATORS ~l' I N I 8 H E R 8 PB.B88:1B.S ( 6) 

MARKET ~ \") ~\->) ~ \"*} ~ \U/ 

--- Number Aver. Hrly. Number Aver. Hrly. Number Aver. Hrly. NUIIlber Aver. Hrly. Buiilbe'r Aver. Hrly. Number -·--· Hrly. 

Earnillll:Bo Earnings. Earnings. Earni~•· Barnillga. Barnillc • 

Manhattan & Bronx 19!0• $ 1.62 12,258• • 1.57 900• • • 99 40M• • 1.19 7221• • 1.08 4421• • 1.71 

Brooklyn & Queena 176• 1.50 2,150• 1.:51 1632• 1.02 !66, .96 1882• .87 99!• 1.47 

' New York State •• 1.09 92 1.50 277 .as 26 .71 121 .66 68 1.1~ 

- Connecticut •• 1.23 59 1.!0 139 .82 •• .9! 71 .61 49 1.06 

New Jersey 36 1.27 269 1.15 439 .84 29 .97 219 .72 H9 1.19 - Boston 35 1.26 201 1.24 32 .82 49 .89 183 .75 92 1.28 

P~ladelphia 53 1.36 269 1.39 79 .87 58 .82 204 .8! 103 1.42 

Baltimore 26 1.16 266 1.30 319 . 75 28 .65 184 .64 118 1.05 

Cleveland 145 1.24 403 1.24 413 .78 •• .64 689 .64 2!! 1.12 

Chicago 112 1.32 516 1.16 249 .65 96 .94 287 .78 178 l.U 

St. Louis 20 1.07 93 1.26 58 .70 11 .88 106 .62 40 loU 

Kansas City 10 1.01 •• .87 264 .68 •• .86 75 .58 23 .76 

Los Angeles 110 1.21 358 1.17 11? .81 16 .86 !53 .66 133 1.08 

1.23 104 

San Francisco 43 1.12 106 .83 •• -- 191 .62 66 l.H 

1.04 38 

Portland 39 - 136 .66 •• - 99 .68 40 .96 

1.38 16 

Seattle •• 1.16 61 .64 •• -- 64 .56 17 .86 

1) llnclud· Ulg , in addition to fu11-fle dg ad coat and euit cutters, workers in the fo11owi.n g claseifications found in th' Western Area onl y a A pp rentice euttersJ se.mi-sld.11ed cutteraJ 

cloth and lini~ pilers; pilers; canvas cutters. 

2)Including, in addition to fUll-fledged jacket, coat, reefer & dress operators, workers in the folloWing classificationsz Skirt operators and, for Western area only, apprentice cp.r. 

3)Including, in addition to full-fledged jacket, coat, reefer and dress operators, workers in the following classifications, skirt operators; apprentioe·operators (Western Area anl7)J 

eel0li-ski11ed operators (Western Area only). 

4)Including, in addition to full-fledged reefer, jacket & coat finishers, workers in the follar.ing classifications: 

akirt basters and finishers (Eastern Area only); apprentice finishers (Western Area only). 

5)Inoluding, in addition to full- fledged reefer, jacket & coat finishers, workers in the following classifications, 

(Western Area only); finishers helpers (Western area only) l apprentice finishers (Western area only) . 

finishers' helpers (Eastern Area only)J skirt basters and fini aheras 

finishers' helpers; button sewers (Western Area only)J button aewera 

6)lncluding, in addition to full-fledged jacket, coat, reefer and dr&ss (upper and under) pr ssers, workers in the following classifications: skirt upper pressers (Eastern Area 

machine pressers (Eastern area only); jacket, coat, reefer and dress p~ pressers (Western area only); and apprentice pressers (Western area only) . 

•Estimation of total from a sample of 38% of employees 

••tlo data. The numbers are in moat cases negligible. 

I 

·::: 

t' 

CITY 

y. c. 

-lJ~-

..: . .CL2: F. 10 - COAT Alw SUIT CeD=-: .:..1J1.!.·:-o:t:I S:Y - TiBLE SEO';! Il~G BY-LARYJ:jr:' 

KJ\S "L;J3 J' S J'2;D RC~X'l ..-\f ES O.i!' c:J~~~~:S -::'_AK_-H!G ( 1) :311LOl7 CODE 

::r.rnm:.; (2'1 CODE MINLilli.I & ,_ ~ V3 COJ:PI~D It::lOl.i TFE PAYROLLS 

FII.LD ~0~ :21:-~ FE2:r. OF 1j ~~ --JL E 9, 1934 1.} 

HIN . RATE 

$1 . 34 

: . OF 1103K:C:!1S --- ----- -

B::Lvif CO.JE TOTAL 

CODE 

I\iir. 

41 

i L ·. & 

P..301lE 

758 799 

:JELOVf 

CODE 

MIN . 

5.1 

P::RCEETAGE 

CODE 

MIN.& 

.A:JOV-:3 

94.9 

. • Y. Stc?.te 1. 21 1 G 6 16.7 8" . 3 

Conn. 1.21 2 9 11 18. ?. 81. 8 

1.21 10 34 29 . 4 70 . 6 

1.21 4 49 53 7.5 9~.5 

3oston 1.21 8 31 39 20 . 5 79.5 

TOJ:.AL 

100.0 

100.0 

100 .0 

100.0 

100.0 

100. 0 

Total Ee.steril 

Areo.. 

(Excl. !7 . Y.C.) 

Western Area 

----------~;~?,v~h ______ 11~8~----~1~4:=3~--~1~7~·~G~----~8~2~·~5~-------

3a~ timor e. 1.17 12 18 30 4:0.0 60.0 100 . 0 

C1evela:ld 1.17 116 1J.8 1.7 98 . 3 100.0 

Chicago 1.17 9 9 .7 90.3 lOD. O 

St, Loui.s 1.17 1~ 10 G0 .3 ~1. 7 100.0 

1.17 6 10 16 37 . 5 6.:.. 5 100 . 0 

Los Ansele r 1.17 4 83 G7 4: . 6 95.4 100 .0 

San Fr2.nci sco 1.17 33 39 15.4 84 .. 6 100 . 0 

1.17 10 14 24 42 58 100.0 

Seattle 1.17 1 4 5 :::o . 0 80 . 0 100. 0 

To t a l ~es er~ Area 52 406 12. 8 86.2 100 .0 

(Excl. 3~ltinor~e~-----------------------------------------------------------------

1/ Tl1.e fi _,ures tln·ouchout the tab1 e e..re :")rel i mL-.c:-.ry C'.nc.'.. subject to correcti o;.·~ . Tl1ey 

are b 2 secl o~: a::a 1;ysi s of )e j•T o11 c~ata fo r G9C sho~)S L1. 1:err York <:'.~·"c'.. e:1.viro::.1s. 

For the s;:1E'.l1 er cities, 2. chec~: of cl eri c£'.1 errors by re-exe..mine.t i on of ··)2.yro11 

d.c'l.ta 011 e2.:r::L·_:::.,s for L1cli vic:.u2.1 em"")1o ~roes shor.rs th2.t the !1Uinber of v10rt:crs be1o\r 

code min.imums is <.ctuc-.11y co·1sidere..bl;y sm<'.11er, :")erh<:'.:")s 2.s mt.1.ch &s GO~~ ' th2.~1 shorcl 

in tc.b1e, (' .. ue chief ~r to coc _i "'.~ of somi-sLi11ed cuttel~ , ~") i1 rs, etc. , 2.s fa11-

f1edbed cu..-cte: . Dc'te. for Cl1i c2.,:,o t hroubhont the t c.blo :c~c 1ude its subu1·bs P:i!c".. it 

is :?robe..b1e ::~ t i:ost of the Chica::;o r!Or1 ·:ers re·)ortecl. ns hc-.vi1:b earned be1oH the 

miLimu.m \78:!." "' er ") 1o~~eos in sho~1s i ·· -. the Chicc\;o ~uburbs . 

9821 
- 114-

mA LE H- 10 Cont ' d. 

COAT AFD SuiT CODE A'l T!:ORJI.rY 

':i:'ABLE SEOTIL7G B - HARI ::T AREAS ifLJ IBERS A::D PERCE-JTAGE 

OF CUT ~IB SE1I-SKILL~D 

1-BELO\i/ CODE ;n Inn: 

2- CODE 1-iiNn.rm .. A'-D ABO i"E 

C0!1:PILED FRO!: TEE PAYROLT.S FILED 

FOR ':'EE ViEEK OF UARCH 5, -UAR. 9, 1934 ?) 

NO . OF WORI'::!=:RS 

BELOW CODE TOTAL 

CODE UN. & 

PERCEll':' AGE 

CI 171Y I,]N. RATE 

Mil.. AJ30VE 

Baltimore . 1. 11 2 2 

Cleveland II 11 11 

Chicat;o <..": Suburbs II 1 5 6 

St . Louis 11 1 1 

· Kansas City 11 4 4 

· Los Angeles II 3 2 5 

San Francisco II 4 1 5 

Portland " 1 1 2 

S~attle " 

Total : West ern District 9 25 34 

(Excl. of Be.l t imorc) 

E) In t · .e C2-Se Of srne.ller cities, a check of cl erical 

pay- roll data on earnings for i ndi vi duo.l empl oyees 

semi-s~illed cutters then here indicated, some of 

classified s full- fledged cutters. 

9821 

BELOW 

CODE 

MIN . 

100. 

. 17 . 

-

60 . 0 

80. 0 

50 . 0 

26 

CODE TOTAL 

1Hi . & 

ABOVE 

100 . 0 

100. 0 100 . 0 

83 • 100. 0 

100. 0 100. 0 

100. 0 100. 0 

40 .• 0 100. 0 

20 . 0 100. 0 

50. 0 100. 0 

74 100. 0 

errors by re- examination of 

shovrs c>. greater nUl'!lber of 

those 1-k"'..vin~ been incorrectlJ 
TABLE .H-10 Gont ' d . 

C0P.T Al'!.D SLTI T I".QDF, AU1

1

HCRI'r Y 

TABLE SHGWIYG :D Y- ~.;;-~'l: r A.:t-:(. S NT. .DEJS A) D PE:::tCEUTAGE 

G F c.~. '~ ·.; ,.s CTT~." :~-~ S- 2 ABlH N ,j :::; 

.. ... .. ~ ., ~ . ... . 

We st ern Area Gn1L-.. - -----.. ... -.... -... ,...._ 

City M I !-J MCJM 

:RA~E ' I I • . . ., 

l 

Ba1 tinw re ...... . '?4 

Clev: nQ. ~ ...• ..-·-··- ···" 

St. Louis . It 

Kansa:3 City .-... li 

Los Angele s II 

San Francisco . \I 

Portland ··. ..• It 

Soatth It 

Chicago, Sub. . ' II 

Total: West ern Area 

(Excl. ~al tim or ) 

1.- S'B YJ i CCJ'D L; Tl-JD.,JT)4·1 

2'"'"C( 1{:;._, ;. :Il.' ;w·~~ AN:) BVVE 

·, Cu t? iF~:) B1Ivi ri

1

l-IE PAYF.QJJLS r i LED 

:B ~ ~~ VJEEK Ul:' MARCH 5-!vulliCH 9 , 1934 ~ 

··

KG. o-g• !CJI:Y~-1 3 ~11: ~tJ1: ; ~ 

B->;'T 0Tri1 ··- ;,( ,j '"G-;-:.F -T ~ -- --- --

.2J.J ~ • o..)~ '· :J ..) :SELCJ W ~: E TOTAL 

CGDE 1J1:E r & CGDE . tl -r J 0 & 

I: I N. .A.BGVE V1IN . .iL~VE 

.. -

1 _.;z. _.,3 33 . 3 66.7 100 ,0 

2 2 100,0 100 ,0 

1 1 100.0 100.0 

1 4 5 20. 0 80.0 1CI(',O 

! • 

1 l 2 50.0 50.0 100.0 

3 10 13 23.1 76.9 10().0 

3/ Th ~ figur e s g iven here a r e subject to qualifications of the kind 

indi~ate d in nut e 2, above. 

9821 

,· 
-J. l.l)-

TABLE n- 10 C0 -1 1D. 

COAT AND SUIT CODE .H.UTHORI TY 

TABLE SHOWING BY-MARKET A_i-tE1 S Nm:BffiS AND PERCBNTAG"Ii: 

F TfT]RS ( APPR ~NTI CE) EARNL:G 

-B i!.;L W CODE N1I ::::I MUM 

2-C DE HI NI AUM Alill ABOVE 

COMPILED FROM TH~ PAYROLLS FIL~ 

FOR ~ WEEK OF MARCH 5-MARCH 9 , 1934 1f 

• estern Area Onl 

N. . OF ~m::tZ:illi S P~C ~: "'IAG =<: . . CITY LI I .lJlvl B~OW CODE TOTAL BELOW CODE TOTAL 

HAT '<: CODE t.:;( N. & COD~ MIN .. & 

MI N. b.BOVE MIN. ABOVE 

Ealtimore . 63 

Cleveland II 

Chicago 8· Sub . It 4 .:1. 100 . 00 . 

St . Louis II 

Kansas City II 

Los Angeles- II 6 6 100. 100 . 

San Francisco II 2 2 100. 100. 

Portland II 2 2 100. 100. •' 

. Sea tle II 

----

'I'otal West e rn 14 14 100. 100. 

District 

(Excl . Baltimore) .. 

y See Note 3, above. 

9821 
-117-

TABLE H 10 CONT 1D. 

' . . 

COAT AND SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

TABLE SHO\dNG BY·.,~Wlli.ET AR.EAS NUivrBJ!;kS AND PERCENTAGE 

OF CLOTH & LINING IL~RS 

1-BELO\, CODE MINIMUM 

2-CODE MINIMUM AND ABOVE 

COMPILED FROM THE PAYROLLS FILED 

.. . 

FOit Tl-i.S Vv .Kt;K OF MARCH 5-M.A.RCH 9, 1934 §} 

W•stern Area Only 

CITY MIN. RATE 

Baltimore .94 

Cleveland II 

Chicago ,If 

st. Lo~is · I: • II 

Kansas. City " Lo~ .Angeles II 

San Francisco ,, ,, 

Portland tt 

-eattle It 

'otal-We stern Area 

{EX.cl. of Balt e~ 

2/See note 3 auove. 

BELOVI 

CODE 

MIN. 

2 

2 

, 

•· 

4 

NQ.. OF i1 OBKEHS 

CODE TOT.AL 

MIN. & 

ABOVE 

4 4' 

3 3 

2 4 • 

2. 

. 

9 13 

PERCENTAGE 

BELOW CODE 

CODE · MIN. & 

MIN. .ABOVE 

1®0.0 

100.0 

50o'OO 50.0 

100.0 

30.8 69.2 

TOT.A.L 

! 

lGO." 

100.0 .. 

-

100,~ 

100.0 

100.0 

.,·: 
c 

-ll.b -

Tabl li-1 0 COP 1 d , 

COAT JJITD SUIT CODE AUTHORI rY 

TAILE SHOVIIli G BY-MAhKJ::T A.RBAS }1JMIJEhS AYD P:E.I;tCENTAGE - .r 

OF FIL1ItS-EA.IiN I KG .'l ·· 

l~BBLO I co- E i liKHD'; 

2-CODE d IMJ,l AND - OVE 

C0MFILED :b':rldM· TH.cl. F ~YROLLS FILED 

~OR THE -Y"v EEK O:B' lAARCH 5- MARCH 9 , 1934 §} 

est e rn .Are? On_ly -~~....__ __ ----------------- _____ _ 

C!TY MIN . RATE 

Baltimore 

Cleveland 

Chicago, Sub . 

St • . Lo-q.i s 

Kansas City 

Los Angel~s 

San Francisco 

PortlBnd 

Sec>ttle 

To 81 Wester n Area 

(Excl . Baltimore) 

• 80 

II 

II 

II 

II 

II 

If 

II 

t1 

§} See note 3, ~bove . 

I . 

821 

BELOYi 

CODE 

11liN . 

0 

JO. 0~ \tORKERS 

CODE TOTAL 

r.UN. & 

ABOVE 

3 

1. 

1 

4 

"1 

2 

"'1 

13 

---

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

..... 

oG 

'1 

13 

Pl!:RCENTAG~ 

BELO t CODE TOTAL 

CODE AIN . & 

MIN . ABOVE 

100. 0 100. 0 

- 100. 100. 0 

100, 11 100.11 

100. 0 00 .~ 

100.9 100.e 

100. 0 1 o.o 

100. 100.0 

100. 1 0.1 

., 
TABLE H 10 (COr'T1 :U) -119-

COAT AND SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

TABLE SH0i7IHG B"'-M.:'\. H~T lillEAS NU1\'!13:&:RS AiJD PE?.CEITTAGE 

OF OPEnATORS ( I.iALE) .- EAR1TING 

l-BELOW 'THE CODE }.UNH!UM 

2-AT Trm CODE I.ii NIMilli AlrD UP TO THE CODE AVERAGE 

3-CODE AVERAGE AND A:DOVE 

COMPILED FROH TH:r.! PAYROLLS FILED Jj 

FOJ;t f'HE ~ O;F' MARCH 5-MARCH 9 , 1934 

---· Min . Aver . NO . 01!' WORlCERS PERCENTAGE 

CITY Rate Rute Below Code Min. Code Total Below Code Code Total 

Code & up to Aver. Code Min . Aver. 

Min. Aver . and Min. and and 

~bOVG up Above 

to 

Aver . 

. Y. c. $1 . 00 $1 . 50 239 2312 385? '5408 4 . 4 42~8 52 . 8 100 .0 

Eastern Area . 90 1 .35 

N.Y . State II II 2 37 48 87 2 . 3 42 . 5 55 . 2 100 .0 

Conn . 11 11 3 35 21 59 5 . 1 59.3 35 . 6 100. 0 

N • J • II 11 17 199 49 2q5 6 . 4 75 . 1 18 . 5 100 .0 

Philade lphia II II 14 127 115 256 5 . 5 49 . 6 44 . 9 100 . 0 

Boston 11 11 16 96 78 190 "8.4 50 . 5 41 . 1 100 . 0 

Total Eastern Area 52 494 311 857 6 . 1 57 . 6 36 . 3 100 .0 

(Excl . N. Y. ) 

Western Area • • 85 1.,26 

Baltimore 11 11 8 6() 79 147 5.4 40 . 8 53 . 8 lO·J .0 

Clevel and II 11 7 201 163 371 5.9 51.9 42 . 2 100. 00 

Chicago 11 II 62 8/ 239 182 483 13 50 37 100 . 1) 

St . Louis II 11 5 37 40 82 6 . 46 48 . 2 100 . 0 

Kansas City II II 1 4 5 20 . 0 80 . 0 0 100. 0 

Los Angelec II II 6 202 123 331 2 61 36 . 8 l OO eO 

San Francisco 11 11 8 36 53 97 8 48 52.5 100 .0 

Portland 11 II 4 15 13 32 12.5 46 . 9 40 . 6 100 . 0 

Seattl e II II 1 5 8 14 7 . 1 35 . 7 57 . 2 100 . 0 

Total We stern Area 94 739 582 1415 6.6 52. 3 41 .1 100 . 0 

(Exclusive of Baltimore) · 

1./ Re- examina.tion of payroll r ecords shows t hat· percent of worke rs 

receiving less than · code minimums os slightly lowe r than f igures her e 

indicate . 

~/ Mainl y Chica o surburbs. 

9821 
TABLE H 10 

• cant t cl • ' \..0 

()Q 

1\) 

I-' COAT AND SUIT CO~E AUTHORITY 171 ii.JLI: SH01JliNG J3Y- l.iAllKET ~lt S lTIJLDETIS Alffi PERCENTAGE 

OF OPE.dAT01lS ( FEi !.ALE) EJU(}}I NG 

1- BELO.(f TI::C CO E l.IINII JIM 

. 2- AT THE CODE .iiI FII.:UU ·AND . UP TO T".HE CODE AVERAGE 

3- CODE AVERAn-E AliD A.JOVE 

COl?IL:t:;D FROi: T:H:C PAY~\.OLL S FILED 

FOR Tiill ;bEK , OF I.WlCH ')- i.JliWH 9 2 1934 

NO . 0? ·.romiT3.S PE_ CE :r'r.AGE 

CITY EHJ. A V:C:J. . }JCLOU CO:JE i:HL CO:JE AVCR . TOTAL BELOW CODE Iii T. CO J~ ~- . l'OTAL 

RATE RATE CO:OE & U? TO & ABOVE CODE & UP TO & ABOVE 

i .I ~~ . AVER. LIN . AVER . 

r. Y. c. . 90 $1 . 50 327 723 58 1108 29 . 5 65 .3 . 5. 2 100 . 0 

E£1 te rn Area 81 1 . 35 

H. St ate . II II 26 241 4 271 9 . 6 88 . 9 1 . 5 100. 0 

Connecticut n II 21 118 139 13 . 1 84. 9 100 . 0 I 

I-' 

Hen Jersey II II 35 400 1 4?.6 8.0 91 . 7 0 . 3 100 .0 l\.i 

_./ c 

Pb.iladelphi a II II 5 72 1 78 6.4 92 .3 1. 3 100. 0 I 

:Boston II II 21 28 25 . 0 15 · 0 100 . 0 

Total Eastern 9L~ 852 6 952 9 -9 89 . 5 .G 100 . 0 

Area (EXcl . :N .Y. C.) 

·.:estern Area -75 -95 

:Jal t i1:.o re II II ?.01 102 31 346 59 · 8 2CJ ~ 10 . 1 100 .0 

Cleveland II If 27 43 23 o r-

,.JO 28 44 23 100 . 0 

C11ica,r·o 11 II 32 21 l~ 57 58 7 37 100 . 0 

St . Louis 11 11 l~l 7 3 51 80 . 4 13. 7 5· 9 100. 0 

Knnsas Ci ~r 11 II L~ 52 6 62 6.4 83 . 8 9 . 8 100 .0 

Los Angeles 11 II l~ 28 G 38 12 . 8 71. 4 15 . 8 101") . 0 

Scm Francisco II 11 G 19 10 35 11 . 1 54-3 28 . 6 100 . 0 

Po rtland II 11 9 25 3 37 24 . 3 67 . 8 8. 1 100 .0 

Seattle 11 11 l 11 U5 5. 6 <:)4 . 4 100 .0 

Total . estern Area 124 212 60 396 31 ·3 53 · 5 15. 2 100 . 0 

(Excl . of Baltimore) 
- 121-

T.ABL.l!.. ,L _ 10 , CCAT 1 D 

TA!jLE; SH ·;nJTG 'JY-: :.A?~~::::T A ... TIAS j:~:iB:223 ,U;D P:::::.tCill~TAGE 

C-., np-,J ·' ml"\ ;') . ( -· \ T • ., ) ="! :r C'1 r- L..,D ·~ ~ ::ni.-1 "TG .tt . -'-"-'Vi.J.. v ~l.v -'! .<UJL "...!.. ~ - o1 1, .t!J t .:..'-1.-:u·! 1\i 

1- '3BL0.7 CC DE 1:LT1iUi: 

2- AT· T; E CCDE :.IIFi iiUi.'! A1 D UP TC =:::::: C·::DE AV3RAGE 

3- CC'DE AV::.:_·.._.{GE Alill ABOVE 

CG~ :? L::::D ::?J.O:·i T~J j PAY :tOLLS ::'TL3D 

Fo.rt T:.:~ ·~reEK GF 1:i.A:::tc: . = 5- ::i.A.?.CL 9 , 1 934 

"!est e rn A"'e:..:::a::...._::C:c.:.n:.::l::...;~'--------- -------------- -------

T~Y ; .in. Av er. 

Rqt e . nat e 

Balti.:no r e . 62 . 88 

Cl ev el and II II 

Ch icago C: 

Suburbs II II 

St . Lou i s II II 

Ka n ::>a s Ci t;y II II 

Lo s .IU'lgel es II II 

.San Franc isco II II 

Portl and II II 

Seattle II II 

To t L1 ~.-:es n .Area 

(Excl . Baltimor e ) 

9821 

lm . OF \7G.?JCE~tS PE3CEfTAG_Z _ _ _ 

BE:UC/il Code i.--in. Code Av er. To t al Bel ow Code Code Tc t2 

Code c; U l) t o .. and Code : iin . 

i.,; in . Av er . a.b0v e ·.un . !:. U ) 

3 ~: ~: 

7 178 r .. 

t) ._) 

10 .(3 

0 2 

111 10 

3'6 6 

r:z 

u 37 l 

6 53 3 

8 21 

26 11 . 5 

248 2 . 0 

58 20 . 7 · 

2 

121 

<1=2 

41 7 . 4_. 

62 9 .7 

29 27 . 6 

t o 

Av e r . 

24 . 7 

71 . 8 

79 . 3 

100 

91 . 7 

85 .7 

90 . 2 

85. 5 

73 . 4 

53 . 8 JOC 

~ II 

II 

II 

8 . 3 II 

14 .3 II 

2 . 4 II 

4 . 8 II 

II 

34 -8 6 83 603 5 . 7 80 . 6 1 3 . 7 II 
-122-

TAJLB H 10 CO T1D 

COAT AND SUIT CODE UTHORITY 

TABLE SI-iO;HNG BY ~i.A.RKET .AREAS NUMBERS iJill PERCENTAGE 

OF OPEP~TORS ~\LE) APPRENT ICE-EARNING 

(1) BELOJ CODE MI IMUM 

(2) CODE .I H~ AND ABOVE 

COMPILED FROM THE PAYROLLS FILED 

FOR THE EEK OF MARCH 5-MAF.CH 9, 1934 

Western Area Only 

NO. OF \iORKE.RS ER ~1TAGE 

CITY Nil N. RATE BELQiiv CODE CODE TOTAL 

Baltimore . 60 

Cl eveland tl 

Chicago C:C Subs. II 

St . Louis II 

Kansas City II 

Los Angeles II 

San Francisco II 

Portland II 

Seat tle II 

TOTAL iJESTERH AREA 

C&;~CL . BALT IMORE) 

9821 

MI N. r.UN . & 

ABOVE 

1 

2 

2 

1 

8 

2 

15 

l 

2 

2 

1 

8 

2 

15 

BELOW 

CODE 

MIN. 

CODE TOTAL 

MI N. & 

ABOVE 

100 100 

100 100 

• 100 100 

100 100 

- 100 100 

- 100 100 

1 0 100 
TABLE H 10 , CON·.r 1D 

CITY 

--

Baltimore 

Cleveiand 

Chicago 

St. Louis 

Kansas City 

Los Angeles 

San Francisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

TABLE Snc·,,·nTG BY - M ... J'T{.ST APE~S N1! laERS Al'TD PERC ~:N TAGE 

OF OPbR\'1C·~:3 (.t'~~li_;.LE) l..L.:.r RiXT[GES , EARNI.:.·TG 

l -13L.J.:/lh. CGJ'~ : . ."i}\:~1vtll 

2 - CO.US 1.:. t~II1Jt1: Al'{lj AlOV~ 

- CCt!l'IL:-::..; F~OM T"1~ Pi3ROLLS FILED 

FOR 'l1E::S WEE!: OF iJ RCE 5-lllA:i:.CH 9 , 1934 

~ . u::c::w:.:au:c: - :i!:tS::OW::::w::Lie - ~~ ·'"~~~ -~c::-- -.:~ ""'r..-lK"C;.....- -r·::---

... ro. OF WOHT~RS FE:i1CENTAC.E 

IviiN. RATE BEiJO' CO:UE CODE TOTAL BELOVl CODE ..•. 

MIH ~HH & CODE MI N.& 

ABOVE IvillJ. ABOVE 

• 47 18 . 18 100 • 

II 17 17 100. 

II 9 9 100 

II 2 2 100 

II 38 38 100 

II 1 21 22 4.6 95.4 

II 8 8 100 

. ·11 -· . - .. -...... 2 2 .. -.w,. Z2 ., ---···=· . 100 

II· 14 14 100 

____ ..,.. __ 

TOTAL VVESTERN AREA 

(EXCL. :BALTIMORE) 1 131 132 .. 0.8 99.2 

9821 

TOTAL 

100 . 

100. 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

# ' . 
TABLE H 10 - CONT 'D 

COAl' A.D SUI T CO::JE AUr.:':fORITY 

TABLE hO~HJ.i: G 2'.- -I."A.. -·~:·~· it.}TAS ' 1:Bt..l'.S ND PE .CE TTAGE 

OF .'-JL : .... 1r.1 O.t :~ . .h.t~IJ:.~ ( :v: '.1E) EAE TI:i~ G 

(1) BELO;,: T:;E COD:: I ·H:! M 

( 2 ) Nr TilE JOD:.: 1·~~1-1Jv1Ulv: .4liiD UP TO THE CODE AV"F,R.AGE 

(3) CDDE J.VBRAGZ .A:;D ABOVE 

- COMPILED J'R0:-1 1f HE :?AYROLLS FILED 

FOR THE WEEK OF1 MA:.1CH 5-)1ARJh 9, 1934 

_-----------------------------------·------------------ -------------------NO . Oli' "VOP..K:2RS FJJJ C.0!1TAGE - - -~----~ 

CITY 

N. Y.C. 

East e rn 

Area 

N.Y.Stat e 

Conn . 

N. J . 

Phil a . 

Boston 

-..! IN o AVER. BEI.O.V CODE CODE TO'l'AL BELO"vv CODE 

lv1IF & 

UP ·ro 

AVER. 

"RATE .. "}lATE C01)E-- 1Vfi1T ' & AVR.ff""&· CODE 

... MI N. UP TO ABOVE MI N. 

AV"Eu.'i. . 

• 90 1.40 2 17 6 25 - B • 68 . 0 

. 81 1.26 4 1 5 · 80.0 20 . 0 

II II ... 

II II • 4 4 - 100.00 

II II - 2 5 3 10 20.0 50.0 

11 11 . 6 2 8· 75 . 0 25 . 0 

CO~E 

AVZR & 

ABOVE 

TOTAL 

24 . 0 100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100.0 

100 . 0 

30 . 0 100 . 0 

100 . 0 

-----------------------------------·--------------------------------- TOTAL EAST:::::IDT A.l:lEA 

( EXCL. N.Y. C. ) 

. 75 1.15 

Baltimo r e 

Cl eveland 

Chicago 

St . Louis 

Los Angel es 

II 

II 

II 

II 

11 

II 

II 

II 

II 

II 

San Fr ancisco II 11 

Portland 11 11 

:'eattle u 11 

!ansas City 11 11 

Tot al ~es n Are~ 

q R01 ( EXCL . BALTIMORE) 

12 

2 

-

2 

12 

1 

8 

1 

2 

8 

19 

3 

4 

5 

3 

8 

27 44 . 4 44.4 

5 20 . 0 

10 20 . 0 80 . 0 

6 

2 

11 

29 

16 .7 

- 100.0 

72.8 

6.9 65 .5 

11.2 100 . 0 

80 . 0 100 . 0 · 

100 . 0 

83 .3 100 . 0 

100.0 

27.2 100.0 

27.6 100 . 0 
--125-

TABLE H-10 CCNT 1D. 

erA 1 AlJ!l fTJT T COJJ:ij At;'T'HOFT TY 

Oll, SKl:l1' O.::'_::/ j\~-1 ~~ (F:;;.P..:SR;) E.A~l.l'l:i.HG 

L . • . r. ~ 'J" tT J.1? E c l::J -q; i.4~ N D· i_f J 

2 . h ·' ·-~::-:: ('Qj)F. f~~li\ hl .' ,m uP ro THE CODE AVERAGE 

3 - C: o:,Jt,; ;; ·1_ .::.(\G ~ 1 ~ID A B 0 "! E 

C~lv11?~ L \ D F?c0M TH"Z P.:i. Y::r18LLS FILED FOR 

Ti1"C WESI~ OF MiW'Ci:I 5 - i./ARCH 9 , 1904. 

~·----------- --_____________ __.__ ------~- ~ -·-·-----

NO. OF WC:'\KE~1 S ---- -~~· .. -· -·-- MIN o .A V'!J.L, B"@_.r:-ut C-JT'E Cl~T'"E 

RATE RATE CO:OE M L JIT , Av=:R . MIN . & \.,"1' i·l~ 

TO ASGV'E 

AV"E'..R . 

Y.C. . 80 1 . 40 0 17 

------ 

...._ ___ ,_._ . - stern 

..,6~~~ - --' . 72 1.26 

Y. State 5 1 

nn. '1 

J . 3 

.ila. 

s on 

tal Eastern Area 

:xc.1. . N. Y. c. 5 e 

·stern Area 

. ) , 70 • 90 

·1 ti- II 11 20 7 1 

more 

.eveland ll 11 4 13 2 - ~ic o II II 

J . Louis 11 . II 2 

_ilnsas City 

II. II 

>s .Angeles II 11 

0 7 6 

tn Francisco 11 " 3 18 1 

:)rt1and IT II 5 2 

eat t1e 11 11 

otal Western Area 

(Ezc1. Baltimore) 12 42 9 

_. 

821 

TOTAL BEIJGW 

CODE 

MIH. 

25 32o0 

6 83.3 

Lt 

3 

13 38,5 

28 71~4 

~----

19 21 .1 

2 

13 

22 13 . 6 

7 71.4 

63 19 .1 

COD~ 

MllJ. 

& 

UP ~:0 

A" 7 SH . 

6() . 0 

~ 

lf;. 7 

]_(')(l,Q 

lCO.O 

61.5 

25.0 

68.4 

100.0 

53,9 

81 . 8 

28 . 6 

66 . 6 

COD"li~ 

.A. I! ~R. 

& 

ABOVE 

3.6 

10.5 

-! 6·. 1 

1.6 

14 . 3 

TOTAL 

100.0 

100 .0 

100 .0 

10() .0 

100 .. 0 

.. 100 . 0 

.100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

-

100.0 
TA.:"JL..:: 

PCC 

- .L&....,LJTA:JI,C i-i-10 Co:: t ' d 

CG.A.I' .Al~D SUI "2: CGDE AU:·-q(;~ II]:'Y 

S!'G Ir-e JY- : A~r :rr· -~ .:. .. ,.. -· . .; ..:....,s -~ 

-TAG-"'"' 0:::' . r.-rs~::L ...,S (" . .LH:) EAP.:Ii.iG 

1- :B£LC·.; l.:'EE CG. i. : ·I:-L V::. 

2- "'J.'l· T'H!£ C0;:JE 1· r:-r: -. . .,:L D UP 

Tv ~P:H: CGDf AVf::tAGH: 

3- CGD~ AVf?.AC f£ ...'"ill X3v'r£ 

Cvl'PILE:i:l :::'lcr· YiE PAT:G ... LS F ILED 

FG:: T~.;:;r ·.;E. iY G:L ·. X'"'C:i 51J•';.i - I 'A"')c:~ 9th, 1934 

- - - ..... _- ~u. ·- ~~ GY' -.:v ~c~-_s 

CI1Y ! ~in . Aver . :3P J. cw· Cod.e Co<:.e I·ot:tl l"' lO ., CoC' P Tot2.l 

RGJo ?.ate Code Li . Aver . CodP. i in. Aver. i ·in. And. An0. j 'in. & Up & Above 

U:p to Aoove to Avr:>~· . 

Aver. 

J:~ . y. c. . 85 l. 25 141 836 537 1564 9 . () 53. 5 37. 5 100. 0 

Eastern 

Area . 765 1 . 125 

N. Y. State II II 9 9 1 19 07 . 4 47 . 4 5. 3 100 . 0 

Conn. II II 3 1 2 6 50.() 15. 7 33. 3 < 100 . () 

N.J. II II 2 17 2 21 9. 5 81.0 3 . 5 100. 0 

Phil:' .• II II 14 l S 5 38 36. 8 sn.o 13. 2 100. 0 

Boston II II 3 19 10 32 9. 4 59 . 4 30. 2 100. 0 

.. Total Eastern .Area 

(Excl. U. Y.) 31 65 20 116 26 . 7 56. () 1?. 3 10(). () 

Western Area 

. 75 1. 1() 

Ba1 timore 

Area . 75 1. 10 7 7 14 50;() 50. 0 100 . 0 

Cl eve l ·-mel II II 1 3 1 5 2(). () sn.n 2(). () l ()(). () 

Chicaro () (;C 

Sub . ll. II 8 63 12 83 9 . 0 7:= .• s ' 14 . 5 lN). () 

St . LOv•.i S II II 2 2 1nn .n 100. 0 

Kc.nsas Cit::/ " II -

Lo s .A! 1g ~s II II 1 ll 3 15 S. 7 73. 3 20. 0 1no. o 

S?.n Francisco 11 II 

Port l :1i1cl II II 

Se~._t tle II II 

Total ~'ie::: tern .Axe3.. 

9821 ( e::cl . of Eal t.) 10 79 L ... 105 9. 5 75. 3 1 5.2 100. 0 
-12'7 -

T:t-DlP E 10 CG:lt ~-

TA3LE s·rv ;r iG 3Y-- ;_-w£1' AJti.:.A.S ~lTI::JE"ttS Al~D ?E'\CE -TAGE 

r-, 7r I Sr .. ·cT)C.. (-.E· T G' ) C:I. ''Y T ... l"T('_ \.1-. ..... .a. - . -- ...., \- ~ ~ - -1-L..:. .. - v 

CII'Y 

.• Y.C . 

.Eastern 

~ .. L • 

R_\.1'E 

. 85 

AVE':i. 

RA'I'E 

1. 25 

.Area . 705 1 . 125 

i_i . Y.S. II If 

Con:1 . If II 

N. J. II 11 

Phil a. II II 

Boston " II 

Total Eastern Area 

( E:-c cl. o Y • C-_} 

Uestern .Area 

. 63 • ~1 

Bal tiinore 11 If 

Cleve lund 11 II 

Chice.go II 11 

St. Lauis II II 

:?~1s as City It 11 

Los M /::,elf!s 11 II 

San Ft~ncisco II II 

Port1eJld 11 II 

Se a ttle II II 

iiestern .Area 

(Excl. of La l tir11ore ) 

9821 

1- :o~~c~ ; 'I·'q-. Cv::JE ; r·ri·u 

2- A1' 1"-! .. CGTIE ITTL u;- ~~-;_, TJP 'I'v THE CGD.b: AVEP .. M'E 

3- CG:U.-:. AV K-~_-_GE _Ali) A.)vV!. 

CGi .?IlS:O F' .GI: ~H£ PA:l':lOLLS :.? ILED 

:::' ~-- T[li ~:En~ u;:· /CC~1 5, - J.:A.-.C:I 9 , 1934 

NG.. ~- ·;; ...,:'l_~R.S lr-'~C£ l·J'IA~E ---=:..=-------=------- ::::SLC/.1 CC..!).t, CGDE TGTAL 

CCJDE LI:~ . ~ AV£3. & 

UP TG zDGVE 

18() 1681 541 24()2 

9 17 26 

22 7 29 

r- .... 

e:_:c.., 4() 7 69 

22 93 19 134 

13 51 s 73 

88 2()8 ~5 .~. 1 

zo 42 20 82 

37 197 41 2r?5 

27 86 119 232 

9 29 7 45 

3 2 5 

12 137 32 101 

5 55 9 69 

11 34 1 46 

3 14 17 

127 554 209 870 

B~LL : Cq:UE C0DE 

CCDE i ·L-• .';; A-rER . 

: I::. UP TQ AJGVE 

AVbE . 

7. 5 70.() 22. 5 

34. 5 65. 4 

75. 9 24.1 

7 1 0 L ..L.. . ;J 58 . 0 .• 10.1 .. 

10. 4 59. 4 14. 2 . 

1? . 8 69 . 9 12. 3 .. 

'23 . 6 62. 8 1(). 6 

2£1. 4 51. 2 24. 4 

~:) . 5 71.6 l t_ . 9 

11. 5 37. 2 51 •. 3 

20. 0 f4 . 4 15. 5 

60. 0 40 o0 

?. 7 74. 6• 17. 7 

7. 2 79 . 7 1 r::. . l 

24. 4 73. 3 2.3 

17. 6 82. 4 

12. 3 63.7 24. () 

TOTAL 

& 

100. 

100. 

100 

100 

100 . 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 ,; ~ 

10[) 
- 128-

TA3LE .i 10 Cont 1 d 

CO .AT Al:D SUIT CO:J.S A:JTHG:-:IrY 

T.:GLE SHV. L:G ::.:.Y- i. _iL?l~E~r ~.E s lU. :::-E:JS A:r:J PE- CE~.TTAGE 

(;:;' J..'I" ~I SHE:::tS I ;.u;:LP.h:_ S (i :ALE) EA2~~ ·o 

1- 3ELU.i 1'-iL C0D t~ J.r: r. m 

AT I' H.!!: CG:UE : r;·n :m.: _A:_iiD UP TO ·rHE CG E V 1!;_._ GE 

3- COD.!£ AV .t'..f~GE _eu ·:U AJ30 1 .E 

COL:PILED ::;''~01.: I·Hf ?ADGLLS FILED ·~ (; ~ rJE ·.iE .K G::' i -~. C? 5 - i"A1CH s, 1934 

?o . of i1o :t !~~.., r s Percent~ e 

City ·.:in. _aver . ::ae lo 7 Code Code 1·otal :Ee1o Code Code Tota: 

Ra te R3.te Code l in. , 

(..; Aver. Code I :in. & Ave r . & 

):lin. Up to and J'in. Up to Above 

AvPr . Above AvPr • 

. . r:. Y. c. • 63 1. 00 4 56 39 99 4.1 56. 5 39. 4 100.0 

Eastern 

Area . 567 • 90 

:·. Y. S. II " 1 4 1 6 16. '? 66 . 6 13. 7 100. 0 

. Corm. II " l l < '""' 50. () 50!() 100. 0 

N.J. " II 1 6 l 8 l2. S 7::-. o 12. 5 100.0 

Phil a . II II 9 2 ll 81. 8 18. 2 100!'0 

Bostoa II " 2 12 2 16 12. 5 75. 0 12. 5 100. 0 

EastP-rn Area 

(Excl. ~J . y. c. ) 5 32 0 43 11. 6 74. 4 14. 0 100. 0 

Western Area 

• 53 . 70 

B3.1 t imo:..· e 11 II 7 5 2 14 50 35. 7 14. 3 100. 0 

C1Aveland II II 0 3 3 100. 100. 0 

ChiC8._;0 & Sub. H II 4 4 100. 10(). 0 100. 0 

st. Lo·u..i s II II l 1 2 50. 0 so.o 100. 0 

~n s City II II - Los Angeles I " 

San Fr..,ncisco II tt - ....:. 

Portland II II ;.. 

Seattl e If II 

Western Area 

(E::cl. of Baltimore) 0 4 5 9 0 44 56 100. 0 

9821 
- 1 "9 -

T _t(:.L L= J 10 CG" 'I' I D 

CvAI _-\... 7) STT I r CG l f ·-..:J I' lV='I r,.y 

T lE I ·c- _):-; ~-::: ~-=:T .'....lEAS -n .:-:;1.,::; A,'J :::;; ~c .:_::~r TA~E 

CI'I·Y l ~·' • AVi:."J. . 

-q_ATE ::;A-:z·E 

- . ·. I . C. ~ 

. ou 1. 00 

EastErn 

ArPa • 567 . ~~ ~ 

-- Y. St '"'~tP 11 II 

-· .. 

Cc:F,. I! I! 

~~ . J . I! 11 

II 11 

II II 

I Tot:- 1 .i'""'£ter~1 .A;,_- p<J_ 

(E=-:c1 . l~ -..- ) 

i/estern Area • 53 . 7n 

/ :3Slt imo~e II II 

C1 PVE' 1 '"'.!10. II II 

Chicc- :=;o & Sub. II II 

St . Louis II " K ' ilS0. S Ci t:;r II II 

Los Ange1E>s II II 

San Fr···.nc i sco II II 

Port1"lnd II II 

Se l. ttle II II 

- To t 1 Wester:1 .A;:-e a 

(E::<:.c1. ]['.1 t .) 

9821 

C.,-, - r··rs-- -,~ f ~--.· :) nC" (-,-,, •:-: .-IT '" ) Lo~ -,-7r-·o .' __ .~. . . ....:: t u . 11: .LU. __ _ ,~..~ _ , .-u !!J .c-_ :r 

(1) :DELG : ~p :.: cv:ur -n m· 

t 2) A'I r:~.:. CGD£ ; :r:rn m; Al1}J UP 't'C T·7:£ CGDL: -rz;;.c-s; 

( 3 ) CCJ.E AV £::1.:'-.Gl: A.:ii XSG V ~ 

Cvi ? Il£D FG:': Y :.G ? AT:lJLLS -,I LZD 

~c-- 1'i=E ~E C (;:_' : ·iCC! .5 - . A_~CrJ 9 , 1934 

:3J:'LG'J .CODE CGDE rrGTAL :BEJJG~- CGDE CODE TvTAL 

CCDi - r - t. AIT ,-' C'- CGJi :·r -.& AV3..'2. & • • ... . \.,A; 

i TN. .ill? Tv A..GV;;_, I r: . 0P TO A30VZ 

AVER. AV~:'1 . 

- --------- 117 6' i, ~s c S_;8 l l. ,... 3l . S 2ll. 7 F 'n. o - - ..J I 

4' '7~ 7 8<1 / '1 ;':'\ 

:.i. e C 30, 9 0 . 3 1nn. 0 

s 3? ~ 11. 9 8~ 1 1on. o 

8 130 5 ~~ · .. ...... . 0 90. 9 :3. 3 . 1no. o 

8 G7 12 37 9. 2 77. 0 13. 8 100. 0 

6 " 7 r-• 1()G ' 0 1 - u 2 •. '3 100. 0 ·J · ( ::1 .!.. . :J 

71 

V - 41ltj, 27 4::J2 ·s. 7 .3 7 . 4 5. 9 1nn . n 

9 62 10 81 }_l . l 76. 5 12. 4 1no. o 

9 3 25 202 3. 9 3~ 3 10. 8 100. 0 

10 '"'4 ,:_h4 C 

t...J -· c:u . o 7.3 . 2 1on. o 

2 LJ:O 2 .. 1( 4 . 3 30. 8 4. -:: 100. 0 ,. L_ t;:: G -LL ,) • V 0 - 5, 0 8~ 3 11. 1 100,0 

l 4 7 142 1. 4 90. 7 4. 9 100. 0 

7 1()3 4 1}_4 7. 8 38. 8 4 100, 0 

6 ,-~ 

1 1 . c ._,_; 3;:). '1 1on. o - -= · 0 

8 ~- 7 25 32. 0 o:-3 . 0 1on. o 

4G .)()_:, 4'1 396 r r o . o .'37 . 1 6. 3 1on. n 
- 130-

Table B:- 10 cont-l d 

coAT ;.::J suIT 0(\D::: An·r-ti03I Y 

T~LE SHO r -r "BY - l..AR:,::ST ARE c: !T1l ;:lE:::S MD PERC::"1TAG:L 

OF BlJTTO:T SW' ""] (FEi .ALE) EARii iG 

1- BELO' .. ~lf.E v0:9E ! I 'I~. 1 

2-AT Ttr: COJE l ii I1 C t .K :!J 1' 1:0 T~:: crm: AVLRA.G:;: 

3- CO E AVERAGE A D OVE 

CO; IDED FRGM THE PAYROL!S ~ILED 

Fr :i " TE JEri~ rF LA.~C'-i 5- l<ARc· 9 , 1 \,. 34 - -- --- - - -·- - - - ---- ----' :__:;:;,;___...::;:..__;,=~:_::_-:.=:c::::...:...~-"-...;..,;:.::,;~...;.,:,_--<., ___ _ 

I Y i'LJ. AVER . BELO 

PArE RATE CODE 

Cleveland 

hicago & 

Sub . 

St . Lo-;. .is 

II II 

II II 

II II 

Kan sa~ City 11 

Los An :~ l e s 11 11 

S, Fran«isco 11 It 

Po r tland 11 

Seattle ll It 

Totel te rn Area 

l'.iiN . 

5 

2 

2 

2 

1 

10 . OF ,.....0.-{I~ERS P:SrtCE!· TAG:C 

CODE CODE BELOW CODE CODE 

lvTN & A:V.ER' .& TO AI BODE HN & AVER & 

UP TO ABOVE MIN . UP TO ABO _.:.; 

AVER . A ER. 

18 19 5 . 3 94 . 7 

31 36 1 3 . 9 86 , 1 

65 1 2 79 2 . 5 82 . 4 15 . 4 

7 9 22 . 2 77 . 8 

1 8 1 19 S4 . 7 5 . 3 

... 

8 10 2 . 0 8. 0 

8 9 1 1.1 88 , C· 

(Excl. :Baltiuore) 12 137 13 162 7 . 4 84: . 6 8 . 0 

9821 
- 131-

LI: q 10 CONT 1D 

COAT Al'D SFI r CO:!JF AUTnORITY 

TATil.,., c;~:o·-r: G· 3Y -tfARXET AREA..S NnABERS A·'O P:S- c:::-iTAGE 

OF FLir s·r -.-cS APP~TTICI (1\i.AL:E ) EARtTP7G 

( 1 1 BI:TJO""/ C0""9E ; :H\I 1 lH 1 

( 2 ) CODE i.IIN n.rm.i .A:. ~D ABO~!E 

co;·.iP I LED FRO! THE PAYTWLT_s IL D 

FO.tt T"Y-:-' -TEE- OF hA::tC H 5-L.A:RSB , 1 S 34 

TST-r.IDT AREA Qii~Y 

1'nH.ffiER OF ~ 03Y:SRS PE:rtCE iT AGE --·---- ~ITY l\IIN . RATE :SI:Lm: CCDE CODE TOTAL BEL0\1 CODE ~OT AL 

re 1 t i rnore $. 50 

a eve l and_ 

~hi cag o 

)t. Louis 

~ansas City 

~0 s An ·se1es 

)an Fr Fl.i1 cis co 

'ort1cDd. 

)eatt1e 

~o tal -·est 1 A:cea 

(E:x:c. :Ba1tiu or e ) 

l82l 

NII-T . ~-1 PI': & 

ABO'ir:E 

5 3 

5 3 

5 

1 

5 9 

8 

8 

5 

1 

14 

CODE 

MTN . 

HIN. & 

ABOI.TE 

62.5 37 . 5 

100.0 

1 00 . 0 

100 . 0 

1CC' . O 

J. CC. O 

1CC . O 

1 CO . O 
-132-

T. LE q 10, GO T' D. 

TABLE SLi0 . I "'G BY- {A..-qJtET AREAS Tl \B::RS .M PE~CDTTAG::' 

WESTE~T AREA ONLY 

CITY -~ . RATE 

Ba l timore . 47 

ClevelP.:.1d 

Chicag o 

St. Lou is 

Kan s as Ci ~r 

Los Ang eles 

San FraD cisco 

Portland. 

Seattle 

Total ··;est er~:1 .Area 

(Excl. Ba1 t r~ore) 

3821 

OF FINIS'f.l':RS (APPRD TICES) .Ei'W..E EARl' rlG 

1- :SELO~i CODE MI . IMUM 

2-CODE MI HMUM .AND ABOVE 

COl :P I I'J FRo·. TBI: PAYROLLS :b,ILED 

FOR T1 .E PEEK OF HARCr.i 5- f,tA_-qCH 9 , 1 934 

P ERCE!'TTAG:S 

COD~ TOTAL BELO\. CODE 

MPT & CODE t.1I . & 

ABGVB ~.i TIT • ABO Vt: 

11 11 100. 

6 37 43 14 . 86 . 

11 11 100 . 

2 2 2 H JO. 

5 5 l C'O . 

1 2 1 2 100 . 

5 5 100 . 

l 1 100. 

-

6 73 79 7. 6 9 2 . 4 

o-::..AL 

100 . 

10(,. 

1or . 

F 'O. 

1C0 . 

100 . 

100 . 

100 . 

100 . 
1~43

TABLE H 1 0 ; COHT ' D 

i 

TABL..., SIIO-:nrc J'_r.:JrARK'""'T _,w-_..,.S lTm'IBElr A TD PERCT-'NJ'AG"E 

OF SJ:GRT (Br ST,...'.S FD!I SHr-; .s) EAL r- "1!:1\.PJJPTG 

1-:Br Lor: THE COD": i"! INIJ iU . 

CITY LUT . AVE:8. . 

n.A ...,.E _. TE 

1'! y c . 60 . 80 

Eastern . 54 . 72 

Area 

1J. y. s. II II 

Conn . II II 

N. J . II II 

Ph i 1Fl . II II 

Bost on II II 

TOTAL EA T~ill~ JLR:A 

( : CL . N. Y. C. ) 

98 21 

2- AT THE COl:lE I< INil'U: i .ANTI UP TO Tir CO:'J"S AV-rRA.\E 

3-COD!:: AVE.RAGI; AND Ad iT~ 

COMP ILED iROl'i THE PAYROLLS ILE:8 

FOR THE ""."EEK OF ~A H 5-l:A.RCH 9, 1934 

3ELO' ~ COD~ CODE .AVER TOTAL 

con:::; I : IN & _1..\.J.-D ru:.·O I; 

;·n:. UP TO 

AVE . 

2 1 3 

1 1 

1 2 6 9 

13 LO"'"":" 

COD:S 

l1 IN . 

100 . 

ll. 1 

COD-r: H ~ CODE TOT_-~. , 

C.: u -:: TO··· "AV"2r. & 

AVER ABOV-:-

66 . 7 3~ . 3 10 0 

100 

22 . 8 66 . 7 10 0 

2 2 6 1. 0 20 . 0 20 . 0 60 . 0 10 0 
-13 

T.A.RLE H 10 ( COl\T HTUE ) 

COA~ AND SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

TAaLE SHO ii l~ .OY- i ~~~--.AET ARZ.~ S l\lU! J3":RS A 'D P"ERr".:NTAr:c_: 

OF SKIRT ( F UTISH:...RS .ATD SKIRT BAST-:RS) FEHALE, EA.:' ETG 

( 1 ) BELO' . TH': CODE i i IN I! l.I" 

( 2) AT TH:E CODE l!I"rTI"Uii AND UP TO THS COD~ A1rRAGB 

( 3) CODE AVERAGE Mm ABOV'.S 

CO ~P ·:.n lROi I TH::' PAYRO:IJLS FIL !.D 

FOR TH""' ··:EEK OF IiARCH 5:.AM.ARCH 9 I 1934 

CITY Mir. AVER. TOTAL BELOW CODE E IN . CODE TOT.Alu 

RAT~ P~TS CODE & UP ~0 .A.;ill ABO'JT' COD::: & UP TO AVER. 

i<HT . AVER . i "IN . AV~R . & ABO JT 

T. ·r , C. , 60 , 70 4 4 100 . 0 100. 0 

- aste rn 

Aren. • 54 . 63 

T y . s . II " . 6 5 1 J.2 50 . 0 41 .7 8 . 3 ioo .o 

Conn . II II 

liT . J . II II 

Phila. II 5 5 100 . 0 100 . () 

Boston II II 9 9 10"' . 0 100 . 0 

TOTAL E;_ST~RlJ AREA 6 10 10 26 23.0 38 .5 38 . 5 100 . 0 

(EYCL . N. Y. C. ) 

9821 
135-

T~ble H-10 Cont 1 d 

CO_-~.T AED SUIT CO:!:"' .n.UTl:ORITY 

T.AEJ_, sHm:nJG JY-i 1.h .. 11:Er AREAS t1Jl1w...,ns ..J. 'D PERCEN'.LlAG:: 

OF RESS:ES (u "2) _R) EARriNG 

l-B-r:Lo· TH.,.. CODE 1 IHI 11 

2- ~ TH':" CODE ; INL .mr .AND UP TO T H-: CODB AITSR. 

3-COD::.:: AV,:P..AC-E A!TD ABOlE 

C')L:PILED FRO: THE PAYTIOJ_,- S :-rL::D 

FOR TH~ -'E:S!.<: OF MARCH 5-l ·.ARCH 9 , 1934 

1 J . OF ' ORI~"R.S --------

CITY r IN. A R. BT'L0\7 CO :DE CO:::lE 

RArE RA '::: CODE rr:, . AV:2P.. 

:·E·· . & UP TO ANTI 

J • •r • C • . 90 1. 25 44 

Eas e r:1 .81 1.125 

.Area. ---

~T • - • S. II II 

Conn. II II 1 

~T • J • II II 5 

Phi~a II II 3 

:Boston II II 

TOT_~ 'SAST PL ~.EA 

~XCL . N.Y.C. ) 9 

r"ESr~m 

AlUlA . 77 1.15 

B ltimore" II 8 

Cleveland 11 II 5 

Chicago & 

Sub If 7 

St . Louis 11 II 

vansas Citv11 II 

Los Angeles 11 II 0 

Sn.n Francisco II II 1 

Portland 11 II 4 

Seattle If II 

TOTAL ··."EsT-mJ A.Jl."P.A 

(::~:X: CL . BALTU 'ORE ) 17 

9821 

A ~TER .Al:30 T'!'., 

148 336 

31 2 

29 

51 s 

17 ll 

14 ll. 

142 3n 

10 12 

30 25 

8 5 

6 5 

1 

28 l !. 

13 2 

9 

1 

95 49 

TQTAL 3-r:Lo-: 

528 

32> 

30 

62 

01 

25 

181 

30 

60 

20 

ll 

1 

39 

16 

1.3 

1 

161 

COD~ 

i IN. 

8 • '7 

8.1 

9 . 7 

5. 0 

26. 7 

8.3 

35 . 0 

6. 3 

30 .8 

11. 2 

co:·r: 

II. 

& UP ro AV~R 

. 28.0 

9 

96.6 

82.2 

54 .8 

56. 0 

78.4 

33 . 3 

5tJ . O 

40 . 0 

54 .5 

100 . 0 

71 . 8 

81.3 

69.2 

58.4 

CODE 

A TER. & 

.ABO~ 

63.7 

6. 1 

9.7 

35 . 5 

44 . 0 

16 . 6 

40.0 

41.7 

25 . 0 

45 . 5 

28 . 2 

12 . 4 

100.0 

30 . '1 

TOTAL 

F )O . O 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

l OO . tJ 

'~0 0 

100 . 0 

100 .0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 .0 

100.0 
- 136-

TABLE H 1.0( cor; T 1 D) 

CO.• T' A./. SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

TABLE SHOf." I rrG -=>v- i<A-:JCT ARSAS NUI3-~S A! pr . CE rT Ar ~ 

0:::-' Pi •. .rtT PR..--:;SSERC::- EA.'1 , L G 

(1) :a-Lo· .. - Jli- COilE l•i iNij Ul' 

( 2) _ T 1'n? CO E · ·IN f • Ui 1 AND UP TO Tlf!. CODE lf:Rrt,.,-

( 3) CODE ·"'· 'TEF-"'C-r~ Alill AJO !7. 

co· 'FILEll ; ROL :rh- PAYROLLS :'ILED 

--o:-: TH::: ~ EE. · oF r :ARcH 5- i r RCH 9, J. 934 

Ho . o7 ~:ow --::;:;,s P:--RC:S TAGE 

CITY I (,T 

! . !·1 . 

R.. .... T"'C 

BELOii 

CODE 

. 

CODE CODE TOTAL BE O~: O~E CODE TOTAL 

· :~ . 'l.v:.~· · ex co E : ·rv. ~ _ . ..v-=:R. & 

c~UP TO ABOV'S i1UlT . UP TO A.jO 'r.. 

B lti1or e .65 . 92 2 

Cleveland II II 

Chicago & 

Sub . II ' II 2 

St . Louis · rr 

Kansqs Ci tv 11 II 2 

Lo ~ Angel:e s II II 

S.- n r.l • J::l r anc i sco II II 

Po r tland II " 1 

Seattle II II 1 

Totql -~ste n Ar ea 

(Excl . Baltimo r e ) 6 

9821 

A~R . 

20 

21 

9 

f') 

2 

13 

6 

3 

7 

66 

A~'!i. . 

4 26 7.7 76 . 9 4 100 . 0 

7 28 75 . 0 25 . 0 100 . 0 

11 1.9 81 100 . 0 

1 6 83 . 3 16 . 7 100 . 0 

6 l(J 20 . 0 20 . 0 60 . 0 100 . 0 

~ 100 . 0 100 . 0 

3 9 66 . 7 33 . 3 100 . 0 

1 5 20 . 0 60 . 0 20 . 0 )_(X) . 0 

8 1 2 . 5 87 . 5 100 . 0 

18 90 8 . 9 71 . 1 20 . 0 100 . 0 
-137-

TABL ~ :-r 10, ~O l~T I D. - -:: ,_ 

TA.r3J.E SHor:E JG :iJ'7- ivi ·.RI'-:::T ARK\S !JUJ.i"3E?..S .AJ:JD ?ERC:!:FTAGE 

01;' D -, "' C'S""" 'S (UPP" R ..., , .,.)l'TI'l 'C ..c ... . \.:..v ~ , .:.;_ , l!j,.i .. . 1\ ,, · 

( 1) BEL0'.7 TH: COD~ I.! I J.TI I.-lJl.i 

( 2) AT ~ CODE I-!Errt1ul! Al1) UP TO T:f-U CO::JE AVEJ.AG'_:j 

( 2) CODE AV~ ~v~ A1 ~ OVE 

COI.I?ILED :B'ROi,i THE PAYHOLLS J!'I1ED 

F0::1 rr;{E 'JEd: : 0:::' l.i. 3.C I 5-LIA..l.CH 9 , 1934 

NO. 0:? ~;ORh.""EB.S P=:RC:SlliTAG::D 

CI TY .II1\f. A1TE::t. COD~ AV"2.3. rr;~ BELO-.r CO:JE CO:JE ~OTAL 

RA12 RATE BJ;LO-.! COD'Z CODE I.!IK AF'D AnOVE CODE MI N & AV~R & 

l•.:L .. e~ UP TO l'!Il: . UP TO ABOVZ 

AV'E:;~. AVER. 

N.Y. C. L OO 1. 35 13 105 328 456 2.9 23.0 74 .• 1 100 

Eastern 

Area .90 1.215 

1~. y. s. " II 8 7 15 53.3 46.7 100 

Conn. if II 6 3 9 66.7 33.3 100 

N.J. " " 17 13 30 56.7 4;).3 100 

Phila. II " 3 "? 

L> 4 10 30 . 0 30 .0 40.0 100 

Boston II II 2 12 14 14 .3 85.7 100 

Total Easte r n 

.Area (.E::-cl. • T •• c ) 1· . y. . 3 36 39 78 3 .8 46 .2 50.0 100 

Jestern 

Area .85 1. 26 

B2.l timo r e If II 7 6 13 53 . 8 46 • .3 100 

Clevel anO. " " 3 65 52 120 2 . 5 54.2 43 -. 3 100 

Chica.g:o " " 10 30 53 93 10 . 3 30 . 9 58 .. 8 100 

St. Louis II II 1 5 5 15.7 8::> . 3 100 

Xar: sas 

Ci ~r " II 2 1 3 65 .7 33 . 3 100 

Los 

Ans ele s " II 1 15 13 29 3 . 5 51.7 44 . 8 100 

San 

~'ranci sco 11 " 1 5 6 16.7 83.3 100 

Portle.ncl II " 5 2 7 71_. 4 28.6 100 

Seattle II II l 1 2 '50 . 0 50 .0 100 

Total ·-;-este rn 

Area ( ~x cl. :Oal t.) 17 117 13::5 270 6 . 2 44 . 3 49 . 5 100 

9821 
T.A:aLE H 10 co··T I D. 

TABL:S SHO. I 

PES TERN AREA ONLY 

-138-

- 26-

COAT Arw SUIT CODE AUT:10RI T _ 

G BY M..A:U.~T A3EAS l'JlJI:'ELR.S AFD ~. CEFTAGE 

OF PRZSS-:RS- E.ARFIFG 

( l) :SELO:J COD:C '.II NI MUM 

( 2) . CODZ ··tiNii.:UM Al'JD A.JOVZ 

COi'.iPILED FRO! ; THE PAYROLLS FILED 

FOR THE . E~K OF 1\.J\RCH 5- HARCH 9 , 1934 . 

NO . O.i!' TI -U<:~:tS PERCENTAGE 

CI TY hHN . RATE BELOIJ CODE CODE TOTAL EEL0-:7 CODE TOTAL 

• .l.J.r l•T o CODE !.1U . (; 

Baltimore . 60 l 

Cl eveland .. II 

Chi cago & Sub . II 

St . Louis II 

Kansas Ci ~r II 

Lo s An,gel e s II 

San .?ranci sco It 

Portland II 

See. tt1e It 

Total JestePn r~ 

(~x . :Ba1 t i mo r e) · 

9821 

i; I N. & 

ABOVE 

2 

4 

l 

l 

2 

1 

l 

10 

3 

4 

l 

l 

2 

l 

1 

10 

MI ~.J . ABOVE 

33 . 3 66 .7 100 . 

100 100 

100 100 

- 100 100 

100 100 

100 100 

100 100 . 

- 100 100 
~139-

-27-

TABLE H 10 (co TT l D) COA'r AND SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

T.A LE SBO~.! I 1\TC- i3'! -1JL'.:!-GGT A~i2AS JU!13~RS AIJ) ?E?.CEi:TAGE 

OF I.rAC :E 1t.j P:LESSEilS -EAP.NIFG 

( l) .JELml THE CODE iv1I .t ~I 'IJ.l~-1 

( 2) AT TEE COD:: ~~~II NI I fU1 ·i Alffi UP TO T:ili COD~ 

( 3) CODE A V:fu~G "' AliD AJOVE AVKlAGE 

(COl 2IL3D FRO:. T"TE ?AT-lOLLS FILED 

FOR ~HE 'VTEEK OF :1ARCH 5-liLI\.RCH_2_,__ 1934 . __ 

NO . 0L' '.JO?TC.it:~S :PERCENTAC'·E 

CITY !HlJ. AVER. B~Lo:· CODE i!ll~·. CODE TOTAL B:SLO;.r CODE CODE TOTAL 

RAT:Z RATE CODE &UP TC AV~R. CODE MI N. & AV.2;R . & 

h·:r :r-r . AVE:::' . & AEOVE JUN. UP TO ABOVE 

A VEl. . 

N.Y.C. 1.35 1.65 53 75 198 326 16.3 23.0 60 .7 100 . 0 

Eastern 

Area 1.21 1.48 

11 . - • s . 11 II 2 12 2 16 12.5 75.0 12.5 100 . 0 

Conn. II 11 7 G '"' 2 11 63 . 6 18 . 2 18 . 2 100 . 0 

J. . II II 16. 10 8 34 47 .1 29 .4 23 . 5 100 . 0 

11 11 2 1 .. 3 6 30 . 3 16.7 50.0 100 .. 0 

II II l 2 , 

.1. 4 25 .0 50 .0 25 . 0 1oo . o · 

.To-tal 3:e.stern 

Area (E.-cl. :Toy o c 0) 28 27 16 71 39.4 38 . 0 22 .6 100 . 0 

(U~ncr Pres~e~ s Retes) 

'WEST~~T . 85 , • 2o 

·AREA 

BaltiMore II 11 9 6 9 24 37 . 5 25 . 0 37 . 5 100 . 0 

Cleveland II II 1 ..... G 3 3:::; . 3 . 66 .7 100 . 0 

Chica.;o 11 II 6 4 10 60 ,. 0 40 . 0 l OO •. C 

St. Louis II II 1 J. 100~0 100 . 0 

Kan"'3.S 

City · II II 1 2 ,.., 

0 33 . 3 66·.7 100 . 0· 

Los 

Angeles II II 2 2 100.0 100.0 

san 

·Francisco" II 3 3 6 50 .. 0 50.0 100 . 0 

Portland II II 6 1 7 85.7 14 .3 100 . 0 

Sea ttle II II ~ :... 1QO . O 

XQTAL WESTERN AREA 

(EXCLUDING BALTI . ) 1 - 18 13 .. 32 :3.1 56.3 40 .6 100 . 0 

9821 
TABLE H 10 CONT 1D -140-

COAT AND SUIT CODZ AUTHORITY 

TABLE SHOVTING BY-MARKET Am.AS JU!ffiERS MID PERCE TAGE 

CITY MIN. 

RATE 

AVER. 

RATE 

N. Y. C. l. 00 1 . 35 

Eastern · 

.Area • 90 1~ 21 

N.Y Sta~ e 11 

Conn . 

N. J. 

Phila. 

Boston 

II 

11 

II 

Total Eastern Area 

(Excl . J. Y. C.) 

West e rR 

II 

II 

II 

11 

II 

Area · . 85 1 . 26 

Baltimore 1

' II 

Cl eveland 11 II 

Chicago II II 

St. Louis II II 

Kansas Cityu IT 

Los Angeles" II 

San Franciscon II 

Portland II II 

Seattle II II 

TOTAL WESTERN AREA 

(EXCL . BALT IMORE) 

9821 

OF NON-CLASSIFIABLE PRBSS::RS-EA...TlNL.1G 

(1) BELOW THE CODE MINHIDM 

( 2) AT THE CODE MINU.flJl.i. MID UP TO THE CODE AVEP.AGE 

( 3) CODE AVERAGE AND ABOVE 

C01IP ILED FROlv· THE PAYROLLS FILED 

FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 5-MARCH 9, 1934 . 

NO. OF WORKERS PERCENTAGE 

BELOW 

CODE 

MIN . 

21 

8 

5 

4 

17 

6 

1 

1 

2 

1 

1 

-

1 

7 

CODE CODE TOTAL BELOW CODE CODE TOTAL 

I l & AVER & CODE MIN .& :AVER.& 

uP TO ABOVE MIN . UP TO . lLBOVE 

. AVER . AVl"Jl. 

193 568 782 2 . 7 24. 7 72 . 6 

4 

4 

12 

12 

32 

8 

4 

18 

4 

5 

75 

11 

,., 

L> 

5 

85 

1 

6 

39 

33 

79 

12 

2 

18 

8 

1 

9 

17 

3 

2 

60 

5 

18 44.5 

56 8 . 8 

49 8 . 2 

128 13 . 3 

26 23 .1 

7 14 

37 2 . 8 

14 14 . 3 

7 14 

45 ~ 

28 

6 

6 12.5 

152 5 

80 J ' 20 . 0 

22. 2 

21 . 4 

24 . 5 

25 . 

30 . 7 

58 

48 . 6 . 

28 . 6 

72 

80 . () 

39 . 2 

50 . 0 

62. 5 

56 

.... 

33 . 3 

69 . 8 

67 . 3 

61 . 7 

46 . 2 

28 

48 . 6 

57 . 1 

14 

18 . 0 

6o . a 

50 . 0 

25.0 

39 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

lf~ . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

1 o. 

100 . 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

100 . 1"1 

1 .o 

1 o.o 

lOO .f'l 

l("lf'I.O 

1 o.r 
-141-

COAT AND SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

T1 'lLE SHOWHJG BY-MARKET AREAS NUMBERS .ANTI PERCENTAGE 

CITY 

Baltimore 

Cl eveland 

Chicago & Sub 

St. Louis 

Kansas City 

Los .Angeles 

San Francisco 

Portland 

Seattle 

MIN. 

RATE 

• 60 

!! 

II 

II 

II 

!! 

11 

1!5 

II 

Total Western krea 

(Excl . Baltimore) 

9821 

OF LINING IRCNERS (:B'EMALE) EARNING 

( 1) BELOVT ~CHE CODE MIND.!U£.1 

(2) AT T~iF ro.:--ii: l!T.Nn•,JJII .AliD UP TO THE CODE AVERAGE 

(3) CODE .A1t:.~li.t- ~ J' 3D ABOVE 

COli!P::1.ED E·n.mi' THE PAYROLLS FILED 

:F·oR 'Iill \'l.?.' ~K OF MARCH 5-MARCH 9, 1934 

NO. OF WORKJ~.ln.S PERCENTAGE 

A\TER . 

RATE 

BELOW 

CODE 

MIN . 

CODE 

MIN.& 

UP TO 

.AVER. 

CODE TOTAL BELOW CODE CODE TOTAL· 

AVER.& CODE MIN. & .\.VER.& 

ABOVE MIN. UP TO ABOVE 

AVER. 

. 82 - . 1 1 2 50.0 50.0 100 . 0 

II 1 1 4 6 16.7 16.7 66 .6 100 . 

II 1 1 ~· 

It 1 1 100 . 0 100 .0 

II 6 0 ) 6 100 100 . 0 

II 1 1 100 100 .0 

II 

II 

!! 1 0 1 100 

8 2 5 15 54 13 33 100 .0 
TABLE H 10 C0HT t D 

N • 

-------- -

CITY ;. ~I . AVER. 

RATE RATE 

- -· ----~ - ---- ... - ~ .. .1.- • -

. y. c. . 85 1. 25 

- ---

Eastern Aren. 765 1. 25 

• Y. S. 11 " 

Co nn. II II 

N. J. II II 

Phi1a II " 

Bqston II 11 

-142-

COAT JlJm SUIT CODE AUTHORITY 

TABLE SHO'I:i"G RY- l..ARI-:6T .ARLAS NU1:BERS .AND PERCE:TTAGE 

OF SKI RT PRES3E.RS (UND:...;R) EARlHLG 

( 1) BELOW UC CODE rn:n:m.; 

( ~ AT THZ CODE 'Ii I LUL. AND UP TO TH8 CODE AVERAGE 

( 3) CO DE A VERAG~ P-:t D A30VE 

CQhlPILED FROl\i THE PAYROLLS FILED 

F R THE VffiLK F ~· AR H 5- :.ARCH 9 , 93~ 

WORKbRS P:!::RCENTAGE 

BELOW CODE CODE TOTAL BELOW CODE CODE TOTAL 

CODE ii H. t. AVER. CODE rrN. AVER. 

l•.ii N tJP TO ~;ABOVE i.iiN. & DP (' 

c.,; 

AiT.bR. TIJ A.,-,ov:c 

-- -- ~ AVER. 

8 1 9 8_$ . 9 11. 1 - 100. 

5 5 100. 100. 

4 . ~ 4 ...... 100. 100. 

---- - - ----- ---·- ----- ----·---- ------- - -- ~ .. - . -- _ .. 

Total Eastern Area 

( Bxcl. H. Y. C. ) 9 9 100. 100. 

98 21# 
OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 

THE DIVISION OF REVIEW 

THE WORK OF THE DIVISION OF REVIEW 

Executive Order No. 7075, dated June 15, 1935, established the Division of Review of ~he 

National Recovery Administration. The pertinent part of the Executive Order reads thus: 

The Division of Review shall assemble, analyze, and report upon the st~tistical 

information and records of experience of the operations of the various trades and 

industries heretofore subject to codes of fair competition, shall study the effects of such codes upon trade, industrial and labor conditions in general, and 

other related matters, shall make available for the protection and promotion of 

the public interest an adequate review of the effects of the Administration of 

Titl e I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the principles and policies 

put into effect thereunder, and shall otherwise aid the President in carrying out 

his functions under the said Title. I hereby appoint Leon C. Marshall, Director of 

tte Division of Review. 

The study sections set up in the Division of Review covered these areas: industry 

studies, foreign trade studies, labor studies, trade practjce studies, statistical studies, 

legal studies, administration studies, miscellaneous studies, and the writing of code histories. The materials which Here produced by these sections are indicated below. 

Except for the Code Histories, all items mentioned below are scheduled to be in mimeographed form by April 1, 1936 . 

THE CODE HISTORIES 

The Code Histories are documented accounts of the formation and administration of the 

codes. They contain the definition of the industry and the principal products thereof; the 

classes of members i n the industry ; the history of code formation including an accour.t of the 

sponsoring organi zations, the conferences, negotiations and hearings which were held, and 

the activities in connection with obtaining approval of the code; the history of the administration of the code, covering the organization and operation of the code authority. 

the difficulties encountered in administration, the extent of compliance or non-compliance, 

and the general success or lack of success of the code ; and an analysis of the operation of 

code provisions dealing with wages, hours, trade practices, and other provisions. These 

and other matters are canvassed not only in terms of the materials to he found in the files, 

out also in terms of the experiences of the deputies and others concerned with code formation 

and administration. 

The Code Histories, (including histories of certain NRA units or agencies} are not 

mimeographed . They are to be turned over to the Department of Commerce in typewritten form. 

All told, approximately eight hundred and fifty (850} histories will be completed. This 

number includes all of the approved codes and some of the unapproved codes. (In ~Qrk 

Materi.§:l§ ~o . HL Content§ of Code Hist ries, will be found the outline which governed 

the preparation of Code Histories. ) 

(In the case of all approved codes and also in the case of some codes not carried to 

final approval, there are in NRA files further materials on industries. Particularly worthy 

of mention are the Volumes I, II and III which constitute the material officially submitted 

to the President in support of the recommendation for approval of each code. These voLumes 

9768--1 . 

-iiset forth the origination of the code, the sponsoring group, the evidence advanced to support the proposal, the report of the Division of Research and Planning on the industry, the 

recommendations of the various Advisory Boards, certain types of official correspondence, 

the transcript of the formal hearing, and other pertinent matter. There is also much official information relating to amendments, interpretations, exemptions, and other rulings . The 

materials mentioned in this paragraph were of course not a part of the work of the Division 

of Review.) 

THE WORK MATERIALS SERIES 

In the work of the Division of Review a considerable number of studies and compilations 

of data (other than those noted below in the Evidence Studies Series and the Statistical 

Material Series) have been made. These are listed below, grouped according to the character of the material. (In jVQrk Mtllliill !iQ. 17, Tentative Outlines and Summaries of 

Studies in Proc~. these materials are fully described). 

Automobile Industry, An Economic Survey of 

Bituminous Coal Industry under Free Competition and Code Regulati~n. Economic Survey of 

Electrical Manufacturing Industry, The 

Fertil ize r I ndustry, The 

Fishery I ndustry and the Fishery Codes 

Fi shermen and Fishing Craft, Earnings of 

Foreign Trade unde r the National Industrial Recove ry Act 

Part A - Competitive Position of the United States in International Trade 1927-29 through 

1934 . 

Part B - Section 3 (e) of NIRA and its administration. 

Part C - I mpo rts and I mporting under NRA Codes. 

Part D - Expo rts and Exporting under NRA Codes. 

Forest Products I ndustries, Foreign Trade Study of the 

Iron and St eel Industry, The 

Knitti ng Industries, Th e 

Leathe r and Shoe Industri es, The 

Lumbe r and Timbe r Products Industry, Economic Problems of the 

Men' s Clothing I ndustry, The 

Mill i ne ry Indust r y, The 

Mot i on Pi cture Indust r y, The 

Migration of Industr y, The : The Shift of Twenty-Five Needle Trades From New York State, 

1926 t o 1934 

National Labor Income by Mon ths, 1929-35 

Paper Industry, The 

Produc tion, Prices, Employment and Payrolls in Industry, Agriculture and Railway Transportation, January 1923, t o dat e 

Re t ail Trades Study, The 

Rubber Industry Study, The 

Textil e Indust r y in t he Uni t ed Ki ngdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan 

Textile Ya rns and Fabrics 

Tobacco Industry , The 

Wholesale Trades Study, The 

Women 's Ne ckwear and Sca rf Industry, Financial and Labor Data on 

9768-2 

- iii -

Women 's Apparel Industry, Some Aspects of the 

Con .. odities, Infor.nation Concerning : A Study of NRA and Related Experiences in Control 

Dist ribution, Manu facture rs' Control of: Trade Practice Provisions in Selected NRA Codes 

Distributive Relations in t he Asbestos Industry 

Design Piracy· The Problem and Its Treatment Under NRA Codes 

Electrical Mfg . Industry: Price Filing Study 

Fertilize r Industry: Price Filing Study 

Geographical Price Relati or.s Under Cedes of Fair Competition, Control of 

Minimum Price Regulation Under Codes of Fair Competition 

Multiple Basing Point System in the Llme Industry: Operation of the 

Price Control in the Coffee Industry 

Price Filing Under NRA Codes 

Production Control in the I ce Industry 

Production Control, Case Studies in 

Resale Price Maintenance Legislation in the United States 

Retail Pri ce Cutting, Restric tion of, with special Emphasis on The Drug Industry . 

Trade Practice Rules of The Federal Trade Commission (1914- 1936); A classification for 

comparison with Trade Prac tice Provisions of NRA Codes. 

Cap and Cloth Hat Industry, Commission Report on Wage Differentials in 

Earnings in Selected Manufacturing I ndus:ries, by States, 1933-35 

Employment, Payrolls, Hours, and Wages in 115 Selected Code Industries 1933-35 

Fur Manufacturing, Commission Report on Wages and Hours in 

Hours and Wages in American Industry 

Labor Program Under the National Industrial Recovery Act, The 

Part A. Introduction 

Part B. Control of Hours and Reemployment 

Part C. Control of Wages 

Part D. Control of Other Conditions of Employment 

Part E. Section 7(a) of the Recovery Act 

Materials in the Field of Industrial Relations 

PRA Census of Employment, June , October, 1933 

Puerto Rico Needlework, Homeworkers Survey 

Administrative Studies 

Administrative and Legal Aspects of Stays, Exemptions and Exceptions, Code Amendments. Conditional Orders of Approval 

Administrative Interpretations of NRA Codes 

Admin istrative La~ and Procedure under the NIRA 

Agreements Under Sections 4(a) and 7( b) of t he NIRA 

Appro~e Codes in Industry Groups, Classification of 

Basic Code, the -- (Administrative Order X-61) 

Code hut.o rities and Their Part in the Administration of the NIRA 

Part A. Introduction 

Part B. Nature, Composition and Organization of Code Authorities 

9768--2. 

- iv -

Part C. Activities Of the Code Authorities 

Part D. Code Authority Finances 

Part E. Summary and Evaluation 

Code Compliance Activities of the NRA 

Code n~ Program of the NRA in the Territories, The 

Code Provisions and Related Subjects, Policy Statements Concerning 

Content of NIRA Administrative Legislation 

Part A. Executive ~nd Administr~ti e Orders 

Part B. 

Part C. 

Part D. 

Part E. 

Labor Provisions in the Codes 

Trade Practice Provisions in the Codes 

Administrative Provisions in the Codes 

Agreements under Sections 4(a) and 7(b) 

Part F. A Type Case: The Cotton Textile Code 

Labsls Under NRA, A Study of 

Model Code and Model Provisions f~r Codes, Development of 

National Recovery Administration, The : A Review of its Organization and Activities 

NRA Insignia 

President's Reemployment Agreement, The 

President's Reemployment Agreemen t , Substitutions in Connection with the 

Prison Labor Problem under NRA and t he Pri son Compact, The 

Probl ems of Administration in t he Overlapping of Code Definitions of Industries and Trades, 

1ul t iple Code Co verage, Classifying Indi vidual Members of Industries and Trades 

Relationship of NRA to Government Contracts and Contracts Involving the Use of Governme~t 

Funds 

Relationship of NRA with States and Municipalities 

Sheltered Workshops Under NRA 

Uncodified Industries: A Study of Factors Limiting the Code Making Program 

Anti-Trust Laws and Unfair Competition 

Collec t i ve Bargaining Agreements, the Right of Individual Employees t~ Enforce 

Comme r a Clause, Federal Regulation of the Employer-Employee Relationshi Under the 

Delega t ion of Power, Certain Phases of the Principle of, with Reference t~ Federal Industrial 

Regulatory Legislation 

Enforcement, Extra-Judicial Methods of 

Federal Regulation through the Joint Employment of the Power of Taxation and the endi g 

Power 

Government Contract Provisions as a Means ~f Establishing Proper Economic St~ndards , Legal 

Memorandum on Possibility of 

Industrial Rel~tions in Australia, Regulation of 

Intrastate AQtivities Which ~o A!f~ct Interstate Commerce as to Bring them Under ~he Co

merce Clause, Cases on 

Legislative Possibilities of the State Constitutions 

Post Office ~nd Post Road Power-- Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Industrial Reg~l

tion? 

State Recovery Lagislation in Aid ~f Federal Recovery Legislation History and Anal ysis 

Tariff Rates to Secure Proper St~ndar s of W3ges and Hours, the Possibility of Vari~ti n i n 

Trade Practices and the Anti-Trust Laws 

Treaty Making Power of the U~ited States 

War Power, Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Regulation of Child Labor? 

9768--4. 

- v -

The Evidence Studies were originally undertaken to gather material for pending c~urt 

cases. After the Schechter decision the project was continued in order to assemble data fo r 

use in connection with the studies of the Division of Review. The data are particularly 

concerned with the nature, size and operations of the industry; and with the relation of the 

industry to interstate commerce. The industries covered by the Evidence Studies account for 

more than one-hal f of the total number of workers under codes. The l ist of those studies 

follows: 

Automobile Manufacturing Industry 

Automotive Parts and Equipment Industry 

Baking Industry 

Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Industry 

Bottled Soft Drink Industry 

Builders' Supplies Industry 

Canning Industry 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry 

Cigar Manufacturing Industry 

Coat dnd Suit Industry 

Construction Industry 

Cotton Garment Industry 

Cress Manufacturing Industry 

Electrical Contracting Industry 

Elect:ical Manufacturing Industry 

Fabricated Metal Products Mfg. and Metal Finishing and Metal Coating Industry 

Fishery Indu~try 

Furniture Manufacturing Industry 

General Contractors Industry 

Graphic Arts Industry 

Gray Iron Foundry Industry 

Hosiery Industry 

Infant's and Children's Wear Industry 

Iron and Steel Industry 

Leather Industry 

Lumber and Timber Products Incustry 

Mason Contractors Industry 

Men's Clothing Industry 

Motion Picture Industry 

Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade 

Needlework Industry of Puerto Rico 

Painting and Paperhanging Industry 

Photo Engraving Industry 

Plumbing Contrac ting Industry 

Retail Lumber Industry 

Retail Trade Industry 

Retail Tire and Battery Trade Industry 

Rubber Manufacturing Industry 

Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry 

Shipbuilding Industry 

Silk Textile Industry 

Structural Clay Products Industry 

Throwing Industry 

Trucking Industry 

Waste Materials Industry 

Wholesale and Retail Food Industry 

Wholesale Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Industry 

Wool Textil e Industry 

THE STATISTICAL MATERIALS SERIES 

This series is supplementary to the Evidence Studies Series. The reports include data 

on establishments, firms, employment, Payrolls, wages, hours, production capacities, shipments, sales, consumption, stocks, prices, ~aterial costs, failures, exports and imports. 

They also include notes on the principal qualifications that should be observed in using the 

data, the technical methods employed, and the applicability of the mate rial to the study of 

the industries r.oncerned. The following numbers appear in the series: 

9768--5. 

Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Industry 

Business Furniture 

Candy Manufacturing Industry 

Carpet and Rug Industry 

Cement Industry 

Cleani ng and Dyeing Trade 

Coffee Industry 

Copper and Brass Mill Products Industry 

Cotton Textile Industry 

Electrical Manufacturing Industry 

-viFertilizer Industry 

Funeral Supply Industry 

Glass Container Industry 

Ice Manufacturing Industry 

Knitted Outerwear Indvstry 

Paint, Varnish, and Lacquer, Mfg. Industry 

Plumbing Fixtures Industry 

Rayon and Synthetic Yarn Producing Industry 

Salt Producing Industry 

THE COVERAGE 

~he original, and approved, plan of the Division of Review contemplated resources sufficient (a) to prepare some 1200 histories of codes and NRA units or agencies, (b) to consolidate and index the NRA files containing some 40,000,000 pieces, (c) to engage in extensi ve field work, (d) to secure much aid from established statistical agencies of government, (e) to assemble a considerable number of experts in various fields, (f) to conduct 

approximately 25% more studies than are listed above, and (g) to prepare a comprehensive 

summary report. 

Because of reductions made in personnel and in use of outside experts, limitation of 

access to field work and research agencies, and lack of jurisdiction over files, the projected plan was necessarily curtailed . The most serious curtailments were the omission of 

the comprehensive summary report; the dropping of certain studies and the reduction in the 

coverage of other studies; and the abandonment of the consolidation and indexing of the 

files. Fortunately, there is reason to hope that the files may yet be cared for under othe r 

auspices. 

Notwithstanding these limitations, if the files are ultimately consolidat ed and indexed the exploration of the NRA materials will have been sufficient to make them accessible 

and highly useful. They constitute the largest and richest single body of information 

concerning the p roblems and operations of industry ever assembled in any nation . 

9768--6. 

L. C. Marshall, 

Director, Division of Review. 





no.lO 

DOC. ROOAI 

..,_. 
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 

III II 111111111111111111 1111 111111111111111111111111111 111 111111 1 

3 1262 08542 4918