Askov American. [volume] (Askov, Pine County, Minn.) 1914-current, 1935-02-28
RELIEF WAGES

The current battle in Congress over
the wage provisions of the S4,8SO,-
100000 relief bill raises number of
important questions. The Roosevelt
administration insists on "subsist-
ence wage" of $50 a month for those
transferred from direct relief to work
relief under the povisions of the bill.
The Senate, however, has tackled on
the McCarran amendment providing
for the payment of the prevailing
wage for the specified kind of work
in the community in which such work
relief is given.
The administration contends that
payment of the prevailing wage will
wreck the whole relief plan and make
IT impossible to transfer anywhere
near 100000 workers from direct
relief to work relief as is cOntem-
plated by President Roosevelt and his
advisers.
Critics of the administration plan,
however, assert that if the wage OF
these millions taken off direct relief
and placed on federal work projects is
held to $50 month there will be a
tendency to drop wages in private
industry. And it seems, indeed, that
there is ground for their argument.
Figures provided by the National
Emergency council show that there
are roughly 5O,O0O,OO0 employable
persons in the United States. The
100000 workers to be taken from
the relief rolls amount to about Z
per cent Of this total--a sizeable frac-
ton. If such a considerable portion
Of the working population were held
to this scale of $50 a month there
is good reason to believe that in many
cases wages in private industry might
be dragged down to near this level.
The worker, perhaps, would have the
choice between accepting the work
relief wage or one only slightly high
er in private industry. 1t is we'll
known that low prices, whether Of
commodities or labor, have a way Of
dragging down other prices In the
same field.
If the scale set by the sponsors Of
the huge work relief program should
tend to bring down wages In private
industry, already somewhat reduced
since the depression began, 1t is con-
ceivable that the relief measure
might prove an obstacle, rather than
an aid to recovery. For If 1t should
cause n reduction in Industrial wages
greater than the total amount spent
for relief wages il would mean that
the total Of purchasing power for the
country would be even lower than at
present.
The nation cannot afford at this
time to risk any further reduction In
purchasing power. The only way that
recovery can be brought about is
through an increase in purchasin
power.
Labor organizations and their rep
resentatives have been particularly
active in opposing the $50 monthly
wage limitation proposed in the adj
ministration work relief bill. How
ever, the measure must. in the final
analysis affect many outside the
ranks Of labor. The farmer IS de-
pendent to a large extent upon the
city working population for a market
for his produce. If the total purchas-
ing power of these workers drops. the
farmers income must fall accord
ingly.
There also arises the question of
whether the payment Of the higher
prevailing wage might not better
serve the very purpose suggested by
the Roosevelt administration than the
$50 scale. While the prevailing wage
plan would somewhat reduce the
total number OF workers to be alb
sorbed by the work relief program
the same total Of wages would be
paid. giving the same increase in pur-
chasing power. This increased buy
ing power should spur private in
dustry and result in the absorption
Of unemployed there. so that in the
end the number restored to employ
ment might be as great as that con
templated I'm the Roosevelt admins
tration's program.
II this were true. and the genera
level Of wages were at the same time
kept higher. business as whole
would have the benefit Of increased
buying power and the cause OF re
covery would be advanced.
Some may question the justice o
paying the prevailing wage on relic
projects. There Is no reason VIII,