Evening star., 1939-07-14
Misdirected Protests

IN tne neat which has been gener-
ated about reform of the w. P. A.,
with its resultant protest strikes
against new wage and hour require
ments, one perplexing and perhaps
inequitable condition has been &C
corded relatively little attention.
BY the terms of the relief law pre-
ceding the 1910 act, the w. P. A. was
permitted to draw up to five per cent
OF its total rolls or up to ten per cent
OF the personnel of any single prof.
ect from sources other than relief
lists. The theory behind such author
ization was that the completion of
certain work projects, a building job,
for example, required a certain
amount and perhaps several vari-
eties of skilled labor. Occasionally
such labor could not be found on
relief lists and both economy and
good sense dictated that the w. P. A.
should go into the open market for
the needed assistance.
Actually, it never became neces-
sary for the w. P. A. to hire as
much as five per cent of its total
working force from non-relief
sources and the percentage as of
the end of the last fiscal year on
June 80 was closer to three. In New
York State, for instance, non-relief
workers comprised 34 per cent on
June %; in Illinois the percentage
was 3.6; in Pennsylvania it was only
81. The District, due largely to tenn
porary project requirements, had
6.5 per cent non-relief employment
recorded on that date.
Since a distinct prevailing wage
requirement was contained in the
previous relief law, non-relief labor,
as well as all other w. P. A. labor,
was paid at an hourly rate which in
many cases was the union scale for
each particular type of work.
When Congress saw fit, upon rec
ommendation of the w. P. A., to
write into the 1910 act a provision
that all w. P. A. labor should work
130 hours monthly for the minimum
security wage, it enunciated a for
mula which fell far short of the
union wage scale in occupations re-
quiring skilled workmen. Since no
exception was made in the law for
non-relief workers, the operation of
this requirement meant, as an illus
tration, that carpenters who were
hired in the open market at two dol
lars per hour would be obliged to
accept a wage nearer fifty cents per
hour if they were to remain on their
w. P. A. jobs.
1t has not been Government policy
in connection with public works of
any nature to employ labor at less
than the union wage scales when it
goes into the open market to engage
help. When that policy was not fol-
lowed in connection with w. P. A.,
the non-relief workers, most of them
members of the A. F. of L., walked
off their jobs in protest. Such action
on their part was defensible since
they were under no obligation to
work for less than the union wage
rates. At the same time, the protest
strikes extended far beyond action
by non-relief workers alone, with
the vast majority of those partici-
pating being individuals for whom
the Government had created work
solely as a means of providing relief.
For these no justification can be
found.
Responsible union leadership
should recognize this distinction be-
tween relief and non-relief employ
ment, stifle it's absurd talk of strik-
ing against all Government opera
tions, and direct it's influence to ad-
justing conditions only where actual
inequity exists.