Evening star., 1952-11-30
Fair Employment
Two New Congressional Reports on It
Provide Ammunition for Both Sides
By Richord FrykIund

BY Richor
Two congressional reports re-
leased last week which were
originally designed to provide
ammunition for the supporters
of a Federal fair-employment
law may prove to be handy
sources Of arguments for both
sides.
The first report was on State
and city unemployment laws,
how they operate and what their
impact has been on the commu-
nifty. The second is a study Of
the employment and economic
status of the Negro. Both in
vestigations were made TOR the
Senate Subcommittee OIL La
bor and Labor Management
Relations, headed by Senator
Humphrey. Democrat of Min
nesota. a civil rights" law ad-
vocate. Both studies can be
used to show that a Federal
FEPC law is either greatly de-
sirable or highly unnecessary.
The report on air-employ-
ment laws was prepared by the
National Security Resources
Board, the group set up to ad-
wise the President on co-ordina-
tion of military, industrial and
civilian mobilization. Senator
Humphrey asked the group to
find out if FEPC laws help the
Nation get full use of the man
power available in racial and
religious minority groups. Last
weeks report was the answer to
this question.
II Stote Lows
Eleven States and Is cities in
nine other States have some kind
of fair-employment law. The
State laws are in Colorado, Con-
necticut, Indiana, Massachu-
setts, New Jersey. New Mexico,
New York. Oregon, Rhode Is
land, Washington and Wiscon-
sin. Among the cities with such
laws are Cleveland. Philadel-
phia. Chicago and Minneapolis.
Most laws make discrimina-
tion in employment illegal. A
company may not refuse to hire
qualified Negroes, for instance,
or refuse to promote them when
they deserve it and an opening
is available. Labor unions may
not discriminate against mi
norities in their membership
policies.
A person who feels he has
been refused a job or advance
ment because he is a Negro, a
Jew, q Catholic, a Mexican, a
Chinese, or other national, re-
ports the incident to a commits
sion or agency which investi-
gates and tries to reconcile the
differences between the en-
ployer and employe. In some
States the matter can go no
further than discussion between
the disputants and the commits
sion.
Before and After
The survey also examined the
record in States and cities with
FEPC laws. In New York City,
it was reported, requests for
workers which excluded mem
bers of minority groups fell
from 999 the year before the
law went into effect to almost
zero the year after an FEPC
law was passed. Results were
the same in New Jersey, Massa-
chusetts and Connecticut. In
these States, it was said en-
ployers did not tend to bypass
the State employment offices
after the on-discriminatory
policies went into effect.
The indirect effects of the law
cannot be determined. Unless
q company changes its policies
after talks with the fair-employ-
ment commission, there is no way
to determine what induced it to
change. The local commissions.
however. say that most employ
ers drop discriminatory prac-
tices without a word to or from
the commission.
Actual cases handled by all
of the State and city fair-em-
ployment agencies have totaled
only $500 since 1945, the NSRB
report said. Data is available
in about $500 of these cases.
In 81 per cent Of these, some
discrimination was present in
the opinion of the commission.
and in almost all of those in
stances, a settlement was
reached through conciliation.
In only six cases did a commits
sion have to issue a direct order
to stop q hiring practice. No
one has gone to Jail.
Favor to Indifference
The report says that employ
ers in FEPC States either like
the law-they say it broadens
their labor pool-or they are
Indifferent to 1.-THE law does
not have a disturbing effect on
their business.
No conclusions or recommen-