Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-03-13
Works Us Over

Your March 3 editorial,
Labor Not Overly Timid,'"
fails to present the facts on
unemployment. Unemploy-
ment Is a serious problem. It
is a public sore, a national
menace. Most recent Stats
tics" your editorial glibly an
nounces, have in fact, re-
Elected considerable improve
ment." Unemployment Stats
tics and millions of unem-
ployed Americans do not
share that Improvement"
Statistically, unemploy-
ment had not dropped sig
nificantly by February, de-
spite IL months of economic
upturn. Total employment
had risen significantly. Pro-
duction had paused in jan
uary and retail sales had
been dropping. In economic
terms, unemployment and
other facts showed the need
for more national economic
vigor. In human terms, I'M
employment has been spelling
tragedy for millions.
The facts are clear:
Cd One year after the 1861
recession low-point, gross ma
tional product (the total val
lie OF goods and services pro-
duced IN our economy was
up 81 per cent. That rise is
roughly the same as the one
year production pickup from
previous recession lows -
9.9 per cent from 1885 re-
cession trough, 9.8 per cent
from the 1854 recession and
close to 1872 per cent after
the 1949 recession low-point.
CD Employment has Jagged
up only IL million or 1.8
per cent after a year from
February, 1861. After 1855
recession the one year pick
up in employment was 3.3 per
cent; after 1954's ST. per cent
and the post-1949 one year
pickup was 40 per cent.
90 The drop in unemploy-
ment over the same period
has been the smallest of any
Of the three one-year post-re-
cession periods: 20.4 per cent
in the first IL months after
the present recession. This
contrasts with the jobless drop
OF 29.2 per cent after 1858,
1858 per cent after 1854 and
45.7 per cent after the 1949
recession during the first IL
months of recovery.
In short, unemployment
has improved least. Despite
no increase in the total civil
ian labor force (there is nor
mally a one million increase)
between February, 1862, and
February, 1861, the SIS
per cent unemployment rate
for February, 1862, is higher
after one year Of recovery"
than after the first year fol-
lowing each Of the 3 previous
recessions. The unemploy-
ment rate was So per cent
one year after the 1858 low
point, 4.3 per cent after 1954's
and Al per cent after 1949's
low-point.
The AFL-CIO Executive
Council statement on the
economy, which The Star ed
itorial censured, described
these developments as of
January. After that descrip-
ton the statement criticized
the size of the Administra-
ton program to combat I'M
employment and offered the
AFL-CIO program. Your ed
itorial reported only the pro-
gram and the criticism. To
overlook this sequence, to
pretend that this public dis
agreement about q serious
national problem is a priv
ate war" between big la
Dor" and the Administration,
is inaccurate. The President
recently called employment
needs the Nations most SER
iouS domestic problem. The
AFL-CIO is concerned that
more vigorous programs have
not been adopted. The Star
is avoiding It's public respon-
S1blllty by translating the
AFL-CIO criticism into Lets
you and him fight"
The editorials pious con-
clusion further clouds the is
sue. Constant pyramiding Of
labor costs per unit of pro-
duction" could indeed be
dangerous. This bogey-man
has not and will not develop
in this chronological economy
unless suppression of con-
sumption slows us to a halt.
Unit employment costs have
been declining for a year. If
The Star is honestly con-
cerned with employment, as
well as with profits and costs,
it might look for a pyramid"
and find not even an ant
hill Stanley H. Ruttenberg.
Director, Department of
Research, AFL-CIO.