These statistics indicate that States which have not enacted FEP laws have a larger proportion of complaints than States which have enacted such laws. However, this comparison is based on absolute figures and does not take account of any qualitative differences such as population; minority and total.

DEFERRAL TO STATE OR LOCAL FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE AGENCIES Title VII provides that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall defer investigation of a case arising in a state with an enforceable fair employment practice law for a period of not less than 60 days and, in the case of a newly established state FEP organization for a period of not more than 120 days.

The Commission has agreements to defer action on complaints with 30 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and two cities with fair employment practice laws.

The following tables show to which states we have deferred thus far. The two cities, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh, have not been shown separately but are included in the data for Pennsylvania.

The tables show: the total number of cases deferred; those which have been closed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after the deferral period because the complainant did not pursue the state remedy or did not or would not request our jurisdiction; those upon which Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is acting subsequent to the deferral period, and last: those upon which the states are still working.

Deferred on fiscal year 1966—Period July 2, 1966–Dec. 13, 1966

ACTION TAKEN ON DEFERRALS IN FY 1967-PERIOD 7/1-12/31/66 The table for fiscal year 1967 is incomplete in that neither the charges which were closed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, nor the charges which are being acted upon by the State or local Commissions are broken down by State. This data is unavailable at this time. It should also be noted that the charges which were not completed by the State/local Commission at the end of FY 1966 are shown under the total deferred column as well as the new

deferrals in FYI 7. Demo in te ste mai lever earges being acted upon in FX 7.

Senator CLARK. Of the re

(Disenssion of the recri

Senator CLARE. On the revo

Senator Pell as a TESTICL

Senator PELL. I have one question for Mr. Shuman, whom I co gratulate for baring the rod sense to have Rhode Island bears Do you find that the trait mons are moving ind vid mond to letting Negroes into apprenticeship rynna y has the Com sion received complaints in them! How good a job are the e unions doing!

Mr. SHULMAN. We have actually had a very interesting expere with regard to crafts hit is that in instance after instance it appears that the craft ions are the practitioners of great dis crimination in the country and yet we receive very, very, very few complaints against craft unions. We have received, I would say in rough terms, some 200 complaints against craft unions.

On the other hand, the complaints that we have received are rather fundamental, indeed, and one of the lawsuits that the Artemey Gen eral has brought which we referred to him was against a craft union. We expect to be in a position of knowing much more about the prac tices of craft unions after we issue our new form EEO 2 and FFO & the first of which will apply to joint apprenticeship programs and the second of which will apply to unions and the operations of their hiring

halls.

When those forms are issued, which we hope will be later this year, we will have full information on that.

Senator PELL. Would you say the situation has improved in the last couple of years, or since you have been Chairman, within the last year?

Mr. SHULMAN. My experience with the problem has been sufficiently short, Senator Pell, that I am unable to detect any change or trend.

Senator PELL. Evidently, from your testimony, the problems which do exist in the unions are of less magnitude than I thought was the case. Is it true that they are mainly with the craft unions, and not with the industrial unions?

Mr. SHULMAN. No; that is not correct.

We have encountered many difficulties with industrial unions. These difficulties are usually of a joint nature, however. In many cases we will find a complaint filed against both the employer and the union that represents the employees, complaining about a matter that might be embodied, for example, in the collective bargaining agreement.

Through that vehicle we have had a number of complaints against industrial unions. The craft unions are generally by reason of their hiring hall operations in a different context from industrial unions and complaints would more frequently come against them only.

I would be happy to submit to the committee a listing of the complaints that we have received against unions as well as against unions and employers and we can include that, perhaps, Senator Clark, in the breakdown that we furnish you.

Senator CLARK. I would like to have it, but I would like you to break it down by category, too, if you will, because I am frankly very surprised at what you have just told us.

I think there is a feeling that the building trades are the worst transgressors against FEPC, and if what you say is true, you have just vindicated them.

Mr. SHULMAN. I did not intend to vindicate the building trades. The number of complaints we have received is not necessarily an indication of what is going on, as you know.

(The information subsequently supplied follows:)

RESPONSE OF CHAIRMAN SHULMAN TO THE REQUEST FOR A LISTING OF COMPLAINTS RECEIVED BY THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION AGAINST BOTH INDUSTRIAL AND CRAFT UNIONS

Because of confidentiality requirements, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is unable to provide for the public record a listing of charges filed with it against specific unions or unions and employers. The EEOC has examined its records and is able to provide totals for such charges.

Complaints brought against craft unions, with a membership of 2.7 million persons, total 182 (116 union complaints and 66 union and company complaints). There have also been 34 Commissioner charges brought against craft unions. With regard to industrial unions, with a membership of almost 7 million persons, there have been 564 complaints (170 union complaints and 394 union and company complaints). There have also been 16 Commissioner charges. There are several unions which have both craft and industrial elements, against which complaints have been filed with the EEOC. These unions have about 1.8 million members and a total 72 complaints have been received (54 union complaints and 18 union and company complaints). There have also been 25 Commissioner charges filed.

These figures reveal that the EEOC has received approximately 8 complaints per 100,000 members of industrial unions and 6.6 complaints per 100,000 members of craft unions.

For those unions with both craft and industrial elements, the ratio is 4 complaints per 100,000 members.

Senator CLARK. Of course, you would have to relate the complaint to the size of the union. For example, it would be abusurd to say you have no more complaints against the carpenters than you have against the auto workers. You would say, therefore, that there is no more discrimination.

There is some factor by which the size of the union and the number of people employed is built into your statistics, isn't it?

Mr. SHULMAN. That is correct.

Commissioner Jackson would like to reply to this, if he may.

Mr. JACKSON. I think the main distinction as to why we have not had as many complaints against the building trades unions depends on the access an individual has to know the practices of a particular union.

In the industrial setting the complaint would be filed by someone already employed, therefore he would have an opportunity since he is under the bargaining agreement or in the plant to know the practices that exist.

Senator CLARK. You mean his complaint is largely that he has not been given adequate consideration for promotion?

Mr. JACKSON. It could very well be in regard to promotions, transfers, access to better jobs within the industry.

Senator CLARK. But if he was complaining because he was not hired, he would not be inside the plant and he would not know; isn't that right?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, but the difference I was trying to make, Mr. Chairman, is that in the case of Negroes or any other group who have not had equal opportunity or at least do not believe they have equal opportunity in the building trades, they are not a part of the union; they have no opportunity to know what the specifics are, the dynamics of the exclusion. So, therefore, they are not in a position to file a complaint.

If you are not in the apprenticeship program or in the referral system or not a member of the union, you do not have access to the information that would permit you to file a complaint. So there are few complaints filed by individuals in this regard because they have very little information from which a complaint could flow. All they could say generally is, we do not believe there are any in the union. Whereas in the industrial setting where you have people already in the plant, they are likely to know the practices and dynamics and are able to articulate a charge.

Senator CLARK. That is interesting and certainly contributes to my education, but sometimes we have to get our noses out of the figures and look around and see what the facts of life are.

Isn't it generally true there is no discrimination in most of the industrial unions such as the steelworkers and autoworkers, and there is discrimination with respect to most of the building trades, or is this just a figment of my imagination just from reading the newspapers?

Mr. SHULMAN. I would have to say this. If you view the matter in terms of the complaints that we actually received

Senator CLARK. I don't want you to. You are a citizen of the United States; you read the newspapers. Let's get away from complaints you actually receive.

You gentlemen have a far better opportunity than Senator Javits, Senator Pell or I to know what the real situation is with respect to equal opportunity. Can you not give us some of your conclusions without going back to the number of complaints you received?

Mr. SHULMAN. Yes, getting away from the number of complaints that we received, I would think the comments that Commissioner Jackson made would tend to say what the general picture is, which is that the problems of discrimination associated with the building trades are problems of exclusion from participation.

The problems of discrimination associated with industrial unions are generally problems of treatment once employed.

Now, when you realize that the problems of exclusion mean that the person exercising the exclusionary power has greater control, you get to a position where you can point the finger, if you will, more at the building trades, whereas the industrial unions share control with the employer when the employee is already hired.

Senator CLARK. Would you care to add anything, Mr. Holcomb? Mr. HOLCOMB. No.

Senator CLARK. I have one final question which I think will be of particular interest to Senator Pell because of his ancestry.

I have just returned from a trip, in connection with the poverty program, to New Mexico, where we visited the reservation of the Santo Domingo Indians. Have you had many complaints about job discrimination with respect to American Indians?

Mr. SHULMAN. We have had very few complaints from American Indians, Mr. Chairman. We do have a program in two instances for American Indians conducted by State FEPC's through our grants. Senator CLARK. Thank you, sir. Senator Javits?

Senator JAVITS. I would like to pursue with you for a moment this question of the trade unions.

I heard your answer; I don't think you identified any order of magnitude. I think what the Chair was interested in, what I am interested in, what Senator Pell is interested in, is where is the big burden of discrimination in the trade union field, if it exists?

Two questions: (a) Does it exist; (b) if it is a real factor, where is the burden of the violation?

You made the distinction in the case of one, its exclusion; in the case of the other it is promotion or whatever might be the incidental difficulties of being employed, even though you are a union member. That still doesn't tell us about the volume and that is what we want to know.

Where is there heavy discrimination in employment in the trade union field, if any?

Mr. SHULMAN. Well, to begin with, Senator Javits, there are many more bodies involved on the industrial union side than on the building trades side in terms of the volume of work opportunities. A figure that occurs to me is that the registered construction apprenticeship