States. We have churches out in Fort Johnson, New York and at other places in New York State.

We have only about 5,500 members in this country and about 55,000 members in the world.

Now, the number of persons that would be in our work force and I will not attempt to say how many, with that total membership I would say there is something over 5,000, for the record. I am going to supply the details and the statistics which will make my presentation as factual as possible, but as I come here with others today this is not the issue as in the case with other faiths.

We think in terms of our observance of the Sabbath beginning at sundown Friday evening and ending at sundown on Saturday evening. We are not especially an evangelistic group as there are evangelistic practices in other denominations, but we follow the Biblical words, "From Eve to Eve shall you celebrate your Sabbath."

That doesn't mean from midnight to midnight. It means from the setting of the sun until the setting of the sun.

This statement is made only to you today by way of explanation of some of the groups that I've mentioned, especially perhaps with emphasis on the Seventh Day Baptists.

The issue here has to do with employment, the issue here has to do with the inability of employers on some occasions to adjust work schedules to fit the pattern, the requirement of the faith of some of their workers.

We believe it is important for us to realize that the affected persons in this matter are workers who are scattered throughout the United States, from the State of West Virginia to the State of New York and from the Atlantic to the Pacific and between the borders of the North and South.

There is no section of this country which has not been affected by the adoption of Title VII and by subsequent adoption of the amendment which I submitted and became part of the Senate language and passed in the amendments of 1972, to the Civil Rights Act.

This amendment now, Section 701(j) of Title VII states, "The term religion includes all aspects of religious observances and practices, as well as belief. Unless an employer can demonstrate that he is unable to reasonably accommodate an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business."

I think we have cushioned the position for the employer. I don't think we made it difficult for him. I think for those employers who work within the spirit of the Act, that few problems would and can arise.

The term religion as in the Civil Rights Act that I've referred to of 1964, encompasses, as I understand it, the same concepts as are included in the First Amendment, not merely belief, but conduct.

The freedom to believe and also the freedom to act or to serve or to work under that freedom with the enactment of the Civil Rights Act, I believe the American people through their Congress and the actions of the President intended to protect the same rights in private employment as the Constitution protects those rights with respect to employment in the Federal, State or local levels of Government.

The Supreme Court of the United States in the case involving Transworld Airlines against Hardison-by the way, forgive me because under the emergency pact I want to remind you that we act too often after the fact.

In 1943, November the 6th, there was another young man who got into a single engine airplane to fly from Morgantown, West Virginia to the National Airport in Washington, D.C., 175 miles across the Allegheny and the Blue Ridge Mountains.

We were flying in a plane fueled by West Virginia coal. Now, we are back to the old stand trying to sell the coal to the American people as aid to the energy problems.

The case of Hardison gives us encouragement because the courts seek to adjust work schedules in order to help workers find time to practice their religious beliefs.

Mr. Hardison was not a Seventh Day Baptist. Nevertheless, he was a Sabbath keeper or observer. He was an individual who I thought was protected under the Amendment that I sponsored and that Amendment became the law and the Supreme Court has seemed to disagree to the protection which appeared to be clear and the concept perhaps is not adequate in practice.

I am gratified that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the three members here today are holding these hearings or this hearing and you are doing it I think to search out the true quest for the answers as to the work places and the Hardison decision.

I think that it might be that new guidelines are in order to clarify what was intended with the Amendment of 1972.

This means that if there are alternative ways—now I am going back to where I wrote this coming in on the plane.

When we talk of the Amendment, the intent of my 1972 Amendment was to apply to religious discrimination, the same principles of law which the courts have applied to discrimination on other grounds under Title VII and to be specific, when an employer uses a practice which would exclude members of a particular religion, such as requiring a

work schedule interfering with the observance of religious beliefs. the-and I quote "The business necessity principle should apply."

This means that if there are alternative ways to schedule work available which would not have this impact, the employer is, and I feel has, an obligation to do something.

I think that is inherent.

The record which you are making on this issue will be very helpful. It may direct us hopefully back to what the founding fathers and mothers intended as a way of moving forward always, but sometimes with difficulty towards that spirit of religious freedom.

With other Senators I have journeyed to Minnesota when the services were held for the former Commander and Chief, the Vice President and member of the Senate, Hubert Humphrey, the services were held in St. Paul and then the burial was in Minneapolis.

It was beginning to dusk and twilight was falling over the area. It was ten below zero and we were riding in buses, many of us towards where the services were to take place.

I remember the huge trucks with search lights shining over the snowy landscape. The bus at a certain intersection stopped momentarily. It was very cold and there was a moisture which formed on the windows. I took my hand and I went like this and about that far away from me, as you are sitting as members of the Commission, were two boys, perhaps 12 or 14.

They had a placard about this size. It was a white placard and they had crayoned very carefully in red these words "We will keep his spirit alive."

We need to keep the spirit and the words of the Constitution of America alive. I commend the members of this Commission for what I call to be a timely and necessary undertaking and I express, of course, personally and for others who make things work, I thank you for the opportunity you have given me and to others, to express our views. Thank you very much.

Chair NORTON: Thank you very much, Senator Randolph. I know you are rushing to catch a plane. I have only one or two questions.

I wonder if your office in Washington has had any opportunity to get a census of whether there have been increased problems after the Hardison decision either because of mail received or from constituents or because of your own contact with the Seventh Day Baptist Church.

Senator RANDOLPH: We have had several cases and I think perhaps to be more exact, if I may be permitted in the record to supply even quotes from letters received.

Chair NORTON: That would be very helpful to us.

You mentioned that there are 40, 45 churches of the Seventh Day Baptist Churches in this country. I wonder if in general your membership has had difficulty in employment before or after Hardison, either in getting jobs or getting accommodations once on the job.

Senator RANDOLPH: I believe to a degree that there has been difficulty. I'm not sure, but there might be witnesses who are here today from the Seventh Day Baptist denomination. Our headquarters are in Plainfield, New Jersey. Whether there is someone who will be speaking for our denomination or not, I don't know.

Chair NORTON: There will be official church testimony given in Los Angeles, when we go to Los Angeles.

Senator RANDOLPH: We have churches there, particularly in Riverside, California.

Chair NORTON: Commissioner Leach, do you have any questions? Commissioner LEACH: I just want to express my appreciation to the Senator. You are an individual who I have the greatest respect and admiration for.

I've observed you closely during my short term of office and as an employee in the United States Senate, you are an extraordinary leader on this, as well as on other issues.

To have you accommodate this hearing as its initial witness, it is a distinguished pleasure and we thank you very much.

Senator RANDOLPH: I am very appreciative, Dan, if I may use that word.

Commissioner LEACH: If you wish.

Commissioner WALSH: Senator, I have no questions, but I would like to add my thanks for you being here and for your very eloquent statement and your impressing on the Commission the importance of our responsibility.

Thank you, Senator Randolph.

Senator RANDOLPH: I am very grateful to you and I shall not forget this morning. You see, it is not just another day for me. It is a new day and without philosophizing, I think it is very important for all of us to recognize each day when it dawns, that it is not just another day, but a new day, a day of challenge and opportunity and that is what we are talking about here, particularly in connection with the subject matter. I thank you, again.

Chair NORTON: Senator, you mentioned the possibility of guidelines. I just want to say for the record that we hope that these hearings do in fact produce the data that will enable us to draw guidelines and we anticipate that we may wish to call upon your good offices once again to

take the kind of initiative you took in strengthening Title VII by adding more guidelines to that statute.

I want to say how much we appreciate your interest in strengthening Title VII and this is on other regards.

Finally, I would like to say that you have done this Commission a very special honor by coming.

Senator RANDOLPH: Again, I express my appreciation.

Chair NORTON: The next witness is Commissioner Werner Kramarsky, Commissioner of the New York State Commission of Human Rights.

He is my old colleague and friend of New York and of whom I am very pleased to welcome.

Mr. KRAMARSKY: Thank you. I am pleased to welcome you again to New York State. I think it is your first hearing as a Chairman that you've held here.

We are happy that you held the first hearing on this subject here in New York and we are sure that the State will do you honor with its witnesses.

Before I begin my formal testimony it is probably appropriate after hearing the testimony of the distinguished Senior Senator from West Virginia to briefly mention that unlike him and the history he told, I am not a native born American.

My country of origin was one that was famous in the world for religious freedom. I was born in Holland and until four months after I left there in 1939, there was no sense of religious discrimination. Four months later there was no sense of freedom of any kind.

I could not testify here in honesty without calling attention to the fact that freedom, religious freedom and the opportunity to practice one's religion is an integral part and is a fragile thing at the least.

It can be destroyed very quickly and we have an obligation, all of us, to protect all parts of that freedom. It is in part because of that background that I am particularly grateful for the opportunity to testify.

The Hardison decision has left us all with deep concerns about the rights of working people to observe Sabbath, holy days and other aspects of religious observance that may impinge on the work place.

Section 296.0 of the New York State Human Rights Law, it is stated that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer to prohibit or discriminate against any person because of his observance of Sabbath or other holy day in accordance with the requirements of his religion.

Complaints concerning this issue are now being evaluated by the