and far be it from me to claim that the mere sending of money indicates that you have done unreasonably more for the group upon which it is spent, or anything of that kind. As a matter of fact, human beings can cooperate on what is being done in their behalf, and take advantage of it, where the poor fish cannot. The fact that the fish supply has increased means nothing to the fish, I suppose. The increase in the amount of fish is brought about for the benefit of human society, so that we may have an excess of good food supply. However, the $15,000,000 for administration of the Labor Department, for the administration of all the labor and social legislation that is vested in the Department of Labor, is, I think, a very small amount, and I want just to give you that over-all picture.

Mr. HARE. How does that compare with last year?

Secretary PERKINS. It is about $1,686,000 over last year; a rather small increase.

Mr. HARE. I suppose at some point in the record we will get a justification of that proposed increase?

Secretary PERKINS. Yes. It is spread over a number of bureaus. As you will recall, the Department of Labor was created by an act of Congress to foster, promote, and develop the welfare of the wage earners of the United States, to improve their working conditions, and to advance their opportunities for profitable employment.

All these were pious directions without any sanctions whatever being given except as Congress has from time to time, by statute, provided specific requirements in line with these over-all directions and provided specific sanctions for some of them.

But, of course, in carrying out a requirement, in carrying out any part of that program in wartime, we find that it takes a very considerable expenditure of funds to meet the extreme needs for the promotion of the welfare of the laborers and the improvement of their working conditions.

Almost immediately, it was discovered that the welfare of the wage earner, and his comfort and general well-being, contribute not only to the ability of the country to recruit excessive manpower, excessive labor for the war push, but to the most efficient production from war workers who are pouring into industry.

You realize today that, in spite of the fact that we are all selfaccusatory in the United States about what we have failed to do, the fact remains that no group in the world has ever seen such high per capita productive capacity as the working people of the United States have shown, and that the ability to produce and to cooperate in production with employers has been one reason why the war is now pushing on to its conclusion; and production of material has been probably the greatest contribution that America has made to the whole war, in spite of its very remarkable military manpower contribution. The supplies have been the great secret of America's strength and America's force, and the ability of the workingmen and the manufacturers to reorganize their whole way of doing things for this excessive push of production has, I think, been remarkable.

So that it becomes a matter of importance to the war as well as to every other activity connected with the war, that the wage earners, the people who go out and do the work, shall have the necessary protection in the interest of their health and their comfort and better morale, the absence of which might reduce that productive capacity.

Therefore, if we can develop knowledge of what constitutes the welfare of the wage earner and what will develop a higher type of productive ability, it is of benefit and value to those who are planning the conduct of the war.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF CONCILIATION SERVICE IN HANDLING OF LABOR SITUATIONS

Now if I may run over some of the major problems, or, rather, the major accomplishments which have been essential to the carrying on of the war effort, they are something like this:

The Conciliation Service, for instance, has been remarkably successful in the handling of labor situations which involve differences between management and labor and which might have greatly slowed down production beyond the present levels.

The Conciliation Service has, in the past year, handled 24,797 situations, as we call them. That means everything from a strike to a request for arbitration, to a request for a technical adviser to come in and tell them how to straighten out an excessive loom load, or something of that sort. It includes all of those services which go through the Conciliation Service.

Mr. KEEFE. Who is the head of that agency now?

Secretary PERKINS. Mr. Howard Colvin. That covered 12,241,000 workers, in those 24,000 situations, which means, of course, a very large part ofthe working group that have been affected at one time or another in that whole service. In the first 6 months of the current fiscal year the Serivce handled 13,368 situations involving some 6,900,000 workers.

I cite those figures to indicate that the drive still keeps up. We believe, and the War Department believes, that it is in the prompt servicing of all these situations that we have the results which we have observed; so that while there is an occasional strike, we have really reduced the seriousness of strikes and stoppages of work and their effect upon the war effort.

The Conciliation Service has brought to a successful conclusion 80 percent of all the situations it has handled, and of the 20 percent that they have not brought to a conclusion, some were referred to the National Labor Relations Board, because they involved a problem that only the National Labor Relations Board could handle; and others have been referred to the War Labor Board, because they involved an issue which only the War Labor Board could handle.

Issues which involve wages can only be settled by the War Labor Board. Negotiators are not permitted to increase wages, even though they agree between employer and workers to an increase in wages, without the sanction and approval of the War Labor Board. That means that there is a certain point beyond which the Conciliation Service cannot possibly go. They can settle every other issue in a case and they can even do the negotiating by which the employer and the workers agree to the particular pattern of wage increases to which they will agree. But before it can be put into effect, it has to be referred in most instances to the War Labor Board.

So that at least 15 percent of these situations go to the War Labor Board eventually for some kind of action or approval.

What I think we ought to point out, because it is the truth, is that the Conciliation Service, before a case goes to the War Labor Board,

in most instances has already processed the case. There may have been 20 issues when the dispute began, and they will have ironed out all but 2, or 1, or 3 of the issues. Those 3 issues then go to the War Labor Board, with all the other issues out of the way, and frequently with a statement of fact with regard to those 2 or 3 issues which are left, which greatly reduces the time and effort necessary to spend on a particular case.

JURISDICTION OF CONCILIATION SERVICE, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, AND WAR LABOR BOARD IN HANDLING OF LABOR CONDITIONS

Mr. THOMAS. Madam Secretary, may I interrupt, to clarify my own thinking?

Referring to the jurisdiction of the Conciliation Service and the War Labor Board, is it or is it not true that if the matter at hand involves a working condition without a corresponding increase in wage, the Conciliation Service handles it without its ever being reported to the War Labor Board?

Secretary PERKINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. THOMAS. And if it is a wage matter that comes within the framework, a matter which when settled will not increase the wage rate

Secretary PERKINS. If it comes within the framework of what is known as the brackets

Mr. THOMAS. Then it does not go to them, either. It is only when they go beyond the prevailing wage bracket that it is referred to the War Labor Board?

Secretary PERKINS. That is correct. Increases of wages, even within the brackets in most cases, are cleared through the War Labor Board, so that there would be no chance of anyone being able to charge that the conciliator winked at something.

Mr. ENGEL. What do you mean by the term "brackets"?

Secretary PERKINS. It is a term that was invented, for want of a better name, by the War Labor Board. It is an attempt to approach the prevailing rate of wages in different communities. The bracket does not cover the entire scope of wages between the minimum and maximum but is established by the Board somewhere in between those two points.

Mr. ENGEL. And you can do that despite the fact that it may exceed the 15-percent increase?

Secretary PERKINS. The Board has tried to set up these brackets and generally approves increases within those brackets. Anybody in the community can request approval for raising wages to the prevailing rate of wages applicable to that community.

Mr. THOMAS. Does that require War Labor Board approval?
Secretary PERKINS. We have so interpreted it.

Mr. THOMAS. It is not mandatory, but you do it as a matter of courtesy?

Secretary PERKINS. Well, there is an agreement; that is, there is a clearing of all increases involving a base wage over 50 cents. The commissioners of conciliation, when they make that settlement, they clear it with the local office of the War Labor Board, to avoid misunderstanding or charges that something was done in the baker's case that was not done in the shoemaker's case.

Mr. ENGEL. You said that they did that to bring it up to the prevailing wage in one place; and then, in another part of your statement, I got the impression that it was within the brackets, which would be anywhere up to the highest wage.

Secretary PERKINS. As a matter of fact, a bracket is around a fairly narrow variation, although in some communities you may find a variation that is quite large.

Mr. ENGEL. The bracket is not the difference between the highest and the lowest wages?

Secretary PERKINS. No; it is not, it is somewhere in between those two points.

Mr. THOMAS. The bracket really surrounds the community?
Secretary PERKINS. Yes; and the type of job.

Mr. THOMAS. The prevailing wage is, perhaps, different in different communities?

Secretary PERKINS. Yes.

Mr. THOMAS. But the bracket merely covers a particular community, a locality?

Secretary PERKINS. That is right, by industry and trade, in a particular community or locality.

Mr. ENGEL. Can they appeal from the Conciliation Service to the War Labor Board?

Secretary PERKINS. Anybody can go to the War Labor Board if they want to, but, when the matter is settled, they do not want to go. If either party is unwilling to settle, the Conciliation Service cannot make them settle.

It is the War Labor Board that can apply sanctions. The Conciliation Service can apply no sanction and cannot force anybody to do anything. So that when I say that we have settled all but 20 percent of these cases, they have bene settled without any sanction, or without any forcing, but merely because the parties were willing to settle under the arrangements that could be worked out through the Conciliation Service.

Mr. HARE. I gathered from your statement that you expect these situations will be more numerous this year than last?

Secretary PERKINS. I do not expect any considerable change. That is partly because of the continuous pressure for wage increases, as you can see when you read the papers. You will see that everybody wants his wages increased; even though that is the only thing they have at issue when they start to develop a dispute, you will find that everything else in the particular plant that they do not like will be raised as an issue, but what they really want is their basic pay increased. I do not think there will be any great falling off in the number of situations this year.

WORK LOAD OF THE CONCILIATION SERVICE

Mr. HARE. Then you think that the work load of the Conciliation Service will be about the same?

Secretary PERKINS. We think it will be about the same. We do not anticipate that it will be greater.

Mr. HARE. Do you not think, by reason of increased efficiency year after year of the Conciliation Service, that management and labor would become better advised as to their rights and privileges, so that the number of situations naturally and logically would decrease?

Secretary PERKINS. On one set of premises, that would be the case, sir. But on the premise of reality, as I have observed it, one of the things that keeps strikes from being disastrous

Mr. HARE (interposing). Of course, if you deny my first premise, then my whole question falls; that is, that there is no increase in efficiency in the Conciliation Service.

Secretary PERKINS. There has been a great increase in efficiency of the Service. And I think it is that increase in efficiency which really makes it possible for employers and labor to find assistance in resolving their disputes; so that, rather than have a strike or a lockout, they tend to call in a conciliator. Now, that really makes for more work for the conciliator. As a matter of fact, we are today getting thousands of requests for conciliators.

Mr. HARE. I should hate to have to subscribe to the philosophy that the more efficient an agency of the Government becomes, the more work it will have to do.

Secretary PERKINS. I do not think that would be true, sir; if applied to every agency of the Government.

Mr. HARE. Suppose it were applied to one particular agency of the Government?

Secretary PERKINS. I think you would find, with reference to the courts, the judiciary, that an increase in the courts seems to mean a reduction in the amount of crime, and a reduction of the number of courts and their accessibility would, I think most of us believe, result in an increase of serious crime, uncontrollable crime. We are all for the courts being open all night and easily accessible, and broken down for men and women and children, and first offenders and bad offenders, and so forth. We have multiplied the judicial processes for the sake of making it possible to wash out the major sins of humanity, or to reduce their effects.

I think you will find that this Conciliation Service is nearer to the process of litigation—that is, calling in the conciliator is not litigation, but it is nearer to that process. An outside party is called, rather than have a major strike.

Of course, if you can change the disposition of the human race to quarrel, and if you can cure the instinct, when you have two parties and one pile of money and both of them with some claim to it-if you can cure the disposition to want the major share, you will be doing more than a conciliator can do.

Mr. ENGEL. Taking the number of cases that you have handled, the percentage that is settled is much smaller than it was before you had the War Labor Board. In other words, the fact that you have the War Labor Board will make a good many of the employers say, "Well, I am not going to do what the Conciliation Service thinks I ought to do; I will take my chances with the War Labor Board." Does not that happen?

Secretary PERKINS. Yes; but less than it used to.

Mr. ENGEL. As I recall it, Mr. Steelman testified in years past the percentage of cases settled was much greater than 80 percent.

Secretary PERKINS. That is true, but you see you did not have that wage problem then. When the law of the land is that nobody can get his wages raised except by going to the War Labor Board, there is no choice; they must go to the War Labor Board. But as the War Labor Board's rules and regulations and as their precedents have become