Senator CLARK. Do you find any difference with respect to complaints which come to you from States where there are State fair employment practice commissions with adequate enforcement power? My State is one-Pennsylvania.

Mr. SHULMAN. We receive a number of complaints in States with fair employment practice commissions that have enforcement powers. For some reason there is a great desire on the part of individuals to bring their complaints to our attention irrespective of the presence of a State agency.

Senator CLARK. The Federal complaint has more status?

Mr. SHULMAN. That's right, and we are required by law, as you know, not to handle a case that comes from a State until the State agency has had an opportunity to handle it.

I can give you some figures here that are of interest in that regard. We have received, in fiscal 1967, 1,049 complaints which we have deferred to State agencies, and we have received back from the State agencies or back from complainants who exhausted the time limit with the State agency, 879.

Senator CLARK. That is a deplorable record, isn't it?

Mr. SHULMAN. The 879, of course, come also from fiscal 1966 charges that were deferred. There is a good deal of movement from the State agency back which comes about in two ways: Either by reason of the fact that the State agency failed to bring about a result satisfactory to the individual or by reason of the fact that the individual did not want to wait for the State agencies' processes to be exhausted and brought it back to us. There is also a substantial number of cases in which the individual fails to file with the State agency. These are included in the 879 figure in that they moved back to the Commission for closing.

Senator CLARK. The State processes are slower that yours, in general, are they?

Mr. SHULMAN. I would hesitate to condemn any agency as to speed when we are having the backlog problems we have.

Senator CLARK. That is not what I asked you. [Laughter.]

Well, it must be true, because you get 800 out of somewhat over a thousand back on which the State agency hasn't acted.

Mr. SHULMAN. But the 800 were also deferred in a previous year. I was giving you the number we deferred to them in fiscal 1967; the 800 came back in 1967, but they may have been fiscal 1966 charges. And a substantial number involved charging parties who did not even attempt to pursue the State remedy. We deferred 919 in fiscal 1966. Senator CLARK. How many so far in fiscal 1967?

Mr. SHULMAN. 1,049.

Senator CLARK. Not much difference, is there?

Mr. SHULMAN. We still have 2 months to go in fiscal 1967.

Senator CLARK. In your statement and also in Secretary Wirtz' statement there are general figures indicating, as I recall it, that 38 of 50 States now have FEPC statutes. That 31 of the 38 have some enforcement powers, and seven do not.

I would like to ask you, if you will, to furnish the subcommittee, to be made a part of the record, an alphabetical listing of those States which have a fair employment practice act commission or its equivalent; those States which you could indicate, I guess, by an asterisk,

which have what in your judgment are adequate enforcement powers, those which do not; and then correlate that, if you will, with your table as to the number of complaints by each State.

And if you would be good enough to do it, with some evaluation on the part of the Commission as to what, if any, trends these statistics reveal. Would you do that?

Mr. SHULMAN. We would be happy to do that, Mr. Chairman. (The information subsequently supplied follows:)

MEMORANDUM FROM EEOC RE COMPARISON OF COMPLAINTS ORIGINATING IN STATES WITH AND WITHOUT STATUTES OUTLAWING DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT

The statistics on complaints received by the Commission in the following table exclude those which have been closed because of failure to receive additional information needed to proceed or withdrawn at the request of the complainant.