fuses to refer workers on job orders which set up discriminatory specifications, if the employer cannot be persuaded to remove the discriminatory specifications. At the present, I believe there are about 11 States and 23 cities which have this type of legislation. In those States which do not have a Fair Employment Practices Act, the local employment office also attempts to secure the removal by the employer of any discriminatory specifications which would appear on a job order.

Senator IVES. I would like to know the results of those efforts. Have its effects been satisfactory? Have you been able to accomplish anything by trying to use that kind of moral suasion, I guess you would have to call it.

Mr. GOODWIN. I would say we have made progress, Senator, but in terms of the magnitude of the problem, it has been comparatively a small amount of progress.

Senator IVES. Has it not demonstrated to you the futility of any effort by voluntary means where this matter is concerned?

Mr. GOODWIN. I think that the problem requires more than the voluntary method, even though we have made some progress by using that method.

Senator IVES. You are bound to make some progress, but can you reach the objective you are really after by the voluntary process here? Mr. GOODWIN. It would certainly take a great deal longer to do it, infinitely longer to do it. I think the most solid progress in this field is made through the educational process, but the educational process is certainly speeded up if there is some kind of legal sanction behind it. I do not care much for the person who gets converted in connection wih this problem strictly by force. You are going to continue to have problems with him. There are so many misunderstandings, so many misconceptions of what is involved in this problem, if you can clear those up-sometimes they are cleared up by the fellow who makes the change because he is forced to do it as was the case in World War II, and then he finds out that all of these dire predictions that had been made as to what was going to happen to him and his problem were not true.

Senator HUMPHREY. Is it not true that had you just had in World War II the soft hand of conciliation and the pious words of persuasion, that you would never have convinced some of these people. In other words, they would still have gone around with these devils, these figments of their imagination, serving to be in their minds the truth, when in fact once they were brought into compliance and once they found out that all of these terrible fears they had did not materialize, that they began to work out a normal procedure of fair employment practices within their industry? Is not that what happened?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes; I think that is right. Of course, in addition to that, one of the most powerful allies we had in this program in World War II was the labor shortage and using that in the argument to the employers. We still make that the basic part of our argument today to the employer, that this is a good business?

Senator HUMPHREY. Of course, it is.

Mr. GOODWIN. Very frequently the best workers available are the minority workers because they have been passed up for all these nonperformance reasons. So that we find that we get further using that argument, and it is a perfectly sound argument.

Senator HUMPHREY. We have, for example, public education. The schools are open to all children. Yet we do have in some States compulsory attendance, do we not?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes.

Senator HUMPHREY. What is the reason for that? It is not because there are not schools. It is because it is a matter of public policy within that particular State that children shall attend school, that they shall not be exploited for occupational or economic reasons and they shall attend school because it is for social betterment. If we had left it on a voluntary basis, some people would have abused it. You cannot have enough truant officers to keep all the children in school. But the fact that you have enforceable means to require attendance results in 99.9 attendance.

In New York State, I do not recall that there have been any real sanctions applied, Senator Ives.

Senator IVES. Not to my knowledge.

Senator HUMPHREY. And yet the fact of the matter is that when you have had the enforcement power as a reserve strength, so to speak, compliance has been much more acceptable and more readily accomplished.

Similarly, the processes of education and conciliation have been fruitful.

Mr. GOODWIN. That is right.

Senator HUMPHREY. That is right. Education and conciliation are the base of any kind of law observance. There is just no doubt about that. You do not have enough officers in every city to enforce every law unless the public is educated to law observance. But you surely would not want to tie the hands of your enforcement division, and abolish that just on the basis that you are going to get everybody to see the light and the blessedness of pure living. You have to have some kind of residual power, and I think the greatest expression of faith in fair employment practices legislation is the fact, and I repeat, the fact that you had to use this residual power of enforcement so little and it has been used so sparingly that it has almost been unused as a tool of enforcement. Yet, the fact that it is there, as an enforcement weapon or mechanism, does accelerate the processes of conciliation, compliance, education, and voluntarism.

Senator IVES. Of course, Mr. Chairman, I think one reason why it has not been necessary to use the force of the law more extensively is because of the force of public opinion. I think public opinion is largely back of this kind of legislation. It is not always a question of converting people to a cause-you spoke of converting by the process you have to follow-of course; you do have to convert. But that is why we have to have these sanctions, because there are some you cannot convert, a very tiny minority, almost infinitesimal. But you can have this thing break down because of that tiny minority. That is why we have to have these enforcement provisions.

On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, you have another condition there. If at any time this law started to be enforced by the rigid application of the penalty provisions on a very broad scale, the law itself would break down, and public opinion would automatically turn against it. Therefore, perforce we have to rely largely on the voluntary procedure. But the idea that the sanctions are there goes

99173-52-3

a long way in persuading people in the first instance to pay attention to the voluntary approach. It is a combination.

We had friction with the people generally in New York when that statute was passed in the first instance. There were a lot of people that wanted a lot of teeth in the law. A $5,000 fine and 5 years in jail is what they wanted for violations. We had to tell them that would defeat this thing for years and years, even if it got on the statute books. It could not be enforced. Then it would be repealed and you would have another one. Therefore, you have to have moderation in the application of the enforcement provisions.

Mr. GOODWIN. I think both in your bill, Mr. Chairman, and yours, Senator Ives, that you hit a very happy medium on that problem. Í think that the great emphasis that you have put on the educational part of the job is good.

Senato IVES. Informal education through these conciliation councils. Mr. GOODWIN. Yes. That is a real strength and would make it workable. I have had serious question about many of the proposals that have been made in this field from my experience in World War II. But I am confident that you have a workable proposition in this bill as has been demonstrated in the States where it has been used, particularly New York.

Senator HUMPHREY. One other point I think needs to be made. Since we started in this field of fair employment practices, or what I would rather call the full utilization of our manpower resources-that is what we are really talking about-we have an emotional block in some places in this country on the term "FEPC." It sets up a set of irrational emotions.

Senator IVES. May I interrupt you at that point? That is why my law is called Discriminations in Employment Commission.

Senator HUMPHREY. I would prefer to use a different term, much more positive, the "Manpower Utilization Commission."

Senator IVES. I think we better get away from the FEPC because it has always caused resentment.

Senator HUMPHREY. That is right. Since World War II, and since the beginning of State and local commissions, what has happened in the country? University after university has set up departments, special chairs, to study in this field of employment discrimination. You have a host of civic and religious groups in the country that have spent large amounts of energy and money studying the field of racial discrimination and minority discrimination. So that today, instead of having untrained people for these advisory boards and State and local councils, and for a national commission, whatever you wish to call it, you have a host of people who are skilled in the field, and who have expressed themselves in their publications, by lecture and address, and have demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt a great knowledge of the complexities involved here and some of the solutions.

I think the important thing in most of these cases, particularly local, State, and regional levels, and even up to a national level, is that the commissioner, or whoever is on the advisory council, instead of acting as a cop, acts as a counsel. In fact, many of these problems are just explained away when the case comes before the individuals that are to adjudicate or to conciliate the case. That is what has actually happened.

I know in my own city we established a fair employment practices commission. We have never had to use the sanctions of law. What has been the result? For 75 years before its adoption not a single colored person ever worked in a department store, not one, and today you can go in any department store in our city, in any of the management sections right up to the top offices-and this is in a period of 6 years-and you have found an entire change in attitude and practice. People are employed. This was not true just of our Negro population, but of the Indian population and Mexican population, and a number of other minority groups in our community.

How was it done? Not by somebody taking a club and saying, "You are going to do it." But a great program of community education and of counsel and advice, lectures, persuasion, and innovation, and slowly; but because of this enforcement power that was behind it, slowly but surely one after the other took it in stride. The record today, I will not say it is outstanding, but I will say it is surely one of progress.

Senator IVES. It is a very interesting thing, Mr. Chairman, in line with your comment just now, that not a few, but a sizable number of industrialists in New York State who were strongly opposed to an act of this type during the period of the hearings on it, have come around since then, since it has become operative, and pointed out that they think it is a splendid thing. It has demonstrated its worth, it has demonstrated that this matter can be handled by that process, and they are some of the strongest supporters today in the State of New York of this particular type of legislation. It is a very interesting thing.

Mr. GOODWIN. Incidentally, we feel, Mr. Chairman, that your Minneapolis program is one of the best city programs in the country. It has done a remarkably good job.

Senator HUMPHREY. Thank you. If you do not mind, I would like to say I feel it is a good one, too.

Mr. GOODWIN. You have a right to be proud of it.

Senator HUMPHREY. I think it is basically good because of what Senator Ives said earlier, not only because of the law, the ordinance which was a good ordinance worked out very carefully with trained people called in from all around America, but because of the caliber of the Commission, that is, the men who were on the Commission. And they have made it a job. They have gone out and explained this program in detail, and all of these bugaboos, all of these bears in the woods that were supposed to be there just never came out. When they came out, they were just nice tabby cats, they were playful kittens. So these terrible problems just did not happen.

Senator IVES. I think the character of the Commission itself and the nature and personality of the members of the Commission has more to do with the success and failure of this kind of statute than any one thing. I think you will agree on that.

Senator HUMPHREY. That is right.

Mr. GOODWIN. Right along this line of the importance of educational process in this problem, I want to draw the committee's attention to what we are doing on that problem as far as the training of our own employment service personnel is concerned. We have gotten out a training pamphlet which I think is a rather good job. It is distributed to all the 1,800 local employment offices in the States. It takes very

much the approach we have been talking about here, understanding the problem. Why the people feel the way they do about it. How do you go about getting community cooperation in a problem of this kind and that sort of thing. We will be glad to make that available to the committee. It is, I think, a good job in that particular area.

The Department of Labor's Bureau of Employment Security has also negotiated agreements for cooperation and exchange of information and services with the National Urban League and 45 of its local affiliates, and an agreement with the Bureau of Indian Affairs for special employment office services for Indians. An article on trailer placement operations of the Employment Service on Indian reservations appears in the October 1950 issue of the Employment Security Review, a copy of which is available.

Senator DOUGLAS. May I ask a question on that?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes, sir.

Senator DOUGLAS. Indian reservations are generally located in very infertile land.

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes, sir.

Senator DOUGLAS. It is very hard for the Indians to make a living on the reservations themselves. Are you encouraging them to work outside of the reservations in off seasons?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes, we are, Senator; we have placed a lot of them. Last year we placed about 32,000 of them on farm labor throughout the country.

Senator DOUGLAS. Was that in New Mexico and that area?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes, sir. The Railroad Retirement Board in its placement services has recruited quite a number of Indians to work on the railroads, as well.

Senator DOUGLAS. Do they go back to the reservation?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes.

Senator DOUGLAS. This is for stated periods of time?
Mr. GOODWIN. That is right.

Senator DOUGLAS. And then they go back to their reservations to their families and to their tribes?

Mr. GOODWIN. Yes, sir. The problem is that the employment opportunities are for too short a part of the work year. It is the same problem that we have in much of migratory labor problem. You can get work for them during peak seasons, but you end up with considerable unemployment when you look at the whole year.

Mr. BARBASH. What are trailer placement activities?

Mr. GOODWIN. It is one of the techniques used primarily in some of our less populated areas, where we do the recruitment through a trailer which we have fixed up for recruiting purposes. We get around to smaller places and recruit that way.

Mrs. Motley tells me that it is an office on wheels, and that describes it as well as anything.

The successful program in Louisiana is an excellent example of the Employment Service's work in this field. An account of this appears in the November 1950 issue of the Employment Security Review, which I also have with me.

In 1951 an agreement was entered into between the Fair Employment Board of the Civil Service Commission and the Department's Employment Service, to avoid discrimination against minority group