"We pledge to do everything in our power in the future, as we have in the past, to make fair employment practices a complete reality in every industry in this area."

Harry A. Bullis, chairman of the board of General Mills, Inc.: "For some years now I have been observing the administration of FEPC in Minneapolis. During this period nothing has come to my attention that would give substance to fears that business could not operate freely and efficiently under it."

Donald C. Dayton, president and general manager of the Dayton Co.: "We have been operating with people from many minority groups for some time. The difficulties of integration which we feared might arise just never did. Both the public and our own employees seemed to receive the plan with hearty approval." Walter Cramond, Jr., president, Central Labor Union, AFL: "The Minneapolis Fair Employment Practice Commission has worked with the unions in opening up opportunities for all workers on the basis of their skills, and without discrimination because of color, religion, or national origin.

"Building better relations between the members of different groups also has strengthened the unions themselves by overcoming causes for conflict and building unity. The unions affiliated with the American Federation of Labor are glad to have had a part in securing the passage of the FEPC law in Minneapolis. "We call upon our members to give their full support to the principle of equal opportunity for all workers, both within the unions and on the job. We ask them to call problems of discrimination to the attention of the commission, and to cooperate in solving these problems."

WHY THE LAW?

York Langton, sales extension manager, Coast-to-Coast Stores, says: "The law is necessary to persuade some of those who make employment policy to face the question of discrimination squarely. When they do, they find that they will benefit from employment on merit, and that the problems of adjustment with employees and customers can be easily overcome. The law backs up the businessmen, labor leaders, and employment agency managers who want to practice the sound policy of nondiscrimination."

IS EDUCATION SUFFICIENT WITHOUT THE LAW?

Lloyd Hale, president of G. H. Tennant Co., says: "While I believe civil rights problems are ultimately resolved only through education, in my judgment good legislation wisely administered is helpful in speeding up the educational process. We shall be more effective in advancing democratic principles throughout the world, the more completely and perfectly we practice them here."

WHAT HAS BEEN THE EFFECT ON LABOR UNIONS?

A. P. Eberl, former president of the Central Labor Union, says: "Union members have learned that conflicts over race and religion reduce union strength and lower labor standards. Since the adoption of the ordinance, which was supported by the Minneapolis Central Labor Union, employment opportunities have been expanded and union membership has increased. Members of different racial and religious groups, coming into the union for the first time, have been fully accepted by their fellow members on the basis of thir individual merits. Our democracy definitely stands for equal rights. We must live this democracy in our country, if we expect the rest of the world to accept it as a way to live free."

WHAT HAS BEEN THE EFFECT ON EMPLOYERS?

George M. Jensen, vice president of the Maico Co., Inc., says: "A number of employers have expressed to me the conclusion that the ill effects expected from the legislation have failed to develop. It is my opinion that employers, employees, and citizens of our community at large, have benefited from the salutary effects.'

D. W. Onan, chairman of D. W. Onan & Sons, Inc., says: "The beneficial effect of FEPC legislation, wisely administered, is to open more minds to the point of trying an open view, actually employing members of minority groups. Our company has had a successful experience in doing that during the past 15 years."

says:

WHAT ARE THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS?

Bradshaw Mintener, vice president and general counsel of Pillsbury Mills, "We cannot afford the luxury of discrimination. I cannot see how we can ever realize our full measure of economic well-being until every man and woman is permitted to work at whatever he can best do, regardless of color or religion."

HOW DOES THE LAW STRENGTHEN AMERICA'S POSITION IN WORLD AFFAIRS ? Abbott Washburn, executive vice chairman, Crusade for Freedom, says: "The best answer to Communist slander is making democracy work better here at home. One of the best ways to do this is to pass sound social legislation of the fair employment type, legislation designed to strengthen our democratic freedoms. Such action strengthens our own country. It heartens the free world."

WHOM HAS THE COMMISSION SERVED?

The law does not grant special privileges to the members of any group, but protects every individual against discrimination because of his race, color, religion or national origin. More complaints are received from some groups than from others because the members of these groups more often encounter the barrier of discrimination. That accounts for the following record of complaints handled by the Commission to January 1, 1952:

Complaints of discrimination because of:

Race came from Japanese, Indian, and Negro Americans.

Religion were made because the complainant was Jewish, Catholic, or Protestant; or because he was not a Jew, not a Catholic, or not a Lutheran. National origin were based on Mexican ancestry or on foreign birth in Germany, Austria, Estonia, or Lithuania.

HAS THE COMMISSION REACHED MEN WHO MAKE EMPLOYMENT POLICY? Through its work in the conciliation of cases, the commission has reached almost every group in the community concerned with employment problems. Experience has shown that the adjustment of a single case in one establishment has often improved the employment patterns in many kindred institutions. Respondents in cases are classified in the following chart:

Since the law was passed in January 1947, the agencies working for the expansion of employment opportunities have found that the effectiveness of their work has been sharply increased. Many persons in policy-making positions were previously indifferent to their responsibilities for solving problems of discrimination in employment. Now they give serious attention to steps which will result in the full use of our human resources.

The agencies concerned with this problem include: the Minneapolis Urban League, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Minnesota Jewish Council, Jewish Vocational Office, Anti-Defamation League, Japanese American Center, United States Indian Bureau Placement Service, United Labor Committee for Human Rights, Joint Committee for Employment Opportunity, and Mayor's Council on Human Relations. These organizations and others have joined with the Fair Employment Practice Commission to achieve the following results:

In city-government employment, workers of different racial and religious groups in increasing numbers have been certified for civil service, accepted and

placed in clerical, skilled, and professional positions. No Negro teachers or administrators had been employed in the public schools before the law was passed. Since that time an increasing number of Negro, Japanese-American and other minority applicants have been hired as teachers, administrators, and in clerical and professional jobs.

In retail-sales work, there had been no Negro workers and few members of other nonwhite racial groups employed before the law was passed. All of the major department stores have now employed such workers in sales positions on the basis of their qualifications. During 1951, the employment of these workers in department stores increased, and several nonwhite workers were placed in sales positions in smaller retail stores. The employment of these workers in clerical positions in wholesale and retail trade also expanded during the year.

In banks and insurance companies, very substantial increases in opportunities for members of minority racial and religious groups have become apparent during 1951. A leading insurance company hired its first Negro accountant and a principal bank employed its first Negro male worker in a white-collar position during the past year. Jobs in this category which members of the Jewish community have long considered to be closed to Jewish applicants are now open to them on the basis of merit.

In manufacturing industries engineering and technical jobs as well as skilled mechanical positions have been filled by nonwhite workers in many leading concerns during the past year. Supervisory jobs in plants and clerical positions in offices of manufacturing concerns have also been opened in increasing numbers on the basis of merit and without discrimination.

Executives of employment agencies have appeared to become increasingly aware of the extent to which discriminatory job specifications tend to limit the opportunity of the agency to place qualified workers in jobs commensurate with their skills. Agencies now show willingness to refer applicants on the basis of merit. The State employment service is putting increased emphasis on the program of selling the skills of qualified workers without discrimination.

A number of labor unions have admitted Negro workers and the members of other nonwhite racial groups into membership for the first time since the ordinance was passed. Other unions are reported to provide improved service to minority group members and to have gained more participation by these members in union activities. Many of the forward-looking unions have themselves assumed the responsibility for guaranteeing admission to membership and full participation in union affairs to all workers without discrimination. They have also undertaken through contract provisions and through negotiation, to assure the acceptance of qualified workers by employers without discrimination.

Workers of American Indian ancestry are moving in increasing numbers from the reservation areas into the city to seek urban employment. These workers had been largely excluded from skilled jobs before the ordinance was passed. Now such workers are using vocational training opportunities and some of them are being accepted for employment in skilled work in the building trades, manufacturing concerns, banks, department stores, public utilities, hospital work, and the service trades.

Vocational guidance agencies report that they encounter less and less opposition to the hiring of minority-group workers and more and more acceptance of such workers on the basis of qualifications.

THE PROSPECT AHEAD

The foregoing instances of progress represent action by the business concerns, labor unions, employment agencies, and minority workers in the community who have pioneered in putting into practice the principle of employment on merit. However, we recognize that the cited practices have not been adopted by all who make employment policy, and that much more work remains to be done. We believe that the administration of the ordinance and the work of the cooperating community agencies have directed the trend away from the discriminations of the past and toward equality of opportunity. During the coming year the commission hopes to confirm the trend and to move the community further in the new direction.

HOW HAS THE COMMISSION SOLVED SPECIFIC PROBLEMS OF DISCRIMINATION?

All complaints so far have been adjusted by conference and conciliation and without the need for a public hearing or for court action. The ordinance has had the effect of causing employers, labor leaders, and employment-agency managers to review their policies in regard to the members of different racial, religious, and nationality groups. When they have examined the experience of others, they have found that employment on merit is the soundest policy. It provides management with additional workers, it strengthens the unity of organized labor, and it gives more business to employment agencies. The commission has served both to increase the opportunities available for minority workers and also to protect the accused against false suspicions of discrimination. The conciliation work of the commission reduces tension, builds good will, and places qualified workers in employment on the basis of merit.

In addition to its conference and conciliation procedures, the commission members and staff met during 1951 with the board of directors of Associated Industries, and with representatives of the Industrial Committee of the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. Both of these groups expressed acceptance of the principle of employment on merit and an interest in assisting their members to solve any problems which might be encountered in putting such a policy into practice.

With labor unions

In addition to the conciliation of complaints involving unions, commission representatives addressed a number of membership meetings and obtained the advice and support of labor leaders in overcoming certain specific problems of discrimination.

With employment agencies

In addition to conferences leading to the removal of discriminatory questions on personal data forms, the commission has counselled with a number of private employment agencies concerning specific placement problems. During 1951, the commission consummated a working agreement with the Minnesota State Employment Service which will enable the two agencies to work more effectively toward their common objective of employment on merit.

With other community groups

Early in 1951, the Minneapolis commission was host to a conference of fair employment practice commission respresentatives from other cities and States. This conference served both to improve the procedures of the Minneapolis commission and to acquaint the community with the succcessful experience of fair employment programs in other areas. The commission cooperated closely with other community agencies working for expanded opportunities for minority workers through educational work and conference programs. The commission also distributed about 25,000 pamphlets to the members of business, labor and civic groups during 1951.

HOW TO PROCEED

1. Discuss any problems of discrimination in employment which may come to your attention with the commission by calling MA 1116, extension 425, during regular office hours. After 4:30 p. m. and on Saturday morning, call MA 3757 or by coming to the commission office in room 407-A, city hall.

2. File a complaint by giving the commission a signed statem nt of the facts including your reasons for believing that discrimination has been practiced, or;

3. Give the commission a signed statement setting forth any information you may have concerning a practice of discrimination, even though you do not wish

The commission will act on this information and may become the complainant in the case.

to file a complaint.

4. Inform the commission about any inquiries concerning race, religion or national origin which are raised by questions on application forms or in employment interviews. Such inquiries are prohibited by the ordinance.

The commission will:

1. Respect your wishes in regard to handling the case. the name of the respondent will be made public.

Neither your name nor

2. Protect you if you file a complaint, testify or assist in any proceeding under the ordinance.

3. Make a tactful and friendly contact with the respondent to get his side of the story.

4. Use the method of conference and conciliation to make sure that a policy of employment on merit and without discrimination is established and maintained.

5. If conciliation fails, the commission will after consultation with the complainant, hold a public hearing or refer the case to the city attorney for prosecution. 6. Give you a full report of the action taken and results achieved in regard to the problem which you present.

CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE COMMISSION Commission members: Amos S. Deinard, chairman, Raymond W. Cannon, Andrew T. Jones, Stuart W. Leck, C. William Sykora. Executive director: Wilfred C. Leland, Jr.

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE SUBMITTED BY IRVING M. ENGEL

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the American Jewish Committee urges the enactment by the Congress of legislation against discrimination in employment on the grounds of race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin.

We do so in concert with the many other individuals and groups who believe that the right to equality of opportunity and treatment in employment is basic to our democracy and to our free economy, and who are convinced that Federal legislation is urgently needed to protect this right for all Americans.

The United States of America was the first Nation in history to be founded on the proposition that all men are created equal. Our founding fathers, when they proclaimed this world-shaking truth in the Declaration of Independence, also set forth certain unalienable rights-life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For they recognized then, as we do today, that it is not enough merely to have been treated equally; that in a democracy, men must be treated as equals, enjoying an equal opportunity to build a happy and purposeful existence for themselves and their families.

There can be little doubt that without a chance to make full use of the skills and talents we possess; without the opportunity to demonstrate our abilities and to be judged accordingly, we cannot enjoy the full benefits of freedom. In fact, ever since most of us stopped living solely on the produce of our own hands; ever since men became dependent on wages and salaries for food, clothing, and shelter, the right to an equal chance to earn a living has been in the forefront of those freedoms for which people everywhere have fought.

Out of the right of fair employment flows many of the other rights we hold dear. The man who is denied the chance to earn a decent living because of the color of his skin, the place of his birth, or the way he worships God, finds it difficult, if not impossible, to enjoy the other privileges of democracy. Not only is he unable to buy adequate food and clothing for his family; he cannot even afford the education that would teach him and his children just what their democratic privileges, rights, and duties are.

We have always maintained that under our economic system a man can advance as far as his ambition and his abilities permit. It is unjust, immoral, and degrading to qualify such a statement with the parenthetical provision that he must be of a certain race, a certain religion, or a certain national background.

During World War II, this issue was recognized for what it is-both a moral problem and an economic problem. Discrimination against Americans of many