xt7pc824fb8n https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7pc824fb8n/data/mets.xml Pennsylvania Fitzgerald, Edward J. United States. Works Progress Administration. 1939 xiv, 92 p.: ill., 26 cm. UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program libraries. Call Number Y 3.W 89/2:42/L-4 books  English Philadelphia, Pa.: Works Progress Administration, National Research Project This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Pennsylvania Works Progress Administration Publications Labor market -- Pennsylvania -- Lancaster Lancaster (Pa.) -- Economic conditions Selective Factors in an Expanding Labor Market: Lancaster, Pa.: A Study of Employment Opportunities in Four Manufacturing Plants in Lancaster, Pa., 1928-36 text Selective Factors in an Expanding Labor Market: Lancaster, Pa.: A Study of Employment Opportunities in Four Manufacturing Plants in Lancaster, Pa., 1928-36 1939 1939 2019 true xt7pc824fb8n section xt7pc824fb8n f“ fifly. , 1 WWWWT‘ ..vg .
gig   TInIILIuIIIIILITILA '
. f“ E? 71‘ ‘9" WWW "

a”; ;, , SELECTIVE FACTORS
:; IN AN EXPANDING _
* LABOR MARKET:
; LANCASTER, PA ‘

‘ l '_ WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION » ' ¥ ‘

‘ l ' NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT . . _

 g
WPA NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT 1
Reports issued to date .
General 9
G-i Unemployment and Increasing Productivity (out of print) a
0-2 The Research Program of the National Research Project =
0-5 Summary of Findings to Date, March 1938 ‘j
G-4 Effects of Current and Prospective Technological Developments
Upon Capital Formation 1
A-S Selected References on Practices and Use of Labor on Farms (out of print)
~ Studies in Types and Rates of Technological Change 3
Manufacture ;
M-1 Industrial Instruments and Changing Technology .’
M—Z Mechanization in the Brick Industry f
3-2 Mechanical Changes in the Cotton-Textile Industry, 1910 to 1936 (Sunnary) .
B-S Mechanical changes in the Woolen and Worsted Industries. 1910 to 1956 (Sunnary) f
' 3-5 systems of shop Management in the cotton-Garment Industry (out of print) %
1' 1
Mining 3
E-1 Technology and the Mineral Industries (out of print) 1
E-3 Mechanization Trends in Metal and Nonmetal Mining as Indicated by Sales of '
Underground Loading Equipment ‘
E-5 Fuel Efficiency in Cement Manufacture. 1909-1935 (out of print) .
E-B Mineral Technology and output per Man Studies: Grade of Ore (out of print)
Agriculture I 51
Changes in Farm Power and Equipment: F
A-Z Mechanical Cotton Picker p
A-9 Tractors, Trucks, and Automobiles L ’
A-ii Field Implements (in press) . ‘ '
- Studies in Production, Productivity, and Employment 3
Manufacture 5
8-1 Production, Employment, and Productivity in 59 Manufacturing Industries, 1919-56 15
Productivity and Employment in Selected Industries: '
N-l Beet sugar ;
N—z Brick and Tile r
B-i Labor Productivity in the Leather Industry (Suaaary) ' p”
3-4 Effects of Mechanization in Cigar Manufacture (Summary) 2"
3-6 Labor Productivity in the Boot and Shoe Industry (Summary) . , .
, if
!
(List continued on inside back cover) i

 “ ‘, ":4?“ . . I
. WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
" i E F. C. HARRINGTON CORRINGTON GILL
6 Administrator Assistant Administrator
”i;
s'Qt'
}
i
g
,
, . 1' NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
» f 5‘.“
f on
g; Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes
'3? in Industrial Techniques
DAVID WEINTRAUB
"’3“ g. D i re c to r
" ., $531?
:4 1.3;: :: my
' ‘7 "3: Studies of the Effects of Industrial Change on Labor Markets

 i
‘i 3
' WORK EXPERIENCE IN THE SAME PLANT, BY AGE OF WORKERS
i (Percent of workers in each group)
LINOLEUM BOTTLE CLOSURE SILK WATCH
PERCENT PERCENT i
so so ;
7° CONHNUOUSLY EMPLOYED,I929-35 70 i
no 60 i
50 50 ‘
40 4° 1
3O 30
20 i 20
10 i0 ,
o o g
80 60
7° SEPARATED AFTER i928 AND NOT REFHRED 7°
50 the ,gi; 5° 1;
4o 40 i
so . so ,3
20 Qfifinmm ggfi "mm I 20
lo mmn wwmggg m
o . mm. , b
no so
70 HRsT HRED AFTER $32 70 g
60 so i
50 50 V
40 4°
i 30 ac
: 2° I 20
‘ I0 I0
.‘ o ii~s~ o
i 33::; tags; a3333 5.13:4:
22223 22225 222.93 22225 ,
E 3 5i 2 8 E 3 3 9 3 2 «"8. 5i 9 5 2 3 3 3 3
WPA-NATWNAL RESEARCH pnouscr L—aa .
The level of employment reached a higher point in 1936 than in 1929 in each of 3
the plants studied except that which makes silk goods. A considerable proportion ’
of the workers rn each plant lost employment during the depression and many were
not rehired during the recovery years. The chart shows that the decline which
occurred In employment between 1929 and 193? and the subsequent increase affected
differently the employment opportunities 0 workers in the different age groups.
The differences in the relation between age and employment experience of workers at _
the Silk and watch plants, where skilled and semiskilled occupations predominate, '
and at the linoleum and bottle-closure plants, where the work is mostly unskilled, ,
are notable. At the silk and watch plants the workers who maintained employment '
I continuously were older on the average than those who lost their JOBS during the ,
i depreSSion and were not rehired. At the linoleum and closure plants the workers ;
separated and not rehired were older than those kept on continuously. . i
1 in all four plants the workers newly hired during the recovery period were ,
! conSIderably younger than those continuously employed or those who had been i
i separated and not rehired. Furthermore, those who had been separated but rehired '
‘ were also concentrated in the lower age groups.
* A small proportion of the workers seoarated and not rehired were no longer
: seeking work in 1936. These were primari y women and older men, and their failure
5 to seek employment does not necessarily indicate that they would not be available ;
‘ for employment should standards of hiring be relaxed. They are shown in the
‘ lightly shaded portions of the bars in the chart.
i The ages are as of the end of 1936. The chart is based on tables A-19 to
i A-22 and A-ze.
, i
i . i
i i

 5 SELECTIVE FACTORS
. IN AN EXPANDING LABOR MARKET: LANCASTER, PA.
A Study of Emfiloyment Ofifiortunities in
Four Manufacturing Plants in

: Lancaster. Pa., 1928—36

1 by

§ Edward J. Fitzgerald

1

WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION, NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT

, Report No. L—4

l

" Philadelybhia, Pennsylvania‘

i June 1939
I ,

 1
1’1
11 1
11 ~-
' 1
1 .1,
1 .
1
1 THE WPA NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT .
ON REEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND RECENT CHANGES
1 IN INDUSTRIAL TECHNIQUES 1
A 1
1 Under the authority granted by the President in the Execu-
1, tive Order which created the Works Progress Administration,
A Administrator Harry L. Hopkins authorized the establishment
1 of a research program for the purpose of collecting and ana— 1
lyzing data bearing onproblems of employment, unemployment, .1
’A and relief. Accordingly, the National Research Program was
1; established in October 1955under the supervision of Corrington I
A Gill, Assistant Administrator of the NPA. who appointed the
1 directors of the individual studies or projects. 1‘
A The Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes 1
in Industrial Techniques was organized in December 1955 to I
A inquire, with the cooperation of industry, labor, and govern—
mental and private agencies, into the extent of recent changes 1
in industrial techniques and to evaluate the effects of these
changes on the volume of employment and unemployment. David 1
Weintraub and Irving Kaplan, members or the research staff
of the Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance, were ap- ;
pointed, respectively, Director and Associate Director of the 1
'A Project. The task set for them was to assemble and organize 1
1 the existing data which bear on the problem and to augment .
1 these data by field surveys and analyses. ,
A To this end, many governmental agencies which are the 001-, =
A" lectors and repositories of pertinent information were in-
vited to cooperate. The cooperating agencies of the United 1
1 States Government include the Department of Agriculture, the
Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior, the Bureau
1 of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor, the Railroad
1 Retirement Board, the Social Security Board, the Bureau of A
. Internal Revenue Of the Department of the Treasury, the De- 1
1 partment of Commerce, the Federal Trade Commission, and the
1 Tariff Commission. A
A .
A The following private agencies joined with the National ‘
- Research Project in conducting special studies: the Indus- 1
_ ‘ trial Research Department or the University of Pennsylvania, A
1 . the National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., the Employ— ‘
1 ment Stabilization Research Institute of the University of A
Minnesota, and the Agricultural Economics Departments in the ,
1 Agricultural Experiment Stations of California, Illinois, A
1 Iowa, and New York. 1
1' .
1 1
1 I
1 _ 1
1 1

 I
: WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
WALKER-JOHNSON BUILDING
I734 NEW YORK AVENUE NW.
‘ WASHINGTON. D. c.
F. c. HARRINGTON
' ADMINISTRATOR
; June 15J 1939
Colonel F. C. Harrington
Works Progress Administrator
‘ S i I‘ :
The city of LancasterJ Pennsylvania, is a rela—
‘ tively prosperous and growing industrial community
1 located in the richest agricultural county in the
' Country. As in other communities in the CountryJ
employment in Lancaster dropped sharply between 1929
k and 1933; but by the fall of 1936 employment in the
; city had almost regained its 1929 levels. In some of
‘ the community's plants it was higher than it had ever
‘ been before. Yet the volume of unemployment remained
‘ of sizable proportions. Many of those formerly
employed were out of work; some had shifted into
‘ industries and occupations that did not constitute
their usual source of livelihood; many of those
; working in 1936 had only recently come of working age
and had not been in the labor market in 1929. The
report transmitted herewith analyzes the experiences
of workers who had been employed in four of the city's
plants in 1929 or were hired by them during the
recovery years since 1933.
The four plants whose Work forces were studied
produced linoleumJ watchesJ silkJ and bottle closures.
In each of these plants a majority of the workers
j became unemployed during the years after 1929. So far
as those who kept their jobs are concernedJ skill
! and experience were the important factors in their
: selection. Where these factors were unimportant
‘ because of the low level of skill required by the
I production processj it was the older worker who
' became unemployed.
l
. _ With recovery, employment in the four plants
' began to rise again. In three of the four plants the
number of wage earners employed in 1936 exceeded
I the 1929 level. Some of the workers who had been laid
‘ off in the depression were rehired. In all cases,
I
l
I

 «vigil; .
jg; . 3
3§i however, the number rehired was less than half of
. E? those who had been let go. The watch plant, with ,

2% a high percentage of skilled operations, took back p
ffi the largest proportion of its former employees. The I
.‘ ‘ closure plant, where unskilled operations predominated

if and where a new process had been introduced, re—

p f employed only a quarter of the workers who had been

'; f laid off. In the linoleum and closure plants it

:E1 was the younger rather than the older worker who was

Q] rehired. Of those not rehired, the older workers ‘
.l generally had greater difficulty in finding other

:i' employment than did the younger workers.

if] The other side of this picture is that substan—

fié, tial numbers of workers new to each of the four plants

'}1 and industries were hired during the recovery period.

ii Most of these were young, many of them new entrants

-li ' into the labor market. Of those hired since 1933, :
‘gw I more than one—fourth in the closure plant, one—third

5 in the linoleum plant, two—fifths in the silk plant, .
51'{ and three—fifths in the watch plant had entered the

t i labor market after 1929. Furthermore, in spite of

in unemployment within the city affecting some of their

é“ OWn former Workers, each of the plants was drawing in

l commuting labor from the agricultural areas outside

?§ the city.

5941- The findings of this study thus throw light

Eli on the composition of the reserves of labor that

ii, have accumulated during the depression years 1930—32,

in? on its relationship to the volume and incidence

.;y of unemployment in the period of recovery, and on

Ta the factors that affect the selection of workers ‘
i; retained during a period of depression or employed or

3? reemployed in a recovery period.

éf Respectfully yours, I
,1] l/’

i Corrington Gill ‘
Ed Assistant Administrator ,
EJ .
7% $ .
"iii E i
ii.

 C O N T E N T S
_ Chapter Page
PREFACE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
' Industrial growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The labor supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Purpose of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Sampling procedure and plan of the study . . . . 6
II. PREDEPRESSION LABOR FORCES OF SELECTED INDUSTRIAL
SITUATIONS.................. 10
Z Characteristics of the situations. . . . . . . . 10
Linoleum workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lO
Closure workers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Silk workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Watch workers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Characteristics of the predepression labor . . . 17
Sex and age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Geographical source. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Foreign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Rural. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Industrial background. . . . . . . . .A. . . . 21
Recent entrants into the labor market. . . . 23
‘ . First jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Longest pre—1926 jobs. . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Jobs between January 1926 and date of sample 25
Summary and comparisons. . . . . . . . . . . . 25
III. DEPRESSION EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE AND SELECTIVE
{ FACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Employment and unemployment, 1929—35 . . . . . . 27
1 .
. Withdrawal from the labor market . . . . . . . 28
Unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
‘ Employment in the sample plants. . . . . . . . 32
Employment outside the sample plants . . . . . 33
6 Sex, age, and employment experience, 1929—35 . . 35
Occupation of silk workers and their employment
experience, 1929—35 . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
y Length of previous attachment to plant and
, ' depression experience . . . . . . . . . . . 42
vii
5
{

 i? i
‘ i l
viii CONTENTS
1 Chapter Page
i IV. THE WORKERS HIRED IN THE RECOVERY PERIOD . . . . . 47 _
i Geographical background. . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 _
i i Previous association with the plants . . . . . . 48
i i Age and sex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
H Previous employment experience . . . . . . . . . 52
. fl Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
h V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
h Employment and unemploymentand selective factors 58
. i
'P Appendix
i A.TABLES...................... 62
3 i, B. SCHEDULE AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED . . . . . . 9O 3
i Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
I . “ Definitions of terms used. . . . . . . .'. . . . 81 . ‘
‘ CHARTS
Figure '
Work experience in the same plant, by age '
i of workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prmnispiece
i
; iii 1. Indexes of manufacturing employment in the
it] United States, Pennsylvania,and Lancaster, 1920—86 2
I i'i 2. Distribution of the Lancaster work force and of
. i workers employed at end of 1928, by sex, plant,
i and age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
, i 3. Distribution of employable man-months, 1925—35,
ff of workers employed at end of 1928, by plant, sex,
,‘ and employment status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4. Distribution of workers employed at end of 1928 who
experienced unemployment in the period 1931—35,
. by plant and duration of unemployment. . . . . . . 31
5. Distribution of workers employed at end of 1928,
‘ by sex and employment experience in 1929—35 '
in sample plant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5
6. Distribution of workers employed at end of 1928,
\ by duration of continuous employment immediately
prior to 1929 and employment experience in 1929—35 '
‘ in sample plant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 ;
:- 7. Distribution of workers hired after 1932, by plant, :
' - type of accession, and age . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 5

 i
i
CONTENTS ix
TEXT TABLES
- Table Page
- 1. Sex and age of workers in predepression samples. . . 20
2. Distribution of predepression workerswho experienced ,
unemployment in 1931—35, by sample industry, sex,
and duration of unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3. Percentage distribution of predepression samples,
by sex and employment experience in 1929—35. . . . 36
4. Sex, age, and type of accession of workers in
postdepression—acquisition samples . . . . . . . . 50
APPENDIX TABLES
: A-l. Manufacturing employment of the United States,
‘ Pennsylvania, and Lancaster, 1920—36. . . . . . . 62
. A—2. Growth of population of Lancaster, Pennsylvania,
' 1800—1930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A—3. Statement of the enumeration. . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A—4. Number of employees in the four selected plants,
1921—36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A—S. Distribution of gainful workers in Lancaster city
10 years old or over, by sex and age, 1930. . . . 64
A—6. Percentage distribution of predepression samples,
by sex and age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A—7. Population of Lancaster County and city, by race
and nativity, 1930. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A—8. Percentage distribution of predepression samples,
by residence at dates of birth, sample, and
enumeration and by sex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
A-9. Percentage distribution of predepression samples,
- by sex and industry of first job. . . . . . . . . 67
A—lO. Percentage distribution of predepression samples,
by sex and industry of longest job which began
before 1926 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
, A—ll. Percentage distribution of total man—months of
5 predepression linoleum workers, 1929—85, by
employment status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
, A—12. Percentage distribution of total man—months of
- predepression closure workers, 1929—35, by
: employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
, A—13. Percentage distribution of total man—months of
‘ predepression silk workers, 1929—35, by
employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 7O

 ._, , 1' ‘
Wit 5 . -.
Si '

55’- 1! J

.r'z... ‘ ‘

i3} ‘5 3 E
t .
‘7 . x CONTENTS

. APPENDIX TABLES-Continued '
K: p j Table Page _
{f . A—14. Percentage distribution of total man—months of

%i ‘ predepression watch workers, 1929—35, by

.3 1 employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

fin , ‘ A—15. Percentage distribution of employable man—months of

fin predepression linoleum workers, 1929—35, by ,
3;: ‘ ; employment status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

5 ',

pi! i A~16. Percentage distribution of employable man—months of

f: . predepression closure workers, 1929~35, by

i; I ‘ employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

#fl‘Ii A—l7. Percentage distribution of employable manamonths of

13L 1 predepression silk workers, 1929—35, by

9? employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Li. H A—lB. Percentage distribution of employable man—months of

j: ‘3 . predepression watch workers, 1929—35, by

;§ j” employment status and sex . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

jl A—lQ. Distribution of the predepression linoleum sample,

;_ ,‘ by employment experience in 1929—35, and age. . . 76 '
;$fl A—ZO. Distribution of the predepression closure sample,

3;; ‘ by employment experience in 1929—35, sex, and age 77

{i‘ 1 ‘ A-21. Distribution of the predepression silk sample, by

fl: 3 employment experience in 1929—35, sex, and age. . 78

if ‘ A-22. Distribution of the predepression watch sample, by

EL i employment experience in 1929—35, sex, and age. . 79

if i‘ A—23. Distribution of the predepression silk sample, by

;; ‘~ sex, occupation, and employment experience in

fig“ 1929—35..................... 80

g; f A—24. Distribution of predepression samples, by duration

5:, ‘ of continuous em loyment in sam le lant

p p p

311‘ immediately prior to 1929, sex, and employment

experience in 1929—35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

i% A—25. Percentage distribution of postdepression—

fii acquisition samples, by dates of birth and

ffiA enumeration and by place of residence . . . . . . 84 j
3H 4 .
331 A—26. Percentage distribution 0f postdepression— ‘
pg} acquisition samples, by sex and type of accession 84

:fj : A—27. Percentage distribution of postdepression—

-fi ‘ acquisition samples, by sex and year of entry

f? ,3 into labor market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

E§§f‘v A—28. Percentage distribution of postdepression— $
§;.'f acquisition samples, by sex, age, and type

fi? of accession. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

J

 I
i’
z
CONTENTS Xi
' APPENDIX TABLES-Continued
. Table Page
A—29. Percentage distribution of postdepression—
acquisition samples, by sex and industry
of first job. . . . . . . . . . _,_ . . . . . . 87
A—30. Distributionof postdepression linoleum acquisitions
who experienced unemployment in 1926—35, by
duration of unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
A—Sl. Distribution of postdepression closure acquisitions
who experienced unemployment in 1926—35, by sex
and duration of unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . 88
A—32. Distribution of postdepression silk acquisitions
who experienced unemployment in 1926—35, by sex
and duration of unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . . 89
A—33. Distribution of postdepression watch acquisitions
who experienced unemployment in 1926—35, by sex
i and duration of unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . 89

 1|? I

g 11
1|5| 3
2| :
1‘1 ‘
_ 1|?

1 1;
i 1|?
v 1
in |
1| .‘
x |
‘ 1|?
| |
|
| ,

 , PREFACE

The labor—market situation studied in this report is charac—
terized by the fact that although the community's industrial
enterprises draw their labor principally from the resident
population, the surrounding agricultural region has been of
great importance in offering the city‘s plants an opportunity
to expand their labor supply by drawing on a reserve larger
than that within the city. Between 1929 and 1933 the demand
for labor in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, fell off sharply, and
Lancaster, like most other communities, faced a severe un—
employment problem. Most of the community's industries have,
however, recovered rapidly since 1933, and in 1936 employment
was almost at predepression heights. The major question posed
in this study is: What, under the circumstances, were the
reemployment opportunities of those workers who lost their jobs
during the depression years of 1929-33?

The labor forces associated with four industrial plants
in the city were selected for study. Each of the plants
represented a slightly different situation. One had not shared
appreciably in the recovery characteristic of the community and
in 1936 was employing a labor force far smaller than the one it
had employed in the predepression years. Another, though its
employment in 1936 was at new heights, had undergone a techno—
logical change at the depth of the depression which rendered
relatively valueless the experience of many of its former
workers. In the two other plants employment was greater than

_ ever before. One of these required predominantly semiskilled
and skilled labor, the other semiskilled and unskilled labor.

The selection of workers who are kept, laid off, or hired is
based on criteria which individual employers consider important

. from the standpoint of management controls and efficient
, production. Some of these criteria have their origin in the
attempt to maintain or to establish a given policy of employer—
employee relationship; others flow from a desire to accumulate
a reservoir of labor attached to the plant; still others are
founded on what are believed to be the requirements of the
jobs. The preferences of individual employers, the needs of
fluctuating production, and the changing technical requirements
of the work to be done thus combine to alter the chances for
xiii
i

 1 ' ‘
. .1 xiv PREFACE
i1 , the reemployment of unemployed workers and to create opportu—
i' ‘” nities for new entrants into the labor market.
i ‘, The prevailing tendency to substitute machines for heavy
;j l unskilled labor as well as for human skills places a premium
:ii ‘i on speed, dexterity, and alertness and thereby forces age and
53, “T experience to yield to youth either for greater adaptability
iii Vii or for wage economy. In this study special consideration is
fig} .‘5 therefore given to the roles played in each of the four situa-
éfi. VJ, tions by the factors of age, sex, skill, and experience in the
$4 ,T selection of workers who retained or lost their jobs during the
ii I depression and of workers who were reemployed during the
if] f T subsequent recovery.
£¥.}”{. The study was made and the report prepared by Edward J.
Fe; Eli Fitzgerald under the direction of Irving Kaplan. Collection
$3" . k of field data for the study was initiated by John B. Knox and
;; completed by Mr. Fitzgerald under the supervision first of
:5 Francis M. Vreeland and, later, of H. Paul Douglass. The
.r completed manuscript was edited and prepared for publication
ii under the supervision of Edmund J. Stone.
3 f;h Acknowledgment is gratefully made to the executives and
3:3;f the personnel departments of the Armstrong Cork Company's
i§3l1:; two plants, the Hamilton Watch Company, and the Stehli Silk
fii‘h'w Company, who supplied both the lists of employees from which
ii «if the samples were drawn and additional information of aid in
:3 ;J- interpreting the material gathered. A particular debt of
%Q i1’i gratitude is owed to all the workers who supplied the informa—
ifi ‘ H tion upon which this report is based. The use made of the
ii i material and the conclusions drawn are solely the responsi— ‘
é: ‘ bility of the National Research Project.
T DAVID WEINTRAUB
:fl ‘3 PHILADELPHIA
.1 “; June 13, 1939
ail-iii -
pg?

 CHAPTER I
‘ INTRODUCTION
THE COMMUNITY
Indua tr ial Growth
Lancaster, a city of 60,000 persons, is geographically and ,

economically centered in the county of the same name, one of
the richest in the United States, situated in the southeastern
part of Pennsylvania. Historically, the city has developed
gradually from the county seat of a predominantly agricultural
region into an aggressive, though small, industrial community,
while continuing to serve as the county's commercial center.
Its industries are diversified, in general, prospering, and
are, many of them, of national and even international impor—

: tance. The Armstrong Cork Company, for example, is one of
the world's leading linoleum manufacturers and produces twice
the amount of linoleum manufactured by any other factory in the
country. It is also one of the leading producers of bottle
closures. The Stehli Silk Company, producers of broad silk and
rayon, has a plant, one of the largest of its kind in America,
on the outskirts of the city. The Follmer—Clogg Company is an
outstanding producer of umbrellas; the Bearing Company of

' America produces a large portion of the ball bearings and
ball retainers used in the automobile industry; the Hamilton
Watch Company is one of America's outstanding producers of
quality watches.

‘ Although the growth of the city has not been of the mushroom
variety characteristic of such a single—industry center as
Detroit, its record of recent industrial development is in
marked contrast to that of such cities as Paterson, New Jersey;
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and the moribund centers of New

. England. In these latter communities a decline in industrial

’ activity set in even prior to the industrial depression of the
thirties. Lancaster's industrial activity, on the other hand,
whether measured by volume or value of goods or by employment,

} ' was flourishing and expanding. Its peak was reached in 1929,
when the depression interrupted its persistent record of
5535913.}Efifeda“t%’é°§a%322?sa§§ ES"fflvclee‘jaiinhiioii‘s’i‘fiié‘é‘eff 51f; Dp‘iéi‘ér’infifihfi’r‘
the manuscript.

1
i
J

 II If . .

‘I II -

2 . 2 EXPANDING LABOR MARKET
‘ ”i I3 “

I} j : growth. Yet evidence that it retains that capacity for ex— 1

f; N g, pansion regarded as an intrinsic attribute of the general I

'i “I{ American economy is afforded by the fact that by 1937 it was .

g' ‘I3 1 one of the cities that had recovered to about predepression

_§“ . ,3 schedules of production.

:5 “H 1 In the quarter—century between 1904 and 1929 the number of I

, ,1 .

5; ‘ I A} industrial employees reported by Lancaster manufacturing plants ‘

It}, I; I . .

‘gf Ijj‘ to the Pennsylvania Department of Internal Affairs almost -

5?, ‘Ihi doubled.1 In the 1920—29 decade of mounting prosperity when ‘

fii‘Ipli Pennsylvania as a whole showed a decline of 22 percent in the

5” I1!‘ number of employees in manufacturing industries and when

E; 5 fl‘ employment in United States manufacturing increased by only

;J I‘lIE 7 percent, employment in Lancaster manufacturing rocketed to

fiflIT;f, a point 17 percent above its 1920 average. The depression

;;‘1w§.- reversed this trend temporarily, and industrial employment

ff‘Iij dropped in 1932 to a point 24 percent below its 1920 average.

“II‘ 3 Thereafter it began again to climb, reaching in 1936 a point

ngI I, above its 1920 average although still markedly below its

igINVI, 1929 record. Moreover, many of its leading factories were

:%f I I _ .

iii}: .I employing in December of 1936 a larger force than ever before

{:2 ‘ 3:1 I I

;;Itf,‘ Figure 1.- INDEXES 0? MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT

I, I IN THE UNITED STATES. PENNSYLVANIA,

fiéIgipI AND LANCASTER. 1920-ac

: j a; I I

545‘ ‘1 ‘3 . 'NDEX NUMBER 0920-!00)

'55": I:‘ ’1 I 120 — .

? I I ‘

S}: “ “ ‘ LANCASTER CITY A‘-

éiii“ 1‘ ‘I I I 4

1 ‘1’: loo 4 , ___ .

ff: . . i ’I’ \

w v ’ W/'\

I \ >

. if}: 3 I ‘ \

{A x ‘. 5° ‘ \ Ill-7

33 I ‘3; L /’\ _,._..—_\ /~\ \ ll

:1? ‘ ‘I i d \ l’ /

{3.3, . I PENNSYLVANIA >\ / .

iii-:2“ , II‘ ‘ / ‘

fli- III 60

;I;I - ,

.: . I‘ 4o _—-

if .,1 3. I '920 '24 '25 '32 , '36 .

, r I 2

if "i- f- 1' IASED ON TABLE A-l WPA -NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT L-33

ea 1 i . I 1m 1904 there were 9.432 employees reported emp[loyed in Lancaster's factories;

'. I ‘ by 1929 the number had grown to 16,625 (Lancaster lancaster: Lancaster Chamber of . v

A , ., j i commerce, m1meo.] , p. a).

{SI fI

 '1
. INTRODUCTION 3
‘ in their history. By contrast, Pennsylvania manufacturing
V employment, though it recovered to its 1929 level, was still
/ 23 percent below its 1920 record; United States industrial
employment was 8 percent below its 1929 record and 1 percent
‘ below its 1920 average.. (Table A—1 and figure 1.)
The Labor Supply
Prior to 1929 the growth in the population of Lancaster city
L was in no way commensurate with the growth in the demand for
labor. In the years between 1900 and 1930, although the city's
industrial labor force alone showed an increase of almost
75 percent, its population increased by but 45 percent.2
’ The greater part of this increase was natural. In other words,
in meeting the expansion in demand for industrial labor the
city's industries relied neither on the immigration movement
‘ so basic to the development of many American industrial centers
‘ nor on the wholesale internal migration movement by which the
surplus agricultural population has more recently fed the
increasing labor needs of our cities. The city, despite
the high rate of expansion of labor demand, met its needs by
‘ methods conditioned by its nature and location.
In the first place, Lancaster, like many other American
cities, was able to extend its use of the usual secondary
‘ sources within its resident population. In the decade between
1919 and 1929, for example, women workers in its industries
increased in number by 26 percent, whereas the number of men
increased by 14 percent.3 More important is the fact that the
city has been able to tap the labor forces that constantly
improving agricultural techniques were releasing in the sur—
rounding farm area without bringing any appreciable proportion
of them into the cities as residents.

- - Lancaster County is a richly endowed agricultural region, one
of the most fertile in the country, and under the intensive
cultivation of its predominantly Germanic settlers, it has been
among the most productive. For over 50 years it led all of the
3,000 counties of the