both Houses were known to favor permanent fair employment legislation, no effective action has been taken to continue in peace what was so well begun in war. Today we have veterans of minority groups honored and decorated as heroes, returning to a civilian life in which the old patterns and practices of discrimination have returned with brutal, degrading, and divisive force. They are finding they can't eat the fruit salad on their jackets. For these veterans and for all the millions who suffer the injury of discrimination in employment inflicted anew each and every working day of their lives, this bill represents the hope that this Eightieth Congress will not short-weight the war aims and the wartime sample of freedom from discrimination in employment represented by the FEPC. The damage which discrimination in employment does to democracy as an ideal and as a way of life is great and in large measure irreparable. Discrimination in employment damages lives, both the bodies and the minds, of those discriminated against and those who discriminate. It blights or perverts that healthy ambition to improve one's standard of living which we like to say is peculiarly American. It generates insecurity, fear, resentment, division, and tension in our society. IV. THE HIGH COSTS OF DISCRIMINATION; THE PROFITS OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT In addition to this damage to the national well-being, discrimination in employment, as I have indicated, keeps in motion a vicious circle in our economy. Such discrimination depresses wages for minority groups and, because of desperate competition for jobs by members of these minority groups, discrimination in employment exerts a downward drag on all wages. This, in turn, cuts mass purchasing power and thereby constricts the market for all goods and services. The circle then begins another round as reduced markets cut production; reduced production cuts employment; reduced employment cuts wages, and, in the absence of effective standards of fair employment, tends to increase and aggravate the very discrimination in employment which set the vicious circle in motion. This is the road of depression, division, and disaster. Mr. Walter White, the executive secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, recently estimated that the share of some 14,000,000 Negroes in the national income was in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 billion dollars a year. A recent compilation by Mr. Boris Shishkin, economist for the American Federation of Labor, of figures on weekly income differentials between white and Negro veterans in 26 American cities showed that white veterans' income ranged from 30 percent above the income of Negro veterans in Birmingham, Ala., to a high of 78 percent in Jackson, Miss. I wish to offer for the record at this point a statement by the National Council for a Permanent FEPC calling attention to the shocking differentials and including the compilation prepared by Mr. Shishkin from a survey made by the Bureau of the Census and the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the National Housing Agency. attached.) (Text A considerable part of these income differentials, which may fairly be considered typical for all wage earners in the cities covered and indicative of the national pattern, is chargeable directly to discrimination in employment. Other factors are lack of educational opportunities, vocational training, and opportunities for employment experience, upgrading, and promotion. All these factors, however, largely stem from the basic evil of discrimination in employment which, back over the years, cut school attendance, vocational training, and onthe-job work experience. In short, most of the income differential between whites and Negroes is due, directly and indirectly, to discrimination in employment. If discrimination in employment against Negroes could be replaced by fair employment practices tomorrow, it would appear that a direct increase in income to Negroes would amount to at least 4 to 5 billion dollars a year, using the differential percentages already cited. If discrimination in employment against Negroes and all other minority groups were replaced by fair employment, the national income and market might be increased by 8 to 10 billion dollars. I recognize that this estimate is not susceptible of statistical proof but I believe it to be a reasonable and conservative estimate. In making it, I have, of course, made the assumption of a full production, high employment economy which is our national policy as expressed in the Employment Act of 1946 and in the platform of both major political parties. This addition to the national income and markets for goods and services would not be at the expense of other wage earners, but would benefit them by freeing them from the sweatshop competition of discriminatory wage rates based on race, religion, color, national origin, or ancestry. Industry, business, and the whole national economy would benefit. From the date this bill becomes effective and to the degree it is effective, the old vicious circle of discrimination in employment will be replaced by a new beneficent circle of fair employment. Thus far I have discussed this bill as an important domestic need. V. FAIR EMPLOYMENT HERE WILL STRENGTHEN UNITED STATES ABROAD Let us now consider S. 984 in relation to our country's foreign policy and its role and standing in international relations. Section 2 (c) reads: "This Act has also been enacted as a step toward fulfillment of the international treaty obligations imposed by the Charter of the United Nations upon the United States as a signatory thereof to promote 'universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.'" Enlarging the focus of our attention to include the 2,000,000,000 people of the world-peoples of all races, religions, colors, national origins, and ancestryit is, I think, accurate to state that the eyes of many hundreds of millions, particularly those of darker color, are fixed on this bill, along with other pending bills against discrimination, such as the antipoll tax and antilynching measures. Their eyes are on this hearing and its outcome, watching to see whether or not the fine words to which we put our hands and seal in the signing and ratification of the United Nations Charter are put to work here in the United States of America by enactment of this bill or are made an empty mockery by its defeat. The State Department policy, as I understand it, is plain. Last year, in a letter to the expiring Fair Employment Practice Committee, the then Acting Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, wrote “* * the existence of discrimina tion against minority groups in the United States is a handicap in our relations with other countries. The Department of State, therefore, has good reason to hope for the continued and increased effectiveness of public and private efforts to do away with these discriminations." On March 14 this year, speaking to the Council of Foreign Ministers in Moscow, Secretary of State George C. Marshall redefined democracy. He said: "To the American Government and citizens it (democracy) has a basic meaning. We believe that human beings have certain inalienable rights-that is, rights which may not be given or taken away. "To us a society is not a democracy ** * is not free if law-abiding citizens live in fear of being denied the right to work or deprived of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." It is, I submit, plain that enactment and effective administration of this bill are necessary not only for our domestic well-being and the practice of democracy here at home, but also as proof that we practice in Washington and throughout the Nation the high principles to which we have subscribed at San Francisco, Moscow, and other international conferences. Enactment is required to strengthen democracy within and without. We need to prove our faith by our daily works and thereby to make it a shining example that will enlist the allegiance of other peoples confronted with the choice between democracy and totalitarianism in the great show-down that now seems to be rushing upon the world. The grim anxiety with which peoples in other lands regard the fate of this bill is heightened, I hardly need state, by recent occurrences here at home, such as returning discrimination in employment, increasing tension, outbreaks of mob violence against minorities, and lynchings, followed by failure or refusal to apprehend, bring to trial, and convict the persons and groups responsible. Millions here in America will view the developments on this bill with the keenest interest. Some I think the great majority-will watch with hope drawn taut to the breaking point by waiting and repeated disappointment. Others will watch with cynicism overlying a hope that has been almost destroyed by frustration and disappointment. But, great as is the anxiety of minorities here in the United States of America and of all Americans of good will who understand the importance of this measure, t' e anxiety of other peoples may be greater because their danger and their need are greater. Imperfect though our practice of democracy is, it is a fact that, because of our material strength and our promises to defend freedom and democracy, our Nation is regarded, more generally than ever before, as man's last best hope on earth. In the enactment of this bill and such companion measures as the antilynching and anti-poll-tax bills, the Congress has the opportunity and, if we may say so, the responsibility for strengthening that hope. Thereby freedom and democracy will be made stronger here and throughout the world. VI. S. 984 IS NECESSARY, FAIR, AND WORKABLE The bill before you is necessary, is fair, is workable. It is not an attempt to legislate against prejudice in the mind of man; it is a method for eliminating the act of discrimination in employment. It is, in our judgment, carefully drafted to take advantage of experience gained in the operation of the wartime FEPC, of the criticism made of earlier fair employment bills, and of the high degree of success in the administration of State antidiscrimination laws in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York where a year's experience is now available. In our view S. 984 is a fresh approach to the problem of insuring fair employment; a difference in degree and the introduction of new methods amount to a difference in kind. Of course, provisions for enforcement have been kept in the new bill. The procedures have been changed in conformity with the Administrative Procedures Act; unlike those proposed in earlier bills, they do not correspond to procedures under the National Labor Relations Act. More important, as a matter of practical administration, emphasis has been put upon obtaining compliance by information, education, conciliation, and the assembly of local communty good will in advisory councils. Perhaps the most important single new provision calls for the posting in work places of facts about the law and the rights and duties of employers and labor organizations thereunder. Experience in the administration of other laws such as workmen's compensation, unemployment compensation, and the Fair Labor Standards Act shows that common knowledge of the law is the first step in obtaining general compliance. While endorsing these new features, we hold that, if they are to have meaning and effectiveness, they must be backed up by provisions for enforcement in extreme and stubborn instances of violation. That is why the New York law, which is known for its use of voluntary methods, contains provision for enforcement. Were provision for enforcement to be removed from this bill, the remainder would be a fraud. It would be immediately recognized as such by all friends of fair employment. We have confidence that this committee and the Congress will see through and disregard all proposals to change this bill to a wholly educational measure. VII. S. 984 AIMED AT THE ACT OF DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT S. 984 is not concerned with race or religious or nationality prejudice. It deals with only one thing, and that is the practice of discrimination on the grounds of color, religion, national origin, or ancestry, which deprives a worker of a job, or rather, his right to live, because on the job the worker receives wages, and with wages he buys food, clothing, and shelter, the basis of his life. Therefore, whoever seeks to prevent a worker from securing a job is seeking to deny him the right to live, which is a very definite nullification of the basic principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Federal Constitution. It is a fallacy to construe race prejudice as synonymous with racial discrimination. They are two different things. Race prejudice is an emotion or feeling. Racial discrimination is an act-a practice. While we cannot by law make a white employer or worker love a Negro worker, or a Protestant worker love a Jewish worker, or a worker in Boston love an employer or worker in Atlanta, Ga., we can stop employers and workers from closing the shops and the unions at the same time. Laws can stop hoodlums from smearing synagogues and cathedrals with swastikas. Laws can stop mobs from lynching people for any reason. I do not condemn the trade-union workers who discriminate against Negro workers and other minorities. Fundamentally, black and white workers do not fight each other because they hate each other, but they hate each other because they fight each other, and they fight each other because they do not understand each other. But if they work together, they will understand each other. Now, bill S. 984 does not seek to make white workers, black workers, or Jewish or Catholic workers love each other, but to respect each other's rights to work and to live. It would outlaw employer exploitation of prejudice by outlawing discrimination in employment. It would be unlawful to play white against black, Protestant against Catholic, Anglo-Americans against Spanishspeaking Americans, and vice versa. It is well-nigh axiomatic that the instinct to live in human beings, regardless of race or color, religion, or national origin, is so strong that they will fight for the right to work in order to live. Hence, it is apparent that racial, color, and religious conflict may beset and plague our country as a result of increased tensions incident to discriminations in employment relations, unless the Congress shows the social vision and wisdom to enact S. 984. For this reason, the enactment of this bill will play an effective and constructive role in achieving social peace in our various communities in the postwar era. Without fair employment to supplement and complement full employment, the poison of Hitler's fascism may get into the blood stream of our country and run to the heart of our Nation. In very truth, there cannot be full employment unless there is fair employment. This is true not only with respect to numbers but also in relation to the utilization of the skills of the minorities and it is apparent that there cannot be fair employment without a fair employment law with enforcement powers. For the clarification of our own thinking, and, we hope, for the convenience of the committee and other Members of the Congress and the public, we have prepared a comparison of S. 984 with S. 101 introduced in the Seventy-ninth Congress and with the New York State law against discrimination. VIII. THE BROTHERHOOD OF SLEEPING CAR PORTERS, A. F. OF L., SUPPORTS S. 984 Before presenting this comparison for the record, I should like to add a few words as president of the International Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, A. F. of L. Our union has been one of the principal backers of the fair employment idea and of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC. In the past 20 years, we have achieved considerable success in promoting fair employment practices for our members. We have done so by union organization and exercise of the right of free collective bargaining with employers. We are proud that the American Federation of Labor, with whose 8,000,000 members we are affiliated through an international charter, has endorsed the principle of fair employment and the policies and methods proposed in this bill. We have insisted, and shall continue to insist, that members of our organization, all Negroes, and all members of all minority groups shall have assured to them, as a civil right, the opportunity of employment and advancement on ability and merit without discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, or ancestry. We consider this consecration to the cause of fair employment as important as any or all of our union objectives. In the long roll of history, it may be that the International Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters will be remembered more for its advocacy of the fair employment idea than for the sum of union benefits brought to its members. IX. FAIR EMPLOYMENT NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE LIBERATION OF MAN My own conviction is that the establishment of fair employment as the pattern and practice in American industry and business will be the greatest liberating force since the abolition of chattel slavery. With its establishment, the achievement of genuine economic democracy becomes a possibility. And, at this moment in the history of mankind's efforts to find and keep freedom, the actual practice of fair employment here will give the United States of America reinforced moral leadership of the world. Our people have had a vision of freedom for 300 years. They have enjoyed some freedom. During the war, under the FEPC, they had a taste of a greater degree of freedom, of more nearly equal opportunity. They will never let that dream of freedom go. They will hope for it, pray for it, work for it, and vote for it. Our plea today is that this committee and this Congress will let that dream come true so that we and all people in this troubled Nation and this desperate world can pass over into that promised land of abundance fairly shared among freemen, secure in employment and opportunity and at peace with one another. (Whereupon, at 5: 40 p. m., Wednesday, June 11, 1947, the subcommittee adjourned, subject to reconvening at 9:30 a. m., Thursday, June 12, 1947.) ANTIDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT THURSDAY, JUNE 12, 1947 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 9:30 a. m., in the committee room, Capitol Building, Senator Forrest C. Donnell presiding. Present: Senators Donnell (presiding), Smith, Ives, and Ellender. Senator DONNELL. The committee will be in order. Mrs. Elizabeth J. Johnson, please. Is Mrs. Johnson here? Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. Senator DONNELL. Step forward, Mrs. Johnson. Mrs. JOHNSON. Elizabeth J. Johnson, 4924 J Street NE. Senator DONNELL. And you are appearing, as I understand it, in order to present the statement of Rev. William H. Jernagin, director, Washington bureau, National Fraternal Council of Negro Churches in America? Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes. Senator DONNELL. Proceed, Mrs. Johnson. STATEMENT OF MRS. ELIZABETH J. JOHNSON, PRESENTING THE STATEMENT OF REV. WILLIAM H. JERNAGIN, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON BUREAU, NATIONAL FRATERNAL COUNCIL OF NEGRO CHURCHES IN AMERICA Mrs. JOHNSON. On behalf of the Reverend W. H. Jernagin, director of the Washington bureau of the National Fraternal Council of Negro Churches in America, I wish to present the following statement: As director of the Washington bureau of the National Fraternal Council of Negro Churches in America, representing 11 denominations and 7,000,000 members, I wish to offer the following statement in support of the new Federal bill against discrimination in employment, S. 984. This is a time when Americans are looking to the Federal Government to insure them of the protection of their basic rights and privileges, especially as regards the right to work and earn a livelihood. A progressive America, leading the world in fostering international harmony and good will, must no longer tolerate discrimination toward any of its citizens on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin. We of the National Fraternal Council of Negro Churches stand firmly in this belief and therefore vigorously support legislation designed to give this protection. 65936-47--10 |