it. 
nat 
ral 
10t 
on, 
ed 
"ess. 
12Y 
ed 
tes 
ng 
ine 
nd 
ve 
ors 
do 
on 
re 
st. 
he 
m. 
i- 
ne 
ls, 
19 
AIL 
Ag 
1e 
IN) 
qa 
b= 
re 
er 
3% 
AT 
in 
UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 83 
Assuming, for instance, that here is a town where industry is 
unionized—— 
Mr. DovucLas (interposing). And with an agreement? 
Mr. MicuENER. Let me finish my question. Where the town is 
unionized, industry is unionized, and here is another section of the 
country engaged in the same industry, the same line of business, where 
they are not unionized; now, assuming that there is a lack of employ- 
ment in the unionized town and there is a surplus of employment in 
the section of the country which is not unionized, would this permit 
the taking of those nonunion men from that section of the country and 
setting them down in the union section and requiring the people to 
use them? 
Mr. Doveras. Not requiring to use them, but the employment serv- 
ice could recommend these men to the employers, then whether the 
employer would hire the men or not would depend upon his agreement 
with the union. If he had an agreement with the union providing for 
the union shop, he would not hire them; if he had no such agreement 
with the union, then he could hire them. In brief, the employment 
service merely effectively recruits labor and does not of itself have 
anything to do with the union shop or the anti-union shop. That is 
a matter for employers and workers to agree upon or to disagree upon. 
Now, gentlemen, I am afraid I have taken up more of your time than 
I should, and unless you have questions I shall stop. 
Senator Wagner. Thank you very much. The last witness that 
I will call is Dr. John B. Andrews, who is the Director of the American 
Association for Labor Legislation, and who has made a particular 
study of this subiect for some years. 
STATEMENT OF JOHN B. ANDREWS, DIRECTOR OF THE AMERICAN 
ASSOCIATION FOR LABOR ILEGISIATION 
Mr. Axprews. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it 
has been three years since I last appeared before your committee. 
That was in connection with the longshoremen’s compensation legis- 
lation, which is now working so smoothly that I am encouraged to 
come back. This afternoon in a very few minutes, because I am 
anxious that the opposition shall have all the time that they need to 
present their opposition case, I wish very briefly to recall to you what 
our problem is here. 
We are faced with a very serious condition. I am not so much 
interested in theories as I am in the fact that in this country we have 
millions of wage earners unemployed. You do not know, I do not 
know, perhaps within a million how many are unemployed. That in 
itself is sufficient surely to suggest—— 
Mr. MonTaGUE . (interposing). What would you give as your 
approximation of the number? 
Mr. AnpreEws. I have refused to try to estimate, because I know 
that no person in this country can know probably within a million 
how many people are unemployed. What we need is the program of 
legislation for which we have been working now for 15 years in this 
country and which every private conference and every public com- 
mission that goes into the subject of unemployment tells the public 
we, of course, should adopt as the minimum legislative program. If 
we adopt these three bills, if we adopt the plan of getting better