xt7mcv4bs03h https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7mcv4bs03h/data/mets.xml Pennsylvania Palmer, Gladys L. (Gladys Louise) Edelman, Kate Leach, M. Eileen Klopfer, Helen Wharton School. Industrial Research Department United States. Works Progress Administration. 1938 xiv, 100 p.: ill.; 26 cm. UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program libraries. Call Number Y 3.W 89/2:53/P-4 books  English Philadelphia, Pa.: Works Progress Administration, National Research Project in cooperation with Industrial Research Department, University of Pennsylvania This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Pennsylvania Works Progress Administration Publications Weavers -- Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia Unemployed -- Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia Philadelphia (Pa.) -- Economic conditions Ten Years of Work Experience of Philadelphia Machinists text Ten Years of Work Experience of Philadelphia Machinists 1938 1938 2019 true xt7mcv4bs03h section xt7mcv4bs03h , IllllIlllllllIlllHIllIlllllllI2
LI L 3 MEEEELEEL: . .
,1? ;‘ } TEN YEARS OF WORK EXPERIENCE OF
' GOVERNMENT PUBLIC/mom
' ’ ' ‘ ' ~ DEPT, f .
_ ; A _ ' OCT15197I ' ‘

I UNIVERSITY 0'-

f, * , , ,LIBRAélEgENTUCKY
‘3 l‘ .7 ‘ ' '
_ . Ham - . _ .

‘ _- I . , WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION '
-- . NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT AND , .
I ., INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DEPARTMENT ' ‘
A r, .‘ UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA f

 iii1
I
1
I
'3
" THE WPA NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT »
0N REEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND RECENT CHANGES '33
IN INDUSTRIAL TECHNIQUES /
Under the authority granted by the President in the Execu-
tive Order which created the Works Progress Administration, 3 I
Administrator Harry L. Hopkins authorized the establishment '
. or a research program for the purpose or collecting and ana- ,
lyzing data bearing onproblems or employment, unemployment, ,
and relief. Accordingly, the National Research Program was V
established in October 1955 under the supervision of Corrington 3
Gill, Assistant Administrator of the WPA, who appointed the 3
directors of the individual studies or projects. 3
The Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes 1 3
. in Industrial Techniques was organized in December 1935 to ‘ ’5
inquire, with the cooperation of industry, labor, and govern- f
. ' mental andprivate agencies, into the extent oi’recent changes 3 :
' in industrial techniques and to evaluate the effects or these '1 5
changes on the volume or employment and unemployment. David , :‘
Weintraub and Irving Kaplan, members of the research staff I 3
or the Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance, were ap-
pointed, respectively, Director andAssociate Director or the -
‘ Project. Thertask set for them was toassemole and organize
the existing data which bear on the problem andto augment
these data by field surveys and analyses.
To this end, many governmental agencies 'which'are the col- 3
lectors and repositories of pertinent information were in- ;‘
vited to cooperate. The cooperating agencies of the United 1
States-Government. include the Department of Agriculture, the _
Bureau of Mines of the Department ‘0! the Interior, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics at the Department orLabcr, the Railroad
1 Retirement Board, the Social Security Board, the Bureau of . ' "
' Internal Revenue of the Department of the Treasury, the De- . ‘
I partment of Commerce, the Federal Trade Commission, and the 1 1
Tariff Commission. j
=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, 3
. . the National Bureau or Economic Research, Inc., the Einploy-
' ment Stabilization Research Institute of the University or . ~
Minnesota, and the Agricultural Economics Departments in the .
Agricultural Experiment Stations of California, Illinois, 1
Iowa, and New York. 1 ‘ . ,.

 3
l WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
E HARRY L. HOPKINS CORRINGTON GILL
f Administrator Assistant Administrator
1
i
5
if
a i
5 NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
f on
,. g Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes
' I in Industrial Techniques
’ f DAVID WEINTRAUB IRVING KAPLAN
1 Director Associate Director
: In cooperation with
INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DEPARTMENT
‘ WHARTON SCHOOL OF FINANCE AND COMMERCE
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
: JOSEPH WILLITS ANNE BEZANSON
, Director Director
A
5 Philadelphia Labor Market Studies
} Gladys L. Palmer, Economist in Charge
i
j

 5
I
i
i}
, ., i
. , , p > , f .- 5 may. 1; , . . , , ‘ , J
' . , ' _ , ,': . p; .55., 112.1,“ - ' , , p , i
. -::f,! «g, fl, .eggéf. veg-nip, ,y.%,g,g/3 >25? 5%,, . _
. , v”. ‘.,.',-"“':';.r.n=:‘.;*’,.< ‘»’,'-.' .' “1.» 1’, _. , , "21¢“. 25,; .1, (Jaw-2,5? » .3 up: 'ng '.5
, -' _ ,~ yrrrcgfl’ffifif’”§ 4,; ’“ggtfita’ .
, ,, .‘W’fix’y’isf We? - ‘,t',<'«;!:v ’7 [Meagcs‘anz w/Z ' , -
’ ,v $4.4 W’f’lwgfaxaeg .59 . ‘,
' We ’51.: , ‘wL. 5x5 rt.“»”( ”8*, 5- . » ,
, , a; -- ._ ‘ ,5 :4. . :53 5 i’ w’vfi,7'“§?3€;{1’v”».,35%i2‘$‘<‘«€ ': ~§f§la -: l
' , ,. rm" atria. tie/”e”? an... 3
.- :flz ,, "WW 16,1, r1- ,3 t.i’~',;_’,',_,.’1’z,’,.¢l‘ 1f; 21;, mfffim .32. .5" ,,-,_ r" .539va :
_ ’ W .. tav‘v‘w’zfdéaefim 5
.. , ‘ 7"” gay/3?”? 45"” Qfiigé,‘ :fé- a .
' ' v a :w’. ear/tram. , i .‘i- 5!.”i.%'=-'<5i’22<»;x a in: . . 3:; ”I."
_ , ” a a i"- “»e}*‘%‘- as} g I
; '7 £17,», - ”gee/swag w». . fiewivx I ‘ diminuwffi «:
’ ,, 3%???th .I‘M’. ”W37,“ l
, 5%ng ’5’» )9? kim'” > 4". l
4. .255: J. ' _ . .1 . 2r t:?4,»...§;rc5:-.¢>'” I:
" , _ , “2‘15?“ ' -- ’ "w,”f ‘,“ », " " { 7,3437%? 1' $ ’ " “fi’n‘k‘r gr: ”.0; .
’.':,‘,’%"/;‘J.§;’;E'(',¢(’_ m _, . ‘ 2:4: ”:3 ' ',, ~!',~i".’. ‘ «hi-int? ’ 4A.“ 7."=*,,‘\<"-*.~rm.,y his :
. dgpp? 235$ . , , 5.9 pa: “(”3” i
% M2... 1». ,v , ,t ; .2 '~::. - > , 2 ,. v :
”shawl“- W, ,5, , ,, . . . t... .,. . » . _.
‘ J5; '“5,"5K;3e, - ~ ,- «its, 1' . '93. , .., :
t g... , - .. ' , .. was ,, . s
’ ‘ ”"2V~'3‘~‘€‘€’7§;:itn hwy/M . ' '2- ' ' " 32, '1'” 3 _ , , ‘
1‘4"... ,tr ., Aim. - WE‘ .- -_ v is" ,, :
, . z... ; , , . ' - ' ‘ , ;,-- .g- ,v», i
'. 'i" , 2': . 5 1.35.5,- . . m1 * " 3.93.5; ' v“? ' g
, ‘ ; an. ,, '- ‘3» i ’ ,p‘ . j g
'- ', . , 2 3.193,»... . ,,_g.-;.,;j__;;:.« .. ,, ‘. - g av, 43““ ‘
"n‘ ~.*7 “ > -, O ,1 w,“ ‘ WW :
it} 1 ~ . ,3 3:11,“ ,”*w‘ 5; 57:. 7: ,, _ ; / y .3. ,. ’ 2"~ l
. 33‘ vs. ,Mn‘; 7‘ - I": t,» : .3 , '. 3
4,4. 4 grid, y-«Wga. , 1 . '5': . ;. . ”a. “a - , . _ '
WPA-National Research Project (Kine)
!
MACHINIST FthSHlNG AXLE 0F LARGE DRIVING WHEEL E
FOR NEW TYPE OF LOCOMOTI VE
l
I i
1
J .
I
l
3
'2, . ‘

 I7 TEN YEARS OF WORK EXPERIENCE 0F
; PHILADELPHIA MACHINISTS
7 by
Helen Herrmann
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION, NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
In cooperation with
INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Report No. P—s
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
September 1938

 {:L/ a
= i
I
. PHILADELPHIA LABOR MARKET STUDIES *
‘ . Members of Staff Who Worked on This Study
GLADYS L. PALMER, Research Associate, Indus—
trial ResearchDepartment, University of _
Pennsylvania; Consultant, National Re-
searchProject,directing studiesof this
3 section
I JANET H. LEWIS, Statistician
J HELEN L. KLOPFER, Associate Economist
I MURRAY P. PFEFFERMAN, Associate Statistician
MARGARET W. BELL, Assistant Statistician
VIRGINIA F. SHRYOCK, Chief Statistical Clerk
HELEN HERRMANN, Research Economist in charge
of field work for Schedule #20
i ,
.' i

 ' x
i
3' WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
. WALKER-JOHNSON BUILDING
., 1734 NEW YORK AVENUE NW.
I WASHINGTON, D. C.
E HARRY L. HOPKINS
§ ApMINISTRATOR
September 1L4:J 1938
Hon. Harry L. Hopkins
Works Progress Administrator
Sir:

There is transmitted herewith a report on i0 years
of work experience of machinistsJ millwrightsJ and tool
makers who were either working or seeking work in Phila—

. delphia in May 1936. The report analyzes in detail
their employment andunemployment histories between 1925
. and 1936.

As the production of Philadelphia's industries
mounted after i933J machinists who had been out of work
were reemployedin substantial numbers. By i935 and 1936
there were frequent reports of a labor shortage in the

' occupation. Yet in May 1936 one out of every eight ma-
chinists was found to be unemployedJ and another was
working at some other occupation) most often at less
skilled work. More than half of the unemployed had
been without a job for at least a year. Since there
were some unemployed among those customarily attached

L to each of the industries employing machinists” the labor
’ shortageJ if it existedJ must have been restricted to
highly specialized jobs.

The age of machinists was significantly related to

‘ their employment status andto their chances for reemploy-
ment. Compared with other industrial workers) the ma—

. chinists were relatively old {45 years of age) and had had

' long years (22%) of experience at their trade. Half of
them reported no unemployment lasting 1 month or more
in the iO-year period 1926—35. This half was somewhat .

V older than the average. On the other hand, those who

s were unemployed in May i936 were also older than the

« average. Thus, although advanced years may be no bar

 17.1. 1-
1~ to retaining a job as machinist; once an older man be— ‘3
comes unemployed; he has less chance than a younger
11 worker of being hired to fill the next job opening. 1

The reportJ Ten Years of Work Experience of Phila—
‘ delphia Machinists, was prepared by Helen Herrmann under '
the supervision of Gladys L. Palmer. This is one of -;
1 the series of reports on the “Philadelphia Labor Market
1 Studies" conducted jointly by the National Research
1 Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes g
in Industrial Techniques and the Industrial Research 1
Department of the University of Pennsylvania. 1
Respectfully yoursJ
f 7 fl
Corrington Gill
Assistant Administrator
1
1
11
11
11 .
1
1
1 ‘
1 -

 i \,
CONTENTS
’ Section Page
PREFACE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
. I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Purpose of study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Place of machinists in Philadelphia's industries 2
» Method of conducting the study . . . . . . . . . 6
Method of analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
‘ II. OCCUPATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEN STUDIED. . 12
Age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Nativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Schooling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Entrance into the labor market . . . . . . . . . 14
The first job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Apprenticeship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Industrial group of customary attachment . . . . 20
Longest job and usual occupation . . . . . . . . 22
Employment status in May 1936. . . . . . . . . . 25
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
III. UNEMPLOYMENT, 1926-35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Employment experience of industrial groups . . . 29
Incidence of unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Characteristics of the men who experienced
unemployment between 1926 and 1935. . . . . 34
Part-time employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Number and length of unemployment periods. . . . 39
Characteristics of the men who were unemployed
in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Reemployment by May 1937 of workers unemployed
in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Characteristics of workers who had no unemploy—
ment between 1926 and 1935. . . . . . . . . 46
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
IV. WORK EXPERIENCE, 1926—35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Division of time between work at the usual
occupation and at other occupations . . . . 51
Division of time between work in the usual
industry and in other industries. . . . . . 56
Job separations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 /
Shifts of employers, occupations, and industries 60r/
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
vii

 IIX : ' '
/
' /:
‘ viii CONTENTS I
Appendix Page I
A.TABLES...................... '75
B. SCHEDULE AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED . . . . . . 125 I
Schedule....................128 ;
' Definitions of terms used. . . . . . . . . . . . 127 I
. 2
1
CHARTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure i
Machinist finishing axle of large driving
wheel for new type of locomotive . . . . . . Prmnisoiece .
g
. 1. Machinist milling down part of a drive shaft i
for a locomotive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
‘ 2. Age distribution of machinists and of all employable 3
men in Philadelphia, May 1988. . . . . . . . . . . 12 I
3. Turret-lathe operator setting machine. . . . . . . . 16 L
4. Industrial group of usual employment and of present I
or last job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 I
i
. 5. Employment status, January 1926-December 1935, by E
2 usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 I
‘ 6. Percentage distribution of man—months of specified i
‘ types of employment experience, 1926—35, by I
. usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 E
L 7. Employment history of individual machinists in four L
industrial groups who reported unemployment, I
, January 1926—December 1935 . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
. 8. Employment history of individual machinists
, unemployed in May 1986, January 1926—December 1935 36 E
i
9. Average number of months of specified types of I
employment experience, 1926—35, by age in May 1936 39 I
10. Socioeconomic character of employment at occupations I
other than the usual, 1926—35, by age in May 1936 54 E
11. Percentage distribution of machinists by type and i
frequency of separations, 1926—35. . . . . . . . . 61 i
12. Tool builder planing for a taper shoe on steam I
hammer ram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 i
i
TEXT TABLES
\
Table . 1
1. Occupational group of first job of machinists. . . . 15 i
i
2. Number of years in the labor market. . . . . . . . . 24 I
3. Frequency and duration of unemployment experience E
for workers reporting unemployment, 1926-85, by
industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

 1 9V
\
\
I .
1 CONTENTS 1X
1 .
, TEXT TABLES-Continued
1 Table Page
1 4. Employment status in May 1937 of machinists
1 unemployed in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
1 5. Occupational distribution of workers who reported no
1 unemployment in the lO~year period 1926-35 . . . . 48
1 6. Number of periods of work at occupations other than
1 the usual, 1926—35, by employment status preceding
1 these periods and by socioeconomic character of
1 the occupations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
1 7. Number of job separations, 1926—35, by employment
1 status in May 1936, age, and type of shift . . . . 62
1 8. Number of job separations, 1928-35, by usual
1 industrial group and type of shift . . . . . . . . 63
,1. APPENDIX TABLES
1 Table
1 A-l. Wage earners in the metal industries of the
1 Philadelphia industrial area, 1929. . . . . . . . 76
i
1 A-2. Employment status in May 1936 by age. . . . . . . . 76
1 A—3. Nativity by age . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
1 A—4. Number of years of continuous residence in 1
Philadelphia, by nativity and employment status
1 in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
1 A—5. School grade completed by age and employment
1 status in May 1936. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
1 A—6. Age of beginning work by age and employment status
f inMay1936................... r79
1 A—V. Year of entering the labor market by age and
1 employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . 80
1 A-B. Apprenticeship by age and employment status in
1 May1936..................... 81
1 A—Q. Length of apprenticeship by number of months
1 unemployed, 1926-85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
1 A-lO. Apprenticeship by usual industrial group. . . . . . 82
1
1 A—ll. Usual industry of workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
' A-12. Usual industrial group by age and employment
1 status in May 1936. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
1 A—13. Industrial group of present or last job by age and
1 employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . 85
1 ’ A—14. Length of service on longest job by age and
1 employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . 86

 x7 1‘ [a :
31/ “j
1// , _
‘1
,1 x CONTENTS
1
1
1 APPENDIX TABLES-Continued
u
11
1 Table Page
A—15. Occupation cflongest job by the usual occupation. . 87
A-16. Number of years employed at usual occupation by age .
‘ and employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . 88
A—17. Number of years employed at usual occupation by
usual industrial group and age. . . . . . . . . . 89
A-18. Occupation of last job by usual occupation, for
machinists employed in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . 9O
A—l9. Employment status by months, 1926—35, for 284 ‘
machinists whose usual industrial group was
the manufacture of machinery, machine tools,
. and electrical goods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
1 A-20. Employment status by months, 1926-35, for 158
machinists whose usual industrial group was the
manufacture of transportation equipment . . . . . 95
‘ A-21. Employment status by months, 1926—35, for 94
machinists whose usual industrial group was
1 the manufacture of metal products, including
“ professional instruments. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
1 1 A—22. Employment status by months, 1926—35, for 145
y machinists whose usual industrial group was >
; government agencies and public utilities and
M miscellaneous manufacturing and other industries 97
1
f A—23. Number of months unemployed, 1926-35, by usual
M industrial group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
11‘
W A-24. Total man—months of employment experience, 1926—35,
p by usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
f A—25. Total number of months unemployed, 1926-35, by age
1 and employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . 99
1
, A-26. Unemployment as a percentage of time in lahor
‘ market, 1926—35, by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
A—27. Number ofmonths employed part time, 1926—35, by age 101
A—28. Year of loss of last job at usual occupation by
employment status in May 1936 . . . . . . . . . . 102
A—29. Average number of months of specified types of
employment experience, 1926—35, by age. . . . . . 102
A—30. Average length of unemployment periods, 1926-30 and
1981-35, by age and employment status in May 1936 108
A-Sl. Average length of unemployment periods, 1926—30 and
1931—85, by usual industrial group. . . . . . . . 104
A-32. Length of longest period of unemployment, 1926—35,
by age and year of beginning longest period of
unemployment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
11“. L

 ' fj— \\
. CONTENTS xi
APPENDIX TABLES-Continued
Table Page
A—33. Length of longest period of unemployment, 1926-35,
by number of periods of unemployment. . . . . . . 105
' A—34. Length of longest period of unemployment, 1926-35,
by employment status in May 1936 and year of
beginning longest period of unemployment. . . . . 106
A—35. Number of months since loss of last job fbr
machinists unemployed in May 1936, by age . . . . 107
A—36. Length of service on longest job for machinists who
, reported no unemployment in the 10—year period
1926-35, by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
A—SV. Number of months since less of last Job for
machinists unemployed in May 1936, by usual
industrial group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
A-SB. Usual industrial group for machinists who reported
no unemployment in the 10-year period 1926-35,
by age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
, A-SQ. Number of months employed at occupations other than
the usual, 1926-30 and 1931—35, by age. . . . . . 109
A—40. Frequency of employer separations fromjobs at usual
p v and other occupations, 1926-85, by age. . . . . . 110
A-41. Number of months employed at usual occupation,
1926—30 and 1981—35, by age . . . . . . . . . . . 111
A—42. Average length of service on each job at usual
occupation for all machinists and for those who
reported no unemployment in the 10—year period
’ 1926—35, by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
A—43. Number of months employed at usual occupation, by
age, 1926-30 and 1931-35, for machinists who
reported no unemployment in the 10—year period
1926—35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
A—44. Number of months employed at occupations other than
the usual, by age, 1926-30 and 1931-35, for
machinists who reported no unemployment in the
10—year period 1926—35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
A-45. Socioeconomic character of man-months of employment
at occupations other than the usual, 1926—35,
by age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
A—46. Socioeconomic character of man—months of employment
- at occupations other than the usual, 1926—35, by
age, for machinists who reported no unemployment
in the 10—year period 1926—35 . . . . . . . . . . 115
A—47. Frequency of job separations, 1926-30 and 1931-35,
by age and employment status in May 1936. . . . . 116

 1 7,1, :/- ' ’ '
2'2 1 :
1m2
1‘1 1
i
. xii CONTENTS 1

APPENDIX TABLES-Continued 1
Table Page 1
1
A—48. Frequency of job separations, 1926—30 and 1931—35, 1
by usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
1
A—49. Frequency of Job separations and employer,
industrial, and occupational shifts formachinists 1
who reported no unemployment inthe lO—ycar period 1
1926—85, by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
A—50. Frequency of employer shifts, 1926.30 and 1931—35. 1
by usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
A—51. Frequency of industrial shifts, 1926-30 and 1931-35,
31‘ by usual industrial group . . . . . . . . . . . , 120
11 A—52. Frequency of occupational shifts, 1926—30 and 1
W11 1931-35, by usual industrial group. . . . . . . . 121
111 A—53. Number of job separations formachinists 30—44 years
1 of age, by employment status in May 1936, usual 1
1 industrial group, and type of shift, 1926—35. . . 122 1
1 A-54. Number of job separations for machinists reporting 1
111 no unemployment in the 10-year period 1926—35, by E
”11 age and type of shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 1
1. 1.1 ‘E
11' 1! i
11 1
1 2
11 :
H 1
1‘111'217.» i

 , v
\
i
f
j PREFACE
It has commonly been assumed that the machinist. a highly
skilled workman. is in a preferred position in the labor market.
His skill is required not only in the industries which build the
1 wide range of mechanical equipment needed in factories and mines
and on railroads, highways, and farms, but also — for repairing
. and maintaining this equipment - in the industries which useit.
It hasiherefore been contended that a machinist can usually find
; a job in another industry if employment conditions in the industry
‘V in which he has been working are unfavorable. This study of the
. io—year work experience of 683Philadelphia. machinists (including
‘ millwrights and tool makers) throws some light on the machinist's
position in the labor market.
‘ The machinist's chances of employment are determined primarily
by the industry in which he is usually employed rather than by
; his occupation. For instance. it was found that those customarily
, employed in the manufacture of transportation equipment were
: unemployed in much higher proportions than those attached to other
T industries. The transportation-equipment industries, which in-
clude locomotive and streetcar building, railroad equipment and
repair shops. shipbuilding. and automobile and parts manufacture.
‘ were especially depressed after 1929 and in May 1936 had not
i recovered so much as had most other industries. Twelve percent
of all machinists were unemployed in May 1936, but 20 percent
\ of those attached to transportation-equipment manufacture were
unemployed. More than half of these had been without a job for
a year or more, and a fifth had been out of work for 4 years.

The rate of unemployment of these machinists in comparison
with that of others suggests an important degree of immobility
of machinists between industries in spite of the commonly sup—

. posed high rate of transferability of their skill. As compared,
for instance, with the hand cigar maker, whose skills are useful

: in making only one type of product. the machinist has similar
work in a wide variety of. industries. Special experience is
required for certain types of work. however. and the skill of
the machinist is not entirely transferable.

Within given industries. the machinist's security of employment
depends considerably on whether he is a production man ora main—
tenance man. It was found that machinists customarily employed

; xiii
i

 " “FMN” No «x .3. in...“ W‘-_,,.__r,,__m,_3 3 _,
EFF“ ' . :
€353 F
4 F xiv PREFACE F
EFF in the production of machinery and equipment of all sorts were
53 F unemployed in greater proportion in May 1936 than those who usu-
['54 1F ally do maintenance work in other manufacturing industries or
F FF for government agencies or public utilities. Among machinists »
F5 who reported having no unemployment of 1 month or more in dura— '
tion within the 10—year period 1926—35, there were relatively ‘
n: F more maintenance than production workers. Only a comparatively F

F? F small proportion of machinists doing maintenance work for govern—
E: F ment agencies and for public utilities experienced unemployment.
{:3 F but among those who did a high proportion were unemployed for
I; long periods.
5;: i In general, machinists as a group had less unemployment during
if”: the 10—year period 1926—35 than other groups of Philadelphia
(FEE; workers studied. Also, in May 1936, 12 percent of the machinists
{wig included in the sample were unemployed compared with 31 percent
mg? of all employable men in Philadelphia. In View of the fact that
Q23 F reports ofa shortage of machinists were widely current in 1936.
3:3 ' however, their rate of unemployment may be considered high.
“$2st High standards of selection. particularly with respect to age,
of and the limits of transferability of the machinist's skill from
fig one industry to another were the primary deteminants of the
:3": employment status of individual machinists in 1936. As Lhe demand
-‘* for experienced machinists became more pressing, many of those
1; unemployed in May 1936 were found upon a checkup to have been ‘
{:3 reabsorbed. Also. the Philadelphia Survey of Employment and
:1; Unemployment found a much lower rateof unemployment among machin—
i”: ists in May 1937 than in May 1936. 7
F“; The materials for this study were obtained by interviewing F
F“, machinists in their homes. We are deeply appreciative of the
*‘ cooperation of the men whose work histories the report analyzes.
: j The assistance of local trade—association and plant executives
, F and local trade—union officials who were consulted from time to
“a time is also gratefully acmowledged.
i5!” DAVID WEINTRAUB
F1322 I IRVING KAPLAN
is?“ PHILADELPHIA
ifii'iff‘fifi
. n.“

 ' 7‘
, SECTION I
3 INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF STUDY
‘ The group of occupations including machinists, tool makers,
and millwrights is relatively standardized. Although there are
gradations of skill within it, training requirements for each
occupation are definite and usually have as a minimum a 4—year
apprenticeshipasnwchinist. The groupisinmortantamongskilled
trades because of the number ofworkers involved. In the Phila-
delphia labor market thegroup is particularly important. Ofthe
10 largest cities in the United States in 1930, onlyDetroit and
Cleveland reported alarger proportion ofskilled workers classi-
fied as machinists, tool makers, and millwrights.1
With increasingbusinessactivity during 1935t01937, a short—
age of workers in this group ofskilled occupations had been an—
nounced in many quarters. It is not the function of this study
to determine whether such a shortage existed. The purpose is
to examine theemployment experience ofthe available laborsupply
in Philadelphia at a time when a shortage was claimed for this
and other areas.2 This examination requires an analysis of the
relationship of age and other employment qualifications to the
extent of unemployment experienced by individual workers, and
the character of the industrial. and occupational shifts they
madeover'a period of years. Since machinists, tool makers, and
millwrights are employed in many industries and their skill is
. considered to be transferable in high degree, the character of -
their work experience in relation to the volume of unemployment
in the major industries in which they work becomes important.
This is, therefore, a study’ of the labor market of an allied
1Figures for machinists, millwrights, and tool makers are obtained from
Fifteenth Census of the limited States: 1930, "Population" (U. 3. Dept.
Com., Bur. Census, 1935), Vol. IV, table 4, p. 1385. Figures for total skilled
workers by cities are obtained from a socioeconomic grouping of occupations
computed from the United States Census and supplied by the National Resources
Committee. In 1930 the census notes 20,452 machinists, millwrights, and tool
makers in Philadelphia. For purposes of comparison, it is well to remember
that in 1920. 30,465 workers were reported in these occupations [Fourteenth
Census of the United States: 1920, "Population: 1920" (U- _S- Debt. Com.,
Bur. Census, 1923), Vol. IV, p. 1195] and in 1910. 19,771l1’htrteenthCensu3
of the United States: 1910, "Population" (U. 8. Dept. Com., Bur. Census.
1914), Vol. IV, p. 184].
2National Industrial Conference Board, Wanted: Skilled Labor (New York:
NICE, Study No. 216. June 1935).
1

 1,4. , -_V_.,_a¥_w_lwz;__ ...__Amm— ~~~r _
' 117 1‘
11.1 '
1 r, '
11.1' / 1
11:1 :_
‘11 2 MACHINISTS :
151 1
111 1
1511,, . . . . . . .
11;? group of skilled occupations which cross industry lines 1na d1- g
11 versified metropolitan area in a period of alleged labor shortage. :
,11 1
1 1
.11
1 PLACE OF MACHINISTS IN PHILADELPHIA'S INDUSTRIES 1
r 1
1 Machinists, tool makers, and millwrights3 find their chief 1
1 employment in the metal-worklng 1ndustr1es. The importance of a
1 1 these industries in the Philadelphia industrial area and in the 1
1 1 city itself can be judged from the detailed list of industries
1 1 and the average number of wage earners in each in 1929, as pre-
5 1 sented in table A-l.4 The products of the metal industries vary
1 ‘1
from heavy locomotives and turbines to hooks and eyes and pen
points.
Work in the selected occupations, however, is not confined to
industries producing metal goods. Wherever machinery is found,
there must be people to keep it in order. Philadelphia isa city
of diversified industries, many of them using delicate and ex-—
pensive machinery. Consequently, many machinists and millwrights
‘ 1 are employed on maintenance work, not only in the city's factories 1
11” but also in nonmanufacturing establishments. Men who do main— 1
tenance work, in the opinion of one official of the Machinists'
1’ Union, are among the most highly skilled and all—round men in
1 1 the trade. They must beprepared to work on a variety of machines
‘M’v . . . .
1‘1 and to use their ingenuity at any t1me.
1‘ 1 During the period of the World War the metal industries of
1 1 . - . ‘
11 1 Philadelphia underwent great expansmn. New plants were estab-
11 lished and ex1st1ng ones were enlarged. In still other cases
11 3 3"The machinist's work has to do in the main with giving a special shape, 1
. 1 size, or finish to metal machine parts. and with assembling, testing, erect-
1 ing, and repairing machinery. It involves a wide range of operations, most
1 of which are performed with machine tools, that is. machines of various
' types fitted with tools made of special steels hardened sufficiently to Cut
1 metals. The shapes and sizes of these cutting tools vary according to the
, nature of the work to be performed.
1 1 "Tool and die making. which are subdivisions of the trade, call for a high
1 degree of skill and an extensive practical knowledge of the working properties
of iron and steel. The men who do this work must have a general knowledge
of the machinist's trade, but in addition theyrequire a considerable'amount
of special knowledge and skill relating to the designing. shaping. and sharp-
ening of tools. The all-round machinist must know how to use all the maChine
1 tools of the trade, but usually he does not possess the special training
1 and experience required in tool making." Quoted from R. R. Lutz, The Metal
1 Trades (Cleveland, Ohio: The Survey Committ