Mr. MULTER. Mr. Springer?

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Commissioner, what percent of the working force in the District of Columbia are not now covered by such a wage? Mr. DUNCAN. I will ask Miss Allgood if she will answer that for you, sir. It appears we do not have that percentage but we may be able to give something relating to it.

Miss ALLGOOD. Our estimate of workers in private employment is 286 in private employment throughout the Government on that type of thing, and covered now under the minimum wage law are 86,000 in private industry.

The figures we do not have are the that I believe is as near as we can answer it, sir. We can't tell you how many are covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act because we have never been able to get that information. We can tell you what is covered by the Commissioners' law.

Mr. SPRINGER. There is a Commissioners' report which went to the Honorable John McMillan, chairman of the committee, on November 7, 1963, in which they said:

The bill would increase current minimum wage coverage for persons employed in the District from about 85,000 women and minors to about 286,000 men, women, and minors.

In other words, you would raise wages for that many people, is that correct?

Miss ALLGOOD. We can't answer it that way. We can answer but that many would be covered because, of course, many people who are in private industry earn a great deal more than the minimum, so you can't say it would raise the wage. We are giving you the figures in

Mr. SPRINGER. What is the employment figure for the District of Columbia, do you know?

Miss ALLGOOD. Well, that figure is the 286,000 figure there that you get. That is our estimate covered

Mr. SPRINGER. There are 286,000 men, women, and minors.

Miss ALLGOOD. On the basis of the unemployment compensation records, that is the best figure we know. We know that that is a conservative figure. Furthermore, this bill covers casual workers and domestic workers. That figure we don't have in there.

Mr. SPRINGER. You don't have casuals and domestics.

Miss ALLGOOD. Not in that 286,000 figure.

Mr. SPRINGER. But you do believe that is a pretty conservative figure of the number of private work force not working for the Government or the District of Columbia, is that true?

Miss ALLGOOD. That is true, and we base that on this fact, that the unemployment compensation figures represent the employers who report to the Unemployment Compensation Board, but there are, of course, as in many cases, many who do not report or some who do not report.

Mr. SPRINGER. Now, do you have any estimate of how many of that 286,000 do not now make $1.25?

Miss ALLGOOD. Our best reference is the BLS material that was compiled in 1952, and for that I would have to cite you to that study made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Mr. SPRINGER. What does BLS say on that?

Miss ALLGOOD. It is quite a document.

28-199 0-64--2

Mr. SPRINGER. What does it say about the number that do not make $1.25?

Miss ALLGOOD. I can quote you from some testimony given before the Senate. Mrs. Peterson of the Labor Department used these figures in her testimony before the Senate committee.

The BLS survey clearly illustrates that the low wages are paid in many industries and are not confined to either sex. The workers who are paid less than $1 an hour include one-fifth of the employees in the real estate industry, more than a fourth of the employees in the motion picture theaters, and slightly more than two-fifths of the employees in eating and drinking establishments.

Workers paid under $1.15 per hour range from 15 percent of the employees who were engaged in the building service to 61 percent of the employees in eating and drinking establishments. The $1.15 group included approximately half of the workers of the motion picture theaters, a third of the workers in the automobile repair service, and about a third of the workers in hotels, more than a third of the workers in real estate and over a fourth of the workers in laundries and a fourth of the workers in hospitals, approximately one-fifth of the workers in the retail trade.

Employees paid less than $1.25 range from 29 percent of those in retail to 60 percent and over of those in the hotels, in eating and drinking establishments, and in the theater.

Mr. SPRINGER. How many in the retail business?

Miss ALLGOOD. How many specifically in retail under $1.25? I believe I am not sure this 60 percent is specifically retail trade from the way this is written. But we can get that for you.

Mr. SPRINGER. I think it is important to know who is going to be covered; that is, what percentage of people are lacking $1.25.

Miss ALLGOOD. Yes. As I say, our material is elaborate on that but this, sir, is our study and under it, the study given by BLS, and under it the exact amount in retail trade under it-just let me see if I have a reference here now.

Mr. DUNCAN. I might also suggest, Mr. Chairman, that this be incorporated in the record.

Mr. MULTER. Without objection, it will be made a part of the record.

Mr. DUNCAN. I think it would be a good idea.

Mr. MULTER. Yes.

(The document referred to follows:)

Summary
Release

Earnings in Selected Industries in the
District of Columbia, Summer 1962

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Ewan Clague, Commissioner

This survey of employee earnings in selected industries in the District of Columbia was undertaken by the Bureau of Labor Statistics at the request of the United States Senate Committee on the District of Columbia for use in the Committee's evaluation of legislative proposals to amend the District's minimum wage law.

The survey covered nearly 87,000 nonsupervisory workers in retail stores, restaurants, real estate operations, and in selected service industries, such as hotels, building services, laundries, automobile repair and services, motion picture theaters, and hospitals. These industries were selected because they are generally not covered by Federal minimum wage legislation (except for large retail enterprises), employ men (not covered by the present District minimum wage) in unskilled occupations, and presumably would be affected by any changes in the District's minimum wage law.

The survey results relate to the summer of 1962 and are presented in five tables. Nonsupervisory employees in each of the industries studied are distributed by their average straight-time hourly earnings in table 1, and men and women separately in table 2. Average weekly earnings by weekly hours of work are shown in table 3 for each of the selected industries.

As requested by the District Committee, estimates are provided in table 4 for the increase in the weekly wage bill which would be required to provide a minimum wage of $1.25 an hour. These estimates are based on the assumption that each employee would work the same number of hours as during the payroll period studied; if the hourly rates for each worker earning less than $1.25 an hour were raised to $1.25. These increases in the weekly wage

bill were then expressed as a percentage of the total weekly wage bill. Table 5 shows the percentage increase in weekly wages which would result from the. establishment of $1.25 as the minimum wage and premium pay at time and one-half for each hour worked in excess of 40 during the week. As in table 4, the calculations were applied to the wages and hours as they were reported during the payroll week studied. The calculations involved several steps. All workers earning less than $1. 25 an hour were raised to that amount and, in addition, the earnings for each employee working more than 40 hours were increased by one and one-half times $1.25 or their regular rate, if higher, for each of those hours. The resulting aggregate was divided by the total wages actually earned (including any premium pay for overtime work) during the payroll period studied. Retail trade is not represented in this tabulation because premium pay information was not collected.

The scope and method of the survey together with definitions

of terms are presented in the appendix.

Less than 0.5 percent.