on a store-by-store basis, but insisted that the union would need to secure a majority of the employees in all the stores belonging to the employers' association before it was eligible for collective bargaining rights. Out of this original dispute and the episodes which accompanied it came the general work stoppage by the local AFL unions. While new unions and rival unions have opposed the system because it blocked their efforts to organize, established unions have generally accepted it. Standardization of wages and conditions results, the process of negotiation is simplified as only one contract must be developed, and the union is protected from raiding by rival organizations, which find it difficult to organize an ertire industry all at once. The more or less unique character of employer organization in San Francisco developed as a second step. Once a uniform agreement was signed, unions could still "whipsaw" employers through processing grievances. By getting one concession here and another there, the basis for an improved contract could be laid by standardizing the concessions at their highest levels. This led the employers' associations to administer, as well as negotiate, the contracts. Grievances, in many instances, have been made the property of the association, and no one employer can make a settlement which would disadvantage other members. Job evaluation has, on occasion, been used to standardize job titles, content, and rates as a method of keeping each company in line with all the rest.

The master agreements cover various areas. The standard craft agreement is usually confined to the local labor market area. The industrial agreement tends to cover the geographical area within which the product is competitively produced and may vary from a single town, as in the case of bread, to a subregion, as in the case of fruit and vegetable canning. Some agreements are not confined by either of these locational forces. They span the area, without reference to craft jurisdiction or product market, over which the union has exercised its influence. Quite diverse groups of workers and products may be covered.

The association which most prominently sponsors multiemployer bargaining is the San Francisco Employers' Council. It unites a number of individual employers' associations, as well as single firms. otherwise unaffiliated. It corresponds to the Central Labor Council (AFL) and the Industrial Union Council (CIO). In addition to other services, it attempts to coordinate the general approach of employers in the city toward the trade-unions. The Council was organized with a program of bargaining with the unions, not of destroying them.

The plan of an area-wide association of employers has extended outward from San Francisco. A number of cities in Northern Cali

fornia have organizations patterned, in part at least, after the council. Similarly oriented associations have been or are being developed in Los Angeles, Phoenix, Reno, and Denver. A Pacific Coast association has been suggested. The expansion of this system, however, has not gone unchallenged. It has been attacked by representatives of the principal national association of industrialists, which is opposed to multiple-employer bargaining. The plan has, however, exhibited survival value in San Francisco, and its supporters can point to the Nation-wide acceptance of industry-wide employer organizations in Sweden and Great Britain.

Multiple-employer bargaining apparently has reduced the number of strikes in San Francisco in the past decade, as compared with Los Angeles and, indeed, with the United States. The greater size of strikes and their augmented cost have encouraged the parties to undertake greater advance deliberation before precipitating a work stoppage. Although the number of strikes has decreased comparatively, the average strike has lasted longer and involved more people, so that man-days lost because of strikes have not been reduced relatively. Resort to arbitration over the terms of a new contract has increased.

The modern type of multiemployer bargaining in San Francisco has not given rise to collusive actions against the consumer, nor have small firms been exploited by the larger firms in each association. The public, however, has been inconvenienced on occasion because the strikes which do occur tend to shut off all sources of supply of goods or services simultaneously.

In summarizing the development of collective bargaining on the Pacific Coast, it is found that: (1) Trade-union agreements more completely cover the "eligible" workers than in the Nation as a whole. Pacific Coast labor is estimated to be 20 percent more fully covered by written contracts then labor in other areas. (2) The unions have had a history, in many important industries, of aggressive action, particularly in the San Francisco and Seattle areas. Some of this aggressiveness originally developed on the water front and in the logging camps. (3) Employers have organized widely, in earlier times to fight, and more recently to bargain with the unions. Some of these associations, especially in San Francisco, administer, as well as negotiate, the collective agreements. (4) While there is great diversity in the bargaining systems, industry-wide or area-wide labor agreements are widely used. The trend is away from the single employer contract. The multiemployer contract has, in several industries, helped bring stability into industrial relations and has indicated maturity of development.

DEVELOPMENT of industry in California, Oregon, and Washington at a later period than in the Eastern and Middle Western areas afforded an opportunity in these States for study of labor laws elsewhere and for the adoption of accepted standards of labor legislation and administration.

Each of the West Coast States has followed recommended standards by establishing a labor department. However, not all labor functions are centralized in these agencies. In California, unemployment compensation and a public employment service are within the authority of the Department of Employment, which is outside the Department of Industrial Relations. In Oregon, five separate agencies, the Bureau of Labor, the Wage and Hour Commission, the Industrial Accident Commission, the Unemployment Compensation Commission, and the Board of Conciliation, have responsibility for various labor functions. In Washington, the Office of Unemployment Compensation and Placement is outside the Department of Labor and Industries.

Minimum-wage laws with coverage limited to women and minors have been enacted by all three States. Wage orders issued under wage board procedure cover most occupations, and in all three States, orders may govern working conditions as well as minimum wages.

The hours legislation also applies primarily to the protection of women and minors. As yet, the standard of an 8-hour day and 40hour week, recommended by the National Conferences on Labor Legislation for all workers, has not been achieved.

Only California has an hours law (providing for 1 day's rest in 7) which applies to all workers; and, in that State, agriculture and a limited number of other special classes of employment are excepted. The three States regulate hours of men only in occupations recognized as especially hazardous, or when the safety of the public might be jeopardized by long hours of work.

California has a comprehensive industrial homework act, with power to prohibit homework occupations. Oregon has no homework law but has exercised some control of such work under its minimum wage statute. Washington has no homework law.

California and Oregon provide by law for the prompt and regular payment of wages in a quickly negotiable form. All three States also make the services of the labor department available to help workers in collection of unpaid wages.

Protection of workers' safety in these three States is provided for through exercise of rule-making authority, under which standards may

1 Prepared by Marian L. Mel, of the Division of Labor Standards, U. S. Department of Labor.

be established by safety codes or regulations which have the force of law, to meet specific existing needs.

The workmen's compensation laws of the three States follow in general the standards recommended by the several National Conferences on Labor Legislation. However, while the California and Washington laws provide for compulsory coverage (so that every employer, with certain exceptions, is required to accept the terms of the law) the Oregon law is of the elective type.

Of the three States, California, in 1868, first enacted a law relating to the employment of minors. This early provision for a maximum 8-hour day for certain minors stands out alone in a period when the few other States which had undertaken to protect minors had legislated in terms of a 10-hour day.

The years since the early part of the century have shown continuing advances, but none of these three States, even now, meets all the minimum child labor standards that have been accepted as needed for the protection of child workers. Briefly, these minimum standards are a minimum age of 16 years except for work outside school hours at 14 in nonfactory work; a maximum 8-hour day, 40-hour and 6day week for children under 18; prohibition of night work, provision of meal periods, prohibition of hazardous employment for young workers under 18; and requirement of employment certificates for the employment of minors under 18.

Although none of these States has a comprehensive industrial relations act, Oregon has a State Board of Conciliation with some defined procedure, and limited powers as to conciliation exist in the other two States.

Each of the three States has an unemployment compensation act, the provisions of which vary as to coverage, amount of benefits, duration of unemployment, and other factors.

A topical summary for each of the three West Coast States is given below. Similarity in the legislation of these States is due largely to the generally similar industrial conditions.

California

The Department of Industrial Relations, which is responsible for the administration of California's labor law, is in marked contrast to the Bureau of Labor Statistics which, in 1883, was directed to collect and report to the legislature biennially upon "every aspect of working conditions in every occupation" (including sanitary conditions in workshops and the number and size of rooms in homes occupied by the poor), and was given an annual appropriation of approximately

$5,000 to defray all expenses. To the fact-finding functions were added, year by year, provisions for enforcement of labor laws as they were enacted. In 1911, California joined the group of States which enacted workmen's compensation, and adopted a minimum-wage law for women and minors. The special problems arising from an influx of foreign workers and a need for controlling labor camps were bases for specialized legislation. In the fashion of the day, each of these functions was made the responsibility of a special commission which had rule-making as well as administrative authority. However, in 1927, a reorganization by law brought practically all functions under the Department of Industrial Relations, and in 1945, another reorganization by law further clarified the functions of six divisions, all functioning within the framework of this single agency, under the authority of a director.

Workmen's compensation.-The compulsory workmen's compensation law of California is more comprehensive as to coverage of workers than those of many other States, in that it specifically provides for coverage of certain domestic and agricultural workers. It provides full coverage of occupational diseases, instead of schedule coverage, under which, in some States, compensation is paid only for specifically listed diseases. The injured worker's benefits depend on the amount of his wages. Maximum benefits for permanent total disability are $30 a week and these are payable for life. Total payments in death cases, however, are limited to $6,000. Medical care must be furnished to injured employees without restrictions as to the amount or cost. The waiting period, during which the injured worker does not receive benefits, is 7 days. In California the employer has the option of insuring either with a private company or in the State fund.

Safety and health.-Employers are required by statute to provide for the safety of workers. When the Industrial Accident Commission (responsible for workmen's compensation administration) was established in 1914, the Industrial Accident Prevention Bureau was set up within the commission. The bureau was later made a separate division, and today is the Division of Industrial Safety, having jurisdiction over all places of employment in the State subject to the workmen's compensation law. Within this division is the Industrial Safety Board. Safety orders, developed after public hearings to which all interested persons are invited for active participation, must receive the formal approval of the Industrial Safety Board, after which they may be legally enforced by the division. In addition to a general safety order, orders relating to 27 specific occupations have been issued. A staff of inspectors is provided for enforcement and for the promotion of safety programs.