Most of the bills heretofore introduced regarding youth employment have centered upon camp-operated programs of outdoor public conservation work and similar projects for young men.

I know that, measured against the task assigned it, the Civilian Conservation Corps compiled a constructive record in the thirties, and I have been impressed by the number of people I know who profited through an association with the corps.

But times are very different now. We feel we should try this type of program on a pilot basis first to determine whether it is geared to work as well today as it did in the 1930's.

We may well find it does, for it was still operating successfully when brought to an end by the demands of World War II for the young men who had filled the corps in those days. We believe that camp-oriented conservation work not only provides a unique means for affording young men with constructive work and training, but that it also results in a permanent contribution to the physical resources of the Nation. Such work can increase the yield from lumber and other resources, build up the soil, save wildlife, and reduce expenditures for firefighting and flood and pest control. Such a program can also have important, if less easily measurable, effects in terms of reduced need for social services, public assistance, and law-enforcement expenditures.

We also feel that we cannot rely solely on one type of program to test out methods for dealing with the new problems we face today.

We must bear in mind the entire scale of young people, with their widely varying backgrounds, aptitudes, and potentialities. We must include programs that would be appropriate for the large number of young women whose employment problems require consideration. Similarly, a program should be provided for youth in our urban centers who wish to live at home, perhaps continue their education on a part-time basis, and yet receive training and work for the future.

In addition, we feel that any program, if it is to be successful today and have the greatest possible impact, should draw as widely as possible upon the experience, assistance, cooperation, facilities, and support of interested individuals and groups at all levels. It should be so directed as to stimulate maximum public and private effort and should operate to fill constructively both public and private needs.

In line with these considerations, we are proposing a measure which, while it would include a camp-type pilot program, would not be limited to this alone. It would rather embrace three separate pilot programs. In addition to the camp program, our bill would authorize a public employment and training program, largely in public service jobs, participated in and partially financed by State and local governments and instrumentalities. It would also offer an on-thejob training program designed to enlist the cooperation of many different interested groups who have an interest and stake in job-related skill development. Both of these programs would be open to many youths for whom campwork would not be suitable. Both would be open to young women as well as young men. Both are designed, on a pilot basis, to promote the kind of independent action outside the Federal Government which, once started, should contribute to continuing and more permanent solutions rather than merely temporary remedies.

All of these programs would be related in purpose, administration, and in the selection of trainees. Trainees would be selected, so far as practicable in pilot programs, according to uniform criteria and with a fair geographical distribution. School-age youth would be selected only after appropriate consultations with school officials, so that they will be encouraged to continue their education. They would be counseled, tested by the employment service, and, so far as possible, directed to the specific program best suited to their individual needs.

Since the programs embodied in our proposals are experimental in character, I am, of course, unable to forecast the exact nature of the activities to be undertaken in carrying out these programs.

Specific projects implementing the various titles of the bill will necessarily be limited in number because in a pilot program we will be particularly concerned with gaining intensive experience as to what is possible rather than achieving the extensive impact of a full-scale program.

Within this limitation we have marked out basic patterns of operation, and the bill provides broad authority within whose framework ways may be revealed to sound results which we have not foreseen. In fact, we hope that this will be true. Methods which may be productive in one locality may not be equally so in

another, or may in the end prove not feasible at all. We can, however, learn by doing.

The bill is designed so that we will make full use of our existing facilities carry out the programs which the bill would authorize. Testing, selecting, counseling, and placement of trainees for all three programs would be performed through the local public employment offices affiliated with the Department of Labor's Bureau of Employment Security.

Not only should we assist in the training of young workers in line with their interests and aptitudes, but equally we must match the skills to be developed to the needs of industry. The essential ingredient of our programs is the development of training and experience which will, in fact, increase employability. The Department of Labor has already developed through its Occupational Outlook Service systematic arrangements for appraising the employment outlook in various industries and occupations. In addition, community skill surveys would be conducted to relate training as closely as possible to job opportunities. As the special programs to be provided by the bill develop, we expect that they will serve to fit in closely with the work we are now doing with local groups in developing plans, including an adequate supply of skilled workers, to attract and retain industry.

Respecting on-the-job training, authorized under title I of the bill, the basic pattern would be similar, though on a pilot basis, to that in our overall training proposals which I discussed with the committee last week. Our efforts, however, would be directed to the special problems of young workers, who have no work experience on which to draw and who must be assisted to find employment opportunities appropriate to their future as productive workers.

Where agreed upon as an integral part of training, specific programs could include classroom instruction as well as direct on-the-job training. In these situations we would, of course, work through the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the State vocational education agencies and other education agencies.

Because of the wide variety of techniques we should try out, we would expect not only to work through public institutions but to elicit the active support and sponsorship of labor unions, trade associations, educational groups, chambers of commerce, and civic clubs interested in sponsoring training programs. We would seek to stimulate and assist smaller employers in setting up planned training, which in many cases can only be done with outside help. In fact, in some situations individual programs may be developed and operated, as they are today, through cooperative arrangements between several community groups.

To provide the necessary stimulation and impetus for this on-the-job training program, the bill would authorize Federal participation in the direct cost of training, including payment of training allowances. In many cases, effective training programs doubtless can be established at little or no cost to the Federal Government other than that involved in affording technical assistance, selection, and referral of trainees. In many others, a proportionately small contribution may be sufficient to stimulate private employer or community action. The specific provision for training allowances in this title is included in recognition of the fact that, in some situations, employers, while interested in the possibilities of training programs, cannot reasonably be expected to expend the time and cost involved in employing a youthful beginner who has little if any contribution to make to the establishment's production. We may find it valuable to draw upon very small employers in this program who do not have the staff or resources to develop their own training programs. After the trainees have acquired some experience and skill on the job it would then be economically feasible for the employer to put them on his permanent staff.

This, of course, does not mean that the Federal Government should be expected wholly to finance the employment of trainees. The bill requires that, prior to approval of any training program, it must be found not only that the program is adequate from a training standpoint but also that wages paid to trainees are not less than those customarily paid in the establishment and community to learners on the same job. It is to be expected that any Federal contribution would be limited to sums above this level, subject moreover to a maximum Federal payment of $20 a week with respect to a trainee.

The proposed public service employment and training program which would be provided by title II presents a challenge to State and local governmental units to survey and find worthwhile job opportunities for their young people. These

jobs may be in State public agencies, such as traineeships or internships in schools and hospitals, or in public programs for conservation, recreation, and other community facilities. The jobs would usually be developed in the young person's home community so that he or she could live at home.

Specific programs would not be approved unless they contributed to a public undertaking which could not otherwise be performed, would not result in the displacement of regular workers and would pay prevailing rates for trainees in the area.

Agreements with the local public bodies for the utilization of young people in their programs would provide that the Federal Government might pay as much as 50 percent of a trainee's wages up to $20 a week and might supply other essentials to the trainee, such as work clothes and tools, or transportation to the job.

We believe that this public service, public work pilot program can be extremely valuable not only in showing communities how they can help their young people to become productive citizens, but also, as does the Youth Corps, in making a permanent contribution to community resources.

The pilot Youth Conservation Corps program in title III would be especially directed to furnishing outdoor work and training to young men between the ages of 17 and 22. The program would be carried out through agreements with the Federal conservation agencies, such as those under the jurisdiction of the Departments of Interior and Agriculture, and with State conservation agencies. Through the assistance of the Secreary of Health, Education, and Welfare, educational opportunities would also be made available to the trainees, and medical services provided.

These young men would receive $70 a month and maintenance, with the chance of $20 a month extra for assigned leadership or special duties. They would also receive old-age and survivors' insurance coverage under the Social Security Act and coverage under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act for employment injuries.

The Secretary of Labor would establish terms of enrollment and other procedures, including counseling, testing, and selecting recruits and assisting them in employment placement at the end of their enrollment.

When arrangements are made for utilization of the trainees on State projects, the States would be required to pay up to 50 percent of the costs incurred with respect to a trainee.

The proposal also contemplates and provides for agreements between the Secretary of Labor and the conservation agencies for the furnishing of camp facilities and other items by those agencies, the cost to be borne by the funds appropriated under the act.

As I have already indicated, I believe this Youth Corps program can prove to have great value, not only for the young people who acquire work experience, but for the permanent contribution they will make to the natural resources of our Nation.

While the wealth of our natural resources is measurable to some extent, the wealth in the hands and heads of our young people is immeasurable. We believe that our Youth Employment Opportunities Act will give this wealth worthy channels of release. We have put our young people on wheels, on wings, and now we are planning to send them by rockets to the moon.

It is in our work-a-day world, however, that we must have the workers to keep the wheels turning and the wings moving and the rockets soaring. It is our job to give our young people a better opportunity to get started. With the proper start, I am as confident as I believe the members of the committee to be, in the result.

I, therefore, urge your early and favorable action on the administration's proposals embodied in S. 2036.

STATEMENT OF HON. ARTHUR J. GOLDBERG, SECRETARY OF LABOR

Secretary GOLDBERG. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. First of all, I would like to say that I commend very much the leadership that Senator Humphrey has displayed in this whole area of growing attention to the problems of young people in America. And I also commend the chairman and members of this subcommittee, who have to deal with so many important aspects of the problems of

71417-61

employment, not only of youth but of adults, which are problems which affect our whole society.

In talking to you today about the administration proposal and other bills before you, I would like to make some very general ob servations and then talk specifically about the bill.

Mr. Chairman, you were good enough to offer for the record the very fine speech made by President Conant, former president of Har vard University, on the problem of youth in city slums. I would commend that article to the attention of everybody in our country.

I know of no speech that has been made in recent years on problems of American life which is more significant than the speech that President Conant made here a few days ago. When he characterized the problem which faces us about youth employment as a problem of social dynamite, he did not exaggerate the situation which confronts us. If anything, he understated the situation which we face.

And President Conant's statement is one that I had occasion to comment on in the same conference, and with your permission I would like to offer for the record a statement I made in reference to this subject at the conference of the National Committee on Children and Youth on May 24, 1961.

Senator CLARK. I would be very happy to have it put in the record at this point.

(The address by Secretary Goldberg follows:)

ADDRESS BY SECRETARY OF LABOR ARTHUR J. GOLDBERG BEFORE THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH, WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 24, 1961

I have looked forward to speaking, along with my distinguished colleagues in the President's Cabinet, to this luncheon of the Conference on Unemployed, Outof-School Youth in Urban Areas.

The National Committee on Children and Youth performs a genuine public service in bringing together, between decennial White House conferences, so many responsible representatives from education, from management and labor, and from youth-serving agencies to consider such serious problems as the one we deal with today.

I am in agreement that the great population of unemployed and out-of-school young people in our city slums is "social dynamite." It is potentially the most dangerous social condition in America today. At this time of unhappy headlines from the South, we should remind ourselves that here in our own backyards-in the industrial cities of the North-we are harboring explosive forces far more hostile to the stability and welfare of our society than mob violence.

I know something about city neighborhoods, having grown up in one in Chicago. It is true that the slum of today is far different than the slum of 50 and 60 years ago. Today the problem of the unemployed, out-of-school young person is essentially a slum problem, a minority problem, and an employment problem. What we view from the corner of the city neighborhood filled with drifting gangs of jobless and schoolless youth is the waste of ambition and ability that we have always known is the end product of prejudice.

Dr. Conant said something this morning that keeps running through my mind. "What was especially shocking to me," he said, “in my visits to the large cities in the last school year was the discovery that the employment of youth is literally nobody's affair."

I would hope that the presence here today of Attorney General Kennedy, Secretary Ribicoff and myself-the members of the President's Committee on Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Crime—is acceptable evidence that from this point forward the Federal Government intends to make it-to the extent we are ablea national affair.

From the whole mix of elements that combine in our youth problem-population trends, technological advances with changing skill demands, an uneven labor market, the breaking down of community and family traditions-I intend to speak today only about those related to my own field of interest. My reason

for limiting my remarks is this: the President is going to send to Congress very shortly a number of legislative proposals to discharge the obligations that this administration feels accrue to it in this field.

In the light of that prospect, I view my own contribution to this conference as giving you, as far as I am able, some of the thinking and a few of the conclusions that are behind the forthcoming program.

It is true enough that not all school dropouts are automatic delinquents. It is also true that there are delinquents who are in school, and delinquents who have jobs, and nondelinquents who are unemployed. However, it is my belief and opinion that a very real, very strong and very decided relationship exists between employment opportunity and delinquency.

No young person, and especially no young person bred to expect rejection, can be asked to share in the mores of our society when he cannot share in the work and receive the fruits of the work of that society.

He lives instead in that hard city within a city that is the juvenile gang, and finds its symbols of independence from society and importance within the group both meaningful and satisfying. A world based on work discipline is unintelligible to those who have not experienced it.

In urban areas where large percentages of young people are both out of school and out of work, it seems clear that some or all of the following conditions exist: Limited employment opportunity at hand;

Lack of means to go where the jobs are;

Lack of education and skill to qualify for most jobs today;

Realization that the school graduate is as hard up to find work as the nongraduate;

The conclusion, supported by sound, realistic logic, that the only door out of the slum is not steady work at low pay-which appears a kind of a trap-but the big and fast buck.

The men who drive the big cars, have the fat bankroll and deserve the most respect are the bookmakers, dope pushers and other men of local high estate. In attempting to change this environment, certain things immediately suggest themselves as appropriate for Government attention.

The first is the provision of some kind of job training to qualify young people for employment.

The second is the creation of a device to locate employment opportunity and make it available to the slum youth.

A third is the vigorous enforcement of anticrime laws, and a fourth, and more general, is an acceleration of the effort to eliminate prejudicial practices in businesses and labor unions.

I would like to comment on each of these.

When we seek to define a training program that will work, we should avoid getting lost in a fog of statistics that apply to the entire labor force, across the whole Nation, involving a span of several years. When we realize, for example, that by 1965 we will have 40 percent more persons under 20 years of age in our labor force than we do today, it is not an adequate response to start recommending training programs in every vacant lot.

The trouble begins, for example, not when the young man comes into the labor force but long before. A training program underwritten by Government should concentrate at the root-in the age group between 16 and 22.

It should, of course, be open to all, regardless of race, color, creed, sex or place of national origin.

And it should proceed in two directions-private training programs sponsored and conducted by employers, trade associations, labor organizations and other agencies, and public service training programs designed to create employment opportunity in the community.

Certainly, it is to the advantage of American businessmen to sponsor programs that will provide them with the kind of workers they will need. It is to the advantage of labor organizations, with their traditional membership base in occupations greatly affected by technological change, to look to the integrity and continuance of the crafts and skills and support them.

A productive partnership with the Government, and with the many youth-serving agencies in the Nation, is to the benefit of all-and to the Nation.

The second approach is equally appealing to me. The places where youthful unemployment and unfinished educations predominate are the very places severely plagued with public service problems. Training programs for public service, conducted by local and State governments in cooperation with the Fed