si/
l-l
CIGAR MAKERS
—AFTER THE LAY-OFF
WORK
PROGRAM
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
HARRY L. HOPKINS CORRINGTON GILL
Administrator Assistant Administrator
(y K . )i
NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
on
Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques
DAVID WEINTRAUB IRVING KAPLAN
Director Associate Director
Studies of the Effects of Industrial Change on Labor Markets
THE W.P.A. NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
ON REEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND RECENT CHANGES
IN INDUSTRIAL TECHNIQUES
Under the authority granted by the President In the Execu¬
tive Order which created the Works Progress Administration,
Administrator Harry L. Hopkins authorised the estaol1shment
of a research program for the purpose ofcol 1ectlng and ana¬
lysing data oearlng on problems of employment, unemployment,
and relief. Accordingly, the National Research Program was
estaol lshed in Octooer 1956 under the supervl slon of Corrinj ton
Gill, Assistant Administrator of the WPA, who appointed the
directors of the individual studies or projects.
The Project cn Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes
In Industrial Techniques was organized in December 1955 to
Inquire, wlthtne cooperation of Industry, labor, and govern¬
mental and private agencies, Into tne extent or recent changes
In Industrial techniques and to evaluate tneeffects of these
changes on the volume of employment and unemployment. David
h/eintrdut and Irvin( Kaplan, members of the research staff
of the Dlvl slon c f Researcn, Stat: sties, and Finance, were ap¬
pointed, respectively, Director and Associate Director : ftne
Project. The task set for them was to assemble and organise
tne existing data wnlcn bear on the problem and to augment
these data oy Held surveys and analyses.
To this end, many governmental agencies whlcoarethe col¬
lectors and repositories or pertinent Information were in¬
vited to cooperate. The cooperating agencies of the United
States Government Include the Department or Agriculture, the
Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics or the Department cfLabor, tne Railroad
Retirement Board, the Social Security Board, the Bureau of
Internal Revenue of the Department of tne Treasury, the De¬
partment of Commerce, tne Federal Trade Commission, and tne
Tariff Commission.
The following private agencies Joined with the National
Research Project In conducting special studies: the Indus¬
trial Research Departmentofthe University of Pennsylvania,
the Natl end Bureau of Economic Researcn, Inc., tne Employ¬
ment Stabilization Research Institute of the University of
Minnesota, andtne Agricultural Economics Departments in the
Agricultural Experiment Stations of California, Illinois,
Iowa, and New York.
CIGAR MAKERS — AFTER THE LAY-OFF
A case study of the effects of mechanization
on employment of hand cigar makers
by
Daniel Creamer
and
Gladys V. Swackhamer
Studies of the Effects of Industrial Change on Labor Markets
Report No. L-i
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
December 1937
EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT AFTER LAY-OFF
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL ELAPSED MONTHS
SINCE LAY-OFF
This figure consists of 10.2 percent spent in working for others and 8.8
percent spent i n se 1 f-empl oyment which has constituted ch ief ly a form of dis¬
guised unemployment. See discussion, pp. 51-7.
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
WALKER-JOHNSON BUILDING
1734 NEW YORK AVENUE NW.
WASHINGTON, D. C.
HARRY L. HOPKINS
ADMINISTRATOR
December 16, 1937
Hon. Harry L. Hopkins
Works Progress Administrator
Sir :
I have the honor to transmit a report on the study
of the effects of mechanization on employment and earn¬
ings of workers in the cigar industry. The study is
the first in a series on "Effects of Industrial Change
on Labor Markets" and is based primarily on a case study
of a plant which was mechanized in 1931. The competi¬
tive conditions under which the change in process was
made and the characteristics of the personnel involved
have been and continue to be so typical of the indus¬
try., as the supporting evidence presented shows, that
generalization of the findings has been appropriately
undertaken.
The principal finding, of special concern to a re¬
lief administration, is that many thousands ofworkers,
formerly ornowattachedtothe cigar industry as skilled
artisans, will be primarily dependent for their well-
being on public relief for many years. Since 1920, the
cigar has rapidly been losing ground to the cigarette.
Ever increasing numbers of cigar manufacturers have been
finding themselves confronted with the alternatives of
either losing their markets or reducing the costs of
production and the price of their product to levels
which will maintain a profitable volume of output. Mech¬
anizat ion of the cigar-making process has afforded the
instrument for the reduction in cost, and the manu¬
facture of a product to retail at five cents or less has
resulted in at least the retardation of the decline in
production. The combined inroads of declining produc¬
tion and mechanization of the production process have
reduced the average employment in the cigar industry
from 114,000 in 1919 to 84,000 in 1929 and 56,000 in
1935.
The decline in employment represented byt he above
figures reflects only part of the loss of employment to
which cigar workers have been subject. It is estimated
that byl929, ten years after the first cigar plant was
mechanized, 35 percent of the total cigar output was a
machine product. The aggravated pr ice competition dur¬
ing the depression further favored the encroachment of
machine production so that more than half of the 1933
output was machine made. Almost without exception,
whenever a plant is mechanized, the entire force of
hand cigar makers is dismissed and a smaller number of
young women is hired to operate the newly installed ma¬
chines. It is estimated that upwards of 15, 000 machine
operators have been thus substituted in automatic pro¬
duction plants, and that approximately 40,000 are work¬
ing in the other plants. The hand cigar worker who can
still find an employer for his craft works under the
overhanging threat of displacement by machine competi¬
tion - a threat reflected in his reduced wage rate and
earnings. Available evidence indicates that, for ci¬
gars selling at 5 cents or less, hand workers whose
product competes with machine production earn less than
the machine operators.
The great majority of skilled cigar makers arewell
on in years and have been long habituated to a single
craft which is not transferable to other industries.
The typical prospect, when the cigar factory at which
he is employed mechanizes, is unemployment of long du¬
ration, interrupted for relatively few by occasional
jobs. The displaced artisan cannot look forward to
making a living at a job at his craft. Self-employment
in the industry frequently does not yield subsistence.
The employed artisan who will be displaced by ma¬
chines in the years ahead will find small comfort in
the present coverage of the unemployment compensation
laws. The chances are that irregularity of employment
prior to his final lay-off will leave him with a very
short or no period of eligibility for benefits ahead,
and, in any event, the limited eligibility period will
only postpone the problem of long-time unemployment.
Typically too old a hand at his craft to make a favor¬
able self-adjustment and not old enough for an old age
pension, the cigar worker who will be displaced in the
next few years will ordinarily, like his brother dis-
placed in the past, wait for the means teat to overtake
him.
This study was made under the direction of Irving
Kaplan, Associate Director of our National Research
Project. The Bureau of Research and Statistics of the
Social Security Board has collaborated in the project,
out of which this study has developed, by making avail¬
able the services of Daniel Creamer, a member of its
staff. The report was prepared by Mr. Creamer and Miss
Gladys V. Swackhamer.
Respectfully yours.
Corrington Gill
Assistant Administrator
CONTENTS
Section Page
PREFACE xv
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Survey procedure 2
II. TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY AND THEIR
RELATION TO THE COMPANY 4
Economic pressures 4
Mechanization and the 5-cent cigar 9
Proposed wage cut and refusal of hand workers 13
Mechanization and lay-offs 15
Productivity and production costs of men and
machines 13
Extent and nature of the labor displacement
at the Company 20
III. PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HAND WORKERS. . 27
Nativity 27
Years at cigar making 28
Years in Manchester 30
Years with the Company 31
Employment pattern at the Company before the
lay-off 32
IV. DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT IN INDUSTRY AFTER
THE LAY-OFF 34
Special obstacles presented by the cigar
industry and the Manchester Area .... 34
Unemployment between lay-off and next job . . 36
Total unemployment 37
Employment status at time of interview. ... 38
Relation of age to employment status at time
of interview 40
The role of migration 40
Character of jobs after the lay-off 43
Duration of current status 47
Public assistance 49
Self-employment at cigar making 51
Earnings as "buckeyes" . 54
Other employment as cigar makers 58
V. COMPARISON OF EMPLOYMENT PATTERN, EARNINGS, AND
UNIONIZATION OF MACHINE OPERATORS AND
HAND WORKERS 59
Employment of machine operators 59
3 x
X CONTENTS
Section Page
Earnings of machine operators 0^
The union after the lay-off 07
VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 70
Summary 7<->
Appraisal of social resources 72
Conclusion - residual relief problem 70
APPENDIX A: A FEW CASE HISTORIES 79
Case 1 7®
Case 2 SO
Ca3e 3 81
Case 4 81
Case 5 82
Case 8 83
Case 7 83
APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSES 85
Preliminary operations 85
Description of hand manufacture of cigars . . 85
Description of combination hand and machine
manufacture of cigars. . 88
Description of machine manufacture of cigars. 87
Subsequent operations 87
APPENDIX C: WEEKLY EARNINGS OF CIGAR WORKERS . 86
APPENDIX D: SCHEDULE AND EXPLANATION OF TERMS
USED IN THE SCHEDULE 91
Schedule used 92
CHARTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
Employment and unemployment after lay-off. . . frontispiece
1. Per capita consumption of cigars and cigarettes,
1900—1934. .................... 5
2. Total cigars and class "A" cigars produced in the
United States and in New Hampshire, 1921-1935. . . 7
3. Cigar-making machine 9
4. Number and sex of employees of the Company, 1921-38. 23
5. Age of cigar machine operators and hand cigar makers 25
CONTENTS xi
CHARTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS-Continued
Figure Page
6. Preparing the binder for a hand-made cigar 32
7. Employment status by age groups five years after
the lay-off 39
8. Hand worker "bunching the filler" 55
9. Hand cigar maker applying the binder leaf 56
10. Making oigars by hand 62
11. Two—operator oigar-making machine 63
TEXT TABLES
Table 1. Production of large cigars, in New Hampshire
and the United States, 1920-36 6
Table 2. Percentage distribution of cigars produced,
by classes, in New Hampshire and the United
States, 1921 and 1924-35 10
Table 3. Distribution by average production per ma¬
chine-hour of 74 wrapper machine operators
at the Company, 1936 18
Table 4. Distribution of the estimated daily production
of 26 hand cigar makers while working for
the Company 18
Table 5. Average annual number employed and the aver¬
age annual production of cigars at the Com¬
pany by biennial periods, 1929-36 21
Table 6. Number of hand oigar makers employed at the
Company, 1931—32 22
Table 7. Distribution by sex of the Company employees,
1921-36 23
Table 8. Comparison of the age distribution of 202 ma¬
chine operators with the age distribution
of 328 hand cigar makers 26
Table 9. Classification by country or State of birth
of 150 hand cigar makers in Manchester, New
Hampshire 27
Table 10. Distribution of 150 cigar makers at the Com¬
pany by time spent at making cigars by hand. 28
xii CONTENTS
TEXT TABLES-Continued Page
Table 11. Distribution of 160 oigar makers at the Com¬
pany by years at making oigars by hand as
a peroent of years in the labor market ... 29
Table 12, Three hundred and twenty-eight hand oigar
makers employed by the Company, classified
by the oigar trade union looal of first af¬
filiation 30
Table 13, Distribution of 150 hand oigar makers by
length of servioe with the Company, 1931 . . 31
Table 14. Distribution of 118 cigar makers by months of
unemployment between lay-off from the Com¬
pany and next job 38
Table 15. Distribution of 118 cigar makers according to
their total unemployment since lay-off ... V
Table 16. Employment status and age distribution of 224
oigar makers laid off by the Company in 1931 39
Table 17. Geographical dispersion of 149 oigar workers
who left Manchester after lay-off 41
Table 18. Distribution by age of 90 hand oigar makers
who emigrated from Manchester, related to
age distribution in entire sample, 1931—38 . 42
Table 19. Two hundred and twenty-four hand oigar workers
classified by industry of present job in
Manchester and elsewhere 43
Table 20. Classification by industry of all jobs held
by 116 hand oigar workers seeking work
after lay-off in 1931 46
Table 21. Duration of current employment status of 129
oigar makers laid off by the Company in
1931 47
Table 22. Distribution of total elapsed months between
lay-off and date of interview, by employ¬
ment status 49
Table 23. Geographical dispersion of cigar makers who
are working at their trade 53
Table 24. Estimated annual earnings from cigar making
at the Company in 1930 and as "buckeye"
proprietors in 1936 57
CONTENTS
xlii
TEXT TABLES-Continuti Page
Table 25. Monthly index of man-hours worked by machine
operators at the Company in 1936 ...... 59
Table 26. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company by the percent of actual man-hours
worked in 1936 to the theoretical maximum. . 60
Table 27. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company, by number of weeks with no employ¬
ment, 1936 61
Table 28. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company, by weeks of less than full-time
but not less than half-time employment,
1936 62
Table 29. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company by weeks of full-time employment,
1936 64
Table 30. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company, by annual earnings, 1936. 65
Table 31. Distribution of 202 machine operators at the
Company by hourly earnings in 1936 66
APPENDIX TABLES
Table C-l. Average earnings per week, by classes of ci¬
gars produced in the United States 88
Table C-2. Average earnings per week, by States, of
workers on class "A" cigars S9
PREFACE
This study of workers in the cigar industry begins a series
planned to throw light onthe bearing of economic conditions and
the technological developments associated with these conditions
on the employment and unemployment experience of workers in se¬
lected industrial situations.
In the situation covered by this survey, more than 600 male
cigar makers were laid off in 1931, and some 200 female machine
operators were taken on instead to make a cheaper product by
automatic machinery. The findings are based primarily on an
analysis of the employment and earnings records of the cigar
workers who were laid off and the machine operators who were
substituted. During the 5 years following the lay-off, the ci¬
gar makers, as a group, were without work 52 percent of the
time, although able and willing to work and actively seeking
work. Nine percent of their time was spent in self-employment
in the cigar industry, 10 percent in working for others in the
industry, and 17 percent in working outside the cigar industry.
The remaining 12 percent of the time was accounted for by those
who became too old or otherwise disabled for work.
Five years after the lay-off approximately 13 percent were
self-employed cigar makers, and many more had tried self-employ¬
ment in the interim and had failed. Another 17 percent were
employed by others in the cigar industry; some of these had the
precarious security of jobs with "buckeyes",1 while others were
no longer cigar makers but had obtained semiskilled or unskilled
jobs with the company which had mechanized its plant. Though
many of them roamed far and wide in quest of a livelihood, the
majority found no work at cigar making, and 25 percent found no
work at all during the 5 years after the lay-off. Jobs were
typically casual, unemployment typically of long duration, and
the older the worker the more prevalent was going without work.
The effects of the mechanization of the cigar-making process
are illustrative of the type of technological change in which
the production process is completely converted from a system em¬
ploying hand workers to one utilizing automatic machinery and
^he "buckeye" Is a se If-employed cigar maker manufacturing on a small scale.
He has no or only a few employees. In the situation surveyed, "buckeye" op¬
eration has constituted a form of disguised unemployment.
XV
x vi
PREFACE
machine operators. Since mass production methods have become
widely prevalent, the field for this typeof technological change
has necessarily become limited. Other examples do, however, come
to mind. Glass blowing went through a cycle of such changes
during theeariier decades in this century. In more recent years
the baking industry has been similarly affected.
When a hand process becomes mechanized, t he experience and per¬
sonal characteristics of the hand workers ordinarily afford no
special qualification for service in the substituted production
process. Frequently, as in the case of mechanization in the ci¬
gar industry, there is at least an apparent advantage in substi¬
tuting new personnel with the new process. The character of the
technological change is thus important in determining the number
and type of workers who become unemployed. On the other hand,
the extent of unemployment facing the workers immediately af¬
fected by the loss of job is controlled, not by the type of
technological change, butbythe economic conditions under which
the change takes place and by the characteristics of the workers
affected. In the case of the cigar industry, the economic con¬
ditions have been those of markedly declining production, reduc¬
ing opportunities for employment in the industry, and the char¬
acteristic worker is a skilled artisan long associated with his
craft and an "older worker."
Examples of industries characterized by declining production
and declining opportunities for employment are, of course, much
more numerous than those of industries affected by the drastic
type of technological change represented by the transformation
of handicraft to machine methods. Moreover, during the past 8
years almost all industries have been subject to severe curtail¬
ment of production and employment for relatively long periods
of time. Under such circumstances the pressure for cost reduc¬
tion is indeed very great, and a technological improvement which
reduces the number of jobs or substitutes one group of workers
for another is likely to impose prolonged unemployment among
many of the workers laid off . When jobs elsewhere, in the worker's
usual industry or in other industries utilizing his special qual¬
ifications, are scarce, the worker's eagerness to work is usually
of little consequence.
The cigar maker's skill is not transferable to other industries
and this is characteristic of skills in many industries. The
PREFACE
xvi i
skills of hand operatives and of skilled workers generally are,
to a greater or lesser degree, specialized to an industry, and
this specialization may fundamentally limit their transferabil¬
ity. These skilled workers are quite generally subject to the
effects of technological changes, whether singularly drastic,
as in the case of the cigar industry, or continuous and cumula¬
tive, as in most instances. Their security is therefore much
more generally undermined by the more common types of technolog¬
ical change than by the complete conversion from hand tomachine
production.
Apart from the mechanical capacity to utilize or adapt skills
required in other industries, long-established association with
one industry may also limit the opportunity to become established
in another industry. Men who have worked in the mines tradition¬
ally remain dependent on the availability of jobs as miners. It
is the farm youth rather than the experienced farmer who finds his
way into industry. While machinists were in demand by many Phila¬
delphia metal industries in 1936, machinists attached to the
heavy-equipment industries remained unemployed. In the same
year, the Minneapolis metal-working plants were seeking machin¬
ists, but railroad machinists remained on the relief rolls. In
all these cases the workers' skills are, in greater or lesser
degree, specialized to the particular requirements of their usual
industry. Other factors than the ability to adapt or acquire
the skill required for jobs in another industry are, however,
important. The absence of extensive and adequately used place¬
ment services may account for the worker's dependence on his
habitual associations in his quest for work.
A number of studies of the National Research Project are con¬
cerned with the degree to which and the conditions under which
workers in given occupations and industries find employment in
other occupations and industries. Since age also isaselective
factor, with older workers frequently finding it more difficult
to establish themselves anew in industry than young workers, the
relationship between age and the characteristics of employment
and unemployment experience are subjects of analysis in a number
of forthcoming reports in this series.
x viii
PREFACE
A debt of gratitude is owed to all the cigar makers who were
interviewed and without whose generous cooperation this survey
would not have been possible. We also are indebted to the R. G.
Sullivan Company and the Manchester Local No. 192 of the Cigar
Makers' International Union for their help in making necessary
records available to us. Mr. John Bogaert, secretary of the
union, Mr. Fritz Kuehn, and Mr. Michael Quinn, all former hand
cigar makers at the R. G. Sullivan plant, were particularly help¬
ful in tracing the whereabouts of persons in our sample and in
providing general information on the history of the industry in
the Manchester area. To Mr. Lucianus Altenau of Manchester we
are obligated for information on the problems of the "buckeye"
proprietors, and to Miss Jules Teras, forelady at the R. G.
Sullivan factory, for material on the present-day conditions of
employment of the machine operators. Finally, acknowledgment
is made to the Portsmouth, New Hampshire, office of the United
States Bureau of Internal Revenue, to the Division of Unemploy¬
ment Compensation of the New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, to the
office of the Commissioner of Charities of Manchester, the of¬
fice of Charities and Correction of Killsboro County, New Hamp¬
shire, and the Central Index of Agencies of Manchester for mak¬
ing available special tabulations included in the report.
David Weintraob
Irvino Kaplan
Philadelph ia
December 7, 1937
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
Vice President Marshall is reported to have remarked during a
period of war anxiety that what the country needed was a good 5-
cent cigar. He could scarcely have realized that the need would
so soon be filled. When, in 19x9, a leading cigar manufacturer
demonstrated that cigars could be made entirely by machines, the
good 5-cent cigar was well on its way toward becoming a reality.
Up to that year cigar making had been largely a hand process.
The successful introduction of machines meant a virtually com¬
plete change in manufacturing technique and an almost complete
change in the labor personnel. Artisans, mostly men, with a
highly specialized skill, were replaced by machines operated by
young women whose work falls into the category of semiskilled.
The problems arising from this replacement concerned the sort
of adjustments which could be made to an abrupt change in manu¬
facturing technique - a change which involves the substitution
of a completely mechanized process for a hand process and the
complete turnover in personnel.
As an approach to the specific problems of the cigar industry
within the framework of the general problems posed by technolog¬
ical innovations of the above type, a particular case was se¬
lected for a special study. In 1931, the R. G. Sullivan Company,
located in Manchester, New Hampshire, decided to discontinue the
manufacture of cigars by the hand process and to substitute the
machine method. About 5 years after the hand workers had been
dismissed by the management, this survey was undertaken in an
attempt to find out what sort of readjustment these displaced
workers had been able to make. The following specific problems
of technological unemployment within the cigar industry presented
themselves for analysis: To what extent does the long-time
shrinkage in the demand for the industry's product intensify
the difficulties of adjustment of the displaced worker? To what
degree do the personal characteristics of the displaced group
Note.- The authors wish to acknowledge their Indebtedness to the many who
have made contributions to this study. Few can here be specially mentioned.
Marlon Hayes designed the charts and made numerous suggestions that have
been Incorporated In the text. Thomas G. Casey assisted In selecting the
sample, Susan R. Caldon and Theresa Coroett were responsible for the scheduled
Interviews, May Belle Balrd, Lillian Wolkln and William Barnum prepared the
tables, and Margaret Snowden and Roselle Moore prepared the charts.
1
2
CIGAR MAKERS
condition the type of adjustment that is actually achieved or
might possibly be achieved? Finally, what effect has this tech¬
nological change had upon labor income?
SURVEY PROCEDURE
These problems are dealt with according to the following pro¬
cedure. The fluctuations in the R. G. Sullivan Company's busi¬
ness and the circumstances that determined mechanization are
traced against the background of the trends in the cigar indus¬
try as a whole during the decade of the nineteen twenties and
the ensuing depression. The reaction of the workers to the Com¬
pany's proposed alternative of mechanization or wage reduction
has been ascertained by reference to the trade-union minutes
covering the negotiations with the management and by personal
interviews with individuals. The increase in productivity re¬
sulting from the use of machines is evaluated, together with the
displacement of manpower. The problems and the extent of read¬
justment of the displaced hand workers are analyzed in the light
of the workers' personal characteristics and occupational his¬
tory before the lay-off.
The personal characteristics and occupational history of these
displaced workers were analyzed from data recorded on schedules1
for a part of a sample of all displaced workers. This sample
was obtained by copying from the records of the Manchester local
of the Cigar Makers International Union the first 316 names of
cigar makers on the membership rolls of 1931. These 316 names
represented approximately so percent of the displaced hand work¬
ers. Since the names had been entered by the secretary in the
order in which the men sat in the factory and since there was
no planned seating arrangement, the sample may be regarded as a
random one. In addition, the names of 12 small cigar-factory
operators, or "buckeyes", in Manchester were obtained from the
Internal Revenue Department in order to investigate the adequacy
of small cigar factory operation as a method of economic adjust¬
ment. Two trained investigators called at the men's homes dur¬
ing a 3-week period in February 1937 and obtained detailed per¬
sonal and occupational histories for 150 of the 328 cases. In-
1The schedule with the explanation of terms is reproduced in Appendix D.
INTRODUCTION
3
eluded in these 150 were the 12 cases added from the Revenue
list and 138 from the random sample.
Many of the men had moved away or could not be reached per¬
sonally in the time allotted. Under these circumstances, other
sources of information were utilized, and for all but six cases
it was possible to secure some items of information, such as the
current employment status or the location of the job or the place
of residence. From union records the date of birth and the union
local of first affiliation were ascertained for almost all of
the 328 cases. Many workers were traced through the secre¬
tary of the union local and through certain former union mem¬
bers, such as the secretary-treasurer of a workmen's sick and
death benefit fund, the City Clerk, and a number of the older
men. In addition, the records of the Bureau of Vital Statis¬
tics of the city and of the relief agencies were consulted, as
well as the files of the American-Canadian Association, a bene¬
ficial society operating extensively among the French-Canadian
population. Accordingly, the size of the sample will vary with
the items under consideration.
To complete the investigation of the effects of machine pro¬
duction, consideration is given to the regularity of employment
and the earnings of the machine operators who replaced the hand
workers. The findings are based on returns made by the R. G.
Sullivan Company to the New Hampshire Division of Unemployment
Compensation. The gradual demoralization of the trade-union
local is also regarded as an aftereffect of mechanization. The
concluding section summarizes the efforts, generally unsatisfac¬
tory, at economic readjustment on the part of the displaced hand
workers, and undertakes an evaluation of the adequacy of the
usual types of social assistance available to such a group.
SECTION II
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY AND THEIR RELATION
TO THE COMPANY
The Company has been in existence for more than Co years, and
during its entire history ownership has resided with Mr, Roger
G. Sullivan and his children. Its development froma very modest
retail tobacco shop, employing one cigar maker, to a factory
employing 1,500 persons at the peak during the war years seems
to have been due to the business talents of the founder. His
genial personality enabled him to introduce his cigar, the
"7-20-4", into ever widening markets in New England, and his
practice of manufacturing the cigar with quality Havana filler
assured him that orders once given would be repeated.1
At an early date the union obtained a closed-shop agreement,
and it was generally understood that the employees at the Company
were to have a slight differential above whatever terms andcon-
ditions prevailed in Boston, once an important cigar-making cen¬
ter. As a result, cigar making was the highest paid industry
of size in Manchester, and the cigar maker enjoyed an enviable
position in this mill city. By virtue of his handcraft, he was
permitted a degree of independence unknown toother factory workers
in an age of mechanization. Up to the time of the great depres¬
sion the factory enjoyed the reputation among hand cigar makers
of being the best place to work of all the cigar plants in the
country.
ECONOMIC PRESSURES
Economic pressures, however, made themselves felt. For some
time the popular taste had been changing in favor of the cigarette,
which represented a cheaper smoke. The per capita consumption of
cigars in this country, asshown in figure 1, began to decline in
the first decade of the century, but the peak of annual produc¬
tion was reached in 1920. That the cigar production of New
Hampshire, represented to the extent of about 90 percent by the
The cigar gets Its name from the address on Elm Street, Manchester New
Hampshire, where the business was first housed.
4
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY 5
FIGURE 1.- PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF CIGARS ANH CIGARETTES*
1900-1934
(Semi-logarithmic scale)
NUMBER CONSUMED PER CAPITA
WP A - National Research Project
LS-7
j|t
Tax-paid cigars and cigarettes sold per fiscal year, as derived from Annual
Reports of Commissioner of Internal Revenue, divided by annual midyear
population estimates of the Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.
6
CIGAR MAKERS
Company, affords no striking exception to national trends, can
be seen from table 1 and figure 2.2
Table 1.- PRODUCTION OF LARGE CIGARS,a IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AND
THE UNITED STATES, 1920-30a
Number of cigars
Cigar production
produced In -
relative
to 1920
Year
United States
New Hampshire
United States
New Hampshire
(Millions)
(Percent)
1920
69.7
8,097
100.0
100.0
1921
55.4
6, 726
79.5
83. 1
1922
56.5
6,722
81.1
83.0
1923
68.8
6,950
98.7
85.8
1924
74.0
6,598
106.2
81.5
1925
65.9
6,463
94.5
79.8
1928
66.5
6,499
95.4
80.3
1927
60.5
6,519
86.8
80.5
1928
55.3
8,373
79.3
78.7
1929
52.8
6,519
75.8
80.5
1930
40.4
5,894
58.0
72.8
1931
41.7
5,348
59.8
66.0
1932
44.5
4,383
63.8
54.1
1933
45.4
4, 300
65.1
53. 1
1934
56.1
4,526
80.5
55.9
1935
57.8
4,685
82.9
57.9
1936°
59.4
n. a.
85.2
n. a.
aClgars weighing more than 3 pounds to the thousand.
aBased on "Tobacco Division, " Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue (U. S. Treas. Dept., Bur. Int. Rev., 1920-36).
cFigure for the Company. Obtained from the Bureau of internal Revenue rec¬
ords.
n'a'Data not available.
p
At the request ofthe R. Q. Sullivan Company, the Bureau of Internal Revenue
provided us with the annual total production figures of this company for the
period 1931 through 1936 and with the production figures by classes of cigars
manufactured during the last 3 years of this period. The production records
by classes for the years prior to 1931 have been destroyed by the Bureau In
accordance with Its congressional authorization.
In the years 1931 to 1936 Inclusive, the Company produced 9? percent, 92 per¬
cent, 95 percent, 94 percent, and 95 percent respectively of New Hampshire's
total.
Thus the output of the Company during this period, all classes considered, was
never less than 92 percent or all cigars manufactured In New Hampshire. This
lowest percentage was produced In 1932 when many of the displaced cigar makers
opened "buckeye" shops. As these shops gradually liquidated, the percentage
produced by the Company Increased.
For this period, therefore, it certainly Involves no distortion of facts to
assume that the relative changes in the various annual production totals for
New Hampshire represent accurately the relative changes In the respective
totals of the Company. The assumption seems equally valid for the decade of
the twenties, since the Industrial directory compiled biennially by the New
Hampshire Bureau of Labor lists for the period under consideration only two
cigar manufacturers, the Company and a manufacturer whose personnel never
exceeded 10. The Census of Manufactures has not published the statistics
of this Industry for New Hampshire In order to avoid disclosure.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
7
FIGURE 2. — TOTAL CIGARS AND CLASS "A" CIGARS PROOUCED IN THE
UNITED STATES AND IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
1921-1935
UNITED STATES
MILLIONS OF CIGARS
snooor
8,000
7,000
5.000
2,0 OC
i.ooo
] OTHER THAN CLASS "A"
CLASS "A" (FIVE CENTS OR LESS)
1921 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MILLIONS OF CIGARS
1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935
Based on data in table 2.
WPA - National Research Project
LS-8
8
CIGAR MAKERS
Although the peak of production for the entire industry was
reached in 1920, the peak for the Company's, or New Hampshire's,
share of the industry was not reached until 1924. Production
for this year was 6 percent above that for 1920, whereas produc¬
tion for the intervening years seemed to reflect cyclical rather
than secular influences. But from 1925 to the end of the decade
a downward trend in New Hampshire's production was discernible.
Thus, New Hampshire's production for 1929 was 24 percent less
than for 1920, although the production for the entire industry
had been stabilized during the second half of the twenties at
about 20 percent below its 1920 level. In the first year of the
depression the rate of decline for the Company was greatly ac¬
celerated and reached its low point in the first half of 1931»
whereas the somewhat accelerated but orderly decline for the en¬
tire industry did not reach its trough until 1933-
This general decline in the volume of. cigar production after
1920 occurred at the very time that an important part of the in¬
dustry was attempting to improve its competitive position by
marketing a low-priced cigar of good quality. To carry this out
profitably, it was necessary to effect a substantial reduction
in costs. This was tantamount to requiring a substantial reduc¬
tion in labor costs, since this item was a high percentage of the
total. The perfection of the automatic "bunching" and "rolling"
machine by 1919 provided a method for accomplishing the requisite
cost reduction.
In that year the firm of Waitt and Bond, manufacturer of the
"Blackstone" cigar, attempted tosolve its labor difficulties by
moving its factory from Boston to Newark, New Jersey, and there
installing automatic cigar-making machinery.3 The successful use
of the machine process by this company was sufficient demonstra¬
tion of the practicability of applying automatic machinery to the
industry, and mechanization, therefore, was not slowtotake hold.
Upon the basis of Bureau of Labor Statistics figures on cigars
produced by machines it has been estimated that in 1919 machine-
made cigars were 2.6 percent of the total; in 1929, 35.1 percent;*
and in 1933, 52.3 percent.5
3
Russell H. Mack, The Cigar Manufacturing Industry{Philadelphia: University
or Pennsylvania Press, 1933), p. 71.
4
"Technological Changes In the Cigar Industry and Their Effects on Labor,"
Monthly Labor Review, 33, No. 0 (Dec. 1931), 13 & 17.
5The Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Di¬
vision of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1936), p. 169.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
9
MECHANIZATION AND THE 5-CENT CIGAR
The relationship between increased mechanization and the con¬
current increase in the production of inexpensive cigars is sug¬
gested by the shift of production® recorded in table 2. Class
"A" cigars, which are made to retail at not more than 5 cents,
represented only 10.2percent ofallcigars produced in the United
FIGURE 3.- CIGAR-MAKING MACHINE
This four-operator machine makes long-filler cigars. From right to left,
the first girl places filler tobacco i ri the machine, which automatically
makes the bunch. The next operator is responsible for the binder leaf, and
the third, for the wrapper. The machine then drops the finished cigar for
inspection by the fourth girl.
States in 1921.7 By 1929 this class accounted for 54-9 percent
of the total production and by 1933 for over 85 percent. The
gain in class "A" production by 1935 resulted in the virtual
elimination of class "B" and the reduction of class "C" by three-
fourths.
Production of cigars by classes Is not available, but data for removed tax-
paid cigars are available. Since there Is only a slight difference between
the two series for the period under consideration, for purposes of exposition
tax-paid removed figures have been regarded as production figures.
tj
Throughout this report, the word "cigars" refers to large cigars weighing
more than 3 pounds per thousand. Small cigars (weighing less than 3 pounds
per thousand) have constituted a negligible proportion of total production.
Table 2.- PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF CIGARS PRODUCED, BY CLASSES,'
AND THE UNITED STATES, 1921 AND 1924-35b
(Cigars weighing more than 3 pounds per thousand)
IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
Calendar
year
Total
"A"
"B"
"C"
"D"
"En
New
United
New
United
New
United
New
United
New
United
New
United
Hampshire
States
Hampshire
States
Hampshire
States
Hampshire
States
Hampshire
States
Hampshire
States
1921
n . a.
100.0
n .a .
30. 2C
n. a .
27. 8e
n . a .
39. 2C
n .a .
2. 7C
n . a .
.lc
1924
100.0
100.0
.4
39. 3
19. 7
20.8
79. 9
38. 0
0
1.8
0
. 1
1925
100. 0
100.0
. 4
41. 6
23. 1
17. 6
76.5
38. 7
0
2. 0
0
.1
1926
100. 0
100.0
.5
44. 0
23.4
14.5
76. 1
39. 3
0
2.1
0
. 1
1927
100.0
100.0
. 5
48. 4
22.5
11.5
77. 0
37. 9
0
2. 1
0
. 1
1928
100.0
100.0
. 9
51. 7
22. 9
10. 0
76. 2
36. 2
0
2.0
0
.1
1929
100.0
100.0
1. 4
54. 9
20.6
8.8
78. 0
34. 2
0
2.0
0
. 1
1930
100. 0
100.0
1. 7
61. 1
20. 1
6. 7
78. 2
30. 3
(d )
1. 8
0
. 1
1931
100.0
100. 0
39.0
69. 7
3.4
3. 3
57. 6
25.5
(d)
1.5
(d)
(d)
1932
100.0
100.0
59. 6
78. 7
. 1
1. 2
40. 3
19.0
(d)
1. 1
0
(d)
1933
100. 0
100.0
70. 1
85. 6
(d)
. 7
29. 9
12. 9
(d )
. 8
0
(d)
1934
100.0
100.0
77. 8
86. 2
(d )
1. 2
22. 2
12. 0
(d)
. 6
0
(d)
1935
100.0
100.0
81. 9
88. 1
(d)
1. 4
18. 1
9. 9
(d)
.6
0
(d)
O
>■
w
EC
>■
CJ
w
CO
Class "A* cigars manufactured to retail at not more than 5 cents each.
Class "B" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 5 cents each and not more than 8 cents each.
Class "C" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 8 cents each and not more than 15 cents each.
Class "D" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 15 cents each and not more than 20 cents each.
Class "E" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 20 cents each.
bBased on "Tobacco Division." Annua( Report of the Conuieeioner of Internal Revenue (U. 8. Treas. Dept., Bur. Int. Rev., 1921-36).
3ee also footnote 0, p. 9.
cThe Tobacco Study (U. 8. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Division of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1930), p. 170.
aLess than one-tenth of 1 percent.
n,a*Data not available.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
11
The production record of the Company (as indicated by the New
Hampshire columns of table 2) also provides a confirmation of the
relationship between mechanization and the shift toacheap cigar.
Prior to 1931, the year of mechanization, class "A" cigars repre¬
sented less than 2 percent of the Company's production, whereas
class "C" cigars accounted for about three-fourths. In the
first full year of production by machines, 1932, the production
of class "A" cigars was greater than that of class "C" cigars;
the respective shares were 60 and 40 percent.
The makers of the "7-20-4" cigar realized, even before the de¬
pression, the necessity for offering a cheaper cigar. In addition
to the "7-20-4", which retailed at 15 cents and upon which the
firm's reputation was built, they were producing the "Dexter",
which retailed since the boom year of 1924 at 10 cents apiece or
two for 15. Other brands, inconsequential in terms of volume,
were the "7-20-4 Pony" and the "Little Gold Dust", both made to
retail at 5 cents. At the first evidences of serious shrinkage
in business in 1927 and 1928, the management was ready to resort
to the use of machines. The step, however, was not taken.
As a result of friendly conferences on matters re¬
lating to shop conditions, an amicable agreement was
reached between the officials of the company and of
the Cigar Makers Union, Local 192, assisted by the
president of the international organization, whereby
the present brands bearing the name of R. G. Sullivan
"7-20-4" will continue to be hand made.
. . . . controversy over the contemplated introduc¬
tion of machines in the factory has existed for some
time. The satisfactory arrangement between employer
and employee means that one of Manchester's largest
and most important industries will continue to function
as in the past. Cigar makers are among the highest
paid workers in the community and the weekly payroll
of the Sullivan Company, when operating at capacity,
totals many thousands of dollars.
In view of the fact that many of the large cigar
manufacturers are using machines, the decision of the
p
Sullivan Company is most important for this industry.
The failure of the Company to mechanize prior to the onset of the
depression accounted in large part for the precipitate drop in
its production during 1930 as compared with the more moderate
decline in national production. That is, since a large part of
the cigar industry was already mechanized, it could profitably
®The Manchester Leader, Manchester, New Hampshire, June 7, 1928.
12
CIGAR MAKERS
manufacture a cheap cigar and thereby was in a better position
to meet the competition of cigarettes. The "7-20-4" plant, on
the other hand, was in no such position, since it still relied
on a 15-cent cigar. As a cigar of that price is in the category
of luxuries, the demand for it would be more drastically curtailed
during a period of business recession than would that fora cheap
cigar-9
During the period preceding the mechanization of the Company's
plant, the management saw the demand for its 10-cent cigar, the
"Dexter", increase and the sales of its 15-cent cigar, the "7-20-4",
decline. By 1930, about two hundred cigar workers in the factory
were employed on "Dexters" and six hundred on "7-20-4's."10 The
makers of the "7-20-4" had taken a $3 cut in the wage rate of
$21.50 per thousand and were working only 24 hours a week. Though
the rate was $18.50 per thousand cigars and the daily production
about three hundred cigars per man, the weekly wage of the"7-20~4"
worker averaged under $20.00. A "Dexter" mold worker averaged
about five hundred cigars a day, but at the rate of iio per thou¬
sand his weekly wage very likely did not exceed that of the "7-20-4"
worker. The firmstated that business was so poor that they could
lay off fifty to one hundred men and stilloperate on a 3-day week.
It was under these conditions that the management again turned
to the cigar-making machines as a solution. The manufacturers of
high-priced cigars were finding that the public accepted the ma¬
chine-made product, which could be retailed at much less though
the tobacco content was the same or better. In the latter part
of 1930 a few machines were introduced into the "7-20-4" plant
for making the "Dexter" cigar. By the early part of 1931, the
machines had justified themselves for "Dexter" manufacture, but
the "7-20-4's", which had been the mainstay of the Company's
business, were lagging behind in sales. The tail was wagging
the dog, and again a change was indicated.
Q
The fact that the fluctuations In the Company's production have greater
amplitude than those for the entire Industry Is, In part, due to statistical
reporting. In a series composed of many reporting firms, there Is a pos¬
sibility of rises offsetting declines and vice versa and thereby moderating
the amplitude of fluctuations, since the business fortunes of all firms in
a given Industry are not perfectly synchronized. In a series composed or
only one firm, this possibility does not exist.
10Both were full-size, hand-made cigars, but the "Dexter" had a bunch com¬
posed of Havana scrap, whereas the "7-20-4" was made with Havana whole-leaf
bunch. In addition, the molds used for shaping the "Dexter" decrease the
time required for making It.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
13
PROPOSED WAGE CUT AND REFUSAL OF HAND WORKERS
Before turning to machines for producing the "7-20-4"s", in
February 1931 the Company made a wage-reduction proposal to the
six hundred hand workers with the installation of automatic ma¬
chinery as the alternative to its rejection. It proposed a rate
of $14 per thousand, which represented a cut of $4.50 from the
prevailing rate of $18.50. Demoralized by the constant attacks
upon hand work and the part-time employment of the last year, the
men, nevertheless, were united in refusing the offer. In their
special meeting of February 25, 1931, they elected a committee
of five to negotiate with the firm, specifying that "if anyone
is fired as a result of taking part in this controversy, others
would go out on strike." It appears plain from the record of
the negotiating committee which met with the management that
the men pressed to know if their acceptance of the lower rate
would keep additional machines out of the factory. It appears
equally plain that the two executives who met personally with
the union committee replied frankly that they could make no prom¬
ises that machines would not have to come and
. . . . added that they were surprised that they kept
on making cigars by hand as long as they did, consid¬
ering the price at which the machines make them. In
the beginning, they were afraid to try the machines,
but they find that the public is buying machine made
cigars. With their trade falling off continually,
the fact that their product is made by hand, does not
even influence the public to pay an extra cent for
their goods. All the salesmen report that it is a
matter of price. The shop should be making 1,500,000
a week and they are shipping only 421,000 and a part
of those are "Dexters" that were made at Christmas.
All our friends in the tobacco business have advised
us to go into machines. To be frank, when we figured
everything down to a rock bottom basis, we realized
that the machine is the only solution to our problems.
We do not feel positive that the price that we propose
will meet the situation. Even at the $14 rate, we have
no assurance that this figure will not del ay the inev¬
itable. 11
Again in summarizing the management's position the same lack
of assurance was expressed thus:
11Mlnutes of Cigar Makers Union, Local 192, Manchester, N. H., under date
Of Feb. 27, 1931.
14
CIGAR MAKERS
Union spokesman:
.... Now as we understand it, we will report back
to the meeting and state that $14 is your price, that
you do not urge the men to take it and that even if
they do take it, you have no expectation and are not
sure that even at that price it will act as a deter¬
rent to the machine.
Management:
That is right.12
That even the acceptance of the wage cut could not forestall
the use of machines is evident from the cost figures mentioned
by the management at this meeting.
.... So when you ask for a compromise [on the
wage rate], we say there isn't any possibility of
that when you figure that with four girls on ma¬
chines, the royalty and interest figured in, you have
— 13
a total cost of $6.25 per thousand.
This is to be contrasted with the proposed cost by hand of $14
per thousand. The large differential in the cost between the
two methods of production lends much credence to the statement
of one displaced cigar maker that by accepting the cut, "we
would have stayed only long enough to have paid for the machin¬
ery."
The union received the report of the negotiating committee and
persisted in its decision to reject the proposed wage cut. On
March 7, 1931,the firm was notified of the action of the union
and stated that "as everything had been thrashed out, there was
nothing more to say."14
When, in April, the management was asked if it would dis¬
continue the use of machines provided the workers would accept
the $14 bill of price, it had apparently irrevocably decided
on mechanization.
. . . . They [the firm] started to make "7-20-4" by
machines last week and are satisfied with results.
When they learned of the action of the union on the
$14 price last February it was then decided to use ma¬
chines. If the men had accepted the reduction they
[the firm] would have been willing to gamble. They
1ZIbid.
13Ibid.
14
Minutes of Cigar Makers Union, Local 192, Manchester, N. H., under date
of Mar. 7, 1931.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
15
would have put the "7-20-4" In the 10-cent class,
taken the differential between machine made cigars of
their competitors and $14, and tried to put it over,
although they were not sure of success. Their competi¬
tor's price is between 75 and 78 dollars per thou¬
sand [compared with $95 for the Company's], therefore
they must make the cigar cheaper in order to continue. 15
MECHANIZATION AND LAY-OFFS
In April 1931, the lay-off of the six hundred hand workers
started and by January 6, 1932 it was completed.16 The cigar
makers had expected that about a hundred would be retained to
supply the market for the hand-made "7-20-4", but only 13 re¬
mained to make the original product which still retails for
15 cents.
The union record indicates that at best it is only a partial
truth to claim that the hand cigar maker himself must take the
main responsibility for his displacement by machines, a displace¬
ment which, it has been alleged, had arisen out of his lack of
foresight and his naive, arrogant belief in the undiminished ef¬
ficacy of his skill.17 Such a claim overlooks the additional
facts that some of the workers had come to the Company only after
they had been displaced by machines elsewhere, and that the un¬
ion journal carried news of technological displacement through¬
out the industry at home and abroad. It appears unjustified to
say that the workers failed to appreciate the technological
trends in the industry, even though a few were reported to have
believed that "the machines wouldn't stay", or that "if the old
man were living, the machines would not be brought in."
But appreciation of technological trends did not necessarily
provide a satisfactory solution. The union record also shows
the lack of resourcefulness of the hand workers in the face of
machine competition. In their lengthy discussions with the firm
the most that their strategy could suggest was to press for in¬
formation on costs, in order toprove that they were being asked
15Mlnutes of Cigar Makers Union, Local 198, Manchester, N. H. , under date
of Apr. 28, 1931.
16Infonnatlon provided, at the request of the Company, by the Treasury De¬
partment, Internal Revenue Service, Cigar Manufacturer's Monthly Returns,
1931 and 1932.
17Accordlng to union sources this Judgment has been fostered by the Company
to offset the community Ill-will evoked by the displacement of a skilled and
well-paid group of artisans. It could not be determined to what extent the
union is Justified In this belief.
16
CIGAR MAKERS
to take a cut out of proportion to the loss borne by their firm.
Once the machines were installed, suggestions for action, which
were dropped after much discussion, were reduced to declarations
that the lay-offs were a lock-out or to insistence upon a dif¬
ferent union label for the machine-made product - an issue on
which the manufacturers had won 5 years earlier. More practical
was the suggestion that the union negotiate with the firm for
the employment of the hand workers as machine operators. This
suggestion, however, was not acceptable to the Company because:
. . . . when they considered putting in machines they
also considered women to operate them as all their
competitors were doing the same. They could not con-
10
sider the men at this time.
According to several cigar workers, the refusal on the part of
the management to put men on the machines was conditioned to some
extent by its experience with two young men who had just com¬
pleted their apprenticeship as hand cigar makers. They were
allowed to operate the first "Dexter" machines but, since they
expressed dissatisfaction with them, no men were given the oppor¬
tunity to operate the machines thereafter.
As the impending lay-offs became a reality, the resulting
distress among the workers was reflected at once in the minutes
of the union. It was the custom of the union to permit old
or sick members or widows of former workers to solicit funds
in the factory. One widow reported a collection of $4.4. When
the men were laid off, many solicited similar box collections to
raise funds to leave Manchester or to help support themselves.
Notices of such requests for collections appeared at nearly
every meeting toward the end of the year 1931 and were never
refused. If an opening for a cigar maker was reported to the
secretary of the union local, he put the names of all unemployed
men in a hat and drew a name at random to determine whom to
recommend.
PRODUCTIVITY AND PRODUCTION COSTS OF MEN AND MACHINES
In the course of negotiations with the union, the firm com¬
mented that "they were surprised that they kept on making cigars
18
Minutes of Cigar Makers Union, Local 192, Mancnester, N. H., under date
of Apr. 28 and Aug. 31, 1931. For evidence that this was the usual proce¬
dure in the industry, see p. 24 & table 8.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
17
by hand as long as they did."10 It is indeed surprising after
an inspection of the relative productivity of the hand and ma¬
chine process. So striking is the difference that the lack of
refined measurements is no serious deficiency.
The productivity of the machine can be measured with accuracy
for 1936. The "Dexter"80 cigars are made by a two-operator ma¬
chine, requiring a binder operator and a wrapper operator. The
Company listed the names of 67 binder operators and 74 wrapper
operators, and the Division of Unemployment Compensation of the
Bureau of Labor in New Hampshire cooperated by submitting for
analysis the year's weekly record of earnings and man-hours for each
operator on the above lists. From this the annual earnings for
each operator were computed as well as the aggregate of the
hours worked throughout the year. Annual earnings divided by
annual man-hours yielded earnings per hour. Since each operator
in 1936 received $1.25 per thousand cigars, this amount divided
into the earnings per hour gives a quotient representing the
number of cigars produced in an hour. A frequency distribution
of the output per hour of the 74 wrapper-machine operators is
presented in table 3. This may be regarded as a distribution
of production per machine-hour.
The productivity of hand makers isshown in table 4forcompari-
son. These displaced cigar makers who are now operating "buckeye"
shops in Manchester were asked to state what they considered
their average daily output when working for the Company. The
answers of these 26 former employees are here tabulated. It
would be only natural for these estimates to have a somewhat up¬
ward bias.
The vast difference in productivity is evident. Thus, the
median output per machine-hour is 459 cigars and the median
output per machine operator is 229.5 per hour,81 whereas the
10Hde supra, p. 13.
^The "Dexter" cigar leads the "7-20-4" now In production, and, since many
of the "7-20-4" machines were Idle, the "Dexter" machines making a scrap-
filler cigar were considered best for this analysis.
pi
Expressed In terms of man-hours per thousand cigars, this would be 4.36
hours. In aplantmaklng a short-riller cigar retailing at 6 cents, surveyed
by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Research Project,
the comparable figure was 3.89 hours. (W. D. Evans, report on productivity
of labor In the cigar manufacturing industry, In preparation.)
The speed of the machine Is set within wide limits by each team of two
operators. The upper limit Is set by the physical capacity of the machine
and the lower limit by what the firm considers an uneconomical use of Its
machine. In practice, the operators of the Company are given much latitude
In determining their own speed.
18
CIGAR MAKERS
Table 3.- DISTRIBUTION BY AVERAGE PRODUCTION PER MACHINE-HOUR
OF 74 WRAPPER MACHINE OPERATORS
AT THE COMPANY, 1936a
Number of
Average production
wrapper
of cigars per
operators
machine-hour
Total
74
9
403 and under
2
404-411
0
412-419
3
420-427
2
428-435
5
436-443
6
444-451
10
452-459
13
460-467
13
468-475
9
476-483
2
484-491
0
492-499
0
500 and over
Median
-
459
aComputed from records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division of Unem¬
ployment Compensation.
Table 4.- DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTIMATED DAILY PRODUCTION OF
26 HAND CIGAR MAKERS WHILE WORKING
FOR THE COMPANY4
Number of
Estimated daily
hand oigar
production
makers
of cigars
Total
26
1
200
2
275
10
300
2
325
5
350
2
400
3
450
1
475
Median
-
300
aThe estimates were furnl3hedby the men and refer to production of the "7-20-4•
cigar.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
19
median output per hand worker per day is 300.22 The machine in
l hour produces, on the average, S3 percent more cigars than a
hand worker did in a day, and the average output per machine
operator in 1 hour and 18 minutes equals the average daily out¬
put of the hand worker.
The difference is still striking when the output of the ma¬
chine operator is compared with the output of the former "Dexter"
hand worker. According to union sources, the latter averaged
about soo cigars whereas the machine operator produces 1,836
per man-day of 8 hours - an increase of productivity of 267
percent.
If the productivity of the machines could be translated into
pecuniary terms, the real advantage over manufacture by hand
could be established. Unfortunately, the cost of machine opera¬
tion per thousand cigars could not be determined for this company.
The only figure available is $6.25 quoted by the management in
the course of its negotiations with the union over the wage cut.
But this was before the firm had had any extensive experience
with machine operation and before the current wage rate of the
operators had been set. An approximation of this cost may be
attempted, however, on the assumption that the cost of operation
of its cigar-making machinery, other than the wages of operators,
does not differ from that of other large companies manufacturing
a 5-cent cigar under the terms of the President's Reemployment
Agreement.
These cost items were incorporated in an investigation of the
cigar-manufacturing industry conducted by a firm of New York
public accountants, Rossmoore, Robbins and Company. The investi¬
gation was sponsored by the group of cigar manufacturers whowere
interested in having a code adopted by the industry. The most
detailed cost information was supplied by the four leading com¬
panies producing machine-made 5-cent cigars. The costs are for
September 1933. The following costs of machine operation have been
adapted from National Recovery Administration file material.23
From Company and union sources it has been established that
each machine operator at the Company is paid $1.25 per thousand.
22No allowance Is here made for any change In the size of the cigar and the
length of the working day. The fact that both were greater before mechani¬
zation than they were after It Is, In this case, an offsetting considera¬
tion. Of course, no account Is taken of any qualitative differences.
^As transcribed by W. D. Evans.
20
CIGAR MAKERS
Added elements of cost chargeable to machine
Costs per 1,000
production (excluding wages of operators)
cigars
Total
$3.0400
Wages of machinists and oilers4
. 3201
Power4
. 1480
Machine repairs and repair parts8
. 1395
Depreciation on cigar machines
. 3670
Interest on cigar machines
. 2844
Insurance on cigar machines
. 0047
Machine production overhead
(includes overhead applicable to
direct machine production, in¬
cluding supervision)8
.5615
Application of cost of maintaining idle
cigar machines to production
. 1054
Loss on defective cigars and on learners
.0953
Royalties on leased machines
1.0051
aTotal for factory. It Is Impossible to allocate that proportion of these
Items which Is due to use of clgar-maklng machines.
Since the machine making the 5-cent "Dexter" cigar requires two
operators, $2.50 must be added tothe above cost, making a total
cost for this stage of production of $5.54. Since the hand
worker on the "Dexter" cigar was paid $10 per thousand, there
has been a net saving of $4-46 on production costs if the above
cost figures apply to the Company. How much of this margin had
to be sacrificed in order to enable the cigar to retail at 5 cents
instead of two for 15 cents or 10 cents straight cannot be de¬
termined in the absence of the prices charged the wholesaler.
EXTENT AND NATURE OF THE LABOR DISPLACEMENT AT THE COMPANY
In view of the extreme difference in the costs of the two
methods, of the limitations to expansion of demand, and of the
complete labor turnover at the Company's plant, the displacement
of workers was considerable. This displacement of workers is
proved by other statistical relationships also, even after full
allowance has been made for the crudeness of the statistics.
The number of hand workers employed by the Company previous to
1931, when machine installation was completed, cannot be as-
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
21
certained. However, the biennial reports of the New Hampshire
Bureau of Labor contain a directory of manufacturing establish'
ments with the number of males and females employed by each.
The annual average number of cigars produced for the same bien¬
nial periods has been obtained from the Bureau of Internal Rev¬
enue. From Company sources it has been established that there
have been no technological changes in any of the other departments
of the factory. Consequently a divergence in the rates of change
in numbers employed and number of cigars produced may be attri¬
buted almost entirely to the technological improvements in the
cigar-making branch of the business.
These rates are presented in table 5. They are striking even
for the biennium 1931-32, during which the transition was made
to the machine-made product. Compared with the average for
1929-30, production decreased in this 2-year period by less than
one-seventh, but employment by more than one-third.24 Produc¬
tion in the succeeding period, 1933-34, was almost 2 percent
above production in the base period, 1929-30, but the number
employed continued to decline, being only 46 percent of the
average number employed in 1929-30. Although the decline in
Table 5.- AVERAGE ANNUAL NUMBER EMPLOYED AND THE AVERAGE ANNUAL
PRODUCTION OF CIGARS AT THE COMPANY BY
BIENNIAL PERIODS, 1929-36
Number
Percent
Biennium
Annual
average
employed3
Annual
average of
cigars
produced6
thousands)
Annual
average
employed
Annual
average of
cigars
produced
1929-30
1,068
46,665c
100. 0
100. 0
1931-32
664
40,295
62. 2
86. 3
1933-34
489
47,457
45.8
101. 7
1935-36
522
57,131
48. 9
122. 4
aAdapted from the biennial reports of the New Hampshire Bureau of Labor.
b0btalned from the Bureau of Internal Revenue records.
cProductlon for New Hampshire from "Tobacco Division," Annual Report of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue (U. S . Treas . Dept., Bur . Int. Rev., 1930-31).
24The production figures for 1929-30 are those for the State of New Hampshire.
They are probably from 3 to 5 percent In excess of the Company's produc¬
tion for this period. However, since no adjustment was made, a conservative
bias was thereby Imparted to the results.
22
CIGAR MAKERS
employment was arrested in 1935-36, it was still less than 50
percent of the 1929-30 average, and the disparity in relative
rates of change between employment and production had become
greater, production being more than 20 percent above the 1929-
30 level.26
The rate at which the hand makers were dismissed is indicated
in table 6. Within a year their number had been reduced from
626 to 13. The distribution by sex of all workers at the Com¬
pany from 1921-22 to 1935-36 is shown in table 7 and figures.
When production was by hand, the number of males greatly exceeded
that of females. In 1929-30, for example, there were 3.2 males
for each female. With the installation of machinery, however,
the proportion was reversed, and in 1935-36 there were nearly
two female workers for each male worker.
Table 6.- NUMBER OF HAND CIGAR MAKERS EMPLOYED
AT THE COMPANY, 1931-32a
Month
Average number of hand cigar makers
employed daily in -
1931
1932
January
626
3b
February
620
13
March
620
13
April
555
13
May
493
13
June
539
13
July
515
13
August
515
13
September
417
13
October
323
13
November
228
13
December
196
13
aTreasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, Cigar Manufacturer's Monthly
Returns - copies of returns supplied by the Bureau at suggestion of the Com¬
pany.
bUntll January 6, 195 hand cigar makers were employed. The number dropped
precipitately to 3 on January 11. The 3 is therefore not the actual arith¬
metic average of the number employed during January but the representative
one .
pc
The Increase In output between 1933-34 and 1935-38 Is due to a decrease in
part-time operation rather than to any Improvement In the machinery.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY 23
Table 7.- DISTRIBUTION BY SEX OF THE COMPANY EMPLOYEES
l»21-36a
(Annual average for biennlum)
Biennlum
Total
Male
Female
1921-22
1,183
903
280
1923-24
1, 282
1,004
278
1925-26
1,239
981
258
1927-28
1,156
882
274
1929-30
1,068
813
255
1931-32
664
351
313
1933-34
489
162
327
1935-36
522
176
346
aAdapted from the biennial reports of the New Hampshire Bureau of Labor.
F
1921-22
1923-24
1925-26
1927-28
1929-30"
1931-32
1933-34
1935-36
KaSii female: HH male
ISURE NUMBER AND SEX OF EMPLOYEES OF THE COMPANY, 1921-36
NUMBER OF PERSONS EMPLOYED
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 T00 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
See table 7 for data.
WPA - National Research Project
LS-9
24
CIGAR MAKERS
The displacement may be expressed in still another way. The
626 hand workers employed in January 1931 had been replaced by
1936 by 13 hand workers on part time, 202 machine operators, and
20 machinists. This reduced number produced more than the larger
force of hand workers.
The refusal to retrain hand workers for machine operation ap¬
pears to have been general throughout the industry. Indeed, so
thoroughgoing was the discrimination against them that in 1933,
according to a special survey of the industry made by the Census
of Manufactures for the National Recovery Administration, only
23 male hand workers were employed out of a total of 12,001
machine piece-workers.26 Moreover, women hand workers were in
almost equal disfavor.
Not only were men being displaced in the modern or¬
ganization of the industry but the older women were
losing ground to the young girls. Wherever machine
equipment had been installed superintendents expressed
a preference for young girls in place of the older
women who were skilled hand makers.27
Little other than their age is known about the young women em¬
ployed to operate the machines in Manchester. This item of in¬
formation, supplied by the Bureau of Unemployment Compensation
of New Hampshire, is classified in table 3 and compared with the
age distribution of the hand workers. (See also figure 5•) The
comparison is for 1931, the year in which the displacement oc¬
curred. The tabulation discloses that a group with a median age
of 26.2 replaced an industrially-aged group with a median age
of 47. Twenty-one of the 321 hand workers in the sample studied,
or about 7 percent, were 65 years of age or over, and about one-
fourth were at least 55 years old.28 Whether the young girls
had had any previous industrial experience could not be ascer¬
tained. Previous experience with cigar-making machinery was
P 6
The Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Di¬
vision ot Review, mimeo. report, Mar. 1936), pp. 159-60.
27
Caroline Manning and Harriet A. Byrne, The Effects on Vonen of Changing
Conditions in the C igar and Cigarette Industries (U. S. Dept. Labor. Women's
Bur., Bull, of the Women's Bur., No. 100. 1932), p. 37.
28
That the hand worker generally was an older worker is confirmed by Manning
and Byrne, op. cit., p. 41. Of the 847 women hand workers interviewed,
". . . . about two-fifths were less than 30, and about three-tenths in each
case were 30 and under 40 and 40 years of age or more." Additional evidence
to the same effect is provided by the distribution by age of 1,908 hand ci¬
gar rollers of class "A" cigars in York County, Pennsylvania District, as
of August 1934. Their modal age was between 46 and 55. See The Tobacco
Study, p. 154.
TRENDS WITHIN THE CIGAR INDUSTRY
25
FIGURE 5.- AGE OF CIGAR MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND CIGAR MAKERS
AS Of July 1931
MACHINE OPERATORS
PERCENT OF TOTAL
35
PERCENT OF TOTAL
35
MEDIAN AGE : 26
16-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64
AGE GROUPS
HAND CIGAR MAKERS
PERCENT OF TOTAL
35
PERCENT OF TOTAL
35
MEDIAN AGE : 47
20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 AND
AGE GROUPS 0VER
See table 8 for data.
W P A - National Research Project
LS-XO
26
CIGAR MAKERS
not a prerequisite for employment, since a forelady instructed
the newcomers in the use of the machine.89
Table 8.- COMPARISON OF THE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE
OPERATORS WITH THE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF
328 HAND CIGAR MAKERS®
(As of July 1, 1831)
Age on July 1,
1931b
Machine operators
( female)
Hand cigar makers
(male)
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Age unknown
18
-
7
-
Total reporting
184
100.0
321
100.0
16-19 years
34
18.5
0
0
20-24 years
49
26.0
7
2.2
25-34 years
59
32.1
53
16.5
35-44 years
31
16.8
77
24.0
45-54 years
9
4.9
100
31. 2
55-64 years
2
1. 1
63
19. e
65 and over
0
0
21
6.5
Median (age in
years)
20.
2
47.
0
Data on machine operators from records of New Hampshire Bureau :f Labor,
Division of Unemployment Compensation, and data on hand makers from records
of Cigar Halters Union, Local 192, Manchester, N. H.
bAges ascertained were calculated back to July 1, 1931. Dates of entering
upon or of leaving employment were scattered; the entire group was not en¬
gaged at the same time.
29
It appears that local girls were selected and the family names of seme are
Identical with those of the displaced workers. It has been claimed the Company
attempted to mitigate the hardships of displacement by employing the daughters
of the cigar makers as operators. This Is denied by union sources which
claim that whatever representation the cigar makers' families have among
the machine operators does not result from the systematic pursuance of a
Company policy but Is rather the result of plant politics.
SECTION III
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HAND WORKERS
NATIVITY
It has been stated that the hand worker was industrially-aged
at the time of displacement. That he was typically foreign-born
is indicated in table 9.
Table 9.- CLASSIFICATION BY COUNTRY OR STATE OF BIRTH OF 150 HAND
CIGAR MAKERS IN MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE8
Country or State of birth
Number of cigar makers
Total born in foreign countries
110
Belgium
61
Canada
22
Holland
15
Germany
3
France
3
Scotland
2
Russia
2
England
1
Switzerland
1
Total born in United States
40
New Hampshire
26
Massachusetts
6
Pennsylvania
2
Illinois
1
Maryland
1
New York
1
Rhode Island
1
Vermont
1
Washington
1
aFleld survey data.
The cigar makers compose an ethnic group somewhat apart from
the textile and shoe workers of Manchester who are French-Cana¬
dian, Irish, Polish, and Greek. Over one-half of the cigar
27
28
CIGAR MAKERS
makers are of Germanic origin, having come from Belgium, Holland,
Switzerland, and Germany. The Netherlands have been prominent
in tobacco trading since the discovery of the weed, and Dutch
and Belgian cigar makers migrated to Manchester in considerable
numbers. French-Canadian cigar makers form the other large
group, having come down from the eastern cities of Canada. The
younger men of native birth are generally the cigar makers' sons
who were inducted into the trade by their fathers. The period
of apprenticeship is 3 years for hand workers and 2 for mold
workers, and union regulation in 1931 limited the number of ap¬
prentices to 5 atatime ina factory employing 500 cigar makers.
These limitations have no doubt operated to restrict the occupa¬
tion to certain families. This is confirmed by the recurrence
of certain surnames.
YEARS AT CIGAR MAKING
An idea of the degree of their occupational habituation may
be had from a tabulation of the years spent at cigar making up
to 1931. Thus, 50 percent of the workers had been engaged at
the single trade of making cigars by hand for 30 years and more,
and 72 percent had been so engaged for at least 20 years.
Table 10.- DISTRIBUTION OF 150 CIGAR MAKERS AT THE COMPANY BY
TIME SPENT AT MAKING CIGARS BY HANDa
As of 1931
Time spent at making
Number of
Percent of
cigars by hand
cases
total
Total
150
100.0
6 mo. to 4 yrs. , 5 mo.
4
2. 7
4 yrs. , 6 mo. to 9 yrs. , 5 mo.
8
5.3
9 yrs. , 6 mo. to 14 yrs. , 5 mo.
14
9.3
14 yrs. , 6 mo. to 19 yrs. , 5 mo.
16
10. 7
19 yrs., 6 mo. to 24 yrs., 5 mo.
17
11. 3
24 yrs., 6 mo. to 29 yrs., 5 mo.
17
11.3
29 yrs., 6 mo. to 34 yrs., 5 mo.
21
14.0
34 yrs., 0 mo. and over
53
35.4
aFleld survey data.
The continuity of employment at their trade can be indicated
in still another way. The years spent at cigar making by an in-
CHARACTERISTICS OF HAND WORKERS
20
dividual may be expressed as a percentage of the total number
of years that he has been in the labor market. Table u repre¬
sents such a tabulation for the year 1931.
Table 11.- DISTRIBUTION OF 150 CIGAR MAKERS AT THE COMPANY
BY YEARS AT MAKING CIGARS BY HAND AS A
PERCENT OF YEARS IN THE LABOR MARKETa
As of 1931
Years at making cigars by hand
as a percent of years in the
labor market
Cigar makers
Total
Under 50 percent
50-74
75-79
80-84
85-89
90-94
95-99
100
Field survey data.
In this sample, 30 percent had been engaged at cigar making
for all their working years; 60 percent worked at the trade for
at least 90 percent of all their years in the labor market, and
three-fourths had spent a minimum of 85 percent of their working
time at cigar making.
While the degree of occupational habituation of this sample
seems extreme, it appears not uncommon for the hand cigar maker
to have spent many years at his trade. The Women's Bureau, for
example, interviewed 1,086 women who had been employed in hand
cigar factories. Of this number, one-quarter had been employed
in the industry less than 5 years, slightly more than one-half had
been so engaged a minimum of 10 years, and almost one-fifth had
spent 20 or more years in the industry.1
^Caroline Manning and Harriet A. Byrne, The Effects on Wonen of Changing Con¬
ditions in the Cigar and Cigarette Industries (U. S. Dept. Labor, Women's
Bur., Bull, of the Women's Bur., No. 100, 1932), p. 49.
30
CIGAR MAKERS
YEARS IN MANCHESTER
Community ties were nearly as strong as occupational ties, as
may be seen from a distribution of the sample of 150 cigar makers
by years of residence in the community. Twenty-one, or 14 per¬
cent of the total, reported residence in Manchester since birth,
while an additional 85 persons, or 56.7 percent, had resided there
at the time of enumeration for at least 20 years. As many as 85
percent claimed Manchester residence for at least 15 years.
Yet in their younger years many of them must have been quite
mobile. This isevidenced not only by the fact that a large per¬
centage of the workers came from foreign countries in pursuit of
employment in the United States, but also by the fact that a sub¬
stantial fraction of the sample was first initiated into the un¬
ion bysome local other than the Manchester one. How many loca-
tional changes were made before coming to Manchester is not known.
A list of the locals of first affiliation is given in table 12.
Table 12.- THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-EIGHT HAND CIGAR MAKERS EM¬
PLOYED BY THE COMPANY, CLASSIFIED BY THE CIGAR
TRADE UNION LOCAL OF FIRST AFFILIATION*
Location of local of first affiliation
Number of persons
Total
328
Manchester
97
Rest of New Hampshire
8
Boston
96
Rest of Massachusetts
9
Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, and
Connecticut
10
New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania
41
Southern States
9
North Central and Mountain States
10
Canada
33
Unknown
17
aFrom records of Cigar Makers Union, Local 192, Manchester, N. H.
The number for Manchester, 97, undoubtedly is largest because
men had come to the Company from shops which were not unionized
or from foreign countries and therefore joined the union for
the first time in Manchester. The next largest group, 96, gave
CHARACTERISTICS OF HAND WORKERS
31
Boston as their local of first affiliation. This number includes
many Belgians and Hollanders who lef t Boston because of the afore¬
mentioned advantages enjoyed at the Company's factory. Only 19
of 311 known cases came from west of the Atlantic Seaboard States;
only 5 of them were from the far West.
TEARS WITH THE COMPANY
The men were not asked how long they had worked for the Company,
and the detailed occupational history begins onlywith 1926. The
characteristic tenure of this group may be inferred, however.
The "7-20-4" factory was virtually the only one in the Manchester
area. Hence, when a schedule shows fewer years in Manchester
than years at cigar making, the former figure may be taken to
represent the years of employment at the Company. Likewise, when
years in Manchester exceed the years at cigar making, the latter
figure may be taken to represent the years of employment at
"7-20-4."z A distribution of the cigar makers by the length of
their service with the Company at the time of the lay-off fol¬
lows. This discloses that 31 percent had been employed for more
than 20 years, more than 50 percent for at least 15 years, and
more than 75 percent for a minimum of 10 years.
Table 13,- DISTRIBUTION OF 150 HAND CIGAR MAKERS BY LENGTH
OF SERVICE WITH THE COMPANY, 193la
Length of service
with the Company
Number of cases
Percent of total
Total
150
100.0
Under 5 yrs., 5 mo.
0
4.0
5 yrs., 6 mo. to
10 yrs. , 5 mo.
29
19.3
10 yrs., 6 mo. to
15 yrs., 5 mo.
34
to
to
^3
15 yrs. , 0 mo. to
20 yrs., 5 mo.
35
23. 3
20 yrs. , 0 mo. and
over
40
30.7
aFleld survey data.
2
In those cases where the individual either was born In Manchester or took
up residence there before entering the labor market, years of residence in
Manchester were computed from the year of entering the labor market.
32
CIGAR MAKERS
EMPLOYMENT PATTERN AT THE COMPANY BEFORE THE LAY-OFF
Association with one company over a considerable number of
years was not the only item of security enjoyed by these artisans.
The actual employment provided was steady. Except during the
dull winter season from January to April, full-time work was
the characteristic employment status. At least, this may be im¬
plied from the data available for the 5-year period, 1926 to
1930.
L . C. Ourette WPA . Nitionil ficjitrch Projict
FIGURE 6.- PREPARING THE BINDER FOR A HAND-MAOE CIGAR
Note pile of binder leaf at left and, in front of the worker, the mold
containing bound bunches ready for molding. This man is now a "buckeye",
whose factory is the cellar of his home.
Thus, out of 1493 cases 144 reported no employer shifts between
1926 and 1930, and 5 cases reported one to two employer shifts.
Equally indicative of stability is the lack of occupational
shifts. No occupational changes were recorded for 142 workers,
and only one to two shifts were reported for 7. That these
shifts represent mostly advancement from jobs of lesser skill
in the cigar industry is suggested by the fact that only one
3
One case out of the 160 was reported unknown with respect to the items here
omimo f a A
CHARACTERISTICS OF HAND WORKERS
33
worker in the sample changed industries (from textiles to cigar
making) in this 5-year period, and this change occurred in the
first year of the period. It is also of significance that in
this period none attempted to operate his own cigar shop or en¬
gage in any enterprise that would involve self-employment.
In view of this evidence of stability, it is not surprising
that unemployment was all but nonexistent. Only 8 of the 150
reported a period of 1 month or more duration of unemployment
seeking work. None of these was unemployed for more than a year
and only one was unemployed for more than 6 months. But even
these figures exaggerate the extent of unemployment, for in one
case the unemployment occurred before the worker's connection
with the Company, and in 5 cases the unemployment period was
placed in 1930 after final separation from it.4 Hence, accord¬
ing to our records, in only two cases was tenure with the Company
interrupted by unemployment periods of a month or more in which
the cigar worker was seeking work. Unemployed but not seeking
work was recorded for only five of the cigar makers, and the
period of unemployment never exceeded 6 months.
In 1930, however, this economic security was shaken by the ex¬
tension of the part-time employment of the dull winter season
to the remaining months of the year. As subsequent events proved,
this was a mere foreshadowing of the change in status.
To summarize, at the time of his displacement by machines the
typical cigar maker was elderly and, in terms of industry's re¬
quirements, industrially-aged. He had learned cigar making early
and had followed this trade almost to the exclusion of any other.
His long tenure with the Company enabled him to grow roots which
went deep into the community, and the regular employment that he
enjoyed gave him little opportunity to learn the art of job hunt¬
ing. Considering these personal handicaps, what were his avenues
of adjustment?
40ulte probably these five cases of unemployment result from faulty memory.
Machines were not Introduced as early In 1930 as the remarks of the persons
Interviewed Indicate.
SECTION IV
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT IN INDUSTRY
AFTER THE LAY-OFF
SPECIAL OBSTACLES PRE8ENTED BY THE CIGAR INDUSTRY AND THE
MANCHESTER AREA
Possibly if the times had been favorable, the limitations of
training would have been less severe. But the widespread de¬
pression at the time of the lay-off militated against any easy
adjustment. Workers were being laid off generally throughout the
country. Moreover, the demand for cigars had declined to such
an extent that, while production in other manufacturing industries
from 1920 onward was increasing, cigar production had dropped 20
percent by 1929. A special survey of employment conditions in the
cigar industry in 1933 was made by the Bureau of the Census at
the request of the National Recovery Administration. The statis¬
tics obtained showed that "weekly wages in the cigar industry
throughout the period [1921-1931] werefarbelow those paid in the
other industries."1
Sweatshop conditions already existed among hand workers em¬
ployed on the cheap "two-for-five" cigars, notably in Pennsylvania
and Florida, where nearly half of the total output of cigars is
produced. When an attempt was made to establish a code of hours
and wages under the National Recovery Administration, the state
of the industry was chaotic. The code provided for a 40-hour
week and a minimum wage of 30 cents an hour in the north for hand
workers on the cheap cigars, and allowed a lower rate for so-
called slow workers. In York County, Pennsylvania, however, an
exemption to these rates was granted to avoid closing of factories.
In a memorandum of the Industrial Advisory Board of the National
Recovery Administration of October 19, 1934, itwasstated that:
The average wage paid cigar rollers [in York County
district] is $9.00 a week, minimum wage in the Code is
$10.80 [per week]. Manufacturers are making no profit
and, if a higher wage has to be paid, they cannot stay
in business and make 2 for 5 cent cigars. .... If
^ The Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration. Di¬
vision of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1938), p. 159.
34
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
30
the Code is enforced, over 8,000 will be thrown out
of work; if it is not enforced it will have a bad ef¬
fect on the wages and hours provisions of the Code.2
This was the state of a craft whose members had once boasted of
making their $6o per week.
With a future sodark for employment at their own trade, where
else could the displaced workers turn? The larger number were
too old to acquire a new skill, and the generally depressed con¬
ditions of 1932 gave no encouragement to them to do so. Man¬
chester had been settled by Amoskeag Mill workers and the well-
being of the city depended upon the mills. The Amoskeag Company
had employed more than fifteen thousand persons in its heyday in
the pre-war and war years, but its business had declined steadily,
and by 1931 was severely affected by the depression. It closed
in 193S. Although in 1931 the company employed on the average
about seven thousand operatives, a portion of them were extra hands
who were taken on and laid off at brief intervals as orders were
received and completed. Depressed wages and increased speed of
production were additional factors making the workers' position
unenviable. The great majority of the employees, though classed
as semiskilled, were performing machine operations which could be
mastered ina few hours' time. Although preference was ordinarily
given to former employees, the cigar makers had some chance at
Amoskeag jobs, unstable in character as these were.
The other large industry in Manchester is shoe manufactur¬
ing, employing 9,800 persons in 1935. It had experienced many
vicissitudes during recent years, and by 1931 thecompanies which
remained in the city had established a labor policy of open shop.
Only young persons, however, were employed as beginners.
Industrial workers in this city, never a highly paid group,
were suffering in 1931-32 from loss of work incident to the de¬
pressed world markets. Retail trade and the personal service
industries in this city of 77,000 quickly reflected the state of
the workers' pocketbooks. Construction workwas practically non-
existant in the area, and many skilled mechanics could get no work.
Agriculture, which many unemployed craftsmen attempted to pursue
during the depression, did not favor the novice here; for the
soil was stony, and even poultry raising, the most generally
pursued form of the agricultural industry in this section, re-
ZIbid., p. 172.
36 CIGAR MAKERS
quired a considerable capital outlay. Finally, theodd-job field
of the untrained laborer was largely closed to men who had been
accustomed to a sedentary occupation which made no demands upon
physical strength.
UNEMPLOYMENT BETWEEN LAY-OFF AND NEXT JOB
The findings of this survey indicate moreover that this pic¬
ture of employment opportunities for the displaced men has
not been too darkly painted. That the difficulties manifested
themselves at the outset is indicated by the distribution of the
interval of unemployment between leaving the Company and obtain¬
ing the next job in private industry, including self-employment
(table 14). Since 13 of those of the random sample with whom
personal contact was established withdrew from the labor market
at the time of the lay-off and since 9 of the random sample were
retained as hand makers at the "7-20-4" plant, the sample in this
connection covers 116 cases. About one-eighth of this total, 15,
Table 14.- DISTRIBUTION OF 116 CIGAR MAKERS BY MONTHS OF UNEM¬
PLOYMENT BETWEEN LAY-OFF FROM THE COMPANY
AND NEXT JOBa
(Including self-employment)
Interval
Number of
Percent
in months6
persons
of total
Total
lie
100.0
0
15
12.9
1-2
5
4.3
3-5
8
6. 9
6-8
4
3.4
9-11
2
1. 7
12-23
21
18.1
24-35
19
16.4
36-47
11
9.5
48-59
9
7.8
60-67
22c
19.0
aField survey data. "Job" excludes government emergency work, but not per¬
manent government positions.
bExcludes periods of "not seeking work."
c0f these, 16 had no Job between the lay-orf and the Interview in February
1637. (See p. 48. )
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
37
found work again without experiencing any unemployment.3 This in¬
cluded 10 whohadnever been unemployed since the lay-off. With¬
in a year 29 percent of the 116 workers had secured employment
and within 2 years almost half were back in private industry for
the first time since the lay-off. This about coincides with the
trough of the great depression. In the third year after the lay¬
off, one of general revival, an additional 16 percent obtained
employment. But 2 more years had to elapse before another 17
percent left the ranks of the unemployed for the first time.
Finally, when business had attained a large measure of recovery,
22, or almost one-fifth of the sample, had been unemployed at
least 5 years. Three of these found some work, but the other 19
have been continuously unemployed since the lay-off.
TOTAL UNEMPLOYMENT
Equally revealing of the difficulties of reabsorption into
economic life is the distribution by the total months of "unem¬
ployment seeking work" experienced any time between displacement
andthedate of our census, a maximum interval of 67 months (table
15). As noted above, the sample is reduced to 116 cases. Of this
Table 15.- DISTRIBUTION OF 116 CIGAR MAKERS ACCORDING TO THEIR
TOTAL UNEMPLOYMENT SINCE LAY-OFF3,
(As of February 1937)
Duration of unemployment
Number of
Percent
in monthsb
persons
of total
Total
116
100.0
0
10
8.6
1-2
4
3.4
3-5
8
6.9
6-8
0
0
9-11
0
0
12-23
12
10.4
24-35
18
15.5
36-47
12
10.4
48-59
20
17.2
60-67
32
27.6
aFleld survey data.
^Excludes periods of "not seeking work."
Since the enumerators were Instructed to disregard employment or unemploy¬
ment of less than a month's duration, It would be more accurate to say that
15 found employment within a month after the lay-off. Two of these were per¬
forming less skilled Jobs at the "7-20-4" plant.
38
CIGAR MAKERS
number io,or9 percent, experienced no unemployment, having been
continuously employed either by others or for themselves. But
3a, or a8 percent, had been unemployed for at least 5 years, and
19 of this number had had no employment since leaving the Company.*
Of the 32, 20 wereagedSS or over. Slightly more thanso percent
had been unemployed a minimum of 3 years, while only 19 percent
had been unemployed not inexcessof8 months, including thosewith
no unemployment. Asforthe remainder, 15.5 percent had been un¬
employed from 24 to 35 months and 10.4 percent from 12 t02j months.
EMPLOYMENT STATUS AT TIME OF INTERVIEW
Even at the time of our interview - about si years after the
lay-off - the readjustments were far from satisfactory. Out of
307 cigar makers (excluding the 12 "buckeye" proprietors who
were known to be employed at the time of sampling and the 9 re¬
tained on hand work at the "7-20-4" plant) , 129, or 42 percent, were
either working for others or were self-employed at the time of
the interview; 23 .4 percent were unemployed seeking work (this in¬
cludes those doing government emergency work) and 7.S percent
were no longer seeking work. The employment status of 48, or
15.6 percent, was unknown. Of this number 45 were no longer
living in Manchester. In all probability many of these were
unemployed, for when a man finds work the news spreads rapidly
among a displaced group and is quickly passed along, whereas
relief status or unemployment is not so readily reported. Al¬
most 10 percent had died by February 1937, additional evidence
of the high age level of the group, and for 6 cigar makers, or
about 2.0 percent, no information whatever was obtained.
Excluding the last 3 groups (employment status unknown, dead,
and no information), the distribution of the remainder of the
sample by employment status is shown in table 16. (See also
figure 7.) Some 5 years after displacement 58 percent were em¬
ployed, 32 percent were unemployed but looking for work, and to
percent hadwithdrawn from the labor market. As subsequent anal¬
ysis will show, the extent of employment indicated here gives a
more favorable impression than is warranted.
*After several years or seeking work 3 additional persons withdrew rroa the
labor market.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
09
Table 16.- EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND AGE DISTRIBUTION OF 224 CIGAR
MAKERS LAID OFF BY THE COMPANY IN 193la
(As of February 1937)
Tot al
Distribution
by
age groups (numbers)
Status
Num¬
ber
of
per¬
sons
Per¬
cent
of
total
Un¬
known
25-34
35
-44
45-54
55-64
65 and
over
Total
224
100.0
2
26
39
64
61
32
Employed by
others
83
37. 1
0
18
21
26
11
7
Self-employed
46
20.5
1
2
5
17
18
3
Unemployed
seeking
work
72
32. 1
1
6
10
19
27
9
Unemployed
not seek¬
ing work
23
10. 3
0
0
3
2
5
13
Employment status from field survey data and age data from records of Cigar
Makers Union, Local 192, Manchester, N. H.
figure 7.- employment status by age groups five years after the lay-off
percent of total in each age group
25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 and over
age groups
■■ employed by others [ ) unemployed seeking work
msm self-employed i 1 unemployed not seeking work
Based on data in table l6. WPA - National Research Project
l s -11
40
CIGAR MAKERS
RELATION OF AGE TO EMPLOYMENT STATUS AT TIME OF INTERVIEW
That age had some relationship to status is borne out by table
16. The chances of being employed by others were greater for
those between the ages of 25 and 44 than for those aged 45 to 54
and 55 and over. The group 45 to 5<+ has a significantly larger
proportion of its workers employed than did the older group.
These relationships were consistently maintained in the other
categories. Thus, as the older workers experienced greater dif fi-
culty in finding an employer, they resorted to operation of
"buckeye" shops. This is evidenced by the higher percentage
who were self-employed in the age groups from 45 to 64 than in
the younger age groups. The fate of the unemployed seeking work
was shared in about equal proportion by all age groups except
those aged 55 to 64. These experienced the greatest difficulty
in finding employment, although they were not yet sufficiently
incapacitated by old age or sufficiently well off to withdraw
from the labor market. They are in sharp contrast to those aged
65 and over, 40 percent of whom had withdrawn from the labor mar¬
ket .5
THE ROLE OF MIGRATION
Even the precarious livelihood earned by this group was at¬
tained in many cases only at the expense of leaving their homes.
The extent of the geographical dispersion at the time of the
canvass is presented in table 17. It understates the amount of
mobility, since some of those resident in Manchester in February
1937 had moved about during the 5-year period since the lay-off.
A few, for example, returned to Europe, tried to find work, and
later came back to Manchester. Likewise, among those known to
be dead, some died after returning totheir former homes in for¬
eign countries and some died in other parts of the United States.
Out of the 307 comprising the sample about 29 percent, or 90, had
left Manchester, 7 of whom were in unknown localities. More than
&Thls relationship Between age and the difficulties of securing employment
Is similar to that found In another area and fcr a larger sample. For ex¬
ample, according to a former cigar plant superintendent In the Belt Area
(the valley Between Ailentown and Norrlstown, Pennsylvania), ". . . . There
probably were a thousand hand cigar makers here 10 years ago. but barely a
hundred are so employed now It was hardest for those over 30, and
the older they were the harder It was. The great difficulty was that few
of the cigar workers were under 35 or 40 when the slump came, since no ap¬
prentices had been trained In the Industry for years." Caroline Manning and
Harriet A. Byrne, The Effects on Monen of Changing Conditions in the Cigar
and Cigarette Industries (U. 8. Dept. Labor, Women's Bur., Bull, of Women's
Bur., No. 100, 1932), p. 17.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
41
three-fifths of the known total remained in the New England
region with concentrations in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
Twelve were reported to be in Europe and 8 in Canada. The geo¬
graphical dispersion of 59 former cigar workers not included
in our sample confirms the regional distribution of the sam¬
ple migrants, according to information from the tax assessor's
files.6
Table 17.- GEOGRAPHICAL DISPERSION OF 149 CIGAR WORKERS
WHO LEFT MANCHESTER AFTER LAY-OFFa
Number of cigar workers
who left
Manchester
Present location
Total
Out of the
Others included
total included
in tax assessor's
in the sample
list of migrants
of 307 cases
after 1930°
Total
149
90
59
Hillsboro County
10
5
5
Rest of New Hampshire
6
5
1
Massachusetts
42
22
20
Connecticut
26
IB
B
Rest of New England
7
3
4
Middle Atlantic
(Pennsylvania
New Jersey
New York]
13
5
8
Rest of United States
9
5
4
Canada
9
8
1
Holland
1
0
1
Belgium
12
10
2
Germany
2
2
0
Other
0
0
0
Unknown
12
7
5
aFleld survey data.
°To facilitate the collection of the annual poll tax, the office of the tax
assessor maintains a card Index of each resident aged 21 years or over. In
the course of the annual canvass, the cards of those who have moved from
Manchester are placed In the Inactive file with a notation of the community
of Immigration, If Known. It Is from this file of Inactive cases tnat the
above tabulation was made.
It Is Interesting to note that only one of the hand workers In either sam¬
ple Is reported to have gone to Pennsylvania, where hand methods of manufac¬
ture are still extensively employed. (See table 23.)
42
CIGAR MAKERS
The factors causing immobility were ascertained from 111 cigar
workers who limited their search for employment to Manchester.
The largest number, or <+s» found jobs of some kind at home before
the matter became so urgent that they were willing to leave the
city. Twenty reported family or community ties and 5 had prop¬
erty which kept them in the city. Nineteen either were aged or
suffered from infirmities. In 22 cases the reasons were a com¬
posite of considerations which seemed to group themselves around
the belief that the odds for security were greater at home than
elsewhere. The continually decreasing demand for hand-made cigars
was a general consideration, and the discouraging reports of men
who went out and sought employment where hand workers were still
used was a particular consideration. A more specific consider¬
ation was the responsibility for support of families, who would
at least be fed as citizens of Manchester but would have no
claim on other communities if efforts to find work or to live
on work obtained were unsuccessful.
The age selection among the migrating cigar makers was contrary
to that usually encountered among migrants. That is, a rela¬
tively larger number among the aged groups, 55 and over, than
among the younger groups left Manchester. Since the employment
status of half of the migrants is unknown, this is difficult to
explain.
Table IS.- DISTRIBUTION BY' AGE OF 90 HAND CIGAR MAKERS WHO EMI¬
GRATED FROM MANCHESTER, RELATED TO AGE DIS¬
TRIBUTION IN ENTIRE SAMPLE, 1931-36*
Age as of July 1, 1931
Age groups
Number of
mi grants
Number in
total sample
Migrants as
percent of total
in each age group
Total
90
307
_
20-24
0
7
0
25-34
4
53
7.6
35-44
16
72
22. 2
45-54
26
90
28.9
55-64
26
57
45.6
65 and over
14
21
66.7
Unknown
4
7
-
aAge data from records of Cigar Makers Union, Local 182, Manchester, N. H.,
and migration data from field survey data.
"No meaningful figure.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
43
CHARACTER OF JOBS AFTER THE LAY-OFF
An examination of the type of jobs held and of the duration of
their current status discloses that even those who got employ¬
ment, with few exceptions, were unable to make any adjustment
that did not involve a serious lowering of their standard of
living.
Table 19 classifies the types of jobs of the 83 men employed
by others and the 46 self-employed (table 16) at the time of the
survey. The jobs outside of Manchester are classified separately.
By far the largest number of those in Manchester, or 37, were in
the cigar industry, of whom 29 were making cigars and 8 had other
jobs in the industry. These 8 represent transfers, principally
of younger men, to semiskilled or unskilled jobs in the Com¬
pany's factory. Of the 29, 18 were self-employed, but as a sub¬
sequent discussion will show, their status may be considered for
the most part as a form of disguised unemployment. This applies
Table 19.- TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FOUR HAND CIGAR WORKERS
CLASSIFIED BY INDUSTRY OF PRESENT JOB
IN MANCHESTER AND ELSEWHERE4
(Including self-employment )
Present jobs (February 1937)
Industry
Total
In
Manchester
Elsewhere
Total with jobs
129
87
42
Cigar manufacturing
66
37
29
Textile manufacturing
6
4
2
Shoe manufacturing
7
7
0
Retail and wholesale trade
15
12
3
Hotel and restaurant
9
8
1
Personal service
2
0
2
Recreation and amusement
3
3
0
Farming
6
3
3
Building and construction
2
2
0
City offices
3
3
0
Other
10
8
2
Total unemployed
95
aField survey data.
44
CIGAR MAKERS
also tomuch of the self-employment and casual employment reported
in industries other than cigar making. A mere enumeration of
the jobs makes this evident.
Of the so men employed in Manchester outside the cigar indus¬
try, only 4 were in the textile industry. Two of these were
laborers who helped to set up machinery while new companies were
moving into the Amoskeag Mills. Seven were employed in the shoe
industry, <+ of whom are known to be machine operators. The
largest number who were employed at other than cigar making were
in retail and wholesale trade inthecity. Of the 12 so engaged,
3 were self-employed. One was the manager of a chain grocery.
Two were grocery salesmen and 1 was a cigarette salesman. Of
the remaining 5 jobs, 1 was skilled, 2 were unskilled, and 2 were
semiskilled. Two of the proprietors noted in the group had no
doubt been able to get a foothold in business through capital
invested. The stock of the third is limited to doughnuts which
he himself makes and sells from house to house. Six of the jobs
are in food selling. Closely related to this field is the hotel
and restaurant trade in which 8 men were engaged. Three were
cafe or restaurant managers, 2 of whom owned their stock. Three
were bartenders, 1 a waiter, and the eighth was a night clerk
in a hotel. All of these were skilled jobs. Recreation and
amusement offered employment to 3. One was a waiter in a club.
Although bookmaking for horse races is illegal in the State, 2
men were so employed. Three men were farmers, 2 of whom were
known to be poultry farmers. It is reported that other cigar
makers had invested savings in poultry farms and had failed to
make them pay. A few of those who opened "buckeye" shops have
followed poultry raising as a concurrent occupation. Building
and construction, private, State, or municipal, offered employ¬
ment to only 2 men, a truck driver and a tool man on State high¬
way construction.
The 3 city offices held by former cigar makers were the only
positions which may be regarded as better than their former jobs.
Of the 8 men who held miscellaneous jobs 2 were janitors and
1 a watchman, 1 a railroad laborer and 1 an insurance sales¬
man. One man helped his son-in-law who was an upholsterer and 2
men trimmed lawns. The latter 2 were old men and their work was
mainly unskilled and seasonal.
A description of the jobs held by the migrants suggests that
their readjustment was no more fortunate than the readjustment
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
45
of those who remained in Manchester, Of the 42 migrants whose
occupations are known, 29 were at their old trade, 11 in shops
of their own. Two were working in textile mills, occupation un¬
known. Three were in retail and wholesale trades, 2 of them as
gas station attendants and 1 as salesman. One was manager of a
restaurant. Two were attendants in a State hospital. Three were
reported as farming, 2 of them as poultry farmers. Two were mis¬
cellaneous as to industry, being an elevator operator and a painter
respectively. Five of the 13 outside of the cigar industry were
self-employed. In terms of skill, 5 were semiskilled occupa¬
tions, 6 were skilled, and 2 were unknown. It is obvious that
the type of work and the skill required do not vary to any ap¬
preciable extent in the two groups and that the bulk of the jobs,
exclusive of cigar making, in both groups are semiskilled or un¬
skilled.
Nor can it be maintained that the deterioration in the quality
of employment was gradual, for the character of the jobs held
at the time of the survey did not differ significantly from the
kind of employment secured throughout the 5-year period since
displacement, judging by the occupational histories taken for
116 workers of the sample (table 20). Previous to our census
there were many more jobs in textile manufacturing, but these had
been eliminated by the closing of the Amoskeag Mills in 1935.
Another marked decrease was in the field of building and con¬
struction. Formerly there had been a number of laboring jobs on
highways and municipal projects, other than emergency, where work
was contracted for by a private firm. Some of the men who held
these positions had become accustomed to physical labor while doing
service in the city's woodyard for their relief check or while
performing other emergency work. At the time of our survey, how¬
ever, emergency work (which has not been tabulated as employment)
had largely superseded all other State and municipal construction,
and private building had had no revival in the Manchester area.
It is especially noteworthy that only 14 jobs were held out¬
side of Manchester; 10 were at cigar making andnonewere outside
of New England.
The extremely precarious work status of some of the men during
the depths of the depression is shown by the reasons given for
termination of employment. An apprentice in a shoe factory lost
his job because the factory closed, as did workers in a beer
saloon and a store that went out of business. A house-to-house
46
CIGAR MAKERS
salesman could notsell enough goods, norcoulda taxi-driver who
covered night calls pay expenses. A taxidermist could not make a
living at his trade. An outdoor man on an estate had to leave
when the weather got cold because he could no longer sleep in the
barn. A dishwasher in a hotel was discharged at the end of the
summer. Thirteen cigar makers who opened "buckeyes" had to close
them for lack of markets for their cigars, although two of them
reopened later. In the Amoskeag Mill, wool sorters, laborers,
and a watchman had two periods of temporary work.
Table 20.- CLASSIFICATION BY INDUSTRY OF ALL JOBS HELD BY 116a
HAND CIGAR WORKERS SEEKING WORK AFTER
LAY-OFF IN 1931°
(Including self-employment)
Industry
Total
jobs
held
Present
jobs
Former jobs
(Separated before
Feb. 1937)
( Feb.
1937)
In Man¬
chester
Elsewhere
Total
143
63
00
14
Cigar manufac¬
turing
58
35
13
10
Textile manufac¬
turing
22
2
19
1
Shoe manufacturing
7
4
3
0
Retail and whole¬
sale trade
15
9
0
0
Hotel and restau¬
rant
6
3
3
0
Personal service
2
1
1
0
Recreation and
amusement
4
1
3
0
Farming
2
1
1
0
Building and
construction
19
2
14
3
City offices
2
2
0
0
Other
6
3
3
0
19 of these cigar workers have had no JoD at all since the lay-off although
continuously seeking work for at least 60 months (see table 21). 3 of
these 19 men, after having oeen continuously unemployed for 5 years orraore,
were no longer seeking work at the time of Interview. The 143 jobs were
therefore distributed among 97 workers.
bFleld survey data.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
47
DURATION OF CURRENT STATUS
The description of the jobs held by these workers has indicated
the quasi-casual character of their employment. This is also sug¬
gested by the data in table 21 on the duration of their status as
of February 1937. Such information can be presented only for the
129 workers of the random sample, who were interviewed for their oc¬
cupational histories. Of this smaller sample 42 were employed
by others, but only six, or one-seventh, of these had been con¬
tinuously employed for 5 years ormore at the same job since the
lay-off from the Company. At the other extreme, 7 had secured
their jobs only within the 2 months preceding the date of inter¬
view, and 13, or 31 percent, within a year prior to this date.
While 17 held their jobs from 12 to 35 months, only 6 had been
continuously employed at their current positions from 36 to 59
months.
Table 21.- DURATION OF CURRENT EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF 129 CIGAR
MAKERS LAID OFF BY THE COMPANY IN 193la
Status as of February 1937
Current
status
Duration
in
months
Employed
by others
Self-
employed
Unemployed
seeking
work0
Unemployed
not seek¬
ing work
Total
42
21
47
19
0-2
7
2
5
3
3-5
0
1
4
0
6-8
2
1
1
0
9-11
4
0
0
0
12-23
8
1
9
0
24-35
9
0
3
3
36-47
4
4
5
0
48-59
2
3
1
0
60-67
6
9
19
13
aFleld survey data.
bIncludes tiiose employed on emergency work.
Those who reported themselves as self-employed enjoyed at least
superficially a somewhat more lasting tenure. Thus 9 out of the
48
CIGAR MAKERS
21 so reported had been self-employed continuously for 5 years
or more, and for 5 of these this represents the entire time since
the displacement. On the other hand, only 4 had acquired this
status within the year preceding the survey. Of the remaining
8, 1 had been self-employed for 12 to 23 months and 7 for 36 to
59 months.
At the time of the interview 47 were recorded as unemployed but
seeking work, 19 of whom had been without private employment since
leaving the "7-20-4" factory, a period of more than 5 years.
Since 6 additional had been continuously unemployed for at least
the last 3 years, half of the total may be regarded as chronic
unemployed, particularly since 15 of the 25 were aged ssorover.
For nine of this group the present status of unemployment had set
in only within the 5 months previous to the interview.
Of the 19 who were unemployed but not seeking work 13 withdrew
from the labor market when they were displaced by the machines.
Three haul withdrawn only within the last 2 months and the re¬
maining 3 from 24 to 35 months previous to enumeration.7
The experiences of the 129 displaced hand workers may be summa¬
rized by a distribut ion, according to employment status, of their
total elapsed time between the lay-off and the date of interview
(table 22). This total elapsed t ime amounted to 8,287 man-months
for the 129 workers. More than half of these months were reported
as "unemployment seeking work" and more than one-tenth of the
months as "unemployment not seeking work." The remaining 36
percent of the time represented employment. However, less than
a fifth of the total time involved employment in the cigar in¬
dustry, andalmost half of this employment was in "buckeye" shops,
a type of self-employment that may be regarded in large part as
7
It would appear that the results of our survey In this respect are not un¬
representative. At least the Investigation made hy the Women's Bureau shows
that the women hand workers, even though laid off during an upswing in
general business, were reduced In the main to outright unemployment, part-
time employment, and quasi-casual Jobs. The results were su»arlmed as
follows:
Of the total 1,150 women, 144 [about one-eighth! had had no Job
since the enforced separation. The 1,006 with subsequent work had
had 1,869 Jobs. Almost one-haif of the^e, 477 women, had had only
one Job, 306 had had two, and 223 had had three or more.
Of the 1,889 subsequent Jobs reported by the 1,006 women. Just
over 80 per cent were In manufacturing pursuits. Almost two-thirds
of these were In tobacco, practically all In cigars. The propor¬
tion of the women 40 years of ageormore who had found manufactur¬
ing Jobs was less than such proportions In the other age groups.
Manufacturing Jobs In other lines than cigars were reported much
more commonly by the women under 30 years of age than by those
older Manning and Byrne, op. ext., pp. 59-60.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
49
disguised unemployment, as indeed was much of the employment in
industries other than cigar making.
Table 22.- DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL ELAPSED MONTHS BETWEEN
LAY-OFF AND DATE OF INTERVIEW,
BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS4 b
(129 Hand Cigar Workers)
Employment status
Number of months
Percent of total
Total elapsed time be¬
tween lay-off and
date of interview
8,287
100.0
Unemployed not seeking
work
959
11.6
Unemployed seeking work
4, 360
52.6
Employed in cigar in¬
dustry for others
842
10.2
Employed in cigar in¬
dustry for self
729
8.8
Employed in other than
cigar industry
1, 397
16.8
aEmployment or unemployment of less than a month In duration was not recorded.
bFleld survey data.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE
In view of the extent and duration of unemployment among the
workers, the role of public assistance must have been consider¬
able.8 At the time of the interviews with the 129 men9 whose
histories were recorded, no inquiry was made regarding relief
status, and unless the man was on emergency work there was no
way of knowing this status. If a cigar worker had grown children
who were unemployed, a son rather than his father would possibly
be assigned to work as a laborer onWPA. In such cases, the father
would merely be noted as unemployed and the fact of public assis¬
tance would not be known. In this random sample of scheduled
8The role of private relief agencies seems to nave oeen negllglcle In Man¬
chester. This Is not surprising In view of the small percent of the popula¬
tion which could oe expected to support them. The Amoskeag Manufacturing
Company maintained health and weirare services among Its workers until the
strike of 1922.
9In this connection the sample numoers 307. Of thl s number, 129 were Inter¬
viewed, another 58 were checked with relief case records, and an additional
120 either had moved away, nad died, or were unknown.
50
CIGAR MAKERS
cases 23 of the 66 unemployed cigar makers were on WPA. Of the
43 remaining, 24 were seeking work and 19 were not. Among the
latter number, 12 were disabled,-9 permanently,-5 were reported
as aged and 2 as retired. Among thedisabled and aged group, as
well asamong the 24 who considered themselves still in the labor
market, there were undoubtedly some indigents. Many of those who
were self-employed or working only part time were not making a
living. Among some full-time employees, the nature of the un¬
skilled work performed did not pay enough to live on. Many were
reported to have lost their property, to have moved to smaller
quarters, or to be living with relatives. Savings accumulated
in previous years have been drawn upon until they have been
exhausted.
Of the 23 on WPA rolls, 2 had just attained a relief status in
1937 and had been assigned to WPA jobs at the time of the survey.
Three had been on emergency work totaling from 3 to 8 months, 10
from 12 to 23 months, 6 from 24 to 35 months, and 2 from 36 to 47
months. In addition to these, 11 men among the scheduled cases
who did not have a relief status in February 1937 have performed
emergency work in the past. Two of them who were self-employed
on this date had been on emergency work from 1 to 6 months; 4
holding jobs had been on emergency work for periods varying from
less than 6 months toas much as 42 months. Two men in the labor
market had worked from 1 to 6 months and another one from 13 to
18 months. In addition, twoothermen, who were not seeking work
at this date, had worked from 7 to 12 months on emergency jobs.
Thus at the very least, a total of 34, slightly more than one-
quarter, had some time or other been on emergency work. With the
exception of a few foremanships, which represented a promotion
from a previous unskilled laboring status, all emergency employ¬
ment reported involved unskilled labor.
Fifty-eight former cigar workers living in Manchester were
not contacted personally. These 58 were checked for relief sta¬
tus with the case records of the City and County Commissioners
of Charities and the family welfare agency of the city. It is
known, however, that the records of all these agencies are in¬
complete for both past and present relief status. The Central
Index of Agencies, which was also checked, did not cover possi¬
ble omissions since only one of the Commissioners registers with
it. Records were found for 23 of the 58, or 40 percent, who had
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
51
applied for assistance since the lay-off at the Company.10 Al¬
though the case records are fragmentary, the indications are
that assistance was granted in all cases recorded, either in the
form of employment under the CWA,11 the State Emergency Relief
Administration, and the WPA, or in the form of direct relief.
Nineteen of the 23, or 33 percent of the total, were reported to
be receiving public assistance at the time of this survey.12
There is no doubt that this is an understatement of the extent
of public assistance, both past and present, among our sample of
former "7-20-4" cigar makers. Concerning relief supplementary
to a job, we know of two cigar makers engaged at their trade to
whom work relief is granted. There are no doubt other such
cases. For the 120 cases constituting those who had moved away
or died or were unknown, no information whatever about relief
status is at hand. But in view of the casual and part-time
nature of much of the reported employment, as well as the periods
of unemployment, it may be assumed that public relief has assumed
a much larger role than our limited figures indicate. Moreover,
the cigar makers constituted a special relief problem despite
their relatively small share in the entire relief burden of Man¬
chester. Their standard of living had been higher than that of
most of the mill population of the city, and yet the relief grants
were designed tomeet the needs of the latter group. This imposed
upon the cigar makers additional difficulties of adjustment.
SELF-EMPLOYMENT AT CIGAR MAKING
The extent to which self-employment at cigar making has really
been disguised unemployment cannot be appreciated without a fuller
discussion of the "buckeye" shops. We have already indicated
that a considerable fraction of the 23313 men whose occupations
are known have remained in the cigar industry. At the time of
100ne case of temporary assistance following a flood In the Merrlmac Valley
In 1935 Is not Included In this figure.
11CWA employment noted here was granted after need had oeen estahllshed, and
Is not to oe confused with CWA appointments from the general unemployed
population.
12Two men were on direct relief, one of whom was Incapacitated Oy old age
and the other oy chronic Illness. Two others were receiving Institutional
care.
13Thls Includes the nine who were retained hy the Company as hand maXers.
Two In the Interim had left the Company, I.e., one secured employment as a
cigar maXer elsewhere, and one was employed as a caretaXer on a private es¬
tate.
52
CIGAR MAKERS
this survey 74, or 32 percent, still had employment in the in¬
dustry. Of these, 29 were self-employed.14
On first thought one would expect a still larger percentage to
have remained in the industry, especially in their own shops or
"buckeyes."15 In most instances of technological displacement
of a skilled group, it is not feasible for the artisan tocontinue
to ply his trade as a self-employer. For example, a linotyper,
displaced by improved machinery, cannot very well set up his own
printing press in the back-yard shed, nor can a bituminous coal
miner, displaced by a mechanical loader, ordinarily continue to
make use of his skill on his own account. In hand cigar making,
however, the equipment is extremely simple: a small table, a
knife, and a set of wooden molds are the tools of the trade. An
extra room or a shed in the rear of the house serves the purpose
of workshop and storage place for tobacco and finished goods.
Moreover, the capital investment involved is not great. One
"buckeye" reported that $150 was sufficient to set up in business.
And there is no problem of complementary skills. As an employee
he made the complete cigar from fashioning the filler tobacco
into a bunch to rolling it in the final wrapper leaf. On the
surface then, it appears that cigar making is an exception to
the general rule applying to technological displacement in a
craft enterprise.
But a closer examination indicates that several important con¬
siderations have been omitted. While employed in the factory the
hand worker makes his cigars from the tobacco with which he has
been supplied. As a self-employer he must select his own mixture
of tobacco, and his long training as a cigar maker has not provided
him with the adequate, specialized knowledge. Consequently he is
at the mercy of his tobacco broker in a matter that is obviously
important in conditioning the salability of his product. It is
14A geographical distribution of cigar makers employed by the Company In
1931 who were employed at cigar making In February 193? Is shown in table 23.
15The term "buckeyes" is used interchangeably for the shops and the men.
Its connotations in the trade are usually derogatory. The name appears to
have been current in the trade as long ago as 50 years according to some
elderly nand cigar makers. From lnaulrles made in the trade as to the ori¬
gin of the word, it would seem that the most plausible explanation Is that
a large number of the small factories first eilsted In the State of Ohio,
which Is popularly known as the Buckeye State. There is, moreover, some
statistical evidence in support of this. For example, according to the An¬
nual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for the fiscal Tear 1889
there were 1,733 establishments manufacturing cigars In Ohio. This number
was exceeded only by those in New fork and Pennsylvania, which had 5,890 and
4,978 establishments respectively. On the basis of number of cigars pro¬
duced per establishment, however, it would appear that of all the leading
clgar-produclng States, Ohio had the smallest shops. The number of cigars
produced per establishment In 1889 was 170,493 for Ohio, 189,830 for New Tork,
and 802,454 for Pennsylvania.
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
53
not without significance that the most successful "buckeye" in
Manchester had worked at sampling tobacco for/* years in Holland.
Nor does the trade of cigar making prepare him to be a good
salesman when he becomes a "buckeye" operator. And yet an unusual
amount of salesmanship is necessary to sell in a declining market
in competition with large business units that make use of all the
methods of high-pressure sales promotion. Thus, the successful
operation of a "buckeye" shop demands a variety of talents which
factory employment does not develop.
Apparently, these facts were realized by the displaced cigar
workers only after bitter experiences. According to the 1932
Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 45 cigar
factories were opened in New Hampshire in 1931, making a total
of 61 in business on January 1, 1932. In the ensuing year 32
were opened, and 80 were in business at the beginning of 1933.
Thereafter, the number of failures exceeded the number of shops
opened.
Table 23.- GEOGRAPHICAL DISPERSION OF CIGAR MAKERS WHO ARE
WORKING AT THEIR TRADEa
(As of February 1937)
Locat ion
Employed
Self-
by others
employed
Total
37
40
Manchester
19
29
Rest of Hillsboro County
0
0
Rest of New Hampshire
2
2
Massachusetts
4
4
Connecticut
9
3
Maine
0
1
Pennsylvania
1
0
Canada
1
0
Belgium
0
1
Germany
1
0
Excludes occupations In the cigar Industry other than hand making. In ad¬
dition to those now employed at cigar making In the sample of 224, this ta¬
ble Includes the 8 employees kept on as makers at the Company who are
still employed at making, and 11 "buckeyes" whose names were added from the
Bureau ot Internal Revenue report. The twelfth person listed by the Bureau
was no longer In the cigar Industry at the time of our field survey. An of
the persons Included In this table worked for the Company prior to 1931.
54
CIGAR MAKERS
In Manchester, 64 "buckeyes" were reported to have been operat¬
ing in 1933, and on the date of this survey (February 1937) 35
shops were reported to be in existence. Twenty-nine of these
are included among the 40 self-employed cigar makers shown in
table 23. The duration of operation is known for only 27 of the
40; 18 had been in business for at least si years while 3 had
begun to operate only within the 6 months preceding the date of
interview. The remaining 6 had been in business anywhere from
7 to 48 months.
It is known that 12 others had failed in the si-year inter¬
val between the lay-off and our survey. The duration of opera¬
tion of only 6 is known. None of these lasted more than 3 years
and 3 withdrew within 18 months. The major difficulties have
already been mentioned. Perhaps a contributory factor is the
variation among the men of the quality of their product, particu¬
larly since the high standard of workmanship on the machine-
made product requires a good hand-made article to compete with
it. Lacking advertising, the hand-made cigar has nothing to
recommend it except itself.
EARNINGS AS "BUCKEYES*
But even those who have managed to hold on to their shops have
had only a meagre livelihood from the business. Of the 35 "buck¬
eyes" in Manchester, only 4 were reported to be making a living
from their work. There is reason to believe that those who
avoided competition with other "buckeyes" by moving to neighboring
cities in New Hampshire or other parts of New England have been
more successful.
The fact that the "buckeye" shop must compete in the market of
the 5-cent cigar suggests that it could yield but a poor return
inmost cases. The "buckeyes" agreed to sell at a wholesale price
of $1.75 for 50, or 3i cents apiece, but few have lived up to the
agreement owing to the pressure of competition. One dollar and
sixty cents for 50 has been the usual amount obtained. Some had
sold their cigars to retail as low as 2 for 5 cents. From his
gross iricome of 3± cents a cigar - if he got it - the "buckeye"
had to pay the revenue tax and union dues and cover the cost of
a band, a cellophane cover, and a portion of a box or pack, in
addition to the cost of the tobacco. During the life of the
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
55
Agricultural Adjustment Administration the processing tax cost
from $8 to $10 per month additional, and the market was too pre¬
carious to pass the extra cost along to the retailer. Detailed
cost figures are not needed to make the point that the combined
wages of labor and of management per cigar must be very, very
small.
l. c. Curette WPA - National Research Project
figure 8.- hand worker "bunching the filler"
The mold in which the bunches are formed under pressure is seen alongside
the bench. This "buckeye" is also shown in figure 6.
The nature of "buckeye" markets suggests, moreover, that the
smallness of the per-unit return above material costs was not
compensated for by large volume of sales. The chief selling
places have been drug stores, restaurants, cafes, and the clubs
run by the various ethnic groups in Manchester or nearby communi¬
ties. Some men have been their own retail salesmen, canvassing
the offices and even the streets of the city selling their cigars
singly or in packs at 5 cents a cigar.
None of the "buckeyes" who were scheduled put in full time at
cigar making. They have been their own salesmen and collectors,
and the time consumed in these activities varied with the distance
to their selling place and thedifficulties of collection. Some
56
CIGAR MAKERS
have had assistance from other members of the family incellophan-
ing and packing the cigars. The majority have not been able to
sell enough cigars tokeep them fully occupied in the cigar busi¬
ness and when possible have been doing other work. One man who
has been regularly employed in a store made cigars after hours.
A few have had poultry farms in addition to their shops. Only
L. C. Dur«tt« »PA K • t i o n» I R««««reh ProJ«ct
Figure 9.- hand cigar maker applying the binder leaf
Note in front of him the grooved mold for bunches. This "buckeye" uses
for a factory the living room of his cottage in the country near Manchester.
a few have been able to maintain the standard of living of pre¬
vious years. One small manufacturer who employed four assistants
and reported his 1936 income as $600 stated that if he could get
a job at $15 a week, he would throw awayhiscigar making equip¬
ment tomorrow. These facts suggest the feasibility of a classi¬
fication "self-employed but seeking work."
The difficulties inherent in self-employment in this industry
are reflected in the annual income earned in 1936 at cigarmaking,
as reported by22 "buckeyes." (See table 24.) The median earn¬
ings of the "buckeyes" were $550 with only one person reporting
earnings of over $1,000 and two under $150. There were concen¬
trations at $iso-$249, $45o-$549> and $750-$849. The retrench-
DIFFICULTIES OF REEMPLOYMENT
57
ment that this must have caused can be appreciated by the com¬
parison with the estimated annual earnings reported as received
by these 22 "buckeyes" and 4 others when employed at the Company
in 1930, a year of part-time employment even during the usual
"busy" months. The median wage was $i,07016 with the range be¬
ginning with $750, i.e., $200 above the median earnings of the
"buckeyes." Earnings of $1,750 and over were reported by four.
Table 24.- ESTIMATED ANNUAL EARNINGS FROM CIGAR MAKING AT
THE COMPANY IN 1930 AND AS "BUCKEYE"
PROPRIETORS IN 1936a
Annual earnings
Cigar makers at
the Company in 1930
"Buckeyes"
in 1936
Total
26
22
Under $150
0
2
$150-$249
0
4
$250-$349
0
0
$350-$449
0
1
$450-$549
0
4
$550-$649
0
1
$650-$749
0
3
$750—$849
1
5
$850-$949
4
1
$950-$l,049
8
0
$1,050-$l, 149
1
0
$1,150-$1,249
3
0
$1,250-$l,349
1
0
$1,350-$l, 449
0
0
$1,450-$l, 549
3
0
$1,550-$l,649
1
0
$1,650-$l,749
0
1
$l,750-and over
4
0
Median (annual
earnings)
$1,070
$550
aFleld survey data.
8It would appear that this figure Is representative. The Internal Revenue
records disclose that 8,096 thousand class "B"and31,446 thousand class "C"
cigars were manufactured In New Hampshire In 1930. Production In the other
classes was negligible. It Is Known that the Company produced 97.2 percent
of New Hampshire's total In this year. Using this as a correction factor
for each class, a very close approximation to the Company's output Is ob¬
tained. Since the makers of the "Dexter" cigar (class "B") were paid at the
rate of $10 per thousand and the makers of the "7-20-4" (class »C") at the
rate of $18.50 per thousand, the Company's wage bill for cigar making for
the year can be determined. This amounted to $644,162.50. The records show
that on January l, 1931 there were 628 hand workers In the Company's employ.
Since displacement had not yet occurred, this number very likely represents
the average number employed In 1930. This number divided Into the wage bill
gives an average annual earnings of $1,026.
58
CIGAR MAKERS
OTHER EMPLOYMENT AS CIGAR MAKERS
There remain the 37 other cigar makers whowere still employed
at theirtrade. (See table 23.) Seven of them continued to work
in the "7-20-4" factory from 1 to 2 days a week, producing the
hand-made "7-20-4" for its strictly limited market. The remain¬
ing 12 inManchester were employed by other "buckeyes", generally
on part-time, so that at least one is known to receive public
assistance in the form of emergency work. Of the other 18, 9 had
gone toConnecticut where union wages still obtained in factories
where hand workers were employed. Their hours of employment were
not reported. The exact status of six is unknown and three are
reported to have been working for "buckeyes." With the possible
exception of the 9 in Connecticut, therefore, the 37 men who
were not inbusiness for themselves had not fared any better than
those who were. They were either employed on short hours in
factories or were working for "buckeyes."
It would appear from this survey that the avenues of read¬
justments with few exceptions have been only the dead-end streets
of part-time employment for others or for self, unemployment, and
emergency or direct relief.
SECTION V
COMPAR1SION OF EMPLOYMENT PATTERN, EARNINGS, AND
UNIONIZATION OF MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS
EMPLOYMENT OF MACHINE OPERATORS
The full effects of the use of machines in this particular in¬
stance cannot be gauged without a consideration of the type of
employment and the amount of earnings enjoyed by the machine op¬
erators. From the records filed by the Company with the Divi¬
sion of Unemployment Compensation of New Hampshire it is possi¬
ble to obtain this information for 1936.
For this year the Division required a statement of the hours
worked and the wages earned in each week of the year for each
of the 202 machine operators who were employed by the Company
during the year- By computing an average of the weekly aggre¬
gates of man-hours for each month and relating these to the av¬
erage for the year, the month-to-month fluctuations canbeshown.
(See table 25.) If the monthly fluctuations in 1936 are represen-
Table 25.- MONTHLY INDEXa OF MAN-HOURS WORKED BY MACHINE
OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY IN 1936b
Month
Percent of average
for the year
January
50. 7
February
74.5
March
84.0
April
95.3
May
108. 3
June
111.4
July
117.5
August
108. 5
September
100. 4
October
114.4
November
117. 7
December
111.4
aBased 011 averages of weekly man-hours.
^Computed from data In records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
59
60
CIGAR MAKERS
tative of the seasonal movement in the 4 preceding years, it is
clear that the use of machines has not ironed out the seasonal
variations in employment. The winter months stillconstitute the
dull season.1
The degree of full-time employment represented by the man-hour
data can be shown in several ways. For example, the 202 opera¬
tors can be distributed by the percentage of man-hours worked
during the entire year to the theoretical maximum. Since the
day shift works a 40-hour week and the night shift a 33.75-hour
week and since there is an interchange of shifts once each week,
the full-time hours in a biweekly period equal 73 .75. The prod¬
uct of the latter multiplied by 26 yields the theoretical maxi¬
mum full-time employment in this 53-week period reported to the
Bureau after allowance is made for five holidays. On this basis
slightly more than half of the operators were employed, on the
average, 85 percent of the work-year and only four operators more
than 90 percent. An additional one-fifth was employed three-
quarters of the time; almost one-tenth had worked half of the
time or less. (See table 26.)
Table 26.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY
BY THE PERCENT OF ACTUAL MAN-HOURS WORKED
IN 1936 TO THE THEORETICAL MAXIMUM8,
Percent of
theoretical
maximum
Number of
operators
Percent
of total
number of operators
Total
202
100.0
30 and under
3
1.5
31-40
6
3.0
41-50
10
4. 9
51-60
9
4. 4
61-70
23
11.4
71-80
43
21. 3
81-90
104
51. 5
91 and over
4
2.0
aCoraputed from data In records or New Hampshire Bureau of Lahor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
1Thls seasonal Index Is similar to the one cased on stamp sales which Russell
H. Maclt computed for class "A" cigars for the period 1925 to 1931. The Cigar
Manufacturing Industry (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,
1933). p. 96-
MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS
61
This suggests that complete unemployment in contradistinction
to partial employment was not widely prevalent. The statistics
on weeks of no employment confirm this inference. Thus 28 per¬
cent had some employment in each week of the year and an addi¬
tional 27 percent was completely unemployed for only 1 week.
Only in a little more than one-quarter of the cases did the weeks
of unemployment exceed 4, but one-fifth of these were unemployed
at least 26weeks. (See table 27.) Failure to achieve a fuller
degree of employment cannot therefore be explained by complete
unemployment but rather by partial unemployment.
Table 27.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE
COMPANY, BY NUMBER OF WEEKS WITH
NO EMPLOYMENT, 1936a
Number of weeks
Number of
Percent
with no employment
operators
of total
Total
202
100.0
0
50
27. 7
1
54
20.7
2
18
8.9
3
12
5. 9
4
9
4.5
5
0
3.0
6-7
7
3.5
8-9
6
3.0
10-13
6
3.0
14-20
10
4.9
21-26
8
4.0
Over 26
10
4.9
aCoraputed from data in records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor. Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
There is additional evidence of part-time employment resulting
from the company policy of sharing the work in the dull seasons.
From table 28 it can be seen that more than two-thirds of the op¬
erators had from 6 to 8 months of not less than half-time but
62
CIGAR MAKERS
t
L. C. burette *P* national Research Projatt
FIGURE 10.- MAKING CIGARS BY HAND
The worker is tapering off the wrapper ofanearly finished cigar. In one
day the hand worker makes about 500 cigars of the kind made by the machine
in figure 11. The pict ure was taken i n t he i nter i or of a "buckeye shop* which
is housed in the rear of a small store operated by the same man.
Table 28.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY,
BY WEEKS OF LESS THAN FULL-TIME BUT NOT
LESS THAN HALF-TIME EMPLOYMENT, 1936*
Number of weeks of less than
full-time but not less than
half-time employment
Number of
operators
Percent
of total
Total
202
100.0
0
0
0
1-8
1
0.5
9-16
12
5.9
17-24
30
14.9
25-32
138
68.3
33-40
20
9.9
41 and over
1
0.5
aComputed from data in records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS 03
less than full-time employment.8 Another 10 percent had from 8
to 9 months of such employment while only 6 percent were so em¬
ployed for less than 4 months.
Obviously, this leaves but a small margin for full-time weeks
as is disclosed by the distribution in table 29. While only two
operators had zero weeks of full-time employment, almost two-
thirds had full-time employment, including overtime, from one-
International Cigar Machinery Co.
FIGURE 11,- TWO-OPERATOR CIGAR-MAKING MACHINE
This mach i ne, mak i ng scrap-f i 1 ler c igars , is of t he type which has largely
displaced hand workers at the Company. The filler is fed into the hopper
at right, and the girl places the binder in position. The operator at the
left places the wrapper leaf and inspects the finished cigar. In one hour
about 460 cigars are manufactured on this machine.
quarter to one-half of the year. None had more than 28 weeks
of such employment, while the duration of full-time employment
for the remaining one-third was less than a quarter of a year.
Nor did the peak demands require many overtime weeks of employ-
As previously explained It has been necessary to analyze the operators' em¬
ployment in units of biweekly periods with 73.75 hours constituting full
time. However, because of a decided concentration of cases at 72 hours for
a fortnightly period, this number of hours has been taken to represent full-
time employment. Accordingly, 36 hours over 2 weeks constitutes half-time
employment. For purposes of presentation the biweekly periods have been
converted to a weekly basis.
64
CIGAR MAKERS
merit in this year which was a relatively prosperous one in terms
of production.3 For example, 29 percent had only 1 to 4 over¬
time weeks, another 38 percent 5 to 8 weeks, and one-quarter, 9
to 12 weeks. None had more than 13 overtime weeks.
Table 29.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY
BY WEEKS OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYMENT,® 19306
Number of weeks of
Number of
Percent
full-time employment
operators
of total
Total
202
100.0
0
2
1.0
1-4
10
5.0
5-8
21
10.4
9-12
37
18.3
13-16
48
23.8
17-20
43
21.3
21-24
36
17.8
25-28
5
2.4
aIncludlng overtime weeks.
bComputed from data in records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
From these facts it seems clear that the seasonal utilization
of labor for peak demands has created a labor reserve. That is,
the peak operations, which occur during 2 or 3 months, provide
full-time work for practically all of the 202 operators and occa¬
sionally provide overtime work. To insure the availability of
the full force for the busy season, and thus avoid the cost of
training new personnel each year, the entire group of operators
is kept attached to the plant throughout the dull seasons by part-
time employment that results from sharing the work.
EARNINGS OF MACHINE OPERATORS
It is for this reason that partial employment was the typical
experience of the operators, despite the fact that 202 operators
displaced about 600 hand workers and that the operators produced
more cigars in 1936 than the hand workers in 1929 - a year of
3See table 1.
MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS
65
full-time employment outside the slack winter months. This is re¬
flected in their annual earnings, which are classified in table 30.
Table 30.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY,
BY ANNUAL EARNINGS, 1930a
Operators with
Operators with
a maximum unem¬
a minimum unem¬
Amount of
ployment
of 4 weeks
ployment
of 5 weeks
annual earnings
Number
Percent
of total
Number
Percent
of total
Total
149
100.0
53
100.0
$250 and under
0
0
2
3.8
251 to $500
0
0
15
28. 3
501 to 750
2
1.3
21
39. 0
751 to 800
8
5. 4
5
9.4
801 to 850
15
10. 1
0
11.3
851 to 900
32
21.5
2
3.8
901 to 950
29
19. 5
2
3.8
951 to 1,000
44
29.5
0
0
1,001 to 1,250
19
12.7
0
0
Over 1,250
0
0
0
0
Median (annual
earnings)
$931
$021
aComputed from data In records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
The operators are divided into two groups: one is composed
of those whose unemployment, measured in pay-roll weeks, did not
exceed 4. These may be regarded as the regular working force.
They constituted about 75 percent of the operators. The other
25 percent did not have employment in as many as 48 weeks. It
is instructive to compare the median annual wage of $931 of the
regular operators with $1,070, the median of the annual earnings
reported by 26 hand workers at the Company in 1.930, a poor year.
The lower and upper limits of the range for the former are below
the respective limits of the range of annual earnings of the hand
workers. This may be explained in part by the fact that the
latter are subjective estimates with something of an upward bias.
But even with some allowance for this factor it would appear
that the operators with the fullest employment in a rather pros¬
perous year earned less on an annual basis than the hand workers
66
CIGAR MAKERS
in a year of depressed trade. That is, despite the increased
productivity of the operator over the hand worker, due to the
greater use of capital, labor's share of the product is less on
an absolute basis and perhaps still less on a relative basis.
The "7-20-4" plant, moreover, appears to be paying an hourly
wage considerably above that of some other large manufacturers.
The hourly wage rate at the Company was derived for each of the 202
operators by dividing the annual man-hours into the annual earn¬
ings. The rates are classified in table 31. The median hourly
wage in this distribution was 57.2 cents. In a recent survey of
four large machine-operated factories making short-filler cigars
to retail at less than 5 cents apiece-which of all the factories
surveyed are the most comparable to the Company - the average
hourly wages were 30, 35, 42, and 48 cents.4 To what extent
the differential may be due to the presence of the union at the
Manchester plant cannot be indicated, since it is not known
whether the four factories that enter into the comparison deal
with the union.
Table 31.- DISTRIBUTION OF 202 MACHINE OPERATORS AT THE COMPANY
BY HOURLY EARNINGS IN 1936a
Number of
Percent
Hourly rate
operators
of total
Total
202
100.0
$.40-$.44
3
1. 5
.45- .49
10
4.9
.50
0
0
. 51.
2
1.0
.52
2
1.0
.53
8
4.0
. 54
5
2.5
.55
10
4.9
.56
11
5.4
.57
34
16.9
.58
39
19.3
.59
51
25.3
.00- .64
25
12.4
.65- .69
2
1.0
aComputed from data In records of New Hampshire Bureau of Labor, Division
of Unemployment Compensation.
WPA National Research Project In cooperation with U. S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, report byW. D. Evans on productivity of labor In the cigar manu¬
facturing industry, In preparation, fide infra p. 68.
MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS
67
If available data on costs and net profit were adequate, it
would be of interest to determine whether the increased produc¬
tivity of the machines alone was sufficient to enable the manu¬
facturer to produce a 5-cent cigar with an adequate profit mar¬
gin, or whether the reduction in the workers' earnings was also
necessary. Unfortunately, the requisite information is not at
hand. However, since an increasing fraction of the industry
has mechanized, it may be assumed that the combination of mech¬
anization and reduced wages has yielded profits.
Just how much leeway there has been for establishing earnings
for machine operators at or closer to the earnings of the hand
makers who were displaced, maybe subject to dispute, but, under
existing circumstances, it is not difficult to understand the
demoralization of wage rates and earnings that has overtaken the
industry.
. . . . Machine use has established a standard of
competition suph that hand manufacturers can survive
only by paying pitifully meager wages to their em¬
ployees. Paralleling the problem of wages paid by
hand-made cigar manufacturers, the wage rates in ef¬
fect throughout the machine-made cigar industry pro¬
vided but a bare subsistence for the workers.5
Moreover,
.... It will be observed .... [from a special sur¬
vey by States made by the Census of Manufacturers in
1933] that low as wage payments seem for the country
as a whole, they were even lower for some of the prin¬
cipal cigar producing states. Attention is directed
to Florida and Pennsylvania in particular. e
To appreciate the effect of the changes in the cigar industry on
the hand rollers who are still employed, it need only be added
that Florida and Pennsylvania are the locations at which the
surviving hand production is concentrated.
THE UNION AFTER THE LAY-OFF
The change in status of the Manchester local of the Cigar
Workers' International Union subsequent to the lay-off must also
be considered as an effect of the introduction of machines.- The
5Ihe Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Di¬
vision of Review, mlmeo. report. Mar. 1936), p. 140.
&Ibid. p. 164. Vide supra pp. 34 and 35 and infra Appendix C.
68
CIGAR MAKERS
union local seems to havp enjoyed no better fortune than the dis¬
placed cigar workers; it too has merely continued to exist. In
this instance t here were fewer extenuat ing circumstances, since the
management continued to observe the closed shop agreement and the
female machine operators were obliged to join t he union. The young
girls, however, came to the union without any previous trade-
union experience or any current interest in labor problems and
organization. Nor was such interest developed by the older mem¬
bers. It is not clear whether personal difficulties of economic
adjustment which the older members experienced precluded any
such activity or whether organizational and educational ability
were lacking among the membership. Yet at one time this union
was the strongest and best organized in the central labor body
of Manchester. It had apparently developed a strong sense of
labor solidarity as judged by the reports that this local had
contributed $40,000 to the strikers in the Lawrence mills in
191a and $35,000 to the Amoskeag workers during their 9-month
strike in 1922. It had engaged also in some welfare activities
for its membership. Thus, the monthly dues of $2 entitled each
member to a death benefit of $350. A fund for the sick and dis¬
abled was created by assessing each member 1 percent of his earn¬
ings, and when a member was unable to work through sickness or
disability, his dues were paid from this fund. Because of the
high mortality rate of cigar makers resulting from the large
number of older men in the trade, two classes of membership had
been established by the International in May 1931. Two-dollar
dues continued the death benefit; $1 covered organization bene¬
fits only. In June 1933 the former class of member in this lo¬
cal was discontinued, and all employees of the factory paid the
same rate of$1 per month, which is the rate that still prevails.
The demoralization of the union was gradual. Although it was
undergoing a transition from craft to industrial status in 1931,
when the machines were being installed, nevertheless, it had ev¬
idenced an aggressive spirit. In May of that year, an executive
committee investigated charges offavoritism and coercion by two
foremen, and adjusted the complaints satisfactorily with the
firm. Moreover, as soon as the women were employed to operate
the machines, a bill of price of $1.25 per thousand cigars was
made for them. This wage rate prevails today and is said by the
secretary to be 10 cents in advance of the Boston rates.
MACHINE OPERATORS AND HAND WORKERS 69
But within a few months the dismissal of the hand workers was
reflected in the treasurer's balance. The union found cheaper
office space and sold some fixtures. The secretary took a 25
percent reduction in salary. With the further demoralization
of the older members and the complete lack of interest on the
part of the new members no meetings for the membership had been
held since 1932. The secretary has called the executive commit¬
tee to order only once a year since this date, in order to have
himself legally reelected. Little wonder then that the machine
operators regard the dues as another tax on wages without any
apparent quid pro quo in the present or future.
SECTION VI
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
SUMMARY
Sufficient evidence has been presented toshow that the problems
and results of readjustment presented in our survey may be con¬
sidered representative of the problems faced and the results
achieved by hand cigar makers throughout the industry after they
were displaced by machines. The problems and results may be sum¬
marized as follows:
The data are concerned with that type of technological change
which substitutes one complete process for another. In this case
it is the substitution of a machine process for a hand process.
This change in process took place at a time of recessive trends
in the cigar industry. Thepercapita consumption of cigars had
begun to decline in 1905 but the volume of production reached
its peak in 1920. The continued swing to cigarettes in the
popular taste resulted in a 47-percent decline in the volume of
production from the high point of 1920 to the low point of 1933.
In the face of this intensive competition, the cigarmanufacturer
was forced to shift his production from the class "C" cigar (to
retail at more than 8 and not more than 15 cents) to the class "A"
cigar (to retail at not more than 5 cents). In 1921, class "A"
cigars constituted 30.2 percent of the total production. By 1935
they were 88.1 percent of the total production. The profitable
production of a less expensive cigar necessitated a substantial
reduction in labor costs. This reduction was accomplished by
the use of automatic cigar-making machinery. It was estimated
that in 1933. only 14 years after thecommercial introduction of
the machines, about 52 percent of all cigars were machine-made.
The economic pressures just reviewed were accelerated by the de¬
cline in demand resulting from world-wide depression. Between
1909 and 1933 the decline in demand and the use of labor-saving
machinery resulted in the loss of 60,000 jobs, according to an
estimate based on The Census of Manufactures. 1
^The Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Divi¬
sion of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1036), p. 141.
70
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
71
The social consequences of the factors of economic pressure
just described have been traced in one community. At the time
of the change in process from hand work to machine work a com¬
plete substitution of personnel occurred. Although more than a
quarter of the displaced men migrated in search of work, an entire
population of artisans was left stranded in the sense that it
has never been reabsorbed in industry. After 5 years of seek¬
ing work and after more than 2 years of business revival, 30
percent of the workers were unemployed and 20 percent operated
"buckeye" shops which, with few exceptions, yielded such a mea¬
gre return that they may well be regarded as a form of disguised
unemployment. The bulk of the 40 percent who were employed by
others were working at part-time, casual jobs. The remaining
10 percent were no longer in the labor market, the majority hav¬
ing withdrawn because of physical disabilities, while a few were
living on their savings.
The difficulties in finding satisfactory reemployment were
largely conditioned by the personal characteristics andtheoccu-
pational background of the displaced workers. It was found that
the displaced workers were an industrially-aged group which had
long been habituated to a single skill. This skill was now prac¬
tically obsolete, and the workers' age and limited experience in
industrial adaptation represented an insurmountable hurdle toall
but a few. A Government study made in 1930 covering 109 cigar
factories in 11 States shows that the same lot befell its sample of
displaced hand workers, who had an average age and a degree of
occupational habituation almost as great as those in this study.
The similarity of our findings with those of a much more exten¬
sive study of displaced hand workers in the cigar industry war¬
rants generalization that such has been their usual fate.
The median age of our displaced group was 47, and the median
years of employment at cigar making were 29. This last figure
was approximated by the number of years of residence in Manchester,
indicating the high degree of stability which derives from em¬
ployment with one company over a large number of years. The
tabular data representing occupational history reflect the con¬
trast between the relatively regular employment experienced by
the hand maker prior to 1931 and the frequent job shifts, casual
employment of a semiskilled or an unskilled nature, and unemploy¬
ment experienced after their separation in 1931.
72
CIGAR MAKERS
The earnings for the year 1936 of those cigar makers who were
running "buckeyes", or small factories of their own, inManchester
were contrasted with their earnings during their last year at the
"7-20-4" plant. Their median 1936 earnings were found tobe $520
less than they had been during a slack year at the factory.
The hand workers were not permitted to remain as machine opera¬
tors. But even had they been, a study of the wages and hours of
the present machine operators reveals that the median wage of
the operators in 1936 was $139 less than that of the hand workers
in the slack year of 1930. Although few of the girls are on full
time, a comparison of wage rates at the "7-20-4" plant with those
of otherplants shows thatthewage rate is higher at the "7-20-4"
plant than at most factories.
APPRAISAL OF SOCIAL RESOURCES
As already suggested, the natural tendency of workers to seek
reemployment in their own field was unavailing because of con¬
ditions within the industry itself. Job opportunities outside
of their own field were of an inferior sort, as an analysis of
actual jobs held at home and afield shows. The conditioning
factors of advanced industrial age and occupational habituation
were a severe handicap as long as economic developments failed
to reabsorb current large numbers of unemployed whowere younger.
It is doubtful whether the aid of employment exchanges and voca¬
tional training, which were not available to our sample, would
have helped much, for the group most in need of assistance was
and will be the older workers, who are difficult to retrain and
still more difficult to place in employment.
No account has been taken of emergency work or direct relief
history as such. However, among the 129 men who were interviewed,
one-quarter reported emergency work at some time in their occu¬
pational histories, and more than one-third of those seeking work
at the time of the interview were holding current WPA jobs. The
facts concerning direct relief or concerning other persons in the
household engaged in emergency work, or even concerning relief
supplementary to a job held at present or previously, were not
ascertained. In the case of 58 other men living in Manchester,
the names were checked with the relief agency as an aid to trac¬
ing them. Though the relief records are known to be incomplete,
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
73
40 percent of those 58 had a relief history. For the remaining"
120, 29 of whom are now dead and 85 moved away, no information
whatever about relief status is at hand. In view of the casual
and part-time nature of much of the reported employment as well
as the periods of unemployment, it is reasonable to suppose that
many more than we know of have received assistance off and on dur¬
ing the years or are receiving it now. Even upon the basis of
partial information, the conclusion seems inescapable that with¬
out public relief the condition of many of these artisans would
have been truly desperate.
Presumably the inability of the cigar makers' union at the
Company to force any concessions in behalf of the displaced workers
was typical of other locals of this union. At any rate, no evi¬
dence has come to light where any other local in the industry was
able to secure dismissal wages for its displaced members or to
have them retained as machine operators. At best, however, dis¬
missal wages are temporary expedients which tend to reduce the
magnitude of the difficulties somewhat, but not to eliminate them.
Under the most generous arrangements a dismissal wage, whether
paid in a lump sum or in monthly installments, has rarely exceeded
a year's earnings, even for those with a long service record.
Usually the payment amounts to much less. Whatever the sum - and
in view of the state of the industry, it could not have been a
large amount - it would doubtless have been a welcome addition
to the workers' savings. Nonrecurring income, however, is no
solution to a condition of chronic underemployment and unemploy¬
ment. Possibly it would have enabled a still larger number to have
become owners of "buckeye" shops, but our study indicates that
these shops may well be regarded as a misdirected investment.2
2The limited efficacy of dismissal wages Is analyzed by Robert J. Myers,
•Occupational Readjustment of Displaced Skilled Workmen," The Journal of
Political Economy, XXXVII, No. 4 (Aug. 1928), 473-89, and by Ewan Clague and
W. J. Couper, "Tne Readjustment of Workers Displaced by Plant Shutdowns,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. XLV (Feb. 1931), pp. 309-46. The
former discusses the experiences of the cutters laid off Dy Hart, Schaffner
and Marx with a dismissal wage which had been negotiated for them by the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers. The latter discusses the experiences of the
employees of the L. Candee Company, a suosldlary of the United States Rubber
Company in New Haven, which granted a dismissal wage at the time of Its
permanent shut-down. More recently there have been several examples of or¬
ganized labor obtaining a dismissal wage. See for example the contract
entered Into oy the International Seamen's Union or America and the North¬
western Pacific Railroad Company in behalf of the ferrymen who were to be
dismissed because of the completion of the San Francisco-Oakland and Golden
Gate Drldges. For the terms of this contract as well as other contracts
negotiated at this time see "Dismissal Compensation for San Francisco Ferry¬
men," Monthly Labor Review, 43, No. 4 (Oct. 1936), 867-9. Probably themost
spectacular case is the arrangement through Federal legislation for protect¬
ing railroad workers to be displaced oy contemplated consolidations. This
is discussed oy Otto S. Beyer In "Unemployment Compensation In the Trans¬
portation Industry," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, Vol. 187 (Sept. 1936), pp. 95-9.
74
CIGAR MAKERS
The expedient of retaining some of the hand workers to operate
the machines would have affected the incidence of unemployment
but not its volume. Had they been retained at theCompany's plant,
there would have been 202 fewer hand workers seeking employment
in 1931-32, but there would have been 202 additional young women
in need of jobs. Since they were younger than the hand workers
and occupationally more flexible, perhaps they would have had a
better chance to find employment than did the hand workers. How¬
ever, in the absence of a shortage of that type of labor, what¬
ever jobs the young women would have obtained would have been at
the expense of others. Of overshadowing consequence is the fact
that there would still have been a very considerable net dis¬
placement of workers because of the great increase in the produc¬
tivity of the machines, which was not overcome by the increased
volume produced. Moreover, if the hand workers had been retained,
very probably the youngest in the group, who had the least dif¬
ficulty in making the adjustments, would have been selected as
machine operators.
Another possibility open tothe hand workers was the acceptance
of a wage rate low enough to have removed any incentive for mech¬
anization. Apparently this is the solution that was effected in
the York County, Pennsylvania, cigar district, where cheapcigars
are still made by hand. It is clear that such a step entails a
serious loss in annual income and standard of living compared with
the earnings and status of the hand workers before the advent of
machines.3 Whether this is to be preferred to the standard of
living and the income of those displaced from the industry is not
easy to determine.
How effective will the Social Security program be now or in the
immediate future if the particular circumstances that have sur¬
rounded displacement inour case study continue toobtain inother
cases? In those States inwhich partial unemployment is compen¬
sated, it is likely that only a few displaced workers would
qualify for benefits at the time of displacement, for the part-
time character of the employment that precedes the lay-off would
leave little or no uncharged earnings upon which to claim un¬
employment benefits at the time of the lay-off. That is, the
uncharged earnings in all probability would be exhausted before
full unemployment set in. Even in those States which compensate
3
Vide supra pp. 34, 36, and 67. See also Appendix C Tor weekly earnings of
cigar makers in July 1933.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
75
only weeks of complete unemployment., the protection accorded the
worker displaced by changes similar to those affecting these
cigar workers will be decidedly limited. Although many will
qualify for benefits at the time of displacement, the duration of
unemployment before obtaining the new job will very probably
greatly exceed the duration of benefits. The provision most
usually encountered in unemployment compensation legislation al¬
lows the payment of benefits for a maximum of 16 weeks in 52.
In our particular case, however, slightly more thanone-fifth of
the displaced cigar workers found employment within the first 4
months following displacement,4 and about 70 percent were unem¬
ployed a minimum of 1 year. Therefore, unemployment insurance
as administered by present statute would be grossly inadequate
in circumstances such as these.
For those aged 65 and over at the time of displacement, fi¬
nancial aid based on a means test is available under the old-age
assistance laws of the various States, and in 1942 monthly
Federal old-age benefits become payable to workers who qualify.
In oursurvey, however, only 7 percent of the 328 men had reached
the pensionable or benefit age at the time of the lay-off. As
displacement occurs in this industry in the future, a larger per¬
centage willbeof retirement age, since there has been virtually
no recruiting of apprentices for hand work.
The income from these sources would doubtless be a very helpful
supplement to the savings of the group that has most difficulty
in finding employment. But it appears that the majority of the
workers in our survey, since they were below the pensionable age
at the time of displacement, will be little affected by the Social
Security measures for the aged. Those under the retirement age
at the lay-off who are covered by the old-age insurance system may
derive very restricted assistance when the benefits do become pay¬
able; for during the period of unemployment subsequent to the lay¬
off there will be no taxable wage, and consequently there will
be no accruals increasing the monthly benefit payments to be re¬
ceived. This may serve to suggest the desirability of lowering
the qualifying age for old-age benefits under circumstances il¬
lustrated by this case and the need for making some provisions
for the continued accrual of earnings credit for old-age benefits
by having either the former employer or the Government pay the
4See taole 14, p. 36.
76
CIGAR MAKERS
worker's premium until he obtains either other employment or a
pension.
The question may also be raised of the desirability of regard¬
ing occupational immobility, created by the circumstances that
have been considered here, as a form of disability compensable
under a scheme of disability payments supplementary toour pres¬
ent Social Security Act.
CONCLUSION — RESIDUAL RELIEF PROBLEM
It seems that the results which might have been obtained
through the various alternatives discussed do not differ ap¬
preciably from the results of the adjustments actually made.
These results may be summarized as a lowered standard of living
even for the one-half of the displaced workers who found some
employment during a 5-year period, the exhaustion of the savings
of all, and the dependence on the private charity of relatives
and on public relief for a considerable portion, i.e., it has
constituted a residual relief problem.
Indications are that economic pressure is compelling the con¬
tinuation of the recent and current trends in the industry and
that such adjustment as may be possible must continue to depend
upon social resources which lie largely outside the sphere of
the industry.
The adjustment discussed above may be regarded as typical of
that which could be made by displaced hand workers generally
throughout the cigar industry.' The judgment is also ventured
that similar results would attend the introduction of any ex¬
tremely labor-saving invention into an industry undergoing a
secular decline in which the work had been performed by an in¬
dustrially-aged group of artisans who have long followed a spe¬
cialized skill.
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A
A FEW CASE HISTORIES
To help the reader visualize the men whom our study concerns,
the following case histories have been appended.1 The cases are
representative of the chief groupings presented in the tables.
Cose 1 represents a characteristic "buckeye" owner of rather
more than usual resourcefulness. Case 2 is one of those still
following the trade who were receiving an adequate wage. Case 3
is typical of the group receiving public assistance. In case 4
we have a white blackbird, a cigar maker who has accomplished
the successful transition to other equally remunerative work.
Case 5 is typical of those who found employment after the de¬
pression began to lift, but employment of a less skilled and
dead-end sort. Case 6 represents those who in spite of active
search have held only casual and part-time jobs and are unem¬
ployed today. Case 7 is representative of men in the higher
age brackets who have had practically no employment since the
lay-off though actively in the labor market and who are ineli¬
gible for WPA because relatives can assist them.
CASE 1
James Fontainbleau, a French-Canadian by birth, had 5 years
of schooling and started to learn the trade at 14. He is now
55 and has 41 years of cigar making behind him. Married, he
has lived in Manchester for 39 years. His first job was in Bos¬
ton. Out of work there, he heard through other cigar makers of
good conditions at the "7-20-4" plant and came to Manchester in
1898. His average output was 325 cigars daily. When the ma¬
chines were installed in the Company's factory he rented the
loft of an old building around the corner from the main street
and acquired enough equipment for himself and two assistants.
At first the response of the town to the "buckeye" shops was en¬
couraging , and Mr. Fontainbleau, being early in the f ield, estab¬
lished a trade name and a list of customers. But as the number
of "buckeye" shops increased steadily, the market became over-
1T4e facts presented are true, out they have been rearranged to some extent,
and the names and places have been changed to prevent recognition.
79
80
CIGAR MAKERS
crowded in Manchester and its environs, with the result that
selling became more and more difficult. He enlarged his field
of selling, going many miles out of the city, but still the mar¬
ket fell off, and the small shops and saloons expected him to
make purchases in return for handling his products. His men
have been on part time, eking out a living by other employment,
or forced to take WPA laboring work. Mr. Fontainbleau himself
has tried to find a cigar maker's job in the New England fac¬
tories where hand work still obtains, but without success. He
estimated his net income during 1936 as between 12 and 13 dollars
per week. More time goes into distributing and collecting on
his wares than into making them. His comment on the whole sit¬
uation was "If I could get a job at $15 a week, I'd throw out
my equipment tomorrow."
CASE 2
Fred Van Loon is 53 years old and a native of Belgium. After
6 years of schooling he started work at the age of 12, helping
to set type in a printing plant in Antwerp. At the end of a
year he left to learn cigar making and after 3 more years came
to the United States. From the time of learning the trade until
the lay-off at the "7-20-4" plant in 1931, a period of 34 years,
he was steadily employed at cigar making. He came to the Com¬
pany's factory 15 years ago from a shop in Philadelphia because
his cousin who was employed in Manchester described the superior
working conditions there. Immediately after tlie lay-off he found
2 months' employment during the Christmas rush in a neighboring
cigar factory and then was without work for over a year. In the
early part of 1932 he risked part of his savings in a shop of
his own but lost money and at the end of 0 months gave it up.
After another stretch of idleness lasting for a year, he took a
job as a wool sorter in the Amoskeag mills in Manchester. Fol¬
lowing 2 years of steady work he again found himself without em¬
ployment when the textile mills closed in the summer of '35.
There followed another 16 months of fruitless search, for there
was no work to be had in Manchester for a man of his age and he
lacked money to travel to more prosperous places. Through the
good offices of a friend working in a cigar factory inWaterbury,
Connecticut, he learned of an opening there and got the job in
December 1936. His wife and two grandchildren are remaining in
APPENDIX A
81
Manchester until they know moreofwhat the future holds for the
head of the home. At the moment he may be regarded as a well-
paid cigar worker for his wages are between $17 and $18 a week.
CASE 3
George Lederer was born in Germany 49 years ago. After 6 years
of schooling he began work in a cigar factory at the age of 12
and within a few months went to work for his uncle as cigar maker.
At the age of 25 he came to Boston, found work immediately, and
was never without work at his trade until the lay-off at the
"7-20-4" factory in 1931. He began work there in 1919 after
other members of his family had preceded him and reported that
wages were higher than in Boston. Since the lay-off he has
found only unskilled work to do. For a year he "couldn't buy
a job" but in the fall of 1932 he was employed for 2 months
cleaning stables on a dairy farm. He had to leave when the
weather became too cold for him to sleep in the unheated barn.
The following summer he had 3 months of part-time, intermittent
employment mixing cement for a private construction company.
Being out of funds, he then applied for relief and became a wood
chopper in the State woodyard for 10 months to pay for his gro¬
ceries. Informed by a friend of an opening for cigar makers in
a small factory in Vermont, he applied, got the job, and was oc¬
cupied for 3 weeks. In the meantime he had lost his relief sta¬
tus and being single was unable to obtain emergency work again
until s months had passed. Finally in December 1935, he was as¬
signed to pick-and-shovel labor on a WPA highway repair project.
Since that time he has been on relief, transferring from one
project to another but always at unskilled labor. He was re¬
jected for road-construction work by the Resettlement Adminis¬
tration following a doctor's examination but was returned to the
same kind of work under WPA where he was working 3 days a week
at the time of the survey.
CASE 4
Thomas Ryall, 42 years old, was born in Manchester and lived
there all his life. He completed the seventh grade and started
to work as a stock boy in the Company's factory at the age of
82
CIGAR MAKERS
i<+. His father had been a cigar maker there before him, and the
good wages and steady work were a source of much satisfaction to
Thomas and his family. After 22 years of employment he was dis¬
charged in the last months of the lay-off. Three months of seek¬
ing work resulted in a laboring job with the city Department of
Public Works. Within 7 months the job was completed, but he was
successful in obtaining immediately a county position as assist¬
ant foreman in road building. After 4 months these jobs were
designated for needy persons only and, as he was not eligible
for relief, he was laid off again. But a city post of assistant
commissioner fell vacant and he was appointed to the position
after only 2 months of unemployment. He has held this position
ever since, representing one of the very few cigar makers whose
economic status is as good today as it was prior to 1931•
CASE 5
Johan Van der Bank was born in Amsterdam, Holland, but came
with his parents to Manchester at the age of three and has lived
there ever since. He is now 33 years old. His employment his¬
tory was bounded by the walls of the Company's factory up to the
time of the lay-off. He finished grammar school while still 13
and went to work when 14 years of age. His first job in the
cigar factory was operating a banding machine. In 6 months he
was promoted to stock clerk and continued as such for 2 years.
At 17 he started making cigars. He had worked at this trade for
12 years up to January 1932. In the meantime, he had acquired
a wife and 3 children and a home in Manchester. After leaving
the "7-20-4" factory he was unemployed for nearly 3 years. Dur¬
ing this period he sought work of any kind in all the industries
in the city. He did not look for work outside, knowing he could
not support his family at home and pay for room and board else¬
where at the wages obtainable during the depression. Finally in
1934- he got work as a warehouse clerk in a shoe factory which
went out of business 5 months later. Within a month after this
lay-off he found an opening as chauffeur for a private family
for whom he has worked ever since.
APPENDIX A
83
CASE 6
Augustus Boerr was bom in Belgium 39 years ago. After 7 years
of school attendance he began making cigars at the age of 19.
He worked for 5 years in the same factory in Ghent and then de¬
cided to try his fortune in America. Coming to Boston he found
immediate employment at cigar making there. He had heard of the
merits of the Company's factory and during a strike in the Boston
factory he went to Manchester and applied for a job. He was ac¬
cepted and did not return to Boston when the strike ended. Laid
off at the "7-20-9" plant in the fall of 1931 after 20 years at
cigar making, he did not try to continue at his trade as there
were no good jobs available. He sought work of any kind in the
shoe shops in Manchester and in the textile mills at Nashua,
Lowell, and Lawrence. He also applied at the Portsmouth Navy
Yard and at the trucking companies in Boston and surrounding
towns. These out-of-town searches were made possible through
the kindness of friends who took him along in their cars when
they were going to these places. In spite of all efforts, how¬
ever, Mr. Boerr has been able to obtain during the summer months
only casual work inadequate in character to support himself and
family. From June to September during the first two summers he
got part-time employment as a caddy on the public golf course
in the environs of Manchester. In November 1933 he was placed
in the CWA at laboring work. But within 3 months all nonrelief
workers were dismissed. Four months later in June 1934 he was
offered a job at road building in a neighboring State. He took
the job after arranging for hiswife and child to stay with rel¬
atives. When in November the work was discontinued for the win¬
ter, he returned to Manchester. After another winter of idle¬
ness he found work as a construction laborer with a building
firm. This employment was part-time and lasted for only7months.
He immediately found another job as a cement mixer with a road-
building contractor in a neighboring city but had worked only a
month when the work was completed. That was in November 1936.
Since then he has had no work.
CASE 7
Martin Eichhorn, 51, was born in Springfield, Massachusetts,
and completed the grammar school. He started work as a roving
84
CIGAR MAKERS
boy in a cotton mill at the age of thirteen. His father was a
friend of the foreman and got the job for him. After 3 years
in the mill he decided to learn the cigar trade and got employ¬
ment in a cigar factory there. For 17 years he worked in the
factory but lost 1 to 3 months each year during the dull season.
This continual loss of work finally prompted him in 1919 to seek
an opening at the Company's plant. He knew of the favorable
working conditions there and friends encouraged him. He was ac¬
cepted and continued there until the lay-off. He had been a
hand cigar maker for 30 years when the machines replaced him.
Since that date in January 1932 he has had no employment with
the exception of a few odd jobs each of less than a month's dura¬
tion. He tried to get work at his trade in the cigar factories
in Springfield by applying personally at the plants and writing
to the union secretary but without any success. He also wrote
to the overseers of several textile mills, but was told that he
could not be given consideration in some of them because he re¬
sided outside the State. He believes his age has been the con¬
ditioning factor, but he is in good health and would take a job
at $10 a week. He applied for WPA employment but was refused
because his son, with whom he lives, is working in private in¬
dustry.
APPENDIX D
DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSES1
PRELIMINARY OPERATIONS
Although cigars may be made by hand, by machine, or by a com¬
bination of both methods, the first steps in manufacture are the
same in any case. The very first step is the assembly of the
leaf tobacco. Cigar leaf is classified according to three gen¬
eral types - wrapper, binder, and filler,-although there is a
substantial degree of alternative usewithin each of these groups.
Tobacco leaf comes to the cigar factories in bales. The bales
are opened and spread out. The leaf is sorted and put into prop¬
er condition for handling by moistening, generally by dipping
it in clear water and allowing it to stand covered in trays for
a day or two. If further curing is necessary, the leaf may be
stored in bins for a period of from 1 to 6 weeks; otherwise it
goes directly to the strippers or stemmers who remove the hard
midvein of the leaf. From the stemming operation the leaf goes
to the hand cigar maker or to the cigar-making machine.
DESCRIPTION OF HAND MANUFACTURE OF CIGARS
The simplest and earliest method of making a cigar is still
in use in some shops, particularly those making higher priced
cigars. It is referred to as the "out-and-out" method. The
worker uses no tools except a knife with a curved blade and a
board on which to work.
The worker cuts a thin strip fromawrapper leaf, another from
a binder, and selects the right amount of filler, which may be
composed of long leaves, short leaves, or scraps of tobacco leaves.
(See figure 8.) He then fashions the filler into proper form and
size in the palm of his hand and wraps it in the strip of binder,
making the "bunch." (See figures 6 and 9.) This is then placed
on the strip of wrapper which lies flat on the board, and with
a deft rolling movement theworker fashions the cigar, beginning
1Adapted from an unpuollshed report on the cigar manufacturing Industry pre¬
pared oy w. D. Evans under the supervision of W. H. Dillingham of the Na¬
tional Research Project.
85
86
CIGAR MAKERS
at the lighting end and finishing at the end which goes into the
mouth, called the "head." It is necessary to trim the wrapper
a trifle just before the head is formed; then, with a bit of gum
tragacanth, the last bit of wrapper is fastened securely, and
the head is smoothed between the thumb and forefinger. (See
figure 10.) The cigar is then put in a gauge which stands on the
table in front of the worker and is trimmed to the proper length.
This "out-and-out" method of cigar making prevailed generally
until the introduction of the mold in 1869. The mold is a wooden
block with cigar-shaped grooves carved in it, generally fifteen
in number. Bunches of leaves are placed in these grooves, a du¬
plicate block is placed on top, and the two are put under pres¬
sure for a few minutes. (See figures 6, 8, 9. aad 10.) The
blocks are then separated and the bunches are ready for wrap¬
ping.
Several decades after the mold came into use, the suction-
table was introduced. This consists of a metal sheet with a
perforated plate in the center, the plate being just the right
sizeandshape for the cigar wrapper. The wrapper leaf is placed
on the plate and held down firmly byair sucked through the per¬
forations. Afootpedal raises the plate, anda roller is passed
over it, cutting the leaf on the plate's sharp edges.
Although the mold and the suction-table changed the cigar
maker's trade considerably, these devices probably should be
considered tools rather than machines. Their use increased effi¬
ciency in manufacture but tended to supplement the skill of the
hand cigar maker rather than to perform automatically any of the
required operations.
DESCRIPTION OF COMBINATION HAND AND MACHINE MANUFACTURE
OF CIGARS
About 1900 a machine was introduced which made short-filler
bunches automatically. This machine, known as the automatic short-
filler bunching machine, requires no labor other than that nec¬
essary to feed the hopper with filler and to place the binders.
These operations can be performed by unskilled labor. Thebunches,
delivered in molds, are wrapped by hand. A significant but un¬
determined proportion of the cheaper short-filler cigars are made
by this method.
APPENDIX B
87
DESCRIPTION OF MACHINE MANUFACTURE OF CIGARS
Although the automatic short-filler buuching machine reduced
labor costs to some extent, the most expensive operation in the
manufacture of cigars, wrapping, was still performed by hand.
It was not until i9i7,whena machine was patented which performed
both the binding and wrapping operations and turned out a finished
cigar comparable with the hand-made article, that the superiority
of the hand-made product was seriously threatened.
This machine, the automatic long-filler cigar machine, requires
four operators (see figure 3): one to place the filler onan end¬
less feed belt; a second to place the binder leaf on the binder
die; a third to place the wrapper leaf on the wrapper die; and a
fourth to "catch" and inspect the finished cigar.
The machine performs the operations of the hand cigar maker
mechanically. Knives cut the filler totheproper length, corru¬
gated rollers compress it and pass it to the apportioning knives
where just the right amount of filler is cut off to make a bunch.
The bunch is tapered and rolled in the binder, and then passed
to the wrapper, spirally wound, formed, sealed, and clipped to
the right length. The headend is smoothed by a knurler, and the
cigar is dropped on a table for inspection.2
The scrap-filler cigar is made by a two-operator machine (see
figure 11): one operator places the binder leaf on the binder
die and the other places the wrapper leaf on the wrapper die and
inspects. The only major variation in procedure is in the proc¬
essing of the bunch. Instead of a knife to cut the filler to
the proper length, there is a balance to weigh out the proper
amount of scrap as it comes from the hopper.
SUBSEQUENT OPERATIONS
Subsequent operations are similar, by whatever method the cigars
may have been made. The cigars are inspected, and then may be
banded and boxed by hand or may go to a banding and wrapping
machine. This machine, requiring one operator, automatically
bands the cigars and wraps them in cellophane. The operator of
the machine then usually packs the cigars by hand.
ZA more detailed description of the operation of the long-filler clgar-maklng
machine Is given In "Technological Changes In the Cigar Industry and Their
Effects on Laoor, " Monthly Labor Review, 33, No. 6 (Dec. 1931), 11-13.
APPENDIX C
WEEKLY EARNINGS OF CIGAR WORKERS
The data presented in this appendix are for July 1933- These
data are based on a special survey of labor in the cigar-manu¬
facturing industry made for the National Recovery Administration
by the United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
The survey covered, as of July 1, 1933. all manufacturers making
$5,000 or more worth of products per year.
The earnings data summarized in tables C-i andC-2 relate only
to individuals whowere paid on a piece-work basis. Pieceworkers
in the cigar industry predominantly are employed directly on the
"making" operation. The columns, "low" and "high", represent
averages of minimum and maximum rates of weekly earnings, re-
Table C-l.- AVERAGE EARNINGS PER WEEK, BY CLASSES OF CIGARS
PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES
July 1933a
Class
of
cigars6
Hand
work
Machine work
Men
Women
Women
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Class "A"
$11.86
$14.13
$ 8.90
$11.60
$10.71
$13.62
Class "8"
15.26
16. 78
11. 11
13.57
9. 75
10.89
Class "C"
16. 92
19. 66
12. 34
15. 34
13. 77
14.76
Class "D"
20. 71
22. 11
15. 22
18.07
(C)
(c)
Class "E"
21.89
25.58
18.64
24. 64
( 0 )
(c)
a?Ae Tobacco Study (U. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Di¬
vision of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1936), pp. 169-60.
6Class "A" cigars manufactured to retail at not more than 5 cents each.
Class "B" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 5 cents each and not
more than e cents each.
Class "C" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 8 cents each and not
more than 15 cent3 each.
Class "D» cigars manufactured to retail at more than 15 cents each and not
more than 20 cents each.
Class "E" cigars manufactured to retail at more than 20 cents each.
°No machine worx on this class of cigar.
88
APPENDIX C
89
Table C-2.- AVERAGE EARNINGS PER WEEK, BY STATES, OF WORKERS
ON CLASS "A" CIGARS
July 1933a
State
Rand
work
Machine work
Men
Women
Women
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
c
CO
or
$11. 86
$14.13
$ 8.90
$11.60
$10.71
$13.62
Cali f.
11.28
13. 19
10. 60
12. 37
10.00
10.00
Colo.
12. 67
12.67
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
Conn.
16.02
18.27
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
Fla.
9.66
12.07
8.67
11. 19
9. 97
12.57
Ga.
5.08
9.25
5.45
7. 85
(c)
( c)
111.
14.80
15.63
11. 25
12. 17
12.00
12.00
Ind.
13.81
14.39
9. 47
9. 83
10.50
11.50
Iowa
11.50
14.00
9. 76
14. 42
22.00
28.00
La.
11. 66
13.50
8.08
9. 29
10. 99
12.60
Maine
15. 33
17.52
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
Md.
8. 73
10.47
11.37
12. 10
(c)
(c)
Mass.
15.94
16.64
10.53
10. 87
15.02
16.60
Mich.
15.61
16.07
9. 79
13. 10
10.08
14. 32
Minn.
14.21
16.97
10.50
11.67
( c )
(c)
Mo.
13.29
14.45
7.80
10. 07
( c )
(c)
N. J.
13. 30
18.41
9. 79
11.69
10.70
14.81
N. Y.
14. 13
16.53
12.80
15. 82
12.53
15.49
Ohio
9.47
11.33
7.60
9.67
9.03
10.77
Pa.
7.79
11.36
7.50
11.23
9.64
13.67
W. Va.
14. 93
15.04
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
Wis.
15.22
16.19
16.09
16.09
(c)
(c)
afhe Tobacco Study (0. S. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration, Di¬
vision of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1936), pp. 163-4.
^Includes States not listed In the stub to avoid disclosing data Tor an In¬
dividual establishment.
cNo data obtained.
n-a'Data not available. Data are not shown to avoid disclosing Information
for an individual establishment.
90
CIGAR MAKERS
spectively. The returns for all classes of cigars (table C-i)
covered total numbers of piece workers as follows: 8,422 male
hand workers, 18,518 female hand workers, and 11,978 female
machine workers.1
For more recent data on earnings, not grouped by classes of
cigars, see Monthly Labor Review for April 1937.2
lThe Tobacco Study (U. 3. Dept. Com., National Recovery Administration,
Division of Review, mlmeo. report, Mar. 1836), p. 160-
Not included in tnese tabulations are returns for 1,381 women and 405 men
who were combination band and machine piece woricers. It Is notaole that the
survey found a total of only 83 male machine operators In the country. These
likewise are excluded from the tables of Appendix C. The weekly earnings
of those or the 23 men who worked on class "A" cigars ranged from $14.01
(average low) to $17.84 (average high). Of the 23 men, 15 were employed In
Florida. (These details on the 23 men were obtained from National Recovery
Administration file material by W. D. Evans and used In an unpublished re¬
port on the cigar manufacturing Industry prepared for the National Research
Project under the supervision of W. H. Dillingham.)
^"Earnings and Hours In Cigar Industry, March 1836," Monthly Labor Review,
44, NO. 4 (Apr. 1837), 853-68.
APPENDIX D
SCHEDULE AND EXPLANATION OF TERMS USED IN THE SCHEDULE
The occupational history schedule, NRP Form #20, shown on page
93, was used for the survey. Certain terms on the schedule which
are not self-explanatory are defined below:
Age is the age on last birthday.
Years in City were calculated from the beginning date of the
most recent period of continuous residence in the community.
Absences of 6 months or less were not counted.
Employment History: The employment data were divided into the
first job, the longest job, and all jobs between 1926 and February
1, 1937, the date of the survey. This last section called for a
chronological record of changes in employment status, the char¬
acter of employment, andthe kind of work performed. The informa¬
tion was entered in this section by beginning with the person's
employment status at the time of the interview and working back
in chronological order to January 1, 1926.
A job was defined as gainful employment lasting for 1 month or
more in an occupation with a single employer.1 Periods of em¬
ployment or unemployment of less than 1 month's duration were
not entered. Unpaid apprenticeships were not considered as jobs.
Self-employment and ownership were distinguished and included
those usually self-employed, or doing contract or specialized
work, or owning the establishment.
The character of employment was determined and classified into
regular, casual or intermittent work in private industry, self-
employment, emergency work, or unemployment. Full time and part
time were also distinguished. Part-time work was defined as less
than 30 hours a week. The designation of "casual" work was re¬
served for jobs in occupations or industries in which work is
ordinarily contracted for by the hour or by the day, such as
domestic service byday workers, "odd jobs" by laborers, or loads
hauled by truck drivers. Intermittent employment was applied
to the service of persons constituting "spare hands" or "contin¬
gent crews" on call for a particular employer or extra crews
lpor exception to work with a single employer, see definition for casual or
Intermittent employment.
91
92
CIGAR MAKERS
hired to complete orders inthe"rush" period in industries which
ordinarily offered regular rather than casual employment. Casual
and intermittent employment were recorded regardless of the num¬
ber of employers involved in each period of a month or more.
The industrial classifications were based on those in the United
States Census. The tables in the report are constructed to con¬
form to the industries and occupations found to be important in
the locale of this study.
Unemployment History: Unemployment, to be recorded, was like¬
wise of a month's duration or more. Unemployment was divided
into unemployment seeking work and unemployment not seeking work.
Employment status was determined according to whether or not the
person had a job on the day the enumerator visited the house.
If aman was employed at the time even though he was looking for
another or an additional job, he was not regarded as seeking
work. If the person was not seeking work during any month of
the period between 1926 and the date of the survey, the reason
for not seeking work was entered. Possible reasons were: out
on strike, temporarily disabled (sick for over imonth but under
1 year without pay), permanently disabled (illness of 1 year or
more), retired persons living on income or pension, persons 65
and over who have not worked in the last 5 years, and those who
consider themselves or are considered by their relatives as too
old to work.
Emergency Work: Emergency work was used as an inclusive term
to cover all forms of government-made work, whether pity, State,
or federal. If it was of more than 1 month's duration, it was
entered, regardless of the number of hours employed per week.
SCHEDULE USED
A facsimile of the schedule used, NRP Form #20, appears on the
following page.
GCCUPAY• lihAL HISTOI
»Y SCHEDULE
HAKE
ENUMERATOR
SCHEDULE NO.
DATE
CLEARANCE DATA
*00RE55
ACE
SEX
RACE
PLACE OF BIRTH
MARI¬
TAL
SCHCOL
CRAOE
AOE
LEAVING
SCHOOL
H— 1
USUAL OCCUPATION
PRESENT
EMPLOYMENT
STATUS
YEARS IN CITY
STA-
H-2
USUAL INDUSTRY
ACE
OCCAM
>ORR
TEARS IN U. S. A.
H-3
YEARS AT USUAL
A
8
C
0
E
r
1
IOTAL TIRE
TOTAL
SEPARATIONS
TOTAL EMPLOYER
SHIFTS
TOTAL OCCUPATIONAL
SHIFTS
TOTAL INDUSTRY | ATfEIIACE LENGTH Of
SHirTS ; SERVICE PER JOB
AVERAGE LENGTH OF
SERVICE PER EMPLOYER
J
K
M
N
0
P
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY PRIOR TO
JOBS (OR
UNEMPLOYMENT) OF MORE THAN ONE M
ONTH'S DURATION
REASON FOR CHANCE
CHARACTER
Of
EMPLOYMENT
BEGIN¬
NING
END¬
ING
OCCUPATIQR
INDUSTRY
NAM AW LOCATION OF EMPLOYER
FIRST JOB
I
r~
LONGEST JOB
»TJ
-V
pq
z
o
»—I
X
o
emlotkkt km unemployment history
• cwits progress *omi»istr»t ic* natichal rese**« c»:.e!
X
CD
GO