ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF STAYS EXEMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CQdE AMENDMENTS CONDITIOHM ORDLRS OF APPROVAL HUTCHINSON W.JA. NO. 74 * OFFICE OF NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION DIVISION OF REVIEW ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF STAYS EXEMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CODE AMENDMENTS CONDITIONAL ORDERS OF APPROVAL By Ely C. Hutchinson D. L. Boland W. M. Chubb WORK MATERIALS NO. 74 NRA ORGANIZATION STUDIES SECTION MARCH, 1936 OFFICE OF NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION DIVISION OF REVIEW ADMINISTRATIVE AMD LEGAL ASPECTS OF STAYS EXEMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CODS AMENDM3NTS CONDITIONAL ORDERS OF APPROVAL By Ely C» Hutchinson D. L. Bo lend W. M. CliUOD NRA ORGANIZATION STUDIES SECTION MARCH, 1936 9844 MAGAZINES BOUND By W. P. A. ^ 2 o J940 This study is in effect a series of preliminary reports on Exemptions and Exceptions, Stays, and Amendments by Mr. D. L. -Bo land and on Conditional Orders of Approval "by Mr, ¥. M. Chubb. An additional section, Part GIG, on Administration, by Mr. Ely C. Hutchinson has "been added. The report was prepared by the NRA Organization Studies Section, Mr. ¥illiam : ,7. Bardsley in charge. All of the devices here examined, i.e., "Stays", "Exemptions", "Amendments" and "Conditional Orders of Approval", were widely used by the National "Recovery Administration in meeting and attempting to solve nrohlems arising either during negotiations on nroposed codes or under codes after their approval. The report deals with the legal and sub- stantive aspects of the subjects, but because of limitations of time and personnel some administrative aspects of the subjects are not covered. Appendix No. I, in each of parts TWO to FIVE inclusive, points cut areas for further study. Appendix No. II, in each of Parts TWO to FIVE in- clusive, gives a comprehensive outline for further study of its parti- cular subject. At the hack of this report will he found a "brief statement of the studies undertaken by the Division of Review. L. C. Marshall Director, Division of Review • ' l March 24, 1936 9844 -l- Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 with funding from University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS and the Sloan Foundation http://archive.org/details/adminis36unit :a3l:': or ccitte: is Pa^e S ;ARY 1 3 . lET I ABillTISTRATIOH Procedural Aspects C Plow Chart - Stays 6 Flow Chart - Exemptions ? v.. Chart -Amendments 8 C mditional Orders of Ao roval 9 Stays, Exemptions and Exceptions, Code Amendments. . 11 Administrative Aspects 12 Recapitulation 14 Conditional Orders of Approval, Favorable Factors. . 14 Conditional Orders of Ao'orova.1 , Unfavorable Factors. 15 • • Stays, Exemptions and Code Amendments . . . PABT II Introduction 13 Chapter I - Bases cf Power 21 Chapter II - Delegation of Power to Grant Stays 22 Chapter III - Definition of the term "Stay" 25 Types of Stays 26 Chapter IV - Methods of Exercise of Stays 23 Chapter V - Causes of the Exercise of Power to Stay - rypes of Code Provisions Affected 23 Types of Code Provisions Subjected to Stays 33 Labor Provisions 33 Code Authority Provisions 3d Trade Practice Provisions 35 Time of Issuance of Stay 39 Retroactive Stays 42 Conditional Stays 42 Denial of Sta.ys 43 Period of Stay 1-3 Chapter VI - Evaluations and Conclusions 44 9844 -ii- TABU OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) PART III Introduction ^8 C • pter I Bases of Power 71 Chapter II Definition and Scope of Terms "Exemption" and "Exception" 79 Chapter III Delegation of Power to Grant or l)fny Exemptions and Exceptions 32 President's Reemployment Agreement 83 Codes under Section 3(a) 83 Joint AAA and ERA Codes 84 Creation of Ertional Industrial Recover;.' Board 83 Delegation of Power to Lesser Officials 85 Territorial Administrators 35 Miscellaneous Delegations 86 Regional Offices 87 Code Authorities 87 Chapter IV Analysis of Applications for end Orders of Exemptions and Exceptions - Causes - Types - Cede Provisions Affected 88 Labor Provisions Wage Differentials Child Labor - Apprentices Trade Practice Provisions Geographical Origin of A (plications Period of Exemption Retroactive Exemptions Conditi onal Exemptions 9844 -iii- 90 90 91 92 93 94 95 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) pter IV (Continued) Reasons - Denial of Exenpti 97 Code Activity p,s to Exem tions 08 General Executive and Administrative Exemptions 100 Exemption - By Code Provision 101 Chapter V Evaluations and Conclusions 102 PART IV Introduction 116 Chapter I - Bases of Power 117 Limitations upon Fower of Amendment 123 Chapter II - Definition and Scope of the Tt, m Amendment ~: 125 Chapter III - Delegation of Power to Approve or Disapprove ■Aiaenfiments 128 President's Reemployment Agreement 128 Codes Under Section 3(a) 130 Joint AAA-ERA Codes 130 Creation of national Industrial Pecovery hoard 131 Delegation of Power to Lesser Officials 131 Territorial Administrators 131 Regional Offices 132 Limitation upon Exercise of Power to A^end 132 Chrpter IV - Llethods of Exercise of Power of Amendment 133 Chapter V - Analysis of Amendments of Codes - Tp.ies of Code Provisions Affected 135 Amendments Affecting Application of the Code 135 Labor Provisions 137 Hour and Wage Provisions 133 Code Authority 144 Trade Practice Provisions 146 Miscellaneous Code Provisions 147 Chapter VI - Evaluations and Conclusions 149 Appendix Ho. 1. - Further Research - Unfinished Phases of the Study 152 Appendix ho. 2. - Outline 154 9844 ~iV~ ^ T iI_Qj_ CC^ITTS (Cont'd) Page Introduction 161 iter I - What >owers of approval of cno.es, agr< e nents and amendments were conferred by the Act? ... 1 ••. Chapter II - What delegations of power of approval were made and what powers retained? 167 Chapter III- What circumstances attended the earliest uses of the device of conditional approval of: (a) Codes 169 (b) Agreements 173 (c) Amendments 174 (d) Other minor administrative actions. . . . 174 Chapter IV - What attempts were fade to obtain assent of pro- ponents to conditional orders of approval? . . 176 Chapter V - What were the most frequent types of conditions in orders of approval? 177 Chapter VI - What necessities of administration were served by conditional orders of approval? 178 Chapter VII- What evidence of compliance or non-compliance with conditions of approval are to be found? What was the legal effect of non-compliance?. . 179 Chapter VHI-Could the desired conditions have been incorpor- ated in the codes themselves without undue difficult;-? 180 Chapter IX - Prom an evaluation of the experience related above what constructive suggestions can be made to guide new legislation and iroper plans fcr administration touching upon the use ef condi- tional orders of approval? 181 Appendices 182 ho. 1. Une xplored Sources of ha tcrials for Purther Study 133 ho. 2. Outlin e 184 ho. 3. Details of various types of conditions in orders of approval, covering all be sic codes of Prir comp e tition.- 190 9844 -V- _1_ SUMMAH? . This work is composed of five "Parts" and is an assembly of so- called "preliminary drafts" of reports prepared by staff members of the Administrative Problems Review Unit of the NBA Organization Studies Section, Division of Review. Hie reports treat "Administrative Aspects", "Stays", "Exemptions", "Anendaseats?. ' and "Conditional Orders of Approval". With the exception of "Part One", each "Part" contains an appendix, thus eliminating a general appendix. PART QUE ■ ADMINISTRATI VE ASP ECTS . Part 'One sets forth the high spots of the procedure which used the powers of stay, exemption, and code amendment. Since conditional orders of approval were in themselves a means, in- cident to code approval, of staying or amending certain code provisions or of creating exemptions thereunder, they also are discussed. "Plow diagrams" showing the progressive steps followed by the organization in each type of action are shown and described. Actual records of elapsed tines for putting cases through the procedure are given. A recapitulation presents the factors as to conditional orders of approval favorable and unfavorable to administration and procedure, points to the influence of numerous opposed forces, all of which were present in the administrative problems of the NRA at one time or another, and records certain other of the author's opinions. FART TWO ■ STAY S. Tlie stay as an instrumentality for the administration of the National Industrial Recovery Act played an important part wherever it was put into effect. It was used both as a permanent and a tempor- ary means of meeting, reconciling and at times mandatorily settling the myriad, newly-experienced- problems that developed with the ex- perience of administering the Act. It was one of several instrumentalities used in the same general way and each of these is a separate part of this report. This part deals particularly with, the legal and substantive aspects of the adoption and exercise of the power of- stay. Chapter I treats the bases of this power. Its delegation is outlined in Chapter II. Chapters III and IV define the stay and the methods of its exercise. Chapter V brings together the causes for the use of stays and the types of problems to which they were applied, while Chapter VI evaluates the facts found and draws conclusions there- from*-. ' 9844 .. ■ - PART THREE EXEMPTIO NS. In this P rt the granting by 1IRA of exemptions from the provisions of codes is treated, especially as to the legal and substantive aspects of such grants. An explanation and analysis of various typos of exemptions is presented and the confusion in term- inology between stays and exemptions is discussed. Chapters I, II and I'll deal with the basis of the power of Exemp- tion, define the scope' of the terms Exemption and Exception and dis- cuss the delegations of the power to grant or deny exemptions and ex- ceptions. Chapter IV analyzes the types of application for exemptions, their effects upon codes and the types of exemptions, such as retro- active and conditional. Chapter V is the evaluation of the factors developed by the study and the conclusions drawn therefrom. The reader is referred to "History of General Exemptions", Work Materials No. 75, for a discussion of Executive and Administrative Orders pertaining to general exemptions. PART FOUR A^TDMENTS . Although the power to amend codes was not definitely set forth in the Act, it was frequently and effectively used during the code period. Part IV of the study discusses the use of such power. Chapters I, II and III deal with the bases in the Act for the power of Amendment and its delegation. Chapter IV treats of the methods by which the power of amendment was exercised. Chapter V analyzes amendments and gives the types of code provisions affected by them, and Chapter VI sets forth the author's conclusions. P.JIT FIVE , CONDITIONAL ORDER OF APPROVAL. The first executive order issued by the President approving a code under the National Industrial Re- covery Act — that for the Cotton Textile Code — was a "Conditional Order of Approval." It contained thirteen conditions which had to be satisfied before complete approval could be granted. Final approval was granted subsequently by a second order. Following that first order, a great many codes were approved by the "conditional" method. The phrasing generally was such as to create doubt as to whether the codes so approved were actually effective as to those provisions which the 11 RA fully approved, until the conditions in the order had actually been met. This question is one on which there was no adjudication. This part of the study discusses the various aspects of condi- tional orders of approval and includes a list of such orders and the conditions they contained. Chapters I and II are on the powers of code approval as conferred by the Act and their delegation. Chapter III discusses the circum- stances which attended the earliest uses of Conditional Orders of 9844 Approval. Chapters IV and V deal with such matters as proper repre- sentation of industry, assent of proponents and prevalent types of conditions. Chapter VI is upon the value of the Conditional Order, administratively. Chapter VII deals with industries' compliance with the conditions and the legal effects of non-compliance, while Chapter VIII endeavors to answer the question whether codes could have "been so written as to avoid the use of conditional approvals. Chapter IX is an evaluation and conclusions are drawn therefrom. It is questionable whether the Act contemplated or permitted the effective approval of voluntary codes when the order of approval con- tained conditions not specifically assented to. If, as appears, codes approved in this manner were really pres- cribed, as provided for in Section 3 (d) of the Act, there is reason to question the authority of the Administrator to sign the orders of approval. The reason for this is that the delegation of power to the Administrator to approve codes specifically excepted prescribed codes under Section 3 (d) In general, little or no attempt was made, as a controlled pro- cedure, to obtain assent to the conditions contained in the orders of approval before the announced effective dates. As a rule, compli- ance with the conditions was tardy. 9844 9S44 -4- PAHT ONE: ADMINISTRATION By Ely C. Hutchinson -S-, PART ONE ADMINISTRATION *• Procedu ral Aspects. All four of the title subjects of this study were instruments widely used by the National Recovery Administration to meet or at- tempt to solve problems arising in the negotiations over proposed codes, or under the administration of approved codes. The authors of the parts of the study dealing with the particular subjects have treat- ed especially their legal and substantive aspects. Yet, their admin- strativR use and the procedural aspects of such use are obviously important p-rts of the subjects. Stays, Admendments and Exemptions and Exceptions were handled administratively in fairly uniform fashion by all the industry divi- sions of NBA and generally in accordance with the reouirements of the NBA Office Manual (*), after it was issued in August, 1934. Prior to the issuance of the manual, procedure for the various administra- tive functions was established by office orders or memoranda and this sarae practice was followed when it became necessary to modify the manual instructions more quickly than the new manual sheets could be issued. Thus, the manual was never quite up to date but served rather tc record the changes already put into effect. Using the data obtained from the manual, modified by later mem- oranda and supplemented by personal inquiry of qualified personnel, the author prepared a series of "flow charts" showing the procedure for the different types of actions (**). These charts are reproduc- ed on the next three pages in illustration of the manner as of April 10, 1955, in which Stays, Exemptions and Amendments were handled, according to the general practice. There were exceptions in some divisions, but none were serious. The broken lines used in the diagrams to denote intermediate movements, conferences, etc. between the numerous administrative units should not be thought of as representing a simple and direct exchange. On the contrary, these exchanges and conferences were highly complex. They arose from a continuous and frequent lv prolonged effort of the deputy administrator in charge of an action, to contact the people he (*) See NBA Office Manual - Central Record Section - NBA Files. (** ) Report of the Committee for the Study of Administrative Procedure, May 21, 1935. Central Record Section - NRA Piles. 9844 STAYS -6- PSRT ONE Code Asst. * — -y_ Div, Adm. JL Adm. Off. r~ -i & Lab, — *~~ .>< 2 2 Con. A L.Do -M. BM> /a Advisory Boards Ind. - Industrial Lab. - Labor Con. - Consumers L.D. - Legal Division R&P - Research & Planning Steps of Progress Intermediate Move- ments, Conferences, etc, —■ In Exceptional Cases After Signature l a Emergency Stay may be signed, "Pro tempore" by Division Administrator. 2. Division Administrator may call public hearing. 3. Field investigation by Compliance, 98*4 -7- PART ONE EXEMPTIONS A Code Auttu r Any Int. Pty, $ -ML* L_ ;| Dep B Adm„ &/ /y & .1 Code Asct, Div„ Ada, Ind< "7T Lab. -N.V. ^U. Con c ■ w. L.D, .v j>k R&P A > CD Pi Advisory Boards Ind. - Industrial Lab. - Labor Con. - Consumers L.D. - Legal Division R&P - Research & Planning Steps of Progress Intermediate Move- ments, Conferences, etc. In Exceptional Cases After Signature relays 3- 5* 1, Communicate with U. Si Employment Service. 2, Eield investigations by Compliance. Possibility of referring cases to Advisory Council. " " appeal Emergency exemptions may be signed "Pro tempore" by Division Ad- ministrator. 6. Division Administrator may call public hearings. 7» May be roff erred to Administrative Officer in special circumstances. 3, Compliance Officer has authority to grant exemptions if Division Administrator fails to act within 3(6 hours. 8b 44 AiSKIMr -8- PART ONE Any Int. ?ty T li > Code R _ . Adv i b . Council — + 1 — - J T 1 2 1 ? ! . > i . 2 */ 1 2 2 ! >« i Ind. Later Con. Leg. D. R & P / A A / A Advisory Boards v / Ind. - Inaustrial Lab. - Labor Con. - Consumers L.D. - Legal Division R&P - Research & Planning Steps Of . rogre - Intermediate I-ove- nents, Confer enc etc . In Exceptionrl C^ses ..fter Signature S844 -9- was supposed to, within NHA, in order to get the views of some, recom- mendations of others and instructions of still others and to endeavor from all to effect a reconciliation "between the views, often opposed, of members of the industry and NHA. As of April 6, 1935, there were nine applications for stays still in progress through NHA which were more than thirty days old and still incomplete!. The actua.l time thus far in process for these ranged from 41 days to 240 days. Two cases had been between 61 and 65 days in progress. Three cases between 126 and 131 days; one case between 201 and 205 days; and one case between 233 and 240 days. Between Sept- ember 1, 1934, and February 1, 1935, seventy three stays were granted. The elapsed time for putting them through NBA procedure ranged from 1 to 20 days and 201 to 220 days. There were two cases in the longer period. The weighted average time was 42 days. As of April G, 1935, there were in process of HRA procedure 293 cases of proposed amendments more than thirty days old and incompleted. The actual time these cases had been in progress ranged from 31 days to 332 days. The cases were well scattered between these extremes, with 43 cases already 150 days or more in the process of completion. Between September 1, 1954, and Febraary 21, 1935, there were actually concluded 204 amendments to codes and the time in process varied be- tween 1-20 days and 301-320 days, there being one case in the latter bracket. The weighted average of actual completion times was 100 days. As of April 6, 1935, there were in process of NHA procedure 300 cases of exemption more than thirty days old and incompleted. The actual time these cases had been in progress ranged from 31 days to 278 days. There were still in process 213 cases between the ages of 175 and 278 days. Between September 1, 1934, and February 21, 1935, there were actually concluded 580 exemptions. The time periods for these varied between brackets of eight in 1-20 days and one in 201- 220 days. The weighted average time for completion was 60 days. (*) A. Conditional Orders o f A pproval. Conditional Orders of Approval of codes were the first evidence of the emergency pressure method of codification. Each industry was invited to prepare its own code of fair cpmpetition. Those industries commanding the greatest man-power were concentrated upon first by NHA in code negotiations, since their codification should get the greatest number of men back to work. Many provisions included in the earlier codes were copied into the ones that followed. This was the quickest way to get something together and since there was no NHA model code with official sanction until November 6, 1933, (almost five months after approval of the Recovery Act) and but few policy announcements, the method was open to cumulative error. (* ) These figures are from the Heport of the Committee for Study of Administration Procedure, May 21, 1935, Central Hecord Files — (NHA files) 9844 At an early date doubts arose as to the truly representative character of some code sponsors. Protests and opposition to the ideas of committees acting for the sponsors developed at the public hearings, sometimes after weeks of preparatory negotiation between IIRA and the committees. Meanwhile, the declared policy of NRA was that an emergency exist- ed and no stone should be left unturned to get industries under codes and men back to work. Time was of the essence in all procedure. Industries for the raost part responded cooperatively. 3ut despite this, differences arose between HRA and industry and between representa- tives of the same or related industries. Although most of them were amicably settled, times came when a few conflicting views were dead- locked and were, in the opinion of IIRA, causing unwarranted delay. The prospect of continued disagreement in these and other circum- stances which tended to slow down industry codification, was met by accepting those parts of the codes as to which there was accord and issuing an order for their approval, conditional upon the acceptance by industry of certain limitations proposed by the ERA to adjust the deadlocked issues. An executive or administrative order of this type was a Conditional Order of Approval. Sometimes tne conditions had the effect of modifying certain code provisions. Sometimes they nullified them. Sometimes the effect upon the code was permanent and at others, temporary. Usually the order approved the code conditionally upon the stay or amendment of certain provisions, the providing of exception there- from or the addition of other provisions. This procedure was generally successful in getting the acceptable parts of a code into operation without the delays which would most certainly have followed refusal of the NRA to act at all until the code was acceptable in all details. The method, nevertheless, frequently changed the status of a code from one voluntarily entered into, to one .in which certain conditions were imposed by IIRA. Provided that the industry to which a conditional order of approval had been issued had a code committee which was representative of the industry, the procedure generally resulted in the acceptance of the conditions by industry and the full effectiveness af the code as thus modified. 3ut where the representation was in doubt, or where someone made claim that the application of the conditions was unjust, or where a claim was made that the conditions had not been submitted to the same procedure as that followed for the regularly accepted provisions of the code, effectiveness might be in doubt. It is not entended to create the impression that all conditional orders of approval were written with the intention of imposing condi- tions upon industry. Yet there is only one case of record in which, on acceptance of the conditions, a. second, clear-cut order of approval was issued. This was in Code No. 1, Cotton Textile Industry. The first order of approval was conditional. The second was final and 9844 -11- un conditional. It appears clearly that as a matter of. procedure there was no administrative provision by NBA by which an entire industry could be heard on the conditions of approval made by NBA. An approved code, apart from conditions in the order of approval, had been subjected to the full process of public notice and hearing and opportunity for all who were interested to participate in its formulation or, at least, to offer objections. The codes which were subjected to conditional orders of approval, on the other hand, con- tained conditions inserted by NBA without public notice or hearing. 3 . Stays, Exemptions and JBxcept ions, Co de Am en dment s. A procedural application of the Stay was established by Executive Order No. 6205-B, dated July 15, 1933, which provided that those who had not in person or by representative participated in establishing or consenting to a code and w.io claimed that applications of the code were_ unjust, should by applying within ten days after the effective date of the code, be given an opportunity for a hearing and that no liability to enforcement of the code would be incurred by the applicant pending the determination of the issues raised. This provided a second line of protection for chose who ha.d not objected to provisions of a proposed code in the course of the procedure through which codes passed before receiving approval. The Administrator was not given the. power to stay code provisions after a code had oeen approved; until February 8, 1934, although he was given the power of approval of the "elimination" of code provisions on December 30, 1953c A request for a stay could originate with the code authority or any interested party. It was referred to the deputy administrator in charge of the code involved. The deputy then sent notification of the request to the three advisory boards, Industrial, Labor and Consumer, and to the Legal Division and Research end Planning Division, all of which discussed the proposal among themselves, and sometimes with each other, and wrote their views to the deputy. Upon conclusion by the deputy, sometimes following innumerable conferences and adjustments as to the proper action for NBA to take, he would have the order drawn with the assistance of the Legal Division, and would forward it to the division administrator's code assistant. Then, for the first time, the Review Division was contacted to. pass upon the conclusions of the deputy and to review them for policy and consistency. The Review Division had its own legal staff and it was not unusual for it to differ materi- ally with the members of the Legal Division. When, in the opinion of the Eeview Division,' the deputy's, conclusion or its presentation was not as it should be, the file was returned to the code assistant with appropriate comment. Thence it was returned to the deputy whose duty it then was to satisfy the requirements pointed out by the Beview Div- ision, provided its recommendations were accepted as being correct. 9844 -12- The original action of the deputy sometimes required weeks to consummate. The second action, at the instance of the Review Division, frequently tool: as long or longer if the corrections were in contro- versial matters. Sometimes this process was repeated a third time before every view was satisfied or otherwise disposed of. As the procedure was organized, there was no provision requiring tact between the deputy and the Review Division while the deputy was first preparing his case, so that there could be no assurance that his action would be approved until it had been completely prepared and submitted. When finally all the interested units were either overruled or satisfied, the order went to the division administrator for approval, thence again to the Review Division, thence to the Administrative Officer for signature and thence to the Code Record Section for record- ing. Except as to the number of steps required and_ the number of units of NRA to be referred torn as shown by the "flow" charts above the pro- cedure for handling exemptions and code amendments was similar. 1 1 . Administrative Aspect s. Stays, exemptions and code amendments were indispensable instru- ments in the reconciliation of the manifold conflicts, controversies, overlaps of code jurisdiction, code authority aggressions, geographical labor provision disputes and other problems constantly appearing be- fore the administrative staff of the NRA from almost as many directions as there were industries and trades. The primary business of NRA was of course the making and the ad- ministration of codes for industries and trades. Each code had certain "basic provisions, and rules as ;o their acceptability (*) were grad- ually developed from the days when codes were assembled largely on the basis of provisions in or experiences gained from those already approv- ed. Elsewhere there have been discussed trie circumstances under which the code definitions of industries and trades were written, why they frequently overlapped and how problems of overlapping definitions, multiple code coverage and classification arose (**). National Recovery Administration Bulletin No. 2, Basic Codes of Eair Competition, June 19, 1933; also, Office Manual, Index II-1C00-1999, Code Making and Amendment, September, 1934. "Problems of Administration in the Overlapping of Code Defini- tions cf Industries and Trades, Multiple Code Coverage, Classifying Individual Members of Industries and Trade - A report of the Divi- sion of Review. NRA files. 9844 -13- Adjustments were made frequently in these types of cases "by the use of stays and exemptions and amendments. The types of cases for which adjustment had to he made were many more than had "been anticipated. Then too, a great deal of ingenuity was used in their presentation to NRA "by industry. The NBA in turn undoubtedly suffered from shortcomings of its own administrative concepts, organization, personnel and proced- ure. The wide discretion among deputy administrators in some respects and the lack of divisional coordination resulted in closely similar ■ problems being settled in different divisions, and even in the same division, through widely differing administrative approaches. This situation was aggravated by the lack of a clear definition, administra- tively, "between, for example, exemptions, stays and exceptions; amendment and modifications; i^nterpreta'tions and explanations. (*) At first the term "Exemption" included "Exceptions' 1 and "Stays" as well (**). later the term "Exemption" was described as any ruling whereby an individual group or class " within an industry " is released from the full operation of "a cc Ae prov is ion ' 1 (*** ) Still later the SUA personnel was instructed that "To preserve uniformity of usage, the term 'Exceptions 1, will not be used as a synonym for 'Exemptions'" (****) The terms "amendment" and "modification" were used interchangeably until September, 1934, (*****) after which the Office Ilanual permanent- ly established the term "amendment" "and discontinued the hitherto more or less synonymously used terms of "modification", "supplement", "re- vision", "addition 1 ' 1 and "adjustment." (*) See Administrative Interpretations of NBA Codes - A Division of Review report. (**) Administrative Order X-27, May 5, 1934. 1IBA files. (***) Part III, par. 3210, Office Manual, Sept. 1, 1934. (****) Ibid# (*****) N&&. Office Manual, Part II, Index 5010. 9844 The records show no noticeable uniformity in selecting any one instrumentality as the proper means for reconciling problems in the same category. They do, however, reflect an effort to keep the codes in order as far as possible by a consistent process of amendment when opportunity offered. On the other hand, code authorities were very cautious about requesting amendment of their codes, since they were aware that an opening of a code for amendment might lead to the pro- posal by NBA that more changes than those requested by the industry be made. Pending the working out of amendments, stays were used as a pro tempore solution of some difficulties and sometimes such temporary stays were so maintained as to have practically permanent effect. The service codes were virtually placed in suspension as to all pro- visions other than those pertaining to labor, by the exercise of the stay. At other times the provisions of one code were summarily stayed by NBA to avoid hardship in cases of overlapping codes. Stays were used frequently to eliminate code provisions which 1TEA studies or revised policy determined were objectionable. III. Recapitulation ; .Conditional orders of approval as used by IJHA were subject to two interpretations in administration: A. Favorable Facto rs 1. They were effective in short-circuiting the regular methods of code formulation, thus aiding the purpose of immediately getting industries under codes. 2. They avoided delays in putting the immediate desiderata of codification (minimum wages, maximum hours for labor, reemployment, etc.) into effect. 3. They effectively closed arguments between NRA personnel and industry representatives, featured by unwillingness of industry to modify its position to conform to policies of LIRA. 9844 -15- B. Unfavorable Fa c tors : l a The conditions in the orders were frequently of such nature as to practically change the code's status from voluntary to imposed, 2. If the conditions in the order were not met, there was question whether or not the code was legally in effect. (Flat Glass Mfg. Industry, Code No. 54l) and enforceable. 3. The method of inserting some conditions into an order of approval evaded (intentionally or" not) the processes of pro- cedure adopted for voluntary code formulation. 4. The use of conditional orders of approval involved the question of whether they were prope-rprocedure and, therefore, good administration. Star's, Uxom pt ions and. Code Amendments : These instruments of .administration were used widely to adjust and reconcile problems resulting from the policy and procedure of code making* In the earlier days each was applied largely according to the personal ideas of the 2J3A official having the case in charge. There were no general rules rigidly regulating the use of each. To the end of the code period some deputy administrators differed in their opinions as to the proper application of stays, exemptions and amendments to certain problems of administration and frequently each could point to -existing examples in support of- his opinion* Expediency frequently dictated the selection of the instrument for accomplishing a desired end. procedure for applying the instruments was complicated ~oy the administrative practice of interposing additional checks wherever and whenever a new weakness or failure of organization appeared. The author's study of the administration of 1TRA in connection with this and other reports, has engendered some ideas which are here re- corded: 1. Wrapped in the problem of administering the NIRA were definite elements which were opposed socially, economically and industrially, and few indeed of those responsible for the administration know how to relate them, or what to ex- pect from them, well enough to make the fundamentals plain to the men who were to make the NIEA a success. A few of these opposed forces were! Capital and labor Monopoly .and competition Controlled economy and laissoz fairc Agriculture and industry Big business and little business Mechanization and unemployment Fair competition and destructive' competition How industrial products and old Seller and buyer 9844 2. Some of these fore. prosont in practically every situation with which administration had to dool* 3. The objectives of NI3A future as well as uvsent, per- manent as troll as emergency, were never sufficiently kno\7n to or understood by many of those entrusted with the execution of its policies and procedure, to procur; the optimum efficiency in administration, 4. For the most part, personnel was faithful and energetic and • all it had in the effort to do what was immed- iately in front of it, but many officials had little idea what it was all about or the tine to find out. 5« In any largo and growing organization it is necessary to depend to a great extent upon the judgment and initiative of individuals to maintain the policies and carry out objectives. Eow could this be done to best advantage when the philosophy and many objectives of administration were obscure and little understood? 6. The logical thing happened, namely, administration rules were built to correct errors which occurred be- cause there had been no rules. Thus, while this tended to correct previous troubles it did not prevent the occurrence of new ones* To conclude, it is believed that this chapter upon the administra- tive aspects of stays, exemptions and code amendments and conditional orders of approval, taken together with the individual reports (*) contain sufficient proof to confirm the statements that: » 1. There was no comprehensive plan of classification of industries and trades upon which to found a general administrative policy and coordinate the procedure for industry codification. 2, There v/as no authoritative unit within NRA whose sole purpose it was to correlate administrative experiences and engage itself energetically in advance planning of the procedure necessary to keep the organization ahead of its problems. It is not claimed that the removal of these two deficiencies would have correct -d all the troubles. It would, however, have ~o ecial t ie-s Laundry and Dry Cleaning Machinery Manufacturing Textile Machinery Manufacturing Glass Container Bui 1 d.o r s Supp lies T rade Boile r Manufacturing Farm Equipment Electric Storage and Wet Primary Battery Women's Belt Luggage and Fancy Leather Goods Ice Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Saddlery Manufacturing Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade Bankers Silk Textile Optical Manufacturing Automatic Sprinkler Umbrella Manufa cturing Mutual Savings Banks Handkerchief Throwing Compressed Air Heat Exchange 0844 -■■ • uufacturir. Slosure ding Do vie s til Trade int, Varnish and Lac- Business Furniture, Storage Equipment and Filing Supply Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Manufacturing Dross Manufacturing I j or and Pulp Millinory Can Manufacturers Los-ling or Distributing Tr Schiffli, the Hand Machine Embroidery and the Embroidery Thread and Scallop Cutting d ' s Neckwear Aluminum Cigar Manufacturi: stigation primarily sought th snersl causes for the admin- istrative exercise of the power of stay and from the material noted above this report attempts to set forth some of the reasons why the National R< covory Administration, either upon its own initiative or Upon the app- lication of some inter ;stjd party, 6 - it necessary to either grant cr d-^ny a stay of the provisions of a code of fair competition. An ana- lysis of cod; provisions subjected to stays lias been made, with particul- ar str:ss being laid upon maximum hours and minimum wage provisions, code authority provisions and trade practice rules. The atithor stresses the preliminary nature of this report and the inability to exhaust all re- cords, but intends to set forth as a result of the study already made, some answer to the question - "What did KRA do with regard to the use of the power to stay ccod provisions?" and from the answers thereto, to submit suggestions and conclusions for legislative purposes and con- sideration. 9644 -21- ci-l.p i.:: : ; I BASES OF PO\7ER 'The Act vos aoproved "by the President of the United States on June 16, 1933, An examination of the provisions of the Act discloses no use of or reference to the word "stay", hut throughout the Act there are sufficient legislative declarations which warrant and justify the use of the power of stay. The theory of the .act Fas a delegation of power to the President with certain limitations upon the exercise thereof, vhich delegation required an exercise of administrative discretion as a means of proper administration of the Act. Section 3 (a.) of the Act contains pertinent language regarding the exercise of the power of the stay. Cer- tain standards and requirements were iraposed upon the President as to the approval of codes and the e action further provided that where the codes affected persons, the President could, as a condition of his ap- proval of a code provide "exceptions to and exemptions from the provi- sions of such code. " This thought of a power of discretion in the Presi- dent obtains throughout the Act. It is found in Section 10(a) in which the President was a ithorized to prescribe rules and regulations and in Section 10(h), which authorized the President to "cancel and modify any order of approval, license, rule or regulation issued * * *. " In view of these specific references in the Act to the power of the Presi- dent to make exemptions and. to cancel or modify Lis orders of approval, it is unquestioned that the President in the exercise of this power and the discretion granted to him was permitted to stay the provisions of the code if he found that such action would effectuate the declared purposes of the Act. The Act provides for various kinds of codes other than those speci- fically mentioned in Section 3(a) (*) out attention is directed to the statements in these particular sections that the approval of these vari- ous types of codes or agreements would have the same effect as a code of fair competition approved by the President under the provisions of Section 3(a). The power conferred by Section 3(a), when coupled with the gen- eral grant contained in Section 10(h), is of sufficient latitude to apply to all forms of codes and agreements authorized by the Act. The power conferred, upon the President to grant or deny stays was by the terms of the Act rather general. Limitations were imposed, but the ambit of administrative discretion was of wide range. Section 1 of the Act ret forth the declared, policies and purposes of the Act and. the President was empowered to exercise this right of stay when "necessary to carry out the purposed of this title". Section 10(a) states:- '(*) See Sections 3(d), and 7(c) 9844 ito ; in his iiscretion ry to effectuate the policy herein d- dared" re ii ■: s: Section 3(r) prescribes :- "for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees and others and:- "in furtherance of the public interest" The operation and effect of a stay is similar to that of an exemp- tion. The author has prepared a report on the latter subject and has considered in detail the bases of power for the use of this latter men- tioned form of administrative relief. It is suggested that reference to the report on Exemptions (Chapter I - Bases of Power) will show authority for the statement contained in the foregoing para jraphs. For purposes of "brevity and avoidance of duplication the content of such chanter has not "been set forth herein. The reasonable L.iolications in the Act convey the existence of the power in the President to approve a code or act or to approve part of a code, to impose limitations or exceptions or modifications uoon the opera- tion of that code. This power connotes the meaning, purpose and effect of a stay and as such the use thereof "by the President or any official to who:. this power has been properly delegated is within the scope and extent of the legislative declarations contained in the Act. CHAPTER II DELEGATION 0? POWER TO GRANT STAYS On June 16, 1933, the date upon which the Act was signed "by the Presi- dent, General Hugh S. Johnson was appointed by the President to be Adminis- trator for Industrial Recovery. This Presidential Order authorized the Administrator for the ensuing thirty days to do such "other and necessary work as authorized under Title I of the said Act". The Executive Order of appointment elso appointed a Special Industrial Recovery Board composed of the Secretary of Commerce as Chairman, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Labor, the Director of the Budget, the Administrator for Industrial Recovery and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. The authority conferred upon General Johnson was made subject to the general approval of this Board' (*). On July 15, 1933, the power originally granted under Executive Order No« 6173 was continued with certain limitations (**). On the same date (July 15, 1933) the President set up a regulation and modified any pre- vious Executive Order inconsistent with its terms. This regulation is as follows : "Any code of fair eo:anetition approved "by me shall he deemed in full force and effect on the effective date as stated in the code; but after (*) See Executive Order No. 6173 (**/ S jcutive Order Ho. 62C5-A. 9844 -S3- the approval of a code and as an incident to the immediate enforcement thereof, hearings may "be given by the Administrator or his designated repr bative to oersons (hereby defined to include natural persons, pcrtnerships, ; ssociations or corporations) who have not in person or b ir a representative participated in establishing or consenting to a code, but who are directly affected thereby, and who claim that applications of the code in >articular instances are unjust to them and T :'ho apply for an exception to, or exemotion from, or modification of the code. Such persons so applying, within ten days after the effective date of the code, shall be given an opportunity for a hearing and determination of the is- sues raised prior to incurring an - "" liability to enforcement of the code, and the Admi nistrator shall, if justice requires, stay the application of the code to all similarly affected pending a determination by me of the i s sue s rai s ed. " ( * ) The substance of the above quoted Executive Order specifically conferred uoon the Administrator the power to stay the application of a code upon the receipt of an application for an exception therefrom, not only as to the person who m<* de the application, but also persons who were similarly affected-. This Executive Order makes the first reference to the use of the term "stay" and is the first specific delegation of power from the President, On December 30, 1933, the President delegated to the Adminis- trator for Industrial Recovery the power of approval of the "elimination" of any one or more provisions of any code of fair competition. This order also permitted the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to approve excep- tions from the provisions of a code (**). The power granted to the Administrator to act on applications re- ceived within the time period set in Executive Order No. 6205-B restricted the proper and, efficient use of the s tay. On February 8, 1934, the Presi- dent, bj Executive Order No. 6590-A, authorized the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to prescribe rules and regulations covering stays and other forms of relief from codes of fair competition approved under Title I of the said Act. This order extended the power of the Administrator in such a manner as to permit the use of the stay after a code had become effective and did not restrict the use of the power to orders of approvals of codes. These powers which had been conferred upon the Administrator were by the terms of Executive Order No. 6859 - September 27, 1934, transferred to the National Industrial Recovery Board, which Board, by its Adminis- trative Orders, authorized the issuance of orders of approval which nec- essarily included orders of stay by the Administrative Officer (***), No further delegations of power to use the stay were specifically made. The power to stay provisions of codes as such was peculiarly con- fined to the Administrator and the National Industrial Recovery Board, (*) See Executive Crier To. 62P5-B (**) Executive Order 6543-A (***) See Administrative Order X-93, September 28, 1934 9G44 bov •. -, * lod of ■ ■ ' Instances "by lesser of icials of 1 • -.-or - Administration, The poorer of approval of code exemptions, exceptions, and such forms of adminis- 'ere from time to time ed to lesser officials, the rcise of whic ,ired adrainistri tive discretion, Often findings, protests, policies, and other considerations resulted in an administra- tive Btay of the intended relief. No forra of written delegation of t] po"- r the i-'se thereof considered broiled and contained in the lower of exemption ' 1 by the Administrator or the National Industrial 3ecover r Board to the particular of icer, -- .inistrative action he al ays resented the ouestion of due proces.;. For mnoses of time-saving and expediency, it being wracticall"; impossible to conduct hearings upon all matters submitted to the Adminis- tration, the Administrator set up trie procedure known as "notice or oppor- tunity to he heard". Tne oweration of this nrocoaure resulted in the ad- ministrative approval of a particular matter with a ten, fifteen, twent 7 -, thirty, or sicty-di^ stay of the operations of the -orovisior.s of that particular matter in order that interested oersons might f if they so wished, object. This power, v;hen vised by the administrator or tne Na- tional I n dustrial P.ieovery Board, was in accordance with the Presidential delegations hereinbefore mentioned, but when used by lesser officials of the National Necover""' Administration was in accordance with implied power which accompanied the particular delegated power rather tnan according to soecificall^ delegated authority. The President's Reeipployment Agreement provided in Paragraph 14 reof for s stay of tne provisions thereof jendin. ■ a summary investiga— tion b Tr the National Recovery Administration (*). The official explana- tion of the ERA (**) makes reference to Pnra^raph 14 and in the explana* 1 tion thereof states that an i dividual employer may make application for a st accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 14. Interpretation "c. 2, concerning Paragraph 14 (***) sets forth the procedure and its effect as a temporary stay without further investigation pending decision by HHA. The interpretation states that Paragra >h 14 is not intended to provide for group exceptions, but onlv to meet cases of individual hard-* ships. This report does not concern itself with a/oplications submitted to NBA in accordance with the provisions of Paragra >h 14 of the PPA. It is true the word "stay" is used in this oararraoh, but in vie : ~ of the fact that the par •■ jh is limited to ca.-.es of individual amplication the conr.ideration of these applications are found in the NRA Organization Sections Study on Exemptions. No other Presidential delegation of power to sta- r the operation of the PRA is found. A Dull et in No. 3, July 20, 1933. *-' See NBA Bulletin No. 4 (**•) See SBA Bulletin No. 4 9844 -25- CPIiLPTSri II I DEPO T. TIQN OF THE TEELi "STAY " The word "stay" In its ordinary meaning is a "staying or stopping, or state of being stayed; suspension of motion or progression, a halt, stand, stop, a stopping, or more "usually a suspension of procedure or execution "by judicial proceedings or executive mandate". (*) The term "stay" in its legal sense has many connotations. It relates to such things as a stay of foreclosure, a stay of court proceedings, a stay of an action of law, and Acts of a legislature prescribing a stay in certain cases set forth in the legislation, a stay of execution (**). As stated above, there is no reference to the term "stay" in the national Industrial Recovery Act and at the "beginning of the Administra— tion of the Act no administrative definitions or explanations of the term were issued. Chapter II refers to the use of the term "stay" in Para- graph 14 of the PEA. This reference r, as one of the first occasions upon which the term "stay" was used by the Administration. The fact that the interpretation of this paragraph made it apply to individual cases showed a disposition upon the part of the Administration to make the term apply to individual applications for relief. As the Administration of codes and of the PEA continued, reference to individual applications was made by the term "exemption" rather than the term "stay". Early in the process of code formulation, the Administration found that for purpose's of enforcement of policy or recognition of protests it "became necessary to sta Tr , in the order of approval of a code, the actual operation of part of the provisions of that code, either permanently or for a limited period of time. The use of this method of aministrative power resulted in the reference to the term "stay", which reference was actually confined to orders of approval or modifications thereof. Later, experience in the administration of codes disclosed the necessity of ex- ercise of the power to stay provisions of codes already approved, either upon application to or initiation "by the ERA. Consequently, the use of the terra "stay" was enlarged to include modifications of orders of appro- vals of codes, The meaning of the term "stay" was that the stay affected all members of an industry or recognized divisions, either geographical or industrial, and tha.t an, exemption applied to a single individual or group of individuals. No administrative definition of the term "stay" was made until May 5, 1934, when the Administrator for Industrial Recovery, by Administrative Order X-27, issued, rules and regulations concerning the modification of and exemptions from approved codes of fair competition. In Paragraph 1 of such Administrative Order it was stated that the term "exemptions" shall include exceptions and. s t ays and all rulings whereby an individual, (*) Wehster's New International Dictionary, Merriam Edition, 1934, P. 2037 (**) Vol-ume 3, Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Rawle's Third Revision P. 31-35 9844 - 36 - group, or class is re] • from tie full operation of a provision of a codo. This definition partially confirmed the already existing -unoffi- cial definition mentioned above and no change thereof was made in defi- nition until the i ie of t. - ice lianual in Se it ember 1934. Offic- - tes, in Part III, p. 3210:- "7 .j terra ' stay 1 includes ?ny ruling whereby an entire industry is released from the full operation of a code -orovision, (i.e., whereby a code provision is temporarily suspended)." This subsequent definition restricts the scope of the term "stay" to an entire industry, but st^ys issued after this official definition applied both to an entire industry and subdivisions of an industry, so that the original -unofficial intention of the application of a stay actually per- sisted. In other words, the use of the stay would be invoked for the Construction Industry and the Painting and Paper hanging Division of the Construction- Industry , whereas an ''exemption" applied to a single indi- vidual or group or class of individuals. The meaning of the terra and the above mentioned limitation as to its application has been taken as a basis for the research conducted for purposes of this report and the results obtained from an analysis of various stays will apply only to those stays which were issued against entire industries or recognized divisions thereof. An.. examination of the records of the various stays issued by the Administration discloses widespread interchangeable use of the terra "exemption" and the term "stay". The provisions of a codo would be stayed as to a single individual and an entire industry would be exempted from the provisions of the code. (*) The interchangeable use of these terms resulted in great confusion as to the nature of the administrative action taken. It is true that the result of the action was the same, but B administrative division had been set up and, of necessity, required separate treatment. Delegations of power differed as to these forms of administrative action. This fact requires more strict adherence to the defined classes of action. As a matter of record, exemptions were found which were in fact stays with the reverse situation equally existent. The files were equally disorganized. Proper classification of the records has been attempted, so that this report will be based upon evidences of "stays" as defined in the foregoing paragraph. TYPZS 0F_STAYS_ The scope of the use of the stay varies as to its extent and appli- cation. The first type is known as a General Stay - one which stayed all of the provisions of a code and applied to all members of an industry. This form of General Stay was utilized very rarely at the time of the original code making. (**) (*) See I73A Orders 72-13, and Order 259-37 See order of approval of the Millinery Industry Code (Code No. 151, December 15, 1933) and order of approval of Spice Grinding Industry Code (Code No. 424, May 11, 1934) 9844 -27- The use of the General Stay became more widespread during the period of administration of codes, particularly with respect to the orders of ap- provals of amendments. Any number of amendments of codes were approved with a stay of the operation of the amendment provisions for a specified period of time. The stay applied to all members of the industry and ap-- plied to all of the terms of the amendment. This form of stay was used particularly in connection with satisf ication of due process require- ments, (*) Another form of stay was one which was general in its extent as to code provisions covered, but limited in its application to members of the particular industry affected. This type of stay was used on many occasions in the order of approval of a code and was also used at the time of the order of ap-oroval of an amendment to a code.(**) A type of stay issued by the Administration was specific as to the extent of the code orovisions covered and general as to the amplication to members of the industry or trade affected. These types of stays were found, both in orders of aourovals of codes and amendments. (***) (*) See the Ice I n dustry Code, Amendment 1, Order 43—1, April 24, 1934; Metal Tank Industry Code, Amenoment 1, Order 154-1, August 2, 1934 (**) The order of approval of the Dresr Manufacturing Code (Code No. 64— October 31, 1933) stayed all of the provisions of the code as to manufa-cture of dresses whose chief content ? r as cotton, both house and wash, oonding further hearing. The order of approval of the Knitted Outerwear Industry Code (Code Ho. 164 - December 10, 1933) stayed all of the provisions of the code as to manufacturers of knitted outerwear for infants and children, sized from infancy to age 15, until determination of their inclusion in the code. (***) In the order of the airoroval of the Medium a.nd Low Priced Jewelry Manufacturing Code (Code No. 75 - December 23, 1933) the orovision of payment of time and one-third for .all hours over forty (40) hours per week to all employees was stayed until March 1, 1934. In the orc.er of approval of the Flag Manufacturing Industry Code (Code ho, 352 - March 31, 1934) the homework provisions in that code were stayed for a period of thirty days, the effective de„te of the code. In the order of approval of the labor provisions of the Brewing Industry Code, the said, provisions were stayed for a period, of ten days. 5344 ■ form of stav is found - one "hich ipecific as to its in connection with code orovisioi also as to its aoplication to members of industry. (*) CHAPTE3 IV t hods or e;:ercise or st^ ys The use of the oower of stay was evidenced in varioxis forms of ad- ministrative action bv the NBA, The President, on May 26, 1934, by Ex- ecutive Order No. 6723, stayed all of the provisions of the codes of the service trades and industries except certain labor provisions. This is an example of the exercise of the power of general stay by the President. Likewi , the power of general stay w« s exercised bv the Administrator in Administrative Order X-5, of February 2, 1934. The operation of a prior administrative order (Administrative Order X-4) was staved for a period of thirty days and later this same order was oermanently stayed by Administrative Order X-8, dated March 3, 1934. In addition, the National Industrial Recover - "- Bo; rd, in Administrative Order X-136-2 stayed the operation of Paragraoh 2 of Administratives Order X— 136 insofar as it related to the code authorities or agencies thereof ''hich were speci- fically set -~orth in the said Administrative Order X-136-2. The Administrator exercised the power of the stay in orders of ap- provals of codes, amendments, and other miscellaneous matters. The ad- ministrative use of the stay also is evidenced inseoarate orders issued to extend, terminate, or modify a stay theretofore issued. On some oc- casions a separate order was -issued to stay some or all of the orovisions of a code which order, was not linked with an order of approval of a code or an amendment, but a separate and distinct exercise of the power to grant stays. Causes op b iercise of pcmeb of stay - types of code pro vi- si01cs affecte d Administrative action, such as a stay, may be made for one or vari- ous reasons. Primarily, its purpose is to afford relief from the equal application of code provisions; to enable the administrative agency to maintain control of and adherence to its rules and regulations; and also to prevent the approval of code -orovisions which are not in conformity In the order of approval of the Insulation Board Manufacturing Code, (Code To. 353 - March 22, 1934) the application of the wage and hour provisions was stayed as to the territory of Hawaii. In the order of approval of the Cotton Textile Industry Code (Code No. 1 - July 9, provisions relating to limitation of machine hours were r ed insofar as they applied to the production of tire yarns and fabric for rubber tires. 9844 -29- with legal requirements or declared policy. The National Recovery Ad- ministration was presented with problems necessitating this form of administrative action. Some sponsoring groups submitted codes contain- ing illegal provisions. Attempts of the Administration to cause a dele- tion of these object ionable provisions often were of no avail and in such cases the use of the power of stay was necessary, in order to prop— erly approve the code. In addition, the Administration, being presented with the problem of codification of industry and the necessity of admin- istration thereof, naturally announced various policies which were de- signed to carry out the purpose of the Act under which the program was progressing. Oftentimes code provisions as submitted did not conform to the announced policy and for purposes of consistency and adherence to this policy it became necessary, upon the part of the Administration, to exercise its power of stay. The KRA, in its administration of the Act, which involved the is- suance of rules and regulations having the force and effect of law, nec- essarily was presented with and obliged to follow due process require- ments. In the early stages of the codification of industry, all of the proposed codes were submitted and considered at a public hearing. As the details of administration increased with resoect to amendment of codes, interpretations, exemptions, classifications, Code Authority rights and obligations, and other matters, it was found to be a practi- cal impossibility to submit all of these matters, many of them routine, to the formality of a public hearing. The recognition of this practical impossibility resulted in the set— up of the procedure commonly referred to as "Notice of Opportunity to be heard". This particular form of notice involved the use of the power of stay. An order was signed re- lating to the particular matter, but the operation thereof was stayed for a specified period during which interested parties could object to the effective operation of the particular matter approved. This form of stay was extensively used by the administration. The investigation of the records of NBA relating to stays was con- ducted along two lines. First, ohe orders of approvals of codes (l to 520 inclusive) were examined and. the orders of approvals of amendments of such codes were also examined. Second, the records of the following codes:— Aluminum Asphalt Shingle and. Roofing Automatic Sprinkler Automobile Manufacturing Automotive Parts and Equipment Bituminous Coal Boot and Shoe Builders Supply Trade Business Furniture California. Sardine Processing- Can Manufacturers Canned Salmon Carpet and Rug Cast Iron Soil Pipe Graphic Arts Ice Ladder Lime Lumber and Timber Men's Clothing Hen's Neckwear Millinery Motion Picture Motor Vehicle Retailing Oil Burner Paint, Varnish & Lacquer Paperboard Paper and Pulp 9844 -30- • Ci aufacturin Coat and Sr.it Construction Cotton Garr.ent Cotton Textile Daily jer Publishing Drer. facturinp: Electric 1 Manufacturing Fertiliser Fire Extinguisher Fisher-- (Basic Code) Floor £ Wall Clay Tile Funeral Supply Furnitrrs Gas Appliance and Apparatus Class Container Silk Textile Plumbing Fixtures Pump Manufacturing in and Synthetic Yarn Retail Drug Retail Trade Rubber Manufacturing Rubber Tire Manufacturing Si It Schiffli Set Up Paper Box Shipbuilding and Shinrepairing Steel Casting Trucking Wholesale Tobacco Wholesale Trade Wool Textile Canning Iron and Steel were examined for the purpose of determining whether or not a stay load' been issued at a time other than the time of the order of approval of a code or amendment. The codes examined disclosed six hundred and fifty- four (654) orders which contained a stay; five hundred and ninety-eight (598) of such stays were a part of orders of approvals of codes or amend- ments and fifty-six (56) orders of stays were issued at a time other than at the time of the code or amendment appro v.- 1. The orders were examined as to the particular code involved, pro- visions staged, and the reasons for the issuance of these orders. A classification of the problems presented shows the general causes for the issuance of stays hereinbelow set forth: 1. 2. 3. o. 6. 7. 8. Geographical problems Recognition of protests Legality ". ecessity of further study (a) by LIRA (b) by industry or trade NBA policy Pending amendment Industrial subdivisionol problems Due process Sixteen orders of approvals of codes stayed the operation of the codes in entirety for various periods of time. (*) A few of these stays applied to certain t ir pes of manufacturers; e.g., the order of (*) See ore'er of approval of the Coffee Industry Code (Code No. 265), the Fisheries Code (Code To. 3C8), Mayonnaise Code (Code No. 349), Peanut Butter Code (Code Ho. 378), Spice Grinding Code (Code No, 434). 9844 -31- approval of the Dress Manufacturing Code (Code No. G4) stayed all of the provisions of the code as to the manufacture of dresses whose chief content s cotton pending further hearing. The order of approval of the Knitted Outerwear Industry Code stayed all of the provisions as to manufacturers of knitted outerwear for infants and children. In some cases the code was approved for a trial period and stayed in its entirety after a cer- tain specified date for purposes of further study or amendment, as in the order of approval of the Millinery Industry Code (Code No. 151) which stayed all of the provisions of the code si:: months after the date of the order pending submission of recommendations regarding continuance or amendment of the code. Stays of all provisions of codes were issued, either at the time of the order' of approval or subsequently, when objec- tions and protests to such provisions were recognized". (*) The Administration issued a number of orders of stays of amendments and the records investigated for the purposes of this preliminary report show the following: Stays cf amendments labor 13 Stays of amendments code authorit - ' - 85 Stays of amendments trade practices — 34 The entire operation of on amendment was usually stayed to meet due process requirements. (**) In some cases amendments were stayed for reasons other than due process requirements, (***) On some occasions the application of a code was stayed for the pur- poses of effecting a. consolidation of that particular code with some other code c (****) From time to time classification problems arose which were caused either by multiple cede coverage or overlapping definitions. The pro- blems created often resulted in a stay of a code provision insofar as certain operations under that code were concerned, or insofar as certain members of the industry subject to that code were concerned. In the (*) See Administrative Order No. 48C-4 which stayed the operation of the Structural Steel and Iron Fabricating Code indefinitely and without the assent of the industry." See also order of approval Uacaroni Code (Code No. 234), (**) See Fabricated Hot al Products Code No. 84, Amendment No.l; Retail Farm Equipment Code No. * 197, Amendment No. 1; Printing Equipment Code No. 257, .Amendment No. 1. (***) See Cotton Garment Industry Code No. 118, Amendment No. 15 (****) See Hire Reinforcement Code, the provisions of which were stayed for the purposes of considering consolidation of the Iron and Steel Code; the Cleanser Manufacturing Code was stayed for pur- poses of consolidation with the Soap and Cleansing manufacturing Code; and the Manganese Steel Casting Code for the purposes of consolidation with the Steel Casting Code. 9844 -32- Oriental Rug Importing Code . 7, Sug 3 mt No, 1, the order stayed the provisions of the Wholesale and Distributing Trade as to Wholesalers of oriental ruga in order to permit operation under the Importing Trade Code. These classification problems often arose in connection with territorial -iroblems, especially where Sep tt fee territorial codes were being considered, (*) Likewise sta^s were issued because of overlapping code definitions, (**) A number of orders of approvals of cooes embodied administrative action, which was in the nature of a stay, but --ere more sweeping and decisive than the ordinary form of sta - ". These orders by their terms "eliminated" provisions from codes nnd usually were invoked in cases where the particular provision ran counter to legal objections or were not in conformity with the announced policy of the Administration. The effect of these orders not only stayed the operation, but rendered the particular provision null and void and deleted it from the code. Admin- istrative policy announced that the so-called "merit clause" relating to the promotion of employees and increase of wages on a merit basis was against policy and in several cases the merit clause set forth in the code was eliminated, (***) Provisions affecting the rights and obligations of code authorities also felt the effect of "elimination. " Administrative objection to Administration members of a code autho- rity being appointed without ercoense to the industry was found to be objectionable in the Foundry Equipment Industry Code No. 264, so the order of approval "eliminated" the ^'ords "without expense to the indus- try". In the same code labor policy objected to an exception from maxi- mum hour provisions which included members of the staffs of executives, executives, and other specified employees. The recognition of this objection resulted in elimination of the terms "members of their res- pective-staffs". (****) See Order To. 446-4 relating to persons engaged in canning pine- apple and can manufacturing in Hawaii. NBA files (**) See Orders Nos. 287-2-A and 268-2-A relating to conflict between Jwspaper Publishing Code and the Graphic Arts Code. NRA file's See Orders o^ avrorovals of the Boiler Manufacturing Code No. 38; Boot and Shoe Industry, Code No. 44; Hotel Industry Code No. 121; lene Industry Code No, 155, and the order of ap-oroval of the Bituminous Qoal Code No. 24, where a "weighing" clause was eliminated. NBA, files (****) j4. ^ -j^g note ,j that this order eliminated parts of a code rovision rather than the entire provision itself. For a re- cognition of objections to labor provisions, see also the order of approval of the Steel Joist I n dustry Code No. 495, NRA files 9844 -33- Trade practice policy often required the exercise of the power of elimination with respect to trade practice provisions. (*) All of the above examples contained clauses or portions of clauses which if per- mitted to remain in the code would have conflicted with legality or the policy of the Administration relating to labor and trade practice pro- visions, NBA insignia s and the like, and as a result, this -power of "elimination", which was in the nature of a stay, was exercised "by hRA, TYPES OP COD S PRO VI5I0IJS SUBJECTED TO STaYS The use of the power of stay covered practically ever~r type of code provision submitted to 1TRA. - labor, code authority, trade practice and general provisions. • ■ L ABOR PR O VISIO NS An examination of the code provisions stayed, discloses some rather interesting information, The use of the power of stay ~oy the Adminis- tration was most usually applied to trade practice provisions, and in a lesser degree to labor provisions of codes. Of the latter, the maxi- mum hour and minimum wage provision of codes were the ones most usually stayed, but the various general labor provisions likewise met with the exercise of this administrative power. Tabulation of the records in- vestigated, relating to labor provisions shows the following: •\ See order of approval of the Horseshow and Allied Products Code No, 325 (price list provisions); Bulk Drinking Straw Industry Code Mo, 331 (underselling clause); Beverage Dispenser and Equipment Cede Ho, 334 (sales contrary to published price list clause); Opti- cal Wholesale Code ho. 443 (uniform discounts); Metal Hat Die and TTood Eat Block Industry Code T T o. 221 (clauses regulating the use of LIRA insignia); Cigar Container Industry Code No. 135, Amendment JTo, 1 (Code Authority contributions clause). BRA files 9844 -. - stays or Lym provisions of oobbs . ( * ) ttpz o? coji peovisici; ::o. of stays Minimum wages 22 Minimum wages (C-eo^ra^hical area) 4 Minimu 36 (Industrial subdivision) 4 Maximum hours 23 Maximum hours (Geographical area) ■"■ 1 Maximum hours (industrial subdivision) 3 Definitions of t'-pes of employees Home work provisions 3 Child labor provisions 1 Piece rate 1 Method of :nt of wages 1 Handica-o jed workers 1 Equitable adjustment of wages 1 Most of the stavs of the maximum hovir and minimum "age provisions were made as a result of protests by interested parties, either the wages r:ere too high or too low. This fact is more strongly borne out by the above table showing administrative recognition of difficulties as to ~eo .cal sections of on industry and also industrial divisions thereof. The stavs of home work orovisions were the result of labor policy as announced by NBA, as were the "eliminations" ''hich v :ere mostly deletions of the so-called "merit clause". All other stays of labor provisions were granted because of exceptional conditions existing in the industry and the need for Particular relief from the operation of the partieul; r -irovisions. C0D5 A UT HORITY PROVISIONS en the President issued enforcement of an order of approval of a code, oroblemr in its administration nere ercpected and, as the codi- fication of industries orogiessed, v.rious policies were announced to meet the difficulties seen at that time. In addition, the National Industrial ? L ecovery Act imposod certain requirements uoon the Adminis- s to the truly representative nature within the industry of persons or groups r>articipatin~ in the formulation of the code, (**) The enforcement of these legislative requirements and policy announce- ments were sometimes evidenced by stays of code authority provisions; i.e., the code provisions which crea.ted the code authority as an in- dustrial administering body with certain rights thereto and obligations thereon. The types of code authorit - "- provisions s objected to stays, insofar as the investigation for ^umoses of this report is concerned, were: - .""ion, it shorJd be noted that thirteen (13) amendments of labor -orovisions were stayed and seven (7) "eliminations" of labor provisions or oarts thereof were issued, (•*] Section 6 of the Act 9844 -35- TYPSS OF CODS PROVISIONS NUMBER Election of Code Authority - participation of trade asc.ocie.tion 5 Insignia — 1 Reports and schedules 3 Code authority finances 81 Liability of code authority 1 Incorporation of code authority 1 Label orovisions 1 .iustment of wages above the minimum - code authority proposal — ■< ■ 1 Code authority powers of classification (a) Industrial or trade — • 1 (*) (b) Geographical 2 Legal objections (the requirements of Section 6 of the Act) caused the stays of the code authority election provisions in the three cases tabulated above. The stays of the label, incorporation, liability and insignia provisions abo\re noted, prevented the conferring of excess power upon the. code authorities involved. All of the code authority finance provisions, with the exception of nine (9), were stayed in order to meet due process requirements; the remaining nine (9) provi- sions were stayed insofar as Paragraph 5 of Administrative Order X— 36 (relating to assessments upon the major line of business of a member of industry) was concerned. The stays of code authority provisions relating to classifications were the result of protests by the several Advisory Boards of the Administration, TFADi; PrACTICS PIOVASIOT'S Trade practice provisions of a code involved vrricus types of trade regulations. Trade practice rules can be classified as follows:- (a) rules generally accepted in law (b) rales desirable to industry or trade, but not fully accepted in law (c) rules desirable, but no basis in law (d) -undesirable rules (e) unenforceable rules The hopes of industries and trades in the sponsorship of codes were high. It was exoected ay many members that the approval of the code would result in the solation of all their industrial or trade troubles. Consequently, trade practice rules in all of the above class- ifications were submitted and strenuously urged by code sponsors. The early promulgation of codes for acknowledged reasons of expediency and the sincere attenpt to effectuate the immediate reemplovment of American labor resulted in the inclusion of undesirable and unenforceable provi- sions in codes. As Administrative experience increased, various (*) These were two eliminations of code authority provisions, both of which related to objectionable features of the code authority fi- nance phase of administration. 9844 -; 6- polic: . ated, restrictin table trade actice provisions, which polici ' n contrary to the form of the provisions c< :: above mentioned early codes. This situa- tion caused jponsors to str« :iore strongly and to refuse consent to withdraw or delete the particular objectionable tra . ctice provisions. In addition, the development of Adminis- trative c ice required th< initiation of various studies and in- vestigations to determine the value of particular trade practice rules, their effect upon small enterprise, consumers, labor ?\vl other in- terested groups, the tendencies thereof towards monopoly, price fixing and other evils an'" 1 also th« administrative problems presented. In short, the use c rbay in connection with trade practice provisions carried ovt the A' . ilnisti ation's determination to adhere to announced policies • ' r as possible, thereby overriding objections of industry or groups thereof, tit the same tine enforced the ordinary re- quirements o. I strative law. Tfhlc exercise of foresight did not obtain in the cases of all codes and, as a result, the pouer of stay was exercised at a time subsequent to t >roval of a code upon a towing to or finding by HRA that the particular approved code or pro- vision thereof was resulting in unreasonable and unfair application. Perhaps a correct ap >roach to a study of stays of trade practice provisions would be an examination of the particular code provisions affected, bearing ii mind the classification of trade practice rules set forth in t.e opening paragraph of this subsection. (*) 17 o attempt has been made at this time to classify the various trade practice rules, but the results of the investigation shows certain types of trade practice provisions whic had been subjected to stays; all of which are tabulated as follows :- TYPZS OF T3A3 I PRACTI CE Ph07I5IC ::3 170. OF STAYS Resale price maintenance 10 Requirement of charging transportation costs to merchant 3 Prohibition of sole of existing stock (Distress merchandise) 1 •hod of determining price differentials 1 Definition of "transportation charges from wholesaler to customer" 1 Provision for payment of volume allowances to reta.il stores 1 Establishment of differential discounts between wholesalers and other cl^.sres of purchase re 2 Open price filing systems 19 • in- period - Open price systems 183 lans 5 Prohibition of adulteration an Ling 1 Provision prohibiting contractor to cut a I 1 for -lufacture of araent ■ 1 Percentage limitation upon ret *ice 2 Provision incor l ?ooc" and Drug Act 1 Provision fixin Lscc ints and terns of 3nle 15 Provision includln loy ■ contract in n i berf rence - - ' contracts" clause 1 Provisions permitting manufacturer to sugger.t resale mini- rices- 3 (*) See Chapter 7 ■ A -37- TYPES OF TEADI PPACTICE F?;OVISI01;S (COITTIHJEI)) HO. . Op 1 STAYS Prohibition of receipt of ".crip for payment of merchandise- 2 prohibition against distributors underselling jobbers 1 prohibition of sales contrary to published price lists 2 tiibition of production of custom-made goods comparable to standard points 1 Uniform conditions of sale and methods of estimates and quotations 1 Definition of "contractor" 1 ;d minimum terms of sale 8 itation of credit period on government purchases 1 Fixed estimate formula 1 Prohibition of future sales and deliveries (requirement of report) 1 requirement of agreement between jobbers and distributors to file price schedules in accordance with code 1 Requirement of agreement to resell in accordance with code provisions 7 — 6 Prohibition of quotation of -prices other than f.o.b. factory 2 Special rules regardin bids to governmental agencies 15 Prohibition of coupons and premium 8 Prohibition of "breah and tahe" merchandise distribution 3 Prohibition of assumption of consequental damages 2 prohibition of furnishing detailed shop drawings of products 9 Prohibition of furnishing shop drawings without charge 3 Prohibition of destructive orice cutting 9 Prohibition of "pooled buying" 5 Prohibition of "trade-in" allowances 11 Provisions setting forth proper trade mark rules 8 Prohibition of dissemination of falsa information regarding products • 6 Prohibition of consignment sales 1 Prohibition of inducement of breach o^ contract 5 Provision prohibiting sales in evasion of code 4 Mandatory requirement of registration of agents, dis- tributors, etc. 1 Provision permitting free advice and consultation services to purchasers 1 Prohibition of absorption of inspection charges 1 Provision exempting sales to export trade — 1 Uniform accounting and cost-finding system 7 Prohibition of guarantees 1 Prohibition of rental of Toroducts 1 Prohibition of discounts except cash discounts 1 Establishment of the uniform agenc" r contract 1 Provision requiring publication of prices covering in- stallation of products 1 Prohibition of allowances for advertising 1 Prohibition of attachment of ERA label to a garment not made under the code 1 TOTAL 403 Ten of the above list of trade practice provisions were stayed through the process of "elimination." Those provisions which were so eliminated are as follows: 9G44 - TYPE. : ' "0 . ^ ILII'IITATIOHS nee 1 Lscounts 1 Prohibition of fut Lverj s 1 Prohibition of - ' r; r to published price list- 1 .libit i or* of uno ra by distributors — 1 Provision permitting suggestion of nin'j ; .e price 1 Inclusion of )yees' contracts in "int - ce irith competitors 1 contract" clause 1 Inclusion of Federal Fee Act 1 Provision prohibiting adulteration and misbranding — 1 It should be noted from I ovo tabulations that most of the trade practice provisions stayed related to price provisions, either with respect to lininuu prices, resale price maintenance, maximum dis- counts an is of sale or o lee filing systems. The tabulation shows '•t^'s of provisions which ordinarily would be classified as de- sirable and enforceable; 3.g., adulteration end misbranding clauses - rence with mothers ' contract. I: - .. ation of the stays of these particular provisions discloses th ' was issued not because of the purposes of the particular provision but rathe:: that the provision was improperly drafted pr too stringent or extensive in its scope and application, llethods cf obtaining uniform prices, or at least in- formation as to the cost, equally fell under this gavel of administrative action. Uniform cost systems, methods of estimating and auctations ~?ere submitted by various cod^-spor roups, but such contemplated pro- visions ran afoul of either th legal or policy requirements of URA resulting in a stay of the provision. examination of the records of the trade practice provisions subjected to stays did not in all cases disclose reasons why the par- ticular stays had 1 Lied. In addition, the author has not had an ty to full - all of the records relating to these Lous stays, howev r, some of the file's and orders examined did dis- close som<^ reasons and, for purposes of this report, certain classifi- cation- aoons . . iadc and a tabulation th r of set forth, le picture of why IDA exercised this administrative '■";". 1 - ' Lon is as folio.:": HZ AS PITS FCR STAYS 0? TRAPS PRAC TICE P ROVIS IONS 1~UI3ER For further inv :ion 7 For • mination of advisability of approval of code lions 2 Cons tion and 6 I ion by ERA — 2 'ide ration of objections to provisions 8 suiting from ■ initiated by NRA 183 r invo- i arin 5 l • «ity 1 Due proc - 75 Ponding f • ;t 1 dditional time for study 1 .c.in submission o* cv - industry ■ 14 ~ ' " for confidential treatment of price infc >n p TOTAL 306 9844 „39- It is realized that the- rxovo general classifications of reasons do not show the purposes of the "further investigations and hearing", "studies initiated by ' T RA or the objections being considered. In some cas« s particular circumstances nay Lave existed in particular industries • hich required further study or investigation. (■*) To delve into these reasons, a furth* r and more exhaustive study must be con- ducted. The above tabulation shows sons one hundred and eighty-eight (188) trade practice provisions stayed because of studies "being conducted by NRA. The majority of these stays' related to the waiting period between the tine of filing of price lists with a code authority and the effect- ive date of such pric: lists. Office Order ho .63, issued oy the di- rection of the Administrator on January 25, 1934, announced that a study as to price changes was being nade and that code provisions re- lating to open price associations would "be stayed in the order of approval of the code. The scope of this order was later modified, (**) but its result was a great number of stays of the waiting period pro- vision of open price systems. It is of interest to note that eighteen (18) stays of trade prac- tice provisions were issued, which postponed the effective dates of fair trade practice provisions . (***) The investigation of the records of stays of trade practice pro- visions discloses that most of the stays were issued at the time of the order of approval of the code and that in such orders either one or several provisions of the code were affected thereby. It is further disclosed that two hundred and eight (208). codes, practically half of the codes examined, contained a stay of trade practice provisions in the order if approval of the code. A list of such codes is set forth in Appendix ITo . 2, hereto attached. TIME Or ISSUANCE Of STAY As stated in Chapter IV, ante, the power of stay was exercised by the Administration at tines other than the tine ?f the order of approval of the code and investigation was directed to certain codes to- study orders of stays issued at a time subsequent to an order of approval of the code. The examination discloses that most of such stays had been issued as a result of application by a particular industry or -trade and that the code provisions from which relief was sought referred to maximum hours or minimum wages, although a few such orders of stay re- lated to relief from trade practice provisions. The schedule set forth (*) The order of approval of the Motion Picture Code, Code No .124, stayed certain trade practice provisions relating to the 'pay- ment of excessive salaries to executives and other employees. This provision affected the salaries of motion picture stars and the effect of the limitation upon these salaries was un- known at the time of the order of approval of the code. As a result, the provision was stayed until ERA had axi opportunity to investigate the effects of the provision. (**) See Office Orders pos . 63-A and 63-3 - January 27, 1934 .NBA Files. (***) See Order Ho. 47-3, L ankers Code - Order ITo. 454-2, Optical Retail Trade Code. HEJA Piles. 9844 -4' - in A R • ' • hereto, is " il in determinin - the coder. and code provisio cted i ced for the groat' of ' subsequent to cod oval.(*) the comment r hereto dis- closes that codes \ Likely to he subjected to any time during the period of its approval of ad i listration. Gone codes had no stays for any purposes whatsoever, others only one till others a number of . The following schedule lists the various codes examined which ha/ more than one st- . : C0D15 ::avii 7 g ;:oid; t hai 0:3 s: :x. cr stays 1. Cotton Textile 13 2. Shipbuildii nd Shi] repairing 2 3. 7ool Textile 4 4. Electric I mfacturing 2 9. Lumber i mher 5 18. Cast Iron Soil Pipe ■ 2 21. Leather 4 23. Dhde] - euk Alii 3d products 4 24. Bituminous Oal 3 25. Oil Burner 2 ; 3 38. Boiler Manufacturing 3 39. Farm Equipment 3 :otor Vehicle 3 43. Silk Textile - 3 54. Throwing ■— : 3 60. 2eto.il ' 9 64. Dress LTr.nuf 4 68. Rooa - : 2 69. Uillini 2 . Steel Castin ' 4- 84. Fabricated Metal Products 4 88. ] Furniture, etc. 5 93. - and Ironing Machine 4 95. Buff and Poli *..heel 2 1C2. Shovel, Dra line Crane 2 113. '"otto- it 3 121. Hotel 3 124. Motion Pictur 3 12 r . U holstery Drapery ; ' 2 123. Cement ---• Jewelry 3 151. Millinery - 4 155. C tylene 5 157. Hair Clot] 2 176. ■ Distributing 2 132. He tail Too ry 4 (*) - : - e • te tabulation was obtained partially ^ ro - author 1 of the ITPJL n - lating to exemptions also the recc ig to stays. The interchangeable une -- '" and "exemption" ] ted in the interchangeable filing o. stays and exemptions, however, for ses of the tabulation, recor i late only to exemptions or stcys which r ere granted to an entire I ry or - recognized subdivision thereof. -41- CODES •HAVIITG IJOHE TRAiT OjTE STAY (CO: niTJED) "0 . OF SIM YS 196, Wholesale Food anc" Grocery — 3 201. '.7h.olesp.ie or Distributing 5 204. Plumbin ■-.; Fixtures .-- 3 234. Macaroni 5 7. Alloy Casting 5 Tag- 2 250. wire Hod and Tube 2 257. Printing Equipment 2 260. Ornamental Moulding 2 264. Foundry Equipment 3 255. Inland ITater Carrier 2 257. Used Textile Bag ; 2 274. Sarc and Steel—- '■ 3 282. Restaurant 4 286. Beauty and Barber Shop 2 287. Graphic Arts " 5 298. Wiping Cloth . 3 313. Steel Uool 2 206. Mica 4 308. Fichery ' 5 311. Ready Mixed Concrete . 2 31S. Newspaper printing Press 2 327. Machine -Applied Staple, etc. 2 329. Upholsterj? Spring . : — 3 332. Ladies Handbag 2 334. Beverage Dispensing 3 341. Fiber and Metal 7. T ork Button 2 347. Machinery and Allied products 9 354. Snail Arms, etc. 3 353. Men's IJeclrwear 2 365.. Sand Lime — 2 367. Metal Treating 2 370. Peanut Butte?- 3 3C6. Umbrella Frame 4 393. Soft Fibre 2 397. Spray Painting Equipment 2 399. Household Goods Storage 3 410. Retail Rubber Tire . 3 414. Bobbin and Spool 2 416. Leather ClotH Fabrics 2 421. Marble Quarrying . 2 423. Drop Forging 2 445. Baking ■ 5 451. Candlewick Bedspread 2 454. Optical Retail-—-- — ] 2 458. Uholesple Confectioners' . — : 4 450. Preserve, Maraschino Cherry — ' , 2 462. Wholesale Tobacco 3 463. Candy Manufacturing •■ 4 466. Retail Tobacco ■ 3 467. Cigar Manufacturing " 2 471. Trailer Manufacturing 2 474. Heedlev:ork - Puerto Rico- 2 9844 8-" CODES HAV 2). ITO.O ? STAYS 478. Secondary Stool 480. Structural Steel 3 465. Cotton G-innin tiery 2 490. Imported Date ] . — 3 508. Uholes . tc- 509 . ilarine Equipment 2 97 CODES SUFFLZiddhTA^Y T O BASIC J?0DdS 84. Fabric 1 Products 44 88. Business Furniture, etc. 105. Autor.otive Farts and Equipment 3 201. Wholesale and Distributing 275. Chemical Manufacturing 3 347. Machinery Al I Products 3Z RETROACTIVE STAYS examples of retroactive 3tays were four. . COliDIT IOl TAI STAYS A few stays were found to rrhich were attached conditions imposed upon persons seeking the relief in the stay. Stays of labor pro- visions often contained a condition as to the payment of an overtime rate fop hours worhed in excess of the maximum hours, (*) Stays of trade practice provisions in some cases contained conditions. (**) The above examples of conditional stays were ones issued after the time of the approval of the code. In some cases a stay in an order of approval of a code contained a condition tr - 'hich certain parties afforded the relief of the r J iuld be required to do something with respecy to the continuance or termination thereof. (***) The author of this preliminary report has cc. . the subject of conditional exemptions. (****) ( *) See Order 151-25, in -hich a stay from bl rovisions of a code requiring payment of time and one-half for overtime was • granted on condition that an overtime rate of tine and one- • third "be paid. In this order a further condition was im- posed - that the industry ■ orh its employees the first five days of the wee 1 ;. See also Order 467-2. 1JBA Piles. (**) See Order 6C-1C5, stay of loss limitation provisions on con- dition that nc sales ade tc members of the industry at less than six per cent (&J>) above cost. (I3A Files) (***) See Order* 41 - Order 347-15. ~~A. Files. (****) See Preliminary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions. NBA mization Studies Section, Division of Review, NBA Piles - Chapter IV, Page 40. The 1 phases of exemptions have been discussed therein and since it is the opinion of the author that a stay and an exemption are to all practical extents the same, it is suggested that reference be made to the treatment of conditional execrations hereinbefore mentioned. 9844 -43- DEITIA L 0? STAYS The records of the orders of approvals of coder, and amendments disclose no denials of stays as they all referred to grants of stays or else were silent on the subject. The author has had no opportunity to examine the records of the various codes in which applications for stays or considerations by FRA of protests, had caused contemplation of a stay, which stay did not materialize at the time of the order of roval of the code. In addition, there lias "been no opportunity to examine the records of various codes with respect to applications for stays received by in accordance with the rule and regulation set forth in Executive Order Ho. 62C5-E, supra, however, examination of records of stays issued after approval of a code shews thp.t one stay was denied. (*) PLPIOD C? STAY Administrative discretion with respect to the grant of stays includes determination o.s to duration thereof. Of necessity, and properly so, this phase of discretion is re;oosed in the administrative agency. The ITRA exercised bhJ \ right by granting stays for various periods of time, ranging from one day to an unlimited period. On some occasions, it been, e necessar - / to e-:tend the period of stay and in some ■ cases when the need of a stay was no longer evident, either upon lication by particular interested parties or initiation by ITRA, the duration of the stay was terminated. (**) The following tabulation discloses the periods of time for which stays were ranted: PERIOD OF STAY • IIP. OF STAYS Unlimited. 70 To June 16, 1935 8 One year 1 Si:: months to one year 8 Ninety days to si:: nonths 20 Sixty to ninety days 26 Thirty to sixty days 30 Fifteen to thirt ' days 73 Ten bo fifteen days 120 Two to ten days ■ 14 One day 4 Pending study 17 Pending further order 220 Pending amendment or hearing 13 Pending submission of evidence by industry or trade 16 Pending election of code authority . 2 (*) See Order Ho. 88-18 IIPA Piles by which the Steel Shelving Division of the Business furniture, Storage Equipment and Filing Supply Code was denied a stay of the trade practice provisions relating to marketing. (**) See Order ITo . 445—13, Baking Code - Extension of a stay; also Orders ITos. 467-33, 467-40,467-46, 467-48; see Administrative Order X~8, termination of stay. YTRA Files . 9344 -44- .unber of orders of st " not disclose ' rticular period fo .In ition, sou r .ers of stays re- lated to sev rovisions of th -- -ovision would be stayed for a period of sixty (60) < • revision stayed for a period of thirty (30) days - [.lthough one order is involved, the various periods of time been included in the above tabulation. ■ I abov-3, due process require lonts let with an ore! of stc- 'as known as a "notice o^ 'opportunity to object." The majority of such stays in iue -orocess req\iirements were either for a period of ten (10) days or fifteen (15) days. .. at number of stays which vrere issued " further order" were the result of (1) show cause order (somewhat in the nature of a "notice of opportunity to be heard" and involving due orocess requirements) (2) Office Order l"o . 63, su__ra, \ . referred to the completion of a study of open price fil Other orders of stay variec 1 as to duration. The stays for longer periods of tine were for the -ar^oses of study of oarticular industrial evils which were attempted to be removed through the vehicle of code, provisions which NBA was hesitant to aporove. The shorter periods of stays were to meet temporary situations existing in industries; e.r., necessities of overtime for inventory taking - time lost through holidays and other emergency requirements. CHATTZ3 VI EVALUATION AI1D C0: T CLUSI0ITS The purposes of a stay are similar to those of an exemption (*). Its use and exercise depend upon legislative grant and administrative • dictates that the exercise of this power should oe fair and reason- able. No mention of the tern "stay" or any power thereof is found in the Act. Any such power is basec" purely upon a construction of the Act, the wording of^which is sufficient for an implication of a rant of power. In vie'-' of this lack of s-oecific mention of the term and state- ment of power, it is suggested that contemplated legislation, if any, make special reference to the nower of stay and that full and adequate provision be made whereby the agency charged with the administration of the Act be permitted to exercise this power at any or all times, either generally cr specifically. It is the author's opinion that the safest reliance upon the basis of power to grant a stay is found in Section 10(b) s upra , The chronicle of the delegation of power to -rant stays as set forth in Chapter II, supra , discloses that general power had been. ..conferred upon the Adminis- trator but that the powers conferred b3 r Section 10, were expressly re- served to the President. It is true that specific mention of power to (*] See Preliminary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions, NRA. Or- ganization Studies Section, Division of Review - Chapter V, page 48, ISA Fil ■• 9344 -45- grant stays is found in Executive Order 320 "j-B, but this delegation is limited to certain applications received from specified individuals fcithin a definite period of time. On December 30, 1933, Presidential Relegation of power referred to " exemptions and eliminations?! but still no -cower of stay was mentioned. It may be argued that the powers of btay were so similar to those of elimination and exemption that there s no need of specific mention. It is submitted that the actual exer- cise of the power of stay should be based uoon delegations specifically mentioning the power and that, in view of the fact that a stay relates tc an entire industry or a recognised subdivision thereof, cither ;raphical or industrial, the delegations should be limited to the Administrator or Administrative Board, with a possible delegation, if necessary, to an officer authorized to handle grants or denials of stays and exemptions (*). Chapter III hereof sets forth the various attempts to define the term "stay". Ho legislative definition left a charted course for NBA in this respect. Various definitions ox the power differed from its actual use. The line of demarcation wa^ arbitrary and many times it Was disregarded. Interchangeable use of such terms as "exemption" ," stay" and" exception" caused administr tive confusion. 'The term "elimination" likewise finds no legislative guide, ho limitations were imposed as to when a "stay" or en climiation" should be invoked. Words as such are mere vehicles but when used administratively, substance and procedure demand defini- tions and clarity. It is therefore suggested that legislative defini- tions of the terms "stay" and "elimination" should hr\.ve been made. A suggested definition of the term "stay" is - administrative action whereby an individual, group of individuals, either geographical or in- dustrial, or an entire industry is relieved from the operation of the previsions of a cede, in whole or in part, by the order of approval of the code. (**) ho suggested definition of the term "elimination" is made. Its use depends upon the policy of and approach to code-making. Approval of a cede can be withheld until all objectionable features thereof are de- leted, thereby -eliminating need of this form of administrative action. (*) Sec Preliminary Report en Exemptions and Exceptions, 1IRA Organization Studies Section, Division of Review - Chapter V, Page 53. (**) See Preliminary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions, I\ERA Organization Studies Section, Division of Review - Chapter V, Page 52 9844 If the opposite Drocccu.ro Lb adopted, a full lerislative definition of • term should be set forth. The grant or denial of a stay involves the exercise of administra- tive discretion subject to certain limitations set forth in the law. Limitations imposed by He Ln the Act wore in effect "to effectu- ate the policies cf the Act", which olic.es were set forth in Section 1 thereof. It is admitt that 1 se limitations nemitted an ambit of wide administrative action. The necessities of fair^ffri" reasonable use of the r of sta: r within administrative discretion arc apparent and some criteria therefor should be set forth. The criteria should take the form of standards set forth legislatively whereby sower could be in- voke.! upon proof and fin that the particular situation is one which comes within the linits of trie standards. It is suggested that +he creation of these 3tandar: ; s be based upon the experiences of Wlk in its use of this power. Th<= sources of tnese experiences could be found in the various reasons why codes or code provisions were stayer"!. Some treatment thereof is set forth in Chapter \ of this report. This report has been concerned with stays and has limited itself to those which affectec 1 entire industries or a recognized subdivision there- of. All types of stays were found as a result of the investigation - some aoplyin^ to entire industries; other applying to separate individ- uals. In actual administrative practice, the term "stay" was synonymous with that of "exemption". The files and records ^ere treated in th^ same' manner and the author finds that the problems of and reasons for the use thereof were alike, The use of conditional stays often amended code provisions. The practice of attaching conditions to orders of stay or exemption may re- sult in invalidity of the condition, depending upon its relation to the ourooses of the Act and thp exemption (*). (*) See Part Three hereof, Chapter IV. „47~ Part Two Apoendix No. 1 M?HER E^S^r.c:: - UNIPIPISHSD P-: -S :S OF THE STUDY This report has been primarily concerned with information which would be on benefit to legislative committ.ees or conferences. A cooy of the outline (*) suggests 9 more detailed review of the subject. A number of sections of such outline nrva not been considered in this r port. Questions of procedure, administrative details, routing of apoli cat ions, considerations had by various Advisory "Boards and the method of final administrative determination arc not considered herein. Trie analysis of the types- -of code provisions, subjected to stays dis- closes that this administrative power was xitilized to meet due -orocess requirements* The form of such a stay, its effectiveness as a form of notice to interested parties and also the question whether or not its . use met with the legal requirements of due orocess are all subjects which are important to p rounded and conrolete report of the subject. Tiie advisability of the use of "elimination" as an administrative- weaoon in the orocess of code-making is dependent u-on the questions of procedure and policy relating to the sponsoring and requirements of- code approvals, therefore, the soundness of administrative policy as to the use of " elimination" is a subject worthy of consideration. Tne use of the power of stay for substantive reasons often was without notice to industry, labor or other interested grouns. The questions as to whether or not the intended use of the power of stay should be np.de the subject of prior notice and, if necessary subjected to public hearing; also considerations of due orocess have not been touched in this report. . Administrative use of tne stay was evidenced- in approvals of a number of code administration matters; e.g., code authority by-laws, trade practice complaint plans, budgets and other matters. What KRA did with respect to these phases of its activities insofar as tne subject of stay in concerned is not covered by this report. A complete analysis of the types of code provisions subjected to stays and the reasons for such stays should benefit the study. It is true that this phase of tne subject is covered in this reoort in a preliminary form. There could be further development of this section of the study. The author has not Qeexi able to explore the records of those situations which resulted in the denial of stays and' the reasons for such denials would be a contribution to the further study of the subject, (*) Appendix No. 2 9S44 STAYS (Outline) 1. Introduction. 1.1 Objective and scrope of study. 3as~s in the Act. . 1 Section 3 (a) . 2.2 Application of Sec. 3(a) to Sec. 4, Sec. 7(b), and Sec. 7(c) Sec. 6(e) and 6(b). 2.4 Sec. 10(a) and Sec 10(b). i.5 Limitations, if any, upon the president. 2.6 Reasonable implications* 3. Definition. 3.1 Ordinary definition. 3.2 Legal definition. 3.3 Administrative definition - changes thereof* 3.4 Discussion of relation to terns "exemption" and "exception". 4. Delegation of power to grant stays. 4.1 Necessity of delegation and extent tnereof. 1.11 To the Administrator. 4.111 P.H.A. 4.112 Codes. 4.113 ?crra of delegation 4.114 Limitations on delegation. 4.2 Retentions of power by Pres I 4.3 Transfer of power to 'J.:..R. . 4.31 Rules 2nd regulations ji" M.R.3. regarding executive grants or refusals of stays. 9844 -49- Part Two Appendix No. 2. 4.311 Form of approval* 4.312 Formalities of issuance. 4.313 Changes. • 4.4 Additional delegations of, limitations or conditions on power granted to N.I.3..B. Note: For purposes of study of subsequent delegations of pov/er to lesser "boards and officer? tne Administrator and N.I.R.B. will be considered together. 4.5 Delegations to lesser "boards and officials. 4.51 Necessity 4.52 Early phases of N.R.A. administration. 4.53 Delegation to Division Administrator permitting temporary and emergency stays. 4.54 Limitations upon delegation. 4.55 Delegation to territorial administrators. • 4.56 Legal aspects of such delegations. ' 4.6 Delegation of power for purposes of appeal. 4.61 Industrial Appeals Board. 5. Itinds of stays. 5.1 General - stay of all provisions of" a Code. 5.2 Partial - stay of some provisions of .a Code. 5.3 Group - stay of all or some provisions of a Code. affecting a group. 5.4 Typical cases. 6. Time of issuance of order of stay. 6.1 Approval of Code. 6.2 After approval of Code. 6.3 Approval of amendment. 6.4 After approval of amendment. 6.5 Approval of Code administration matters. 6.6 After approval of Code administration matters. 9844 .. .. Part Tv;o Appendix "o. 2. 7. general causes of stays of codes ^r amendments. 7.1 At time of Code approval or Code amendment. 7.11 Legality. 7.12 ■ Legislative clariy and draftsmanship. 7.13 For purposes of study. 7.14 Conflict with other Codes. 7.1*1 Approved Codes. 7.142 Codes pending approval. 7.15 Enforcement of policy. 7.16 Recognition of protests. 7.17 Coordination or conflict with other governmental agencies. 7.171 Federal. 7.172 State or municipal. 7.18 Sec. 5 and Sec. 6(a). 7.19 True representation. 7.11 Difficulties of administration, compliance and enforcement. 7.12 Refusal of industry to accept administrative cnanges. 7.13 Other causes. 7.2 After time of Coae approval or Code amendment. 7.21 Legality. 7.22 Cnanges in policy. 7.23 Difficulties of administration, compliance and enforce a< 7.24 Non-cooperation of industry, 7.25 Geographical problems. 984* -51- Part Two Appendix No. 2. 7.23 Multiple code coverage. 7.27 Increase of exemptions. 7.28 Foreign competition. 7.29 Pending amendment. 7.21 Other causes. . Types of code provisions subjected to stays. 8.1 Code definitions. 8.11 Industry or subdivisions thereof. 8,. 12 Members of industry and classifications thereof. 8.13 Distribution agencies. 8.14 Commodities. 8.15 Analysis of bases of applications and industries affected. 8.2 Labor provisions. 8.21 Maximum hours. 8.211 Normal week period. 8.212 Normal day period. 8.213 Overtime tolerances. 8.214 peak -period. 8.22 Minimum wages. 8.221 Normal rate. 8.2211 Hourly rate. 8.2212 Piece rate. 8.2213 Weekly rate. 8.222 Overtime rate. 8.223 Apprentice rate. 8.224 Skilled rate. 344 — ... . — Part Two Appendix No. 2. Uni >n contract rate. 8.23 Caild labor. 3. 24 A/Prentice limitations. o.25 Handicapped workers. 8.26 Standards of safety and health. 6.27 Home work. o.2o Stretch-out. 8.29 Scrip payments. o.21_ Equitable readjustment of wages above the minimum. 8.22 Posting. 3.23 Collective bargaining. 8.24 miscellaneous. 8.25 3ases of applications for stays of labor provisions. 8.25 Analysis af industries which were subject to stays of labor provisions o.27 Development of labor oolxcy vith respect to stays. 8.23 Le 1 aspects of labor provision stays. o.29 Evaluation of experiences. 8.3 Traae practice provisions. .31 General analysis aid discussion Df trade practice revisions with respect to stays tnercof , the provisions being grouped as follows: 6.311 "ally accepted in law. 8.312 Desirable but not fully accepted in law. .313 Desirable but no basis in law. Undesirable. -.315 l'n;nforceable. -53- Part Two Appendix Wo. ?,, 8.32 Code Authority rules and regulations having force and effect of trade practice rules. 8.33 Price policy. r ...'. 8.331 Price fixing. 8.3311 Pixed prices. 8.3312 Lowest reasonable price. 8.3313 Modal mark-up. 8.332 Price control. 8.3321 Loss leaders. 8.3322 Loss limitations. 8.333 Open price systems. 8.3331 Institution of system. 3.3332 Particular contracts. 8.3333 Method of operation. Note; For purposes of discussion "bid depository systems are included under this sub-division. 8.334 Cost provisions: - 8.3341 Sales below cost. 8.3342 Obsolete goods. 8.3343 Emergency disposals. 8.3344 Competition. 8.335 Accounting systems. 8.3351 necessity of approval of Administrator. 8.3352 Complexity of system. 8.3353' Difficulties of installation. 8.336 Sales reporting systems. 9844 .. .. •t Tv;o ,-i.poendix No. 2. 9. 3c. bhority provisions! 9.1 Rights of Code Authority. 9.2 Obligations and duties of Code Authority. 9.21 Optional. b.22 Mandatory. 9.3 Use of stay to enforce. 9.31 Representative elections. 9.32 Prevention of undue association participation. 9.33 Legality. 9.34 Policy. LO. Jode Authority finances. 11. Labels 11.1 Bases of applications. 11.2 Use of stay for 11.21 Control. ■ ; 11.22 Withdrawal. 11.23 Policy. 11.3 Effect of stays granted. 12. Statistical reports. 12.1 Executive orders of general appl-ication. 12.2 "3ases of applications. 13. Conditional orders of approval. 13.1 llcture of stay granted. 13.2 Effect upon conditional order.s. 13.3 Effect upon policy and general code structure. 1<±. ..iiscellaneous code provisions subjected to stays. 15. Government contracts. Part T"/o Aocendix No. 2. 15.1 Executive Orders 6337 and 6646. 15.2 Stays of codes provisions caused by Government contracts. 15.3 Nature and effect of stays for government contract purposes, 16. Period of stay. 16.1 Duration of Act. 16.2 Duration of code. 16.3 Temporary. "■■•' 16.4 Emergency. 17. Types of orders, etc., other than code provisions Which tvere subjected to stays. 17.1 Executive orders. 17.2 Administrative orders. 17.3 General rules and regulations. 18. Procedure. 18.1 Source of application. 18.11 Industry. 18.12 Labor. 18.13 Governmental ageioies other than JSf.'H'.'A. 18.14 Consumers. 18.15 Others. 18.2 Application directed to 16.21 Washington'. 18.22 Eield offices. 18.23 Code Authority. 18.24 Other governmental agencies. 9844 Part Two Appendix No. 2. . .3 Consideration by N.R.A. of application. 16.31 Interoffice. 18.32 Extra-office. 13.33 Due process. 16.4 Final action on application. 16.41 Form. 18.42 notice. 19. Stays instituted by 1 T .R.A. 19.1 Bases of action. 19.11 policy. 19.12 Legality. 19.13 Protests. 19.131 Industry. 19.132 Labor. 19.133 Consumer. 19.14 Recognition of recommendations of advisory boards. 19.2 Analysis of industries and provisions stayed 'oy N.R.A. on its own motion* 19.3 Effect of stays instituted by IT. it. A. 19.31 Industry* 19.3? Labor. 19.33 Consuiers. 20. Po- er of subsequent modification or termination. 20.1 N.E.A. initiation. lication by industry. 9844 .57- Part Two Ap xmdix No. 2. 20.3 Application "by labor. 20.4 Application- "by consumers. 20.5 Application by Code Authorities. 20.6 Bases of application. 20.7 Effects. of modification or termination. 21. Evaluations. 22. Conclusions. 23. Bibliography. 9844 ■-58- Part Tv/o Appendix No. 3 I. ,IST OF C3DIS raiCH "ERE SUBJECTED TO A STAY OF 50i,B Oil ALL OF -THE TRADE PRACTICE PROVISIONS THEREOF IN THE ORDERS OF APPROVAL OF SUCH CODES CODE. i'O . 13AM3 OF CODE 96 - Buff and poll suing Uneel 124 - ..otion picture 182 - Retail Food 8& Grocery 196 - Wholesale Food & Grocery 202 - Carpet & inufacturing 204 - plumb i . - _ i :tures 234 - macaroni 236 - Cooking <& Hei ting 237 - Alloy Casti. 239 - Porcelain Breakfast Furniture Assembling 240 - Advertising Display Installation Trade 241 - Chewing Gum Manufacturing 243 - Slide Fastener 84- 2 - Hand Chain Hoist 84-3 - Chain Manufacturing 64-4 - Electrical Industrial Truck Manufacturing 245 - Corru & Solid Fibre Shipping Container 246 - Paper Disc Milk Bottle Cap. - Food Dish & Pulp & Paoer Plate 248 - Glased and Fancy Paper 249 - Tag Industry 250 - "ire, Hod & Tube Die 252 - Cylindrical Liquid Light Paper Container 257 » Printing Equipment 259 - Hat Llanufacturing 260 - Ornamental Moulding, Carving & Turning 261 - Foundry Supply - Machine Knife & Allied Steel Products 268 - Secondary Aluminum 269 - Carbon Black 270 - T/ood Ho el 272 - Unit Heater and/or Unit Ventilator 274 - Saw ck Steel Products 262 - Restaurant 2tf6 - Beauty cna Barber Shop 287 - Graphic Arts 269 - Oloth Reel 290 - Photographic uount 291 - Uood Cased Load Pencil 293 - Summing Industry 294 - Gummed Label & Embossed Seal 295 - Waterproof paper 9844 ~5S- CODE NO. 296 300 301 304 305 306 307 311 313 315 325 327 329 331 333 334 341 349 356 359 362 364 365 366 367 369 370 371 84-7 84-8 84-9 84-10 • 84-12 • 84-11 ■ 377 378 382 385 386 388 391 394 397 399 403 406 409 410 412 II NAME OF Part IVo Appendix 3, CODE Fluted Cup, Pan Liner & Lace Paper Lye Sample Card , Outdoor Advertising Fibre Can & Tube Mica Stay Manufacturing Ready Mixed Concrete Steel Wool Industry Industrial Safety Equipment Horseshoe & Allied Products Machine Applied Staples & Stapling Machine Upnolstery Spring & Concessions Mfg. Bulk Drinking Straw, Etc. Canvas Goods Beverage Dispensing Equip. Fibre & Metal Work Clothing Button Mayonnaise Fullers Earth Producing Preformed Plastic Products Photographic 8c Photo Finishing Clay Drain Tile Manufacturing Sand Lime Brick Retail Monument Metal Treating Expanding & Specialty Paper Products Open Paper Drink, Cup & Round Nesting Paper Food Container Sanitary Milk Bottle Closure Tool & Implement Hack Saw Blade Manufacturing Forged Tool Manufacturing Cutlery, Manicure Irrolement & Papers & Paper Hangers, Tool Mfg. , etc. Power & Gang Lawn Mower Tackle Block Mfg. Reclaimed Rubber Manufacturing Peanut Butter Transparent Materials Converters Railroad Soecial Track Equipment Umbrella Frame, etc. Sandstone Insecticide & Disinfectant Lightning Rod Mfg. Spray Painting & Finishing Household Goods Storage & Moving Bleached Shellac Manufacturing Boatbuilding & Boat Repairing Flexible Insulation Retail Rubber Tire & Battery Trade Loose Leaf & Blank Book 9844 -60- CODE HO . III. NA1S OF CODS 414 _ Bobbin & St-p^I - Leather Cloth & Lacou«red Pahrics 84-? 3 - Porcelain Enanelin 84-14 - Non-P«rrous Hot ~at°r Tank 84-15 - Wr<=>nch Manufacturing 201- 4 - Beauty Barber Ecuvonent 84-16 - Snap Fastener Mfg, 308- p - Wholesale Lobster 419 - Soft Lime Hoc 1 : 4 PC - Gyosum 421 - ^ble Quarrying & burnishing 423 - Dro^ Forcing 426 - Pp-oer Makers Pelt 432 - Specialty Aoct, Surroly 436 - Pur Manufacturing 444 - Shoe Pattern Mfg. 64-18 - Sere- Machine Products 275- 1 - Agricultural Insecticide & Fungicide 84-19 - Cpr) Screw Mfg. 275- 2 - Carton Dioxide 84-2C - Machine Sere 1 -' Hut 3C8- 5 - Blue Crab 84-21 - Bright Wire Goods Mfg. 84-"2 - Drpt>ery & Carpet Hardware 84-23 - -••chine Screw Mfg, 84-24 - Wood Screw Mfg, 347- £ - "~ood"orking Machinery 347_ 7 _ Beates & Jordan & Allied Products 2C1- 8 - 'Wholesale. Dry Goods 64-25 - Steel Package Mfg, 84-26 - Standard Steel Barrel & Drum 347- 8 - Water Meter Mfg, 445 - Baking 448 - Optical Wholesale 450 - Dog Food 455 - Metal Etching 456 — Ice Cream Cone 458 - Wholesale Confectioners 46C - Preserve, Maraschino Cherry & Glace Fruit 462 - Wholesale Tobacco Trade 463 - Candy Manufacturing 84-27 - Galvanized Ware Mfg. 84-28 - Job Galvanizing Metal Coating 84—29 - - Machine Parts 84-3C - Milk & Ice Cream Can Mfg, 84-31 - ~ rm Air Furnace Mfg, 84-32 - Hog Ping & Ringer Mfg, 84-33 - Flexible Metal Hos- & Tubing 84-34 - Wire Ro^e & Strand 9844 - 1- code no . iv. ;:ame of code 347„ 9 _ Di«mond Core Drill 347-10 - Mechanical Lubricator 347-11 - Contractors Punp 347-13 - Ivaterporer Equipment Industry 347-14 - Rolling Mill Machinery 64-35 - Cutting Die Mfg. 4- l - Refrigeration 347-15 - Pulverizing Machinery 201-11 - Fur Wholesaling & Distributing 347-16 - Steam Engine Mfg. 347-17 - Rock fc Ore Crushing 347-13 - Reduction Machinery 464 - Coca & Chocolate Mfg. 466 - Retail Tobacco 467 - Cigar Manufacturing 469 - Sulphonated Oil Mfg. 471 - Trailer Mfg. 472 - Warm Air Register 347-20 - Hoist Builders 347-19 - Hoisting Engine Mfg. 347-21 - Kiln Cooler & Dryer Mfg. 347-22 - Conveyor & Material Preparation Material 34-35 - Lift Truck & portable Elevator 105- 1 - Automobile Hot Water Heater 34-37 - Artistic Lighting Equipment 105- 2 - Replacement Axle Shaft 34-33 - Complete '.Tire & Iron Fence 347-24 - Roller & Silent Chain 201-12 - School Supplies & Equipment 477 - Public Seating 479 - Cold Storage Doer Mfg. 435 - Cotton Ginning Machinery 439 - Safety Razor & Safety Razor Blade Mfg. 490 - Imported Date Packing 34-40 - Cut Tack, Wire Tack & Small Staple Mfg. 347-25 - Power Transmission 347-26 - Caster & True 1 -: Floor Mfg. 347-23 - Water Softener & Filter 24-41 - Open Steel Flooring 347-30 - Multiple V-Belt Drive 201-13 - Athletic Goods Mfg. 105- 3 - Leaf Spring Mfg. 347-31 - Envelope Machine Mfg. 347-32 - Air Filter 347-33 - Gas Powered Industrial Truck 347-34 - Sprocket Chain 34-43 - Vitreous Enameled ~ tnii 1 ding and Shiprepairing 2-14 Shipbuilding and Shiarepairing _ I ~ LIST 0? STAYS ISSUED SUBSEQUENT TO CODS APPROVAL - CODS PROVISIONS iiESECTSD - ■ REASONS T>SRSECR CODS PROVISION Machine Hours Hours (Sat. closing) Hours (for certain employees) Normal hours and over- time tolerance REASON Limited equipment Impending strike. To start produc- tion. Additional men unsatisfactory for testing in- stallations. 2-31 5-11 15-61 16-22 Shipbuilding and Shioreua ir ins Normal hours and over- time tolerance Lace Manufacturing Machine hours (Barmens Machine) Men's Clothing Hosiery Normal hours Learning period Emergency T'ork. Discriminate against small companies. Peak demands. To enable em- ployees to learn other skilled op- erations and assure steady en- "Dloyment. 18-18 . 19-14 41-18 42-8 Cast Iron Soil Pipe Normal hours Machine Lours 7a 11 Pa-oer Women' s Belt Lug-age & Sancy Leather Normal week ueriod Normal wee 1 - neriod Normal Week Period Discriminates against small enterprises. Scarcity of skilled help and peak de- mands. Scarcity 'of skilled help and peak de- mands. Scarcity of skilled help and peak de- mands. 60-5 Retail Drug Minimum wage outside salesmen and drug store delivery hoys. Until Hearing. 9844 QUEER NO . 60-6 60-2 60-16 5-16 3-17 3-22 5C-20 5-22 25-6 71-58 71-^6 38-6 - I - (Continued) LIST 07 STAYS ISSUED SUBSEQUENT TO C&DE APPROVAL - CODE PROVISIONS AFFECTED - IaSGNS THEREFOR CODE Retail Drug Retail Drug CODE P ROV ISION normal Day period. All provisions Retail Dru^ Coot and Suit Wool Textile REASON "ore than one houi lunch period. Relief for sraoll enterprises in towns of 2500 or less. Consecutive hcurs for Inventory, specially skilled em- ployees. - II - 1 member of Code Autho-Pending amend- rity selected from m.ent. Infpnts pna Coats Assn. ",7ool Textile Rules of Practice (Moisture Basis) Rules of Practice (for niece rroeds) Automatic Sor inkier Unfair methods of competition* Disclose inforna- ticn to conroetito and no useful pur- pose. Export soles. Pending amendment] Difficulty of enforcement. Cc^t ond Suit Semi-Automotic Sprinkler Paint, Varnish, and Lacquer Faint, Varnish, and Lacquer Quotations or sales on Demoralized con- invitation to bidi dition of industr Method of Assessment Non-represent^tiv character of Code Authority I - nuf ncture «nd sale Code conflict, of shellac ond varnish below cost. Seles be lor cost. Processing sche- dules not extende Business Furniture, Prohibiting nrice guar-Relief to U.S. Storage Equipment, etc. an tee and s-^le belov* Government published or ice. 9844 -co- ORDEH NO. S8-7 SS-1S S&-25 151-5 151-7 CODE Business Furniture, Storage JEq.uip;ae ft, etc. Business Furniture, Storage JSauipnen't, etc. Business Furniture, Storage Sqi^Lpuent, etc. Millinery Millinery cc. ROVISIOE REASON Quantity discounts Relief to U.S. Govern- ment Marketing Provisions Sales below publish- ed prices to U. S. Government. Area Rates Area Rates Impractical to deter—' mine whether prices conform to code. , Relief to U.S. Govern- ment. File incomplete. Unfair Competitive condition. 151-16 Millinery Days per week as ap- plied to shipping crews. pending amendment 151-12 :: Millinery Days per week as ap- plied to shipping crews. File incomplete 151-25 M illinery Time and one-half payment Unfair an.d di sa- vant age ous. t ^-30 Millinery Daily hours and overtime pay Make up tine lost Christmas 3ay. 151-71 Millinery Hours None given. 363-11 I 7 Men 1 s Neckwear F.O.B. deliveries Vxr vi sio n create s confusion and in- equalties U67-2 Cigar Mfg. Hours , Merchandi sing Plan, Wages. Continuation of stay in Executive Order of Approval ^7-7 Cigar Mfg. Wage exemption for slow workers Operating at a loss e ^7-27 Cigar Mfg. Overtime payment Work on Armistice Day. 1+67-33 Cigar Mfg. Wages Unable to pay code wages and remain in business 9SUU -66- ORDER CODE NO. CODE PRO VI SI Oil U67-U5 Cigar Mfg. Overtime 60-5 Retn.il Drug Minimum '.7 REASON Lincoln' s Birthday ITone given drug store delivei"- eraployees. 60-105 Retail Drug Loss limitations Confusion in ap- plication of prov- ision. 98H*+ -67- PA3T THREE SXEI/iPTIOlIS AND EXCEPTIONS By D. L. Bo land 9844 .68- INTRODUCTIOi: The purposes of this study are to disclose the question, problems, limitations and deficiencies relating to exemption and exceptions which were presented to or imposed upon the National Recovery Administration in its capacity as a governmental agency charged with the formulation, promulgation and administration of codes of fair competition under the terms of the National Industrial Recovery Act. (*) The report endeavors to treat certain phases of the above matters, which, in the opinion of the author of the report, are of primary importance. These phases are concerned with the National Industrial Recovery Act and the bases of power therein contained with respect to the subject of exemptions and exceptions; the delegation of such power; the necessity of such delegatit and a recapitulation of the exercise of such powers, both administrative and delegative. The report attempts to present an explanation and analysis of the various kinds of exemptions and exceptions. The extent of the analysis covers the causes of the application or applications or initiations thereof, the considerations had thereon by the National Recovery Adminii tration and the nature of its decision. The bases of the findings set forth in this report result from an investigation of the files and records of the National Recovery Adminis- tration and its official orders which relate to exemptions and exception Lack of time and personnel prevented an investigation of all the records of the administration relating to this subject, so for purposes of this preliminary report a selected list of codes was drawn up, such list being made upon the basis that an examination thereof would disclose in the main a cross-section of American industry and also a fairly represent tive and reasonable picture of the problems and questions presented to the Administration in connection with the subject of exemptions and ex- ceptions. The list of codes is as follows: LIST OF CODaS EXAMINED. Cotton Textile Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Wool Textile Zlectrical Manufacturing Coat .and Suit Lace Manufacturing Corset rassiere Legitimate Full Length Dramatic and Musical Theatrical Lumber and Timber Products Iron and Steel Fhotographic Manufacturing Fishing Tackle Rayon and Synthetic Yarn Producing , (*) 48 Stats. 195 9844 LIST O F CUD^S EXAMINE D (Continued) Men's Clothing Hosiery . Automobile 11 anufac tuning Cast Iron Soil Pipe' Wall Paper Manufacturing Salt Producing .. Leather Motion Picture Laboratory Underwear and Allied Products Manufacturing . Pi tuminpus Co al -0.il 3urner Gasoline Pump Manufacturing Textile Bag • < ■Transit ' ; -Artificial Flower and Feather Linoleum .and Felt Base Manufacturing Lime Knitting, 3raiding and Wire Covering Machine Retail Lumber, Lumber Products, Building Materials and Building Specialties Laundry' and Dry Cleaning Machinery Manufacturing • Textile Machinery Manufacturing Glass Container Builders Supplies Trade ' Boiler Manuf ac tur ing ■ Farm Equipment ••'::' Electric Storage and Wet Primary Battery '•■ Women' s Belt Luggage and Fancy Leather Goods Ice Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Saddlery Manufacturing Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade Bankers : ■> •■ . Silk Textile J;,;,, ' , . Optical Manufacturing; - Automatic Sprinkler ;........' Umbrella Manufacturing Mutual' Savings Banks _ : " ' : Handkerchief Throwing - : ' .. . : , . Compressed Air Heat Exchange Pump Manufacturing Cap and Closure Marking Devices Retail Trade Paint, Varnish and Lacquer Manufacturing Business Furniture, Storage Equipment and -"iling Supply Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Manufacturing 9844 -70- LIST OF CODE S EXAMHI5D (Continued) Dress Manufacturing er and Fulp Mil] inery Can Manufacturers Wholesaling or Distributing Trade Schiffli, the Hand Machine Embroidery, and the Embroidery Thread and Scallop Cutting Men 1 s Neckwear Aluminum Cigar Manufacturing The objectives of this study have been mainly concerned with the problem of legislation, keeping in mind at all times the content of the President's letters to the chairmen of certain committees of the Congress with respect to suggestions for future legislation embodying the prin- ciples of the NRA. As a result, the author of the study has concerned himself with the experiences of the National Recovery Administration with exemptions and exceptions as a legislative question, the extent of the power to grant exemptions and exceptions, the limitations upon such power, the methods of use and exercise of that power, the methods of the dele- gation of such power, and constructive suggestions as to the subject in general. The outline of the study which is attached hereto is much more comprehensive and includes phases of the study which are not made part of this preliminary report, some of which are problems of procedure, ad- ministrative detail, relationships with other governmental agencies, more critical analyses of the subjects of this report and evaluations of experiences relative thereto. This preliminary report is rather con- cerned with the more important and substantive subjects hereinabove mentioned. No attempt has been made to extend the scope of the study or the sources of material thereof beyond the actual files and records of the National Recovery Administration. These records do not include those of code authorities, other governmental agencies, or private individuals. No conferences have been had with any such agencies or individuals. In short, it is the intention of this report to present in preliminary form some answer to the question - What did the National Recovery Administra- tion do in the exercise of its power to grant or deny exemptions from and exceptions to code provisions? Again, it is the intention of this study to present in likewise preliminary form some answer to the question- What should any future governmental agency embodying the principles of NRA be empowered to do with respect to exemptions from and exceptions to code provisions? 0844 -71- 3.13-3 01 POWER The National Industrial Recovery Act (*) beqame law on June 16, 1933. Title I of such Act relator! to industrial recovery, and provided in general for the set-up of various codes of fair competition. Section 3(a) of the Act states as follows: "Upon the application to the President "by one or more trade or industrial associations or groups, the President may approve a bode or codes of fair competition for the trade or industry or subdivision thereof, represented by the applicant or applicants, if the President finds (l) that such associations or groups impose no inequitable restrictions on admission to membership therein and are truly representative of such trades or industries or subdivisions thereof, and (2) that such code or codes are not designed to promote monopolies or to elimi- nate or oppress small enterprises and will not operate to discriminate against them, and will tend to effectuate the policy of this title: Provided, That such code or codes shall not permit monopolies or monopolistic practices: Provided further, That where sucn code or codes affect the services and welfare of persons engaged in other steps of the economic process, nothing in this section shall deprive such persons of the right to be heard prior to approval by the President of such code or codes. The President may, as a condition of his approval of any such code, impose such conditions (including requirements for the making of re- ports and the keeping of accounts) for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees, and others, and in furtherance of the public interest, and may provide such exceptions to and exemptions from the provisions of such code, as the President in his discretion deems necessary to effectuate the policy herein declared." It is to be noted that under the terms of this particular section the President was delegated certain power to "* * * impose such conditions (including requirements for the making of reports and the keeping of accounts) for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees, and others, and in the furtherance of the public interest, and may provide such exceptions to and ex- emptions from the provisions of such code, as the President in bis discretion deems necessary to effec- ■ tuate the policy herein declared." (*) Public Resolution Ho. 67, House Resolution No. 5755, 73d Congress, 48 Stats. 195 9844 -72- It is apparent from this particular suction that Congressional dele- gation of power had been made up to the President to grant exemptions and exceptions from the provisions of codes approved under the pro- visions of the said Section 3(a). This sentence gives the President power to do two things: (l). To impose certain conditions: and (2) To irovide exceptions and exemptions. As to the first, it says he "may, as a condition of his approval of any such code, impose such conditions" . As to the second, it is said he "may provide such exceptions to and exemptions from the provisions of such code, etc." A careful reading of the grant of pov/er reveals that the clause "as a condition of his approval of any such code" surrounded by commas, is interposed between "ran^and "impose", whereas later "may" is again repeated and placed just before "provide" without any such interposition It must follow, therefore, that the very language of the act is such that no time condition is expressed, limiting the power to grant ex- ceptions and exemptions. Section 4(a) of the National Industrial Recovery Act provides as follows: "The President is authorized to enter into agreements with, and to approve voluntary agreements between and among, persons engaged in a trade or industry, labor organization, and trade or industrial organizations, associations, or groups, relating to any trade or industry, if in his judgment such agree- ments will aid in effectuating the policy of this title with respect to transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, and will be consistent with the requirements of clause (2) of subsection (a) of section 3 for a code of fair competition." This section contemplates the creation of voluntary agreements between the President and various groups, but exercise of the autho- rity is subsequently conditioned upon the requirement that the agree- ment is consistent with the provisions of the second clause of Section 3(a) herein-above set forth. This clause refers to monopolies and it may be argued that the authority conferred upon the President by Section 3(a) to grant exemptions and exceptions from the provisions of codes npplies to Section 4(a) agreements insofar as monopolies and oppression of small enterprises are concerned. Section 7(b) of the Act is as follows: "The President shall, so far as practicable, afford every opportunity to employers and employees in any trade or industry or subdivision thereof with respect to which the conditions referred to in clauses (l) and (2) of subsection (a) prevail* 9844 -73- to establish "by mutual agreement, the stanAsjpcLg as to the maximum hours of labor, 'minimum rates of pay, a>, offered in the corait- tee, and, of course, I feel that I ought to rjtand "by the action of the co:a::iittco; bat General Johnson, when he ap- peared before the coruittee, said he did not think it was necessary as to this matter. I askec' unaninums consent for the reconsideration of the vote "by which it was adopt- ed in order to get the matter before the Senate, so that we could dispose of it." '. George. "I make that motion, Mr, President, and sug- gest the absence of a quorum unless it is accepted." Mr. Presiding Officer. "The absence of a quorum is sug- gested. The clerk will call the roll." (Page 5259, June 8th, 1923.) After a roll call with 92 members answering, the foregoing dis- cussion of licenses under Section 4(b) of the Act was continued. Sec- tion 4(b) wa.s finally passed without the provision as to geographical areas. The following remarks of Mr. Black illustrate the opposition to the unsuccessful attempt to maize the license features have a geograph- ical aspect: "... I strenuously object to having ony one state marked off with lines around it, and the statement made to the public that there is an infection in that State in a par- ticular industry. It seems to me" that we should either have the rules applied to an entire industry or that they should not apply to it at all. I can see nothing fair, when there might be an investigation of some complaint made about one State, saying that we will require every person engaged in the business in that State, drawing a line around it, to be licensed, but that we will make no such requirement of those engaged in the same industry in any other State. . ." (Page 526", June 8, 1933) This portion of the legislative history seems of doubtful value to us because the license features of the Act were not exercised by the President, and his power to license expired by the terms of the Act a year earlier than the other provisions of the Act. (*) See Report No. 114 of the Senate, 73d Congress, 1st Session. 9844 -79- D" TT m -; -1 .- p— r? ~r~ , = II -l Y , i?" T3rn 11 x-jr^i II ~ , Y r,_ 'P r P~r" l l .^jX 11. X . -l . xi-Li— Ov _ J: . .._ J - J '. o jAJllm. 1 —I - --*-.U jjau-jI jj .v:. An "exemption" in the ordinary meaning of the wcrd is "tie act of exempting or state of being exempted; freedom from any charge, burden, evil, etc., to which o tiers are subject; immunity; privilege; * * *n ^ (* n . According to tie strict legal definition tie term "exemption" relates "to tie rig-.it given by lav; tc a debtor tc retain a portion ..is property without its being liable to execution at tie suit of a creditor, cr to a distress for rent." (**) The ordinary meaning of tie term "exception" is "tie act of excepting or executing; exclusion; restriction by taking out some- tiling which otherwise would be included; as in a class, state-lent, cr rale. - "That which is excepted or taken out from o tiers; person, thing, or case specified as distinct, r r not included; as, almost every general rule lias its exception." (***) Tie legal meaning of tie term "exception" has several applica- tions, but for the purposes of this study refers to an exclusion from the general rules and operations of the lava (****) Tho National Recovery Administration from tie cutset recognized its power to grant exemptions and exceptions. I .ragraph 14 of tie original President's Reemployment Agreement (5) Bulletin lie. 3, National Recovery Administration, of the President's Reemployment Program, July 20, 1933, specifically provide.! f r petitions for stays of the particular provisions pending a summary investigation by NBA. The order of approval of tie first ITRA Code (Cotton Textile) which (*) Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language, G. & C. Lierriam Co., 193d-, at p. 7G7. (**) Bouvier' s Law Dictionary, Rawle's Third Revision, Vol. 1, p. 1152. (***) Tfebster* s New International Dictionary of tie English Language, G. d C. Lierriam Co., 1934, at p. 763. (****) Bouvier' s Law Dictionary,* Rawle' s Third Revision, Vol. 1, -o. 1108. 9 344 De- tained a i exc I n as to c irtain members of t e try from t [uiring mach ne hour limitations. The use of this L, but n tive ■ te tie terras "stay' "e::ce tion" were used .eynonyinougly and without re- rd to any crder] Hon and mt :.i the scope of the meanings of the various terms. This interchange of to use of the ras nee. r Ly required clarif icatioi . Hugh 3. J; hson, Administrator for Industrial Recovery, by Admin is- tr ■ . • r No. X-27, it ascribed rules and regulations concerning exceptions tc and exemptions from a iprcved codes of fair competi- tion. The order defined the term "exemption" as follows: "The t srra 'exemption' shall include 'exceptions' and 'stays' and all ru] .ereby an individual, group or class is released from t.^.e full operation of a provision of e code." It will be seen from this strative definition that the terra "exemption" and "exception" related tc a release from an approved code and t..at the intention of the Administration was to consider them in the same meaning and sense. ~. - ministrative definition continued to be operative until approximately September 1, 195<, when the Administration issued an Office hanual . Part III, par. 3210, of the Office iianual, described t..e term "exemption" as follows: "The tor:;. ' Exempticn ' includes any ruling whereby an individual, group, or clo.ss within an indus- try is r d eased from the full operation of a code provision. " Paragraph 3210 further states - "To preserve uniformity of usage the tern 'Exceptions' will net be used as a synonym for 'Exemptions' . Such Of iice Manual contains the foil ; statement: "Superseding all previous Office Orders and Memoranda, including all Administrative Orders and all Executive Orders wit. general application of N2A." and further declares:- "It is t o purpose of the Office Lianual to:- "To eliminate all conflicts and obscurities in existing Office Orders, Office heme -ran -".a, and Administrative r 's." "Upon completion of the first edition all previous Office Crders and Memoranda will be revohed." 9844 -81- This 0, 'ice Manual was rdored by the direction of the Administra- tor and t-.e -. r of issuance the ecf by 0. A. Lynch, tie Administratj ve ff icer. It will be noted from tie above that, t e Office Manual varies from the definition set forth in Administrative Order X-27. According to the statement of the explanation of the Office Manual the terms of Administrative .Order X-27 were su.-erseded and accordingly would be affected, but the author of the report, during the course of his in- vestigation, oonferred with Mr. Melvin Sims, Assistant Counsel of the Legal .Division of the hhA, regarding the definitions of the terms "exemptions" and "explanations" contained in the Office Manual, Mr. Sims was a member of the committee appointed by the Administrator to prepare the Office Manual and was well acquainted with the circum- stances surround the inclusion of Part III, Par. 3210* Mr. Sims ex- plains the variance in that the reference to the term "exception" related 6nl to the situation created by the Presidentiel use of the ter.a "exception" in Executive Order 6646 relating to Government con- tracts and tli at it was the intention of to.e drafters of the Office Manual tc treat the both terms as synonomous with the one different instance mentioned, ho other official administrative definitions of the terms have been made and for the purposes of this report the original intention of the Adiaini strati on shrll be followed and the terms "exemptions" and- "exceptions" shell be used synonomously. 9344 -83- • • c::apt:::'. h i Under the terms of Section 2(a) and 2(b) of the "."ITA. the President was authorized to establish such agencies, accept the services of and to utilize Federal officers and smplo; , >rescribo their authorities, and to delegate any of hir functions and powers uidcr the title of the Act to such officers, agents, and employees. The particular sections in quest- ion are as follows: » To effectuate the policy of this title, the President is hereby authorized to establish such agencies, to accept and utilize such voluntary and uncompensated services, to appoint, without regard tc the provisions of the civil servicj laws, such officers and employees, and to utilize such Federal officers and employees, and, with the consent of the State, such State and local officers and employees, as he may find necessary, to prescribe their auth- orities, duties, responsibilities, and tenure, and, without regard to the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, to fix the compen- sation of any officers and employees so appointed. "The President may delegate any of his functions and powers under this title to such officers, agents, and employees as he may des- ignate or appoint, and may establish an industrial planning and research agency to aid in carrying out his functions under this title." Pursuant to this authority, the President on June 16, 1933, by Executive Order Ho. 6173, appointed Hugh S. Johnson, as Administrator for Industrial Recovery under Title I of the Act. Under the terms of the said order the President further appointed a special Industrial Recovery Board to be composed of the Secretary of Commerce as Chair- man, the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secret- ary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Labor, the Director of the Budget, the Administrator for Industrial Recovery, and the Chairman of the Fed- eral Trade Commission. General Johnson, Administrator for Industrial Recovery, was granted authority for thirty days subject to the approval of the special Industrial Recovery Board, to a^rooint the necessary personnel on a temporary basis and to conduct the work authorized under Title I of the Act. On July 15, 1933, the President, be Execut- ive Order Ho. 6205-A, continued the appointment of Hugh S. Johnson as Administrator for Industrial Recovery and authorized him, subject to the general approval of the aforementioned Special Industrial Recov- ery 3oard, to appoint the necessary personnel on a permanent basis, and among other things to exercise functions invested in the President by Title I of the Act, except the approval of codes, making of agree- ments, issuance of licenses, or exercise of power conferred in Sect- y ions 3(e), 6(c) 3(b\ 9 aadlO. The first specific reference to exempt- ions in the various delegations of power by the President to the Admin- istrator is found in Executive Order Ho. 6205-B of July 15, 1933, in which the President granted the Administrator power to stay the prov- isions of a code upon the receipt of an application for an exception to or an exemption from a code from persons who allege d that the op- eration of a code would result in undue hardship. 9844 -83- P RESI DENT ' S 533HP L0YtO iT>G37".: EH? Early in the administration of Title I cf the National In>u»t,rial Recovery Act the President invoiced the powers contained in Section 4(a) of the Act to institute the program of acre snout a knows as the President's Reemployment Agreement. ' This program was announced oy Bulletin No. 3, issued July 20, 193:', and on September 12, 1933, Bulletin Ho. 5 of the National Recovery Administration, as approved "by the Administrator and the Chairman of the National Industrial Recovery Board, (apparently a misnomer for the Special Industrial Recover:/ Board), set forth regulat- ions and procedure for local NRA Compliance Boards. These "boards were set up for the handling of complaints of non-compliance and petitions for exceptions from the terms of the PRA and were composed of members who volunteered their services in the particular districts in which they lived. The "boards were empowered under Section 2 of the Bulletin to receive all petitions for exceptions from the provisions of the PIA and to grant exceptions in cases of peculiar circumstances or great and unavoidable hardship. Certain exceptions from the delegation of this power were set forth in Section 2 of the bulletin. It was con- fined to consideration of individual cases of individual hardship and in general those "boards were permitted to grant exceptions from the wage and hour provisions of the PRA. Ho specific delegation of power to grant exceptions to and exemptions from the PRA was made "by the President at the time of the issuance of Bulletin No. 5, "but on Nov- ember 22, 1933, the President, "by Executive Order No. 6443, authorized the Administrator to grant exceptions to and exemptions from agreements. (Referring to the President's Reemployment Agreement). The local NRA Compliance Boards operated on a voluntary "basis and consisted mainly of members of local committees which had been sot up "by civic groups at the time of the institution of the PRA campaign. These "boards were created in practically every city and town in the United States and e xercised the power granted from tha time of the issuance of Bulletin No. 5. In the meantime, the Administrator retained the final power to grant PRA exemptions. Office Order No. 40, issued "by the Administrat- ion over the signature of Alvin Brown, Assistant Administrator and Executive Officer, created a national Compliance Board, which Board was empowered to recommend exceptions and the Ea^le Brancn of the Compliance Division of the Administration was designated as the body to grant exemptions from the PRA . No other specific admin is tractive delegations of the newer to grant PRA exemptions and exceptions has been found in the records of NBA. C ODES UNDER SECTION 3(a ) Immediately after June 16, 1933, the- NRA began the codification* of industry and trade and the approval of various codes submitted nec- essarily required exercise of power to grant exemptions therefrom. The irigiiial delegation by the President was of general description, but the Administrator acted thereunder until December 30, 1933 , when the Pres- ident, by Executive Order No. Gy43-A delegated to the Administrator the following functions and powers; 9844 -84- " (.?) The aporoval of any *** exception or exemption from *** any one or more provisions of any code of fair competition." This delegation specif ically related to codes and incorporated pow- er theretofore generally granted. It specifically shows that no limita- tions were placed unon the Administrator other than those contained in the Act in the exercise of the power conferred. A further Presidential delegation of power to grant exemptions oc- curred on March 14, 1934, when the President, in the exercise of the ex- ecutive and governmental discretion to impose such conditions as may "be necessary in the governmental purchasing activities, set forth in Execu- tive Order No. 6646 certain requirements with regard to bids submitted to governmental agencies and at the same time in paragraph 5 of the order empowered the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to make exceptions in specific cases and otherwise under the order when in the judgment of the Administrator justice to the public interest would be best served thereby. JOINT A. A. A. A2-TD I'.R.A. CODES The National Recovery Administration vras primarily concerned with the codification of industry for the vurposes of industrial recovery. The Presidential program also included the rehabilitation of agriculture through the vehicle of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and in the terms of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (*), the Secretary of Agri- culture was appointed as Administrator of the Act. On June 26, 1933, the President, by Executive Order No. 6182, dele- gated to the Secretary of Agriculture all of the functions and powers (other than the determination and administration of provisions relating to hours of labor, rates of pay, and other conditions of employment) as referred to in Title I of the Act with respect to the industries and trac engaged partly in the handling of milk and its products, tobacco and its products, and all foods and foodstuffs. This delegation was subject to the reservation of power in the President to approve or disapprove pro- visions of any code. This delegation was re-affirmed in Executive Order No. 6207 dated July 21, 1933, and on January 3, 1934, the President, by Executive Order No. 6551, transferred all of the functions and powers theretofore delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture to the Administra- tor for National Recovery insofar as these functions and powers related to certain industries which were set forth in the order and which were also the subject of subsequent agreement between the Secretary of Agri- culture and the Administrator for Industrial Recovery. The result of this Executive Order placed codes covering industries and trades which were closely allied to the regulations of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration under the power of the Administrator for Industrial Re- covery I theretofore been delegated pc-'er to grant or deny exemp- tions and exceutions. (*) Public Resolution No. 10, 73d Congress. 9844 -85- CREH6.TICJT OP N ATIONAL IN DUS TRIAL RECOVERY BOARD In September 1934", the .President decided uptm p change in the form of the administering "body of the national Industrial Recovery Act. General Johnson had resigned as Administrator for Industrial Recovery and on. September 27, 1934, the President, by Executive Orcie* ]j . 6059, created the National Industrial Recovery Board, consisting of se?ea members. The order appointed Clay T/illiams, A, D. Whiteside, Sidney Hillman, Leon C. Marshall, and Walton Hamilton as members of the Board, and appointed Dlackwell Smith Legal Adviser aid Leon Henderson, Economic Adviser to the Board. These two advisers served as ex-officio members of the Board, The five members ap Jointed (other than ex-officio mem- bers) were empowered to administer, under the direction of the President, Title I of the Act, and the Board was authorized to exercise all powers theretofore conferred by executive orders upon the Administrator for Industrial Recovery. This creation of the Board and transfer of power fro:-: the Administrator to the Board necessarily carried the power to grant or deny exemptions or executions, theretofore granted to the Ad- ministrator, DELEGATION OP POTTER TO LESSER OFFICIALS Applications for exceptions and exonro'tlohs from the provisions of the codes increased as the number of approved codes increased. At the outset of the Administration, individual applications for exemptions were granted or denied by Presidential orders (*)"• Later such others were signed by General Johnson, but the volume of a plications so increased that the delegation of power to lesser officials of "the NRA became neces- sary. On March 26, 1934, General Johnson, through the vehicle of Office. . Order No. 75, set up a procedure to be followed in rulings on code admin- istration problems. Part of this procedure related to exceptions and exemptions and provided that each Division Administrator was empowered to make rulings on applications for exemptions and exceptions and that the Division Administrator' 1 s decision would be- final, subject only to the ultimate disapproval of the Administrator himself. This power of the Division Administrator was continued throughout the code administration period of NRA, (**) Ho further delegations were made to officials under the supervision of Division Administrators, although Deputy Administrators were given power cf recommendation, TERRI TORIAL ADMINISTRATORS During the course of code administration, territorial problems arose and many applications were received for exemptions from territorial codes (*) See Executive Orders Eos. 6274-6296 NRA files. (**) Sec Office Orders Bos. 87 and 89, Office Memorandum Ho . 248, and Part III, Section 3225 BRA Office Manual - 3235. 1. 9844 -86- Dr the application of national codes to the territor 1 -. These ;roblens recognized by the Administration (*). Shortly after the issuance of these orders, the \7RA established a Territorial Division, which — s charged with matters rel- tin to the territorial administration of codes, oaTticularly in Hawaii and Puerto Rico (**). After considera- tion as to the problems presented and the .most effective method of ha-ndl ing territorial exemptions,- the National Industrial Recovery Board dele- ted to th". Demty Administrator for the Territory of Hawaii the auth- ority tn grant exemptions from codes of fair competition aowroved excul- sively for the Territory of Hawaii* (***) This delegation was subject to the conditions of the ret ion tkane being in accordance with the rules nnd regulations and policy of the lTati nal- Industrial Recovery 3oard rnd that all action taken b; r the Deputy Administrator for the Territory of Hawaii he reported to rnd be subject to review and disapproval by such Board, Shortly after the above delegation re 7; rding Hawaiian codes the Deouty Administrator for the Territory of Alaska "as authorized "to exem or refuse to exempt from any provision of any code of fair cornet ition to the extent that such code applies to my transaction within the Terri« tory of Alaska". This authority did not apply to exemptions fron the following specified codes: C a/in ing Indus try Canned Salmon Industry or and Timber Products Industries Fisheries Industry This authority was granted by the National Industrial Recovery Board on ISay 3, 1935 (****). II o official delegation was made to the Deputy Adninistr~tor for Puerto Rico rnd the Virgin Islands, although the national Industrial Re- covery Board had -planned a similar grant of authority as had been made to the Deputy Administrator for Hawaii. IIIS05LLA11EOUS DELEGATIONS A further delegation of power was made with res-oect to the issurnc* of exemptions on A'oril 9, 1934, ^hen General Johnson created the office of Administrative Officer and designated such Officer "to act on all tters not otherwise assigned which do not require the Administrator's personal attention, including final approval in the name of the Admin- istrator of codes and other documents requiring the Administrator's act ****"• The National Industrial Recovery Board continued this office a (*) See Administrative Order X-60 - Office Order ilo. 104 - NHft file (**) See iIRA Office Memorandum of December 29, 1933. (***) Office Memorandum ilo. 348 - March 19, 1935, (****) Office Memorandum Mo. 355 - NliA files. 9844 -87- its order conferring the authority states "to execute any °r all papers, documents, or other instruments in writing required in the oerf ormance . of the functions and powers delegatec to said Board by said Executive Order and otherwise, including, "but without limitation, the ->ower to issue orders, approvals, rules or regulations". (*) A few miscellaneous delegations of authority to grant or deny exemp- tions were made in connection with various phases of code administration! Executive Order No. 6646 related to compliance with codes for purposes of bidding on Government contracts. This wa.s primarily a matter of compli- ance and on December 15, 1934, the Director of Compliance and Enforcement Was authorize..", oy the Administrator to grant exceptions from the provi- sions of this Executive Order (**), The necessity of efficient handling of applications for exemptions motivated the authorization of the Chief of the Compliance Division to grant or deny an application- for an exemption which had been referred by any of the St.- te Compliance Directors (***) f when the ordinary procedure resulting in a decision by a Division Administrator had caused undue delay. REGIONAL OSS' ICES No evidence other than the territorial delegation has been found showing any decentralization of the authority to grant or deny exemptions, The NBA maintained offices in each state under the direction of a state director and on January 1, 1935, created a regional organization which divided continental United States into eight regions, each under the dir- ection of a. regional director. It was contemplated that the authority to grant or deny exemptions would oe delegated to these "regional directors, but the plans for this decentralization of the authority never materializ- ed (****). i n addition, the Code Administrati n Division of ERA was decentralized \)j the a ) .ointment of region;! directors of code adminis- tration. Offices '-ere authorized in -New York, Chicr. -o and Son Francisco, but there was no delegati n of authority relating to exemptions to these officials. CODE AUTHORITIES Certain codes by their terms authorized code authorities to grant exemptions from the provisions of the particular codes which they '-ere administering. The approval of these provisions necessarily constituted a further delegation of the governmental authority, but this rcoort does not consider this ohase of the question, as it will be treated by the Review Studies Group reporting upon the activities of code authorities, as such. •••■■-•-.. (*) Administrative Order X— 10? ,• November 1, 1934 - Administrative Order X-93, September 28, 1934 - NBA files. (**) See Executive Order Ho.664G - Administrative Order X-123 - NBA files. (***) Office Order No. 108 - August 16, 1934, in NBA file (****) See NBA Compliance Division Eield Letter No. 190. 9844 -83- CIIAPT5R IV ANALYSIS 0? APPLICATIONS FOR .-uD ORJDZRS OF sizsuPTiJiis and zrcrp ti ons - causes - typrs - COZE PROVISIONS AFF3CTE3 The haturu of the torms n oxomption n and "exception" and the basis of the administrative grant thereof is to bring relief to a particular individual or group of individuals fron hardship, unfair situations and other conditions which arc caused by uniform applica- tion of code provisions. The study" of the subject of exemptions and exceptions has been based upon an analysis of the reasons why appli- cations for exemptions ..'ere made, the considerations had by the National Recovery Administration on such amplications and the bases for the grant denial, or modification of the relief requested. The author of the re- port was aided by a former representative of the Labor Advisory Board, who had, during the course of the code administration, maintained a record of exemptions from labor provisions. The files of this indivi- dual were made available and the index which she had prepared was used as a guide in the examination of the actual records and portfolios of the official orders of grants and denials of exemptions. The investi- gation caused the examination of the entire records of the official orders of exemptions or denials thereof as to the codes which are listed in the Introduction to )art Three, suora . Five hundred and fifty- four (554) orders of exemption or denial thereof were examined, of which four hundred and eight (408) orders granted exemptions from codes and one hundred and fort:--si:: (146) orders denied the relief requested in the application^ All of such orders related to the above memtioned codes, and applied to both labor and trade uractice provisions. ' LABOR PROVISIONS The orders of exemptions or denials thereof ond the surroorting data found in portfolios which were studied disclose that most of the exerro— tions granted related to labor provisions and that in very few cases were exemptions granted to members of industry from trade practice pro- visions. A tabulation of the tyoe of labor provisions to which the a ro~ lications for exemutions were directed and which the ERA officially either granted or denied discloses the following: - Type of Labor Provision Number of Orders Normal minimum wage provisions 170 Skilled minimum wage provisions 8 Overtime wage provisions 12 Apprentice minimum wages 5 Equitable readjustment of. wages above. the minimum- 4 Normal maximum hours 295 Peak period hours 2 watchmen - maximum hours 8 Overtime tolerance - maximum hours 29 Child labor provisions 3 Limitation of number of apprentices or learners 14 9844 -89- Type of Lao or Prov i sion - - Number of Orders Slo\; worker tolerances-— '■ 21 Prohibition of home work J 2 Specified piece rates — — 1 Machine hour limitations 65 Production control 7 All labor provisions 2° The total of the above tabulation does not coincide with the num- ber of orders issued because in many cases an order of exemption was issued which referred to several provisions of a code, however, the tabulation has listed each provision affected. The records' of the orders of the grants or denials of exemptions in most cases contained the application for the exemption, which appli- cation usually contained the reasons for the application. Examination of these applications found that most of the exemptions sought were based upon scarcity of skilled help, seasonal peak demands, or rush of orders, as distinguished from rush of orders in a peal: season. It was likewise found that financial difficulties of members of industry or trr.de and unfair advantages because of geographical differentials prompted the filing of applications with HRA. In addition, most of the applications relating to machine hour limitations acted upon set forth necessities of production adjustment or seasonal peak demands as the causes therefor. A complete tabulation of . the reasons set forth in the applications for labor exemptions, which applications were acted upon either in the form of a grant or denial thereof shows the following: Reason ITo. of Ap'oli cation s Departmental difficulties--- 65 Peal: demands 63 Rush of orders • ; 56 Hardship 44 Foreign competition 2 u jj..'' Oppression of_small/enterprises 11 Strikes 6 Emergency (breakdown) in Inventory ' 11 Scarcity of skilled help ■ • 1^9 Production adjustment 29 Introduction net? articles or process 6 Poor Equipment 3 Lack of equipment , 14 Lack of spacer 7 Eire 4 To start production . 2 To make career (child labor) 2 Financial difficulties . 40 Geographical differentials , 3<") Handicapped or inefficient workers 19 Multiple codes 1° 9844 -90- Eeason No. of Applications Competition with exempt firms Inconvenient location 4 Pending investigation 4 Ti::e lost due to holidays 7 Change of plant operation 13 Charitable institution 1 Shipment delays 2 Non-compliance of competitors 8 The above tabulation, as in the case of the tabulation of code pro- visions, does not represent each individual application. Most of the applications set forth only one ground for relief, but in some cases various reasons were specified in seeking one exception. It was found, as a result of the investigation that the reasons, scarcity of skilled help and peak demands were linked together, and that the relief request- ed related to maximum hour provisions and overtime minimum wage rates. WAGE DIFTEREHTIAL S Ho cases were found which involved an application for an exemption from wage differentials as to sex, but as stated above, a number of applications from the minimum wage provisions were submitted, giving as reason for relief requested the fact that geographical differentials of wages would impose hardships. A number of these applications originated with southern manufacturers or in states bordering those sections in which a lower geographical differential had been set up. (*) Likewise various codes set up rates of pay for specified areas, the application of which resulted in some cases of hardship. The application for exemptions from these area rates alleged competitive disadvantages that made it impossible to continue the operation of these wages. This sit- uation among the codes examined was particularly evident in the adminis- tration of the Millinery Code (**). CHILD LABOR- APPRENTICES The records disclose that only three applications for exemptions from the child labor provisions of the codes examined were made. These cases involved boys of 14 and 15 years of age, and in two cases, the reason given was to embark the boy upon a career. The reason given in the third case was that the father wished his son to work for him in his plant. Some applications for permission to employ more learners than specified in the code occurred in the Handkerchief Code (***), the Millinery Code (****). The reason for such applications was the opening (*) See Order Ho. 49-6 and Order ilo. 57-19 in NRA files. (**) See Order No. 151-9, Order No. 151-24 and Order Ho. 151- 5^, In hRA files. (***) See Order Ho. 53-5; (****) See Order Ho. 151-69 in iiRA files. 9844 -91- of new departments. Relief from the application of percentages as to employment of apprentices was also-sought; also a number of applica- ' tions for exemptions from a Wage tolerance as to slow workers which was set forth in the Cigar Manufacturing Code. The usual reason given for the exemptions from' the percentage of apprentices employed was that there was a scarcity of skilled help- and it was necessary to employ ad- ditional apprentices to carry on production. In some cases, relief from the payment of apprentice wage was requested, but in all these cases the relief ashed related to overtime rate slather than relief from the payment of minimum wages. Only '.one case was found in which the applicant asked for permission to pay learners below the minimum wage s , v.h i ch app 1 i c a t i o n was . deni e & ( * ) . A number of applications requested exemption from the overtime tolerance provisions of codes. These applications were very numerous in the administration cf the ppaper and Pulp Code, Code No. 12o, and. the reasons given therefor were necessities of bolstering inventory and. inability to meet orders on time (*•*). A particular industrial reason was also given in those particular applications, which was lack of suf- ficient water power. TRADE PRACTICE PROVISIONS As stated.' above, the orders of exemption examined, disclosed few which affected trad.e practice provisions of codes. A tabulation of the types of trade practice provisions' 'is as follows: TYPES OP TRADE PRACTICE PROVISIONS NUkBER All trade practice provisions ■ 2 Productions control 7 Consignment sales— 1 Price Piling : 1 Loss limitation ' ' 1 Sales below cost 2 mislabeling— J — --■ ■ — 1 Uniform terms of sale ; 1 Container specifications : -- ■ 1 Merchandising plans 2 The main reason set forth in the applications relating to trad.e practice provisions was that the particular applicant was losing busi- ness and that his continuance therein was dependent upon the relief requested.. Anotner main reason' which was set forth with respect to applications for exemptions from production control provisibns, sales below cost and loss limitation, was that the competitors of the appli- cant were not complying with the particular provision. Relief from the (*) See Order lie. 120-105 in KRA files. (**) See Orders Los. 120-11, ' 120-12, 120-29 and 120-37 - ERA files. 9844- 2- code provisions relating to container specifications and mislabeling provisions was requested upon the basis that th- 3 applicant had a stock of cans and containers on hand and that the non-use of those containers would result in great losi * Lra. It Le Interesting t*->**ote the Administration denied all of 1 ' Lons for exemuj$>L,ns from trade practice provisions, wit exception of two. Ho orders of exemotion were found among the code*? examined, af- fecting code authority provisions or the rights and obligations of the code authorities created under the orovisions of any such code. GEOGRAPHICAL ORIGIN OF APPLICATIONS The origin of aoolications for exemption as to geographical con- siderations was widespread. Of course, it is realized that the codes selected for examination for the Durposes of this preliminary report would have a very marked effect uoon the geographical locations of the applicants. In many cases the members of the industry or trade were concentrated in a particular section of the country which would neccesarily affect the geographical picture, however, the tabulation set forth below will give some idea as to the origin of applications for exemption which were officially acted upon. Districts No. of April i cants New England (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut) 82 Middle Atlantic States (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia) 157 Southeastern States (Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina South Carolina, Georgia, 7/est Virginia, Virginia) 63 Gulf States (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi .Louisiana — 16 Middle West ( Ohio, I ichigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa) 121 Southwestern States (Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Arkansas,, Kansas) 19 Northwestern States (Wisconsin, "innesota, North Dakota, Soutn Dakota^ 2<"> Rocky Mountain States (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada) 11 Pacific Coas* States (California, Oregon) 11 Pacific Northwest States (Washington, Idaho, Montana)- 6 S844 ~Q7. Districts ;;, . of Aoolications 3 Ho. of Crders 125. 43 114 (*) 53 155 Puerto Rico . ■ -- Hawaii n Alaska n As stated above, an examination of tne records of the orders of exemotion included the location of tne particular applicant or aop'll cants therefor. Tor the ourppses of information as to tne origin of aoolications wit-, respect to peculated districts of thf» country, the author has caused a tabulation to be made, shov--in=' the distribution of the origin of replications for exemotions upon which some official ac- tion ""as taken with resoect to the size of the towns or cities in which tne t) articular aoolicant was located. Citips of a million population or over Cities with population of 5'">o,nor to l,nnn t nnn Cities w'rth population of inn t nnn to 5<">fi,onn Cities with population of 5n,nr»n to l^onn Cities and towns witn pooulation under 50,00.0 — , — In some cases the work sheets on which the above tabulation was made did not give exact information as to tne location of the applicants - some c=sses such as,- ''Seventeen members of tne industry on tne Pacific Coast", "I/embers of the industry operating in competition with tne Dress Manu- facturers" and other like designations were -unable to be charted as to location. It is submitted that the above tabulation represents prac- tically 955b of -^11 of the ordert. studied and accordingly oresents a picture of the pooulation situation to tnat extent. PERIlD CF E'CEr PTKi! The power conferred upon the President in the Act. permitted the granting of exemptions *nd exceptions within tne discretion of tne President, provided tne oolicies of the Act ^ere effectuated. Tho exer- cise of tnis discretion was evidenced in tne aeriod for whicn exemotions were granted. Some aoolications were received in wnich relief was re- quested for a limited period; e.g., one day, one wee'-, one month. Other applications made no mention of the period of time of relief requested. Considerations upon the aoolications had by 1TRA often resultpd in a limitation or an extension of tne time of tne .exemotion granted. In addition, some aoolications requested exemotions for a limited oeriod and subsequently asked for an extension of the exemotion for either a further limited oeriod or an unlimited oeriod. All ohases of the period of exemotions aooearin,-- in tne orders of exemotions were studied for this -preliminary report. Tne tabulation is as follows: (*) Note: Records of population charts set forth in tne World Almanac, i935 Edition, were consulted for ourooses of this tabulation. S844 -94- PiUlD NC. OF EXETTTION S Unlimited -- - 121 To June 15 or 16, 1 3E '6 Pending Hearing or Study -- -- 6 To the Expiration of tin ; " -■' 1 Until Terminated — 3 Pending Amendment •■- — - 2 Sixty Days cr Cv^r 62 Thirty to Sixty Days— 44 Fifteen to Tnirt ■- Days 53 Cne reel: to two weeks 5^ r days to one week -■» 20 Cne cay 16 No general analysis of the reasons for these various periods of exemptions can be made, with the exception of a few. It was found that the exemptions for various periods of time "frp asked because of various conditions. An examination finds that the exemptions granted for one cay or for tne period of from two days to one week '"ere requested for the paroose of tnking inventory, to repair "broken-down machinery or to meet some emergency situation. The unlimited exemotions were granted during th< early part of NPA administration of codes n nd being coexten- sive with the Act, terminated on June 16, 1935. On .or about February 1, 1935, the Administration became increasingly mindful of the date of tar termination of the Act, and, as a matter of policy, the source of which tne author has not explored at this time, orders of exemoticn were soecifically not permitted to continue beyond June 16, 1935, S^me-ordons. stated June 15, 1935 - others - June 16, 1935. This difference most orobably arose from a misapprehension as to the actaal date of termination of t .e Act. The exemotions granted for t le oeriod pending a hearing, study or amendment are self-erolanatory. p.iLTP.LACTi^i £::£^ptili-:s Not all aoolications for exemption were tie result of foresight. Some members of industry or trade being uresented with an emergency situation, violated tie code provisions and later made application to tne Administration for exemption from the code to cover the violation theretofore committed. In addition, apolicatio-ns for exemotions were dir-. • to trie Administration before tne date uoon which tne requested relief wou] t :o effect, but due to difficulties in routing, reference to to Advisory Boards and otner orocedaral requirements, tne actaal deci- sions .-'& to the exemo + ion was not made and the order of exemption is- sued until after tie time noted in the apolication had partially or totally elaosed. For example - Crd^r Mo. 3-51 (Wool Textile Code) grantee an exemption from tne normal hoar orovisions of that code from March 4, 1935 to ray 1, 1935 - the order was signed on "arch 8, 1925; in Order No. 59-19 (Marking Devices Code) the order of exemption was signed on January 10, 1^35 exempting the applicant from the normal hour provisions of the cod'- from December 31, 1934 to January lo, 1935, the date upon which the order was signed. These cases are known as retro- active exemptions. 9844 - 95 - The power of the President to grant exemptions was of wide latitude, subject only to the limitations that the action should effectuate the policies of the Act, but the Act does not contain any specific legisla- tive declaration exempting certain classes or groups of individuals from the -provisions of codes which related to members of industry or trade. The absence of this statutory assumption required administrative exer- cise of dispensing powers which necessarily operate upon a foresight basis. The power to exempt with respect to future acts is admitted and in cases where applications for exemptions were received by the adminis- trative agency prior to the time to which the exemption related can equally be justified because administrative remedies had been sought. It is true that some penalties accrued an a result of the tardy order of exemption, but these considerations are offset by the activities of the- seeker of the remedy. Tne Constitution does not deter an interested party from seeking administrative remedies and for so doing, violations prior to the adjudication upon the application will not be imposed. (*) However, in cases where the applicant chooses to await proceedings and violates the code, the penalties may be imposed. The grant of an exemp- tion in the last mentioned case or on a retroactive basis, is not a grant of relief from code provisions which have already been violated but is more in the nature of a nolle prosequi exercised by prosecutors in the administration 'of criminal justice. The failure to prosecute cases is in reality largely an administrative matter controlling a de- sired effort to accomplish the general purposes of a criminal law, even though in many cases some wrong-doers are allowed exemptions from the strict terms of the statute. It is true that in certain statutory enact- ments, the effects of which are retroactive, certain exemptions are set forth. These types of statutes do not apply here in these cases because of the absence of any statutory declaration in the Act. It is the author's opinion that retroactive exemptions, as such, were not in fact exemptions from -orovisions of codes but condonations of violations already committed and administrative declarations of intentions not to prosecute, which declarations are similar to the practice in the criminal law known as nolle prosequi. COHDITIOUAL EXS^PTTOirs A number of orders of exemptions issued by the Administration ex- empted the particular applicant or groups of applicants from the provi- sions of the code on condition that certain things be done or that cer- tain requirements be satisfied. (**) The conditional form of exemption did not occur in each case. (*) Wadley Southern R. Co. v. Grorria . 235 U.S. 651, 662, 669. See also New York Public Service Commission Law, Section 24. (**) See Order 64-55, Order ITo. 120-10- "'IRA Piles. 9844 - .. IYP£S X F CGN?ITIC' POSAD BY ERA I'Ut/BER Payment of Jfage rates si 'der of exemption 9 Requirement of abidin th< minimum wagi rates in the c<~>de — 1 Adherence to rules -> r . ' inistration 1 Requirement that new ewoloyei s oe ....• • t o Le rate— 1 Requirement that r\o work be 3on<= on .- 1 Requirement that Administrative permission to increase ocrcentage cf es1 " 1 volume oe obtained- 1 Gomolianci i code 4 Req-. - overtime be oaid during certain specified monthsl Requirement that no excessive maximum hours be worked 1 Limitation of period of aoprent ice shin 1 Limitation of number of aoprentices and payment of time and one-half for overtime 12 requirement of no nay-cut 1 Limitation on reduction of personnel 2 Limitation on working; 96 hours in two weeks ■ 1 Limitation of maximum daily hours and maximum weekly hours with requirement of deduction from oeak season tolerance- 2 Requirement that overtime be averaged over 13-week period 1 Limitation of 43 hours a week 1 Requirement of payment of time and one-half for overtime 12 requirement of payment of time and one-third for overtime 11 Limitation upon number of hours of overtime 11 Requirement of reoort of additional hours worked 1 The majority of these imposed conditions related to the payment of minimum wages or adherence to certain maximum hour requirements. There is no doubt of the power of the Administration to exempt the particular applicant or applicants from the provisions of the code either upon a partial or complete basis as to Doth extent and time, however, the im- position of a condition must bear a relationship to the general purposes of the statute in order to have a valid condition. (*) The declared policy of the Act, among other things, relates to the promoting of the organization of industry, the reduction and relief of uneraoloyraent and tne improvement of the standards of labor. An exami- :on of some of the types of conditions tabulated above might show a relation to the declared purposes of the Act, however, some of them may Oe ooen to question. In addition, it is .subject to question whether or not the Administration should affix a condition to an exemp- tion or:., r which is not a part of the code and which a member is not already bound to comply with. These various phases of the question resulted, in the ooinion of the author, in many invalid conditions which ,rt ere attacned to orders of exemotion. invalidity of these conditions raises two points, one, the effect upon the minimum wage provision, two, the effect uoon the aopli- c-:nt. It would appear tha't tne grant of an exemption to Wiich an (*) See Smith v. Cahoon, 282 U. S. 553 (1930) 9644 -97- invalio. condition was attached would be a valid exemption but that the condition wbuld be inoperative. In U. S. v. Caica^o, et c. , Railway Co . , 282 U. S. 311 (1931) the Interstate Commerce Commission attached in- valid conditions to its grant of a permit to issue securities and after the securities were issued tae court held taat even though the condition was not severable from the basis of the oermiti the condition could be ignored. (*) It would seem that an investigation of the conditions attached to orders of exemptions would b^ necessary in order to determine, with the background o^ the legal principles hereinabove stated, whether or not the conditions imposed were valid in fact and in law. There is also the larger field o r investigation that, assuming the conditions attached to orders of exemptions <"ere valid, ^ou 1 . d they in fact modify the provisions of the code or cause ambiguity to arise there- from? REASC ,'S - ?<£■■■' I AL L v EXEMPT MITS An investigation discloses that of the orders examined one hundred and forty-six (Mo) thereof denied tae application for exemption and in some cp.ses the Administration took occasion to express its reasons there- for. A tabulation shows the following: REASOFS FOP. INITIAL Uf £X£!.?TICN I-IITI^EH UF CFJEPS Grant of Exemption would be unfair to competitors 14 Grant of exemption would result in code collapse- 1 Applicants are code violators 3 Absence of Proof of hardship 9 Code authority and the Administration considered grant a particular precedent 3 Market over- sup died ; (Machine hour limitation exemption) 1 Skilled help available 4 Conditions of applicant not dissimilar from those of other members of tae industry 3 Minimum wages too low tc justify exemption 1 The few reasons above tabulated, are not of mucn help in determining the factors in the actual decision of denial. The orders of exemption are rather general in their statements of reasons and no findings of fact were contained therein. The power of exemotion, as granted by the Na- tional Industrial Recovery Act, is limited to the finding that the action is "necessary tc effectuate the policy of the Act". (*) See NRA Legal research memorpndum 883, Kay 16, 1935, memorandum on tae effect of tae conditional exemotion order. 9844 3- The power to grant executions is executive in cnaracter and it is presumed that the exercise of po'ver was in accordance witn the limit-p- tions laid down by Congress. (*) All of the orders of exemotion examined contained a statement that the particular administrative ac- tion set forth in the order w=s "necessar;' to effectuate the oolicy of the Act." This finding, coupled witn the authority of a line of decisions holding that an order of exemption is valid even though made without any formal findings (**), rendered the action of the Adminis- tration valid within the terms and limitations of the National Indus- trial Peccvery Act. CODE ACTIVITY AS TO EXEMPTIONS The activity of the particular codes studied for ourooses of this report in the realm of exemptions may be of interest an^ the following tabulation hqs been made, which snows the name of the code studied and the number of orders of execution found therein. The tabulation also sho'-s the particular code orovision to which most aoolications for exemption referred: NAVE Or CODE Cotton Textile Shipbuilding & Shiprepairing Wool Textile Electrical i'anufacturing Coat & z Suit Lace Manufacturing Corset 8c Brassier Legitimate Full Length Dramatic & Musical Theatrical Lumber & Timber Products (incomplete) Photographic Manufacturing Fishing Tackle Rayon Synthetic Yarn Producing ] en 1 s Clothing Hosiery Automobile Manufacturing Cast Iron Soil Pipe Wall Paper Manufacturing Salt Producing Leather Motion Picture Laboratory Undervrear & Allied Products Oil Burner NO. OF ORDERS CODE PROVISION MOST LFTEN AFFECTED 30 9 38 67 7 20 28 1 29 18 9 5 7 2 1 14 2 Machine hour orovisions Overtime wages Machine hours & normal maximum hours Normal hours- and wages Wago area rates Maximum hours Normal wages Normal maximum hours llormal maximum hours Normal maximum hours Machine hours Overtime tolerance Normal maximum hours Overtime tolerance Normal hours Machine hours All orovisions (*) Sep Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, to Suo. Ct. 242 (1935), page 283 (**) See NRA Legal research memorandum 680, March 2, 1935, memorandum of law on the administrative law governing exemptions. 9844 -99- NAME OF CODE NO. OF ORDSRS CODE PROVISION MOST OFTEN AFFECTED Gasoline Pump Textile Bag Transit Artificial Flower & Feather Linoleum & Felt Base Lime ■Knitting, braiding & lire Cover- ing Machine Retail Lumber Laundry & Dry Cleaning Textile Machinery Class Container Bui lder s ' Supp lies Boiler Manufacturing Farm Equipment Electrical Storage & Wet Primary Battery iVomen 1 s Belt Luggage & Fancy Leather Coeds Ice Boot & Shoe Manufacturing Saddlery Manufacturing Motor Vehicle Retail Trade Bankers Silk Textile Optical Manufacturing Automatic Sprinkler Umbrella Manufacturing Mutual Savings '..Banks.. Handkerchief Throwing Compressed Air Heat Exchange Pump Manufacturing Cap & Closure Marking Devices Retail Trade Drest Manufacturing Paint, Varnish & Lacquer Paper & Pulp S illinery Can Manufacturers Wholesale & Distributing Trade Schif f li , Hand Embroidery, etc. Men' s Neckwear Aluminum Cigar Manufacturing 3 4 23 3 1 2 12 4 Normal hours Normal minimum wages Wages and hours Normal maximum hours Normal maximum hours Normal maximum hours Overtime tolerance Wages and hours I mi mum wages Overtime tolerance Maximum hours Child labor Machine hours Hours Hoars 7 Learners 4 Minimum wages 1 Minimum wages 2 Wages and hours 4 "inimum wages 2 Overtime tolerance 1 Max imam hours 15 Maximum hours 29 Skilled, wages 9 Vag^s and hours 70 Overtimp tolerance 41 • Area wage rates and per cent age of aoorentices 2 Hours 14 Maximum hours 5 Normal maximum hours 2 ! inimum wages 1 Hours and wages 25 Slow worker wage toler- ance 9844 -100- . GENERAL EXECUTIVE A.D ADl'INIST-.ATIVE EXEMPTIONS This chapter has so far concern--. Itself with tne treatment of Administrative orders of grant or denial of exemotions which were issued after the approval of a code, t -r. lb, during tne coarse of code admin- istration. The content of the stu is oeon baood upon orders 'affoctin. or a few particular codes. As the '-dministrntion of codes Drogressed, various problems arose which required onstic and widesoread action, either Executive or Administrative, whicn would find some expression in the issuance of general exemptions. An order of general exemotion was one issued either by. th** Bresr- dent or tie Administrator and applied to all codes, or to all codes _ch were affected by tne particular situation covered. A few samples suffice. (*) Experience taught the Administration that the operation of the PKA in small towns and hamlets resulted in many cases of hardship in local retail trade ^nd service trade establishments. The solution of the problem lay in exemptions of those affected, so on October 23, 1933 the President, by Executive Order No. 6354 issued a general exemp- tion from certain orovisions of the PHA to employers engaged locally in retail trade and. local service trades, whose place or places of busi- ness were located in towns 6f less than 2500 copulation. This form of general exemption was not exercised by the President on many occasions, but was utilised by the Administrator to meet problems relating to policy, hardship and other situations. Charitable and publicly endowed hospitals found undue hardship with respect to purchase of materials from members of industries subject to codes. This condition resulted in tne issuance of Administrative Order No. X-4 (January 23, 1934) where- by tnose members of codified industries who sold materials to charitable and publicly endowed hospitals were exemoted from the provisions of the codes relating to s-'les. Difficulties of assessment of members of in- dustry for code administration necessitated the use of this cower of exemption, as evidenced by Administrative Order X-3b (**^ NRA policy required som Q consideration insofar as cooes applied to sheltered work- shoos, and in tne execution of this policy a general exemotion was granted whereby sheltered workshops ,j <=re e v empted from the operations of codes on certain conditions. (***) This power of general exemotion was used on verv f°w occasions ~oy tie Administration and it is mentioned here for the purpose of shoeing one particular f yoe o^ exemotion and (*) See r.lzo Administrative Order No. X-140 - NRA files (** N r or more detailed treatment of general exemptions created by Executive and Administrative Crders se^ " u istory of General '■ions' 1 , fork Materials Nc. 75. mmm\ Administrative Order X-9, ! arch 3, 1934, in NBA files. 9844 : -101- the met nod cf execution thereof. On some occasions a general erection was issued upon the application of tie interested parties, as in the case of Administrative Order No. X-9. EXEMPTION - ?i Y CODE PROVISION Various codes ^s submitted for approval., and some as agreed uoon between the sponsors thereof and the Administration, contained pro- visions setting up exemptions from the orovisions of the code. A usual exemption found in codes related to sales for export where "by the provisions of the code did not apoly to export sales (*). Other tyoes of exemptions were written into codes ^nd operated to relieve members of the industry from the operation of some or all of the orovisions of a code. Various questions arise in connection with these tyD^s of exemptions, but the author has not had an oooortunity to fully consider them. One of these problems relates to the above mentioned type of exemption by which code definitions of export trade varied from the definition of interstate and foreign commerce found in 7 (d) of the Act. (*) For example, Article X, Oil Field pumping Engine Manufacturing Code, No. 547, Sup-o. 35, Codes of Fair Competition, Vol. XIV. p. 357. 9844 -1C CHAPTER V EVALUATIONS AMD CONCLUSIC The power to grant exemptions is one easily susceotiole of abuse and the exercise of v.'hich, can result in complete defeat of the purposes of le latirn from which the exemption is granted. The reasons for the power of exemptions or dispensing ;.o - 'ers, as they are sometimes called, can be bro 1 : down as follows; 1. definite ascertainment of general legislative language without the necessity of specific penalties or law suits. 2. Recognition of special cases which cannot fit into a general rule. 3. Relaxation in cases of an emergency nature where humanitarian considerations are concerned. 4. Relaxation cf questionable policies, especially those of an economic nature (*). The above classifications show reasons for the allowance of exemptions and each one of them enables a just enforcement of the Act and as such are neil to effectuate the policy of the Act. Chapter I refers to various sections of the Act upon which the po^er grant exemptions can be predicated. Specific mention of the phrase "ex- ceptions to and exemptions from" in Section 3(a) leads to the conclusion this section was intended to grant this power. This section however, in main specifies procedure for the submission of codes and for the conditio! approval thereof. Some doubt might arise that the power, to exempt or exi relateed to the time of the order of approval, but a careful reading of t| grant of power reveals that it is not linked up with the order of approva rather is repeated so that there is no such limitation upon the power to This conclusion is based on the construction of the Act. Chapter I also that a grant of power to exempt was conferred by Section lC(b). Some dou| may arise as to whether exemptions and exceptions are included within the phrase "cancel or modify", however, it is suggested that the specific sta| be set forth in new legislation, if any, as to power of exemption. Such ments should make it clear that the power to grant exemptions may be raadel the time of the order of approval of the code or afterwards; that the exel may be modified or terminated; and that power to exempt may apply to an in- dividual, group of individuals, industrial subdivision, an entire indust American industry in general. * Chapter I mentions the administrative discretion conferred upon the dent in the exercise of the power of exemption. An arbitrary action witk pect to exemptions is not proper and substantive ruides as to the subject e xemptions denote general principles of fair classification. These princ (*) Freund, Administrative Powers Over Persons and Property (1926), Page 9544 to 139, inclusive -103^ fall into one of two categories - (l) classifications must "be fair and reasonable and not arbitrary, (2) all persons within the class must be treated alike so that others not at the moment ar> ">lying for exemption may make appli- cation at a later time upon a showing that they are within the class so fefined (*). It is true there is n r guarantee in the Fifth .Amendment of the Federal Constitution of equal protection of the la ?s , but in cases arising under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution it does prescribe '^ equal protection of laws, which will serve as a. precedent for determining valid classifications in the exercise of the power of exemptions. (**) The necessity of exemptions being fair and reasonable and that the ; application thereof be equally uniform would indicate that the power to exempt should be granted legislatively in accordance with a declaration of standards upon which the exercise of administrative discretion could be predicated and limited. This form of grant of power could specifically set fort": the various requirements for the grant of an exemption and require that upon sufficient showing and a finding thereof by the administrative agency that the f applicant came within the limitation of such standards, the exemption could be issued. The issuance of such an exemption could, under the terms of the statute be declared a precedent for all other persons equally situated, thereby meet- ing the requirements of a fair and reasonable exemption applying to all persons in the same category. For the purposes of information, it could be required that notice and proof of condition similar to that of the precedent should be submitted to the administrative agency by the particular person or group of persons so similarly- situated. This requirement of report and proof would enable the administrative agency to take action with respect to any particular problem which would arise by virtue of the precedent created. . . >■ The above mentioned standards for rules and classifications find a basis for a statement thereon in Section 1 of the present Act. Elaborations upon these standards can be obtained in some degree from the information set forth in the Chapter entitled "Causes of Exemptions". The reasons set forth in the applications will serve as some criteria for the standards suggested. It is (*) 3ee N3A Legal research memorandum No. 4C6 , November 16, 1934, memo- randum of law concerning substantive guides in granting exemptions. (**) See Connoly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co . , 184 U.S. 540, 22 S. Ct.431, 46 L. ed. 679 (1902) Central Lumber Co . v. South Dakota , 226 U.S. 157, 33 S.Ct. 66, 57 L. ed. ' 164 (1912) Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe .Rwy.Co . v. Ellis , 165 U.S. 150, 17 S.Ct. 260 61 L. ed. 685 (1897) Jones v. Brim, 165 U.S. 180, 17 S. Ct. 282, 41 L. ed. 677 (1897 Seaboard Air Line ILwy . v. Seegers, et al , 2C7 U.S. 73, 28 S. Ct. 28 52 L. ed. 108 (1907) German Alliance Insurance Co . v. Hale , 219 U.S. 307, '31 S. Ct. 246, 55 L. ed. 229 (1911) Radice v. New York , 264 U.S. 292, 44 S. Ct. 325, 68 L. ed. 690 (1924) 9844 -104- 5 realized that very little Information is contained in this revert as to t reasons for exem ti^ns from trade practice ->rovisions and also code autho provisions, "out soie information ..rust be available in some of the studiics being conducted by the Trade Practice Studies Section of the Division of Review and. a further study of this subject will discover them. Examination of records of NRA in respect to the use of the terms "exemption", "exception" anc "stay"' shows attempts on the part of the Admi tration to differentiate the meanirgs thereof, folio-rod by attempts to tre the terms syncn--mously t resulting in interchangeable use of the terms. Ut crnfusicn resultec as to the exact meaning of the administrative use of t various terms. Administrative orders covering identical situations in one case would exempt the particular applicant from the provisions of the code and in the other, stay the provisions of the code as to the particular appl cant. It is true that the effect of the administrative action does not da upon mere terminology, but for purposes of a administrative cl rity, the pro- cedure and the like, it is reconraended that legislative definitions of the terms "exemption" and "exception" be made to act as guides to administrato of any new Act. It is suggested that the term "exemption" refer to admini trative action ~by ^hich the particular member of an industry or trade or several members thereof, including geographical or. industrial subdivisions or the entire industry, are relieved from full or -oartial operation of a cc and that an exemption cannot operate unless there has been a prior obligatj to abide by the code. The term "exception" should refer to administrative action whereby an individual, group of individuals, either in geographical or industrial sub» divisions, or sn entire industry or trade is relieved from the operations < a code, or portion thereof, by the terms of the code itself . The term "stay" should refer to administrative action whereby an in- dividual, grotto of individuals, either geographical or industrial, or an entire industry would be relieved from the operation o f the provisions of a code, in whole or in part, by the order of approval of the code. The sta; operates from the time of the promulgation of the code and recognizes the existence of the particular provision but relieves persons from the operat thereof from the time of the order of approval. The effect of an order of stay issued after the approval of the code would, under the suggested def: nitiop, be on exemption and not a stay. The suggested definitions may ser some guide and it is most strongly urged that some clarification of the te be ma do. . • • • This report lists the actual official record of the delegation of pow to frant exemptions. The record of itself is in the main sufficient. An examination of the files discloses various deviations in the authority gra It is true, consideration of speed and emergency confronted the Adrainistra in 1933 and the early part of 1934. Such matters as delegation and the pr expression thereof seemed of secondary importance. In addition, the exces of authority -found in the records were not attributed to the Administrator the National Industrial Recovery Board, but rather to the lesser officials NRA. Lack -of orordination of activities 'and precedents upon which their actions could be based were very strong contributing causes of these exce of authority. If the suggestion relatin;; to standards and classifications to exemptions ifi followed, the necessity of gross delegation would not be real. The variances may in some cases have been due to problems of procec 9844 n I -105- snd interoffice operation. The situation is net ef such importance as to re- quire legislative action, ho- ever, it is suggested that the never to grant ex- parptions should remain in the administrative agency with the possibility of some delegation to an exemption officer, who should "be the only one permitted, other than the head of the administrative agency, to exercise this power. Since this report has not considered questions of delay and inefficiency with resnect to geographical considerations, the question of the regional decentrali- zation of authority'' is left open as to suggestion, however, the plan initiated by the National Industrial Recovery Board with respect to exemptions in terri- torial codes' as evidenced by Office Memorandum No. 348, March 19, 1935, should be continued. It is the opinion Of the author that the wholesale delegation of the p'ower to exempt resulted in lac 1 : of coordination and little knowledge of the extent and number of the applications being submitted, thereby re- sulting in inequities, code break:— downs and arbitrary rulings. A tighter, closer and more carefully guarded control of this power would result in better administrative use thereof. The elimination of the- causes of exemptions depends upon the types of code provisions to which exemptions would be addressed. The analysis of e xemotions and codes in Chapter IV, is more a matter of history than a basis for concrete suggestion ?s to particular codes. The experience had with certain industries as to certain provisions, of course, is helpful, provided the same type of provisions would be submitted by the same industry. A knowledge of the conditions in the industry often is the controlling factor as economic and industrial conditions may change, but it is suggested that, in consideration of any new codes, particular attention be paid to the following: Multiple codes, overlapping definitions, peak seasons in the industry, adequate pro- visions for rush of orders, availability of skilled help, financial condition of the members of the industry, the departmentalization of the industry, labor unrest in the industry, geographical differentials, all of which. result in applications for exemptions. The author does not feel qualified, . upon the basis of this report, to submit any recommendations regarding trade practice provisions. It is suggested that with respect to the neriod of an exemption, great latitude and discretion be reposed in the administrative agency. It is suggested that retroactive exemptions, as such, be eliminated and that if situations arise whereby newer of condonation should be utilized, that it be used in th»t manner rather than in the form of a retroactive ex- emption. It is the opinion of the author that a number of administrative orders of exemptions contained conditions which, under the ordinary rules of law of conditional exemptions, were invalid. The necessity of conditions in exemptions is recognized, but the administrative exercise of the imposition of these conditions should be limited by statutory declarations as to the types of conditions which could bs imposed, bearing in mind the legal re- quirement that the condition must bear relationship to the matter upon which the order of exenoticn is issued. 9844 -106- IEE Apcendix No. 1 F' THE?. PlSSZjCCK - UNPI 'I SKIP PHASES OP THE STUDY The outline of the study of this subject (Aonendix No. 2) lists code authority finances as a general topic for s tudy of exem iti^ns, hut n^ record of this form of exemptions, other than Administrative Order No. X-36 , haveB been mentioned herein. In addition, the subject of termination of exemption contained in Administrative Order No. X-36 has not been covered. The substantive phases of exemptions and exceptions are the basis of J this report. However, there are m: other parts of the subject that are I portant and have a direct relation to the substantive side. The admin- istrative procedure set up to handle applications for exemptions, the origii thereof as to the typo of applicant, matters of routing, co vomica t ions, T^ from field or as £>n interoffice matter in Washington, the participation of the Advisory Boards and the decisions uoon applications of exemptions, th< requirements as to legality and policy, the amount of consideration of aj plications both pro and con,- the part played by field offices in this conei eration'i and other general questions relating to procedure have not been cdvered "oy. this report. Coupled with considerations of >rccedure are also questions of the efficient handling of applications ~nd operation under the procedural set-up. Investigations into a critical analysis of the proce&ur and the various conditions causing or aiding delay in the efficient handlin of applications are matters of importance in the study of an administrative agency. The effects of inefficient handling and delay thereon, if any, upc the general purposes and policies of the Act, code structure, code compli»r and code enforcement are questions of consideration. It has not been possi in this report to consider these phases* Preference to the outline of the stud:; (Appendix No. 2) will reveal tht scope of the possibilities of further review, "History of General Exemptions", Work Materials No, 75, treats Execut and Administrative Orders pertaining to general exemptions. 9844 I : 544 -107- PART THREE / Appendix Ho. 2. EXEMPTIONS A3 EXCEPTIONS (Outline) 1. Introduction 1.1 Objective and sco ti< i, 5.2 Complete individual exemption, 5.21 Exempts one or more industry or trade members from -•~11 provisions of a code. .211 Causes. 5.2111 Small amount of business under code. 5.2112 Multiple codes. 5.2113 G hical problems. 5.2114 Bankruptcies, and business failures* 5.2115 Receiverships, 5.2116 Foreign competition* 5.2117 Subject tc other government agencies* 5.3 Partial individual exemption. 5,51 Exempts one or more industry or trade members from art of the provisions of a code. 9344 -109- Exempticns pad exceptions from c<~de provisions relating to labor! 6.1 Types of hour and wages exemptions.- 6.11 Unlimited. 6.12 .Conditional. 6.13 Typical cases, 6.2 Maximum hours. 6.21 Normal periods. 6.22 Pec. 1 - periods. 6.23 Overtime tolerances. 6.3 Minimum wages. 6.31 Normal rate. 6.32 Overtime rote. 6.33 Apprentice rate. 6.54 Skilled rate. .6.35 Union contract rate. 6.4 Reasons for maximum hour and minimum wage exemptions. 6.41 Geographical differentials, 6.42 Inability to operate xinder code provisions. 6.421 Scarcity of labor, 6.4211 Common. 5.4212 Apprentice. 6.4213 Skilled. 6.422 Peal: demands, . 6.423 Rush of orders. 6.424 Inventory bolstering. 6.425 Emergency work. 6.4251 Protection of property. 6.4252 Maintenance, 6.4253 7/eather, fire, acts of God. 6.426 Competition with uncodified industries. 6.427 Federal and state competition* 6.428 Financial difficulties. 6.429 Departmental difficulties. 6.5 General labor provisions, 6.51 Child labor 6.52 Apprentices, 6.53 Handicapped workers. 6.54 Standards of safety and health. 6.55 Home work. 6.56 Stretch out. 6.57 Scrip payments. 6.58 Equitable readjustment of wages above the minimum. 6.59 Posting. 6.51^ Collective bargaining. 6.52 Miscellaneo^is, 6.6 Typical cases and discussion thereof as to 6.61 Bases of exemptions. 6.62 Development of policy. 6.63 Evaluation of experiences. 9844 c- 7. Exemptions and exceptions from trade nractice provisions. 7.1 "p.H.A. 7 . 2 Co do s . 7.3 Kinds of provisions. 7.31 General tmde practice rules, 7.311 Cedes. 7.3111 General!, accepted in la-. . 7.3112 Desirable out not fully accepted in law. 7.3115 Desirable "but no basis in law, 7.3114 Undesirable. 7.3115 Unenforceable. General analysis and discussion of trade ractico rules from viewpoint, of exemptions and exceptions. 7.32 Code Authority rules and regulations having force and effect of trade practice rules. 7.33 Price -oclicy. 7.331 price fixing. 7.3311 Pixod pi-ices. . ■ 7.3312 Lowest reasonable orice. 7.5313 Modal mark-up. 7.352 Price control. 7-. 3521 Loss lenders. 7.3522 Loss limitations. 7.333 Open price systems. 7.5531 Institution of system. 7.3332 Particular contracts. 7.3333 lie the d cf operation. No be ; For purpose of discussions bid depository systems are included under this sub-division. 7.334 Cost provisions*.- . 7.3541 Sales Delow cost. 7.5542 Obsolete ^oods. 7 . 3343 Erne rgency . di spo sals. 7.3344. Competition. 7.335 Accounting systems. 7.3551 Necessity of approval of Administrator. 7.5552 Complexity of system. 7.5553 Difficulties of installation, 7.356 Sales reporting systems. 8. Exemptions and exceptions from Cede Authority provisions, 8.1 Duties required by cede previsions. . 8.11 Organization of Cede Authorit . 8.12 Report's bv Code Authorities. 8.15 Compliance activities.- 8.14 General code administration. 8.2 N.R.A. rules and regulations regarding activities cf Code Authorities. 1.3 General executive and administrative order regarding Code Authority • .31 Organization. idatory requirements. ,33 Cede administration. ,34 Compliance. 9844 -Ill- 9. Code Authoritv finances, 9.1 Necessity of uexemp.tiqn, 9.11 Administrative Order X-19 and subsequent or^ rs relating thereto. 9.2 Development of termination of exemption. 9.21 Necessity. 9.22 Bases of applications therefor. 9.23 Considerations by N.R.A. 9.24 Determinations. 9.241 Complete termination. 9.242 Partial termination. 9.25 Effects. 9.251 N.R.A., policy. 9.252 Code Authority finances. 9.253 Compliance and enforcement. 10. Labels. 10.1 Bases of .exemptions from label provisions. 10.2 Effect of exemptions granted 10.21 Upon industry members. 10.22 Compliance 11. Exemptions from requirements of reporting data. 11.1 Where Code Authority is reporting agency. 11.2 Where reoorts are required from individual members of industry. 11.3 Usual governmental reports 11.4 General executive or administrative orders as exemptions from re-iert-making. k • 11.5 Rules and regulations re exemptions from report-making. 12. Government contracts. 12.1 Discussion of Executive Orders 6337 and 6646 as to exemptions. 12.2 Bases of a-y lication for exemptions from executive orders. 12.3 Nature ^nd extent of exemptions granted. 12.4 Effect of exemptions upon purpose of executive orders. 13. Conditional orders of approval. 13.1 Nature of exemptions requested. 13.2 Considerations by N.R.A. 13.3 Determinations. 13.4 Effect upon conditions and general code structure. 14. Miscellaneous exemptions. 14.1 Code Provisions. 14.2 Executive and administrative orders. 14.3 Policy. 14.4 N.R.A. rules and regulations. 15. Time of exemption. 15.1 Duration of Act. 15.2 Temporary period, 15.3 Retroactive. 15.4 Conditional 15.5 Emergency, 9844 -112- 16. Procedure as to exemptions. 15.1 Application by 16.11 Industry member. 16.12 Industry grou ■. 16.15 Code Authority. 16.131 National. 16.132 Local. 16.14 Instituted by N.R.A. 16.141 Indus tr" r Division. 16.142 Le ;el Divisic . 16.143 Advisory boards. 16.144 Field offices. 16.145 Other departments of N.R.A. , 16.15 Government agencies other than N.R.A. 16.16 Labor. 16.161 Individual. 16.162 'Group of employees; 16.1621 Unorganized,, 16*1622 Union. . " ' 16.2 To vjiicm -as application directed. 16.21 Washington. 16.22 Field offices. 16.23 Code Authorities. 16.24 Other governmental agencies. 16.3 Consideration of application. 16.31 &r deputy 16.32 Advisory Boards. 13.33 Research and Planning Division 16.34 Legal Division. 16.35 Administration r.;3mbers and. Code Authority. 16.36 Review Division • 16.37 Extent of cons\dera t ion by boards, etc., and limitations thereon. 16. 33 Division administrators, 16.39 Higher officials and President. 16.31_ Extent of consideration of briefs pro and con. 16,32 Field offices - N.R.A. ■ • 16.4 Due process requirement. 16.41 Amplications submitted tohearin . 16.411 Type, form and extent. of notice. 16.412 Place of hearing. 16.413 Record of hearing. 16.42 Applications submitted to an opportunity to o- heard, 16.421 Type, form and extent of notice. 16.43 Application receiving no public consideration. 16.44 Discussion of treatment of applications with regard to due process requirements. 16.5 Final action on application. 16.51 Form. 16.52 Notice. 16.6 Time of submissioni of application. 16.61 Before effective date of Code. 16.62 Code administration. 16.63 During ccimlipnce complaint, 16.64 During litigation. 9844 -113- 16.7 Time of handling applications. 16.71 Amplications received in field. 16.711 Geographical considerations. 16.712 Delays caused, by reference to Washington. 16.713 Typical cases. 16.72 Aoplicaticns received by or referred to Washington. 16.721 Routing of applications. 16.722 Necessity of reference to boards. 15.723 Causes of delay. 16.724 Effects of delay on 15.7241 Code structure. 16.7242 Compliance. 16.7243 Enforcement. Power of subsequent modification or termination of exemption. 17.1 N.R.A. initiation. 17.2 Application by industry. 1^,2 Application by labor. 17.4 Application by Code Authorities. 17.5 Application 'oy other parties. 17.6 Bases of application. 17.7 Effects of modification or termination. Substantive problems. 13.1 Should N.R.A. permit Code Authorities to grant exemptions and exceptions. 13.2 Should N.R.A. permit field offices to grant exemptions. 13.21 Temporary. 13.22 Emergency. 13.23 Permanent. 13.24 If review should be had by Washington. 13.3 What requirements of due process should be considered by N.R.A. 13.31 Notice. 13.32 With or without hearing. 18.4 Should applications for exemptions and exceptions be referred to: 13.41 Code Authorities. 13.42 Other governmental agencies. 13.43 Administration members. 13.5 General legal effect of amendments, stays and interpretations upon exemptions and exceptions. 13.6 Should the exemption or exception ruling be a precedent for all parties similarly situated. 13.7 General legal aspects of 13.71 Retroactive exemptions. 13.72 Temporary exemptions. 13.73 Conditional exemptions. Effect of exemptions. 19.1 Industry 19.2 Labor. 19.3 General code structure. 19.4 Initiation of amendments - stays. 19.5 Oppression of small enter-orises. 19.6 Monopoly. 19.7 Development of policy. Q;" 344 -114- 20. Discussion of procedure and constructive suggestions relating thereto. 21. Evaluations. 22. Conclusions. 23 1 Bibliography, -115- EART FOUR: CODI] AI^IDM3LITS 3y D. L. Boland 1844 -116-1 IITTRCDUCTICJ Under the authority of Executive Order Ho. 7075, June 15, 1935, the Organization Studies Secti ) f the Division oview has designated the subject - A .its - for study and report. subject a ^lies t :, th se phases of the activities as a governmental agency in its treatment of amendments to c ides. The problems, questions, and attendant matters relative to tho sxibject are presented in this r rt. The content :: the report is primarily concerned with the "bases of power, delegati-ns such power, the necessities f sue".: p >wer an . f the xtent Df the delegation thereof. The report als :onsiders the types f code provisions amended, the industries affected by cue.', amendments, and the effects of such amendments. Aii analysis af the t; f c visi 3d and new cede provisions inserted in codes b; . f amendment is set forth. Some treatment of the benefits and detriin nts f amendments to the particular industries concerned is included in the report - such treat- ment being limited to amendments of labor provisions. As a basis for this report, the author has compiled a list of all amendments approved from J u ne 16, 1033 to hoy 2, 1935, inclusive, (approximately eight hundred). list also sets forth the nature of the amendments as tc the type f cove provision affected. IIo attempt has been made to explore the causes for such amendra nts and the considerations had by iOA ;:>ri ■ t approval. Time, f r tho purposes of this report, did n I emit, although some an nts which resulted from applications of policy have been noted. The sources of this report ana the findings set forth therein rre the filer and records of the National Recovery Administrati i!o outside sources of information have ~ooc\ investigate,", and no conferences or conversations have been had with any >ther governmental agencies or any private individuals. The records of code authorities and trade associations have net b xamined, as the intention of this report is t-; present in preliminary f m A sou cos some answer to the questions:- (l) Was the power t amend codes properly conferred upon 1TRA7 (2) vThat did IRA do in t.. . rcice of this power? (3) What should any furtv.-- mi ntal agency, ying the principles of ITRA, be empowered to do with resocct to amendments of codes? 9844 -] 17- ^h£^.JL .asps op pc Or. June lb, 1533> the President signed the rational Industrial Re- covery Act. ( r;: ) Title I thereof related to industrial recovery and aiong other -things Drovides for the f emulation of pro: miration of codes of fair co petition. Section 3 (?) of hie Act states: "Upon the application to the President o," one or nore trade or industrial associations or "roups, the Presi- dent ir- approve a code or codes of fair competition for the trac"e or industry or subdivision thereof, represented "by the a licant or applicants, i:" the President finds (l) that such associations or groups impose no . inequi table restrictions on ad.iission to membership therein and are truly representative of such trades or industries or sub- ■ -divisions thereof, and (") that such code or codes are not designed to promote lonopolies or to eliminate or op- press mall enterorises and "'ill net operate to discri- minate against the', and "'ill tend to effectuate the policy o"° this title: Provided, Jliat such code or codes shall not permit monopolies or monopolistic practices: '•Provided further, That chore such code or codes .affect the r er""ices arc' '.;clfare of persons engaged in other steps of the ccono ic process, nothin p in this section shall deprive such persons of the ri ;ht to be heard prior to approval ^r' the Fresident of such code or codes. The President iay, as 8 condition of his approval of any such code, impose such conditions (including requirements for the lahin of reports and the heeping of recounts) for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees, and others, and in. furtherance of the public interest, and nay provide such exceptions to anc exemptions fro:; the provisions of such cote, as the President in his discre- tion dee. is necessary to effectuate the policy herein declared. » Section 3 (d) of the Act states: "Upon his orn notion, or if complaint is nade to the President that abuses inimical to the public interest and contrary to the policy herein declared are prevalent in any trade or in- dustry or subdivision thereof, and if no code of fair compe- tition bherefor her- theretofore been approved bp r the President, the President, after such public notice and hearing as he shall specify, nay prescribe anc 1 approve a code of fair con- petition for such trade or industry or subdivision thereof, mhich shall have the sa le effect as a code of Pair competi- tion approved by the President under subsection (a) of this section. " (*) Public hesolution ho. 37, H.Zt. 3753, 73?d Congress, US Stats. 1S5i hereinafter celled the "Act." - 118 - Section 4(a) of the Act states: "The President is authorized to enter into agreements with, and to approve voluntary agreements "betv/een and among, persons engaged in a trade or industry, labor organizations, and trade or industrial organizations, associations, or groups, relating to any :rade or industry, if in his judgment such agreements will aid in effectuat- ing the policy of this title with respect to transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, and will be consistent Lth the requirements of clause (?,) of subsection (a) of section 3 for a code of fair competition." Section 7(b) of the Act states: "The President shall, so far as practicable, afford every opportunity to employers and employees in any trade or industry or subdivision thereof with respect to which the conditions referred to in clauses (l) and (2) of subsection (a) prevail, to establish oy mutual agree- ment, the standards as to the maximum hours of labor, minimum rates of pay, and such other conditions of employment ar; may be necessary in such trade or industry or subdivision thereof to effectuate the policy of this title; and the standards estaolished in such agree- ments, when approved by the President, shall have the same effect as a code of fair competition, approved, by the President under sub- section (a) of section 3." Section 7(c) of the Act states: "Where no such mutual agreement has been approved hy the President he may investigate the labor practices, policies, wagesi hours of labor, and conditions of employment in such trade or industry or subdivision thereof; and upon the basis of such investigations, and after such hearings as the President finds advisable, he is authorized to prescribe a limited code of fair competition fixing such maximum hours of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of em- ployment in the trade or industry or subdivision thereof investigated as he finds to be necessary to effectuate the policy of this title, which shall have the same effect as a code of fair competition approved by the President under subsection (a) of section 3. The President may differentiate according to experience and skill of the employees affected and according to the locality of employment; but no attempt shall be made to introduce any classification according to the nature of the work involved v/hich might tend to set a maximum as well as a minimum wage." The above quoted sections all refer to various types of codes or agreements which would serve as bases for amendments thereof, but it is to be noted that in none of the quoted sections of the Act is found any reference or specific mention of the term "amendment" or the power to amend. 9844 -119- Examination o^ Sections 10 (a) and 10 (b), folio- ;s: ,'incii proviae as "Section 10 (a) - The President is authorized to precri"be such rules and regulations as may be necessaiT to carry out t-he purposes or? this title, anc fees for licenses and for filin- 1 "' codes o: fair competition and agreements, and any violation of an;- such rule or regulation shall be punish- able by fine of not to exceed $500, or imprisonment for not to exceed si:; months, or both. "Section 10 (o) - The President may from time to tine cancel or modify any order, approval, license, rule, or regulation issued under this title; and each agreement , code of fair competition, or license approved, prescribed, or issued un- der this title shall contain an express provision to that effect, " lil:e™ise shous no specific mention of such tern or pover. This lack of legislative declaration requires a construction of the Act upon mhich to predicate the poner to emend codes. A usual method of statutory construction is:— "to have recourse to the legislative history of the. Act and Statements by those in charge of it during its consideration by the Congress." U. S. v. Gr eat North ern Itailtray Co., 287 U.S. •iw: See also "U.S . v. Miss ouri Pacif ic fail/ 27C U.S. 2oS, 27S ;o. The legislative history of the HIPA reveals that the sponsorship thereof intended to give the President broad movers. An examination of the record of the hearings before the House anc Senate on the Act, of the reports of the Senate Committee on finance and the House Committee on Tier s and ileans enC. of the Conference deport discloses some helpful information. The language usee, by Senator "Jagner of l\e" : York, mhen aderessing the Sanate on June 7j 1S33» lends some she. to construction of the Act. The Senator said:- "Put if any trade or industry cannot or "'ill not cooperate in the formulation 0^ a voluntary- code, the Fresicent is authorized, after proper investigations and hearings, to prescribe a code in- cluding all the sa.lm.tary and protective features of the voluntary codes. Or if any trade or industry voluntarily arrives at some of the requirements of a cofe and neglects others, the President may in a mroocr manner prescribe these others and include all in a general code." (*) f (*) 77 Cong. rec. Ho. 70, p. r :?-5& r 9844 ■A t at th " y code feal . In these respects ho also clearly :e of codes fomed under Section 3 ( a ) on application of the industry. Section 3 (a) contains provi i >ns 'fhich "ae an rotective," , S nator f 8 use ■ ' ! i ribe" ?inds no re- for . bio 3 (■' • - in Sections 3 (0 r: --~ i (°)» -ould therefore i • -'hen Senator 7af;ner rrords ted above, r?as referrin;; to Section 3 (a) \7hen spealrinrj °^ volunta r codes and to Section 3 (d),vhen 'escribed codei . Ic.tive com lent re Tran" Section 10 (b) gives nore light >n the o-'cr of rnenduent! (a) "esident had porrer to modify or cancel ar; r ret: on taken by '. . : "Section ( b) (*) authorized th nt to lodify or cancel any action taken b; ider the title." (Senator ".,'■ ■, H.H, 5065, pa&e ;;:.) (b) The Presii i1 ider Section 10 (b) had the po "er to 10 ult; r agreements: "If codes, a reenents, or licences orove faulty, tin '"or is reservec to the Pre- sident vn .er Section f (0) to cancel or riodi ny order, approval, license, rul e or - Lat ion i s sued unde r t hi s title. " (1. h. "\. (Report 0" the House Comittee on ' '■ s ; id ileans.) (~;--r 3.) "Section \ (a.) ' rovides etofore started, for the cancellation or Modifica- tion of ray order, roval, li'cen , rule, or ro # ti(**) (c) The Presidential oovers conferred vere largely 1 nrestricted i - rgencies: "The question J -as raisec a f 0- • linutes ago by hr, Le "is — that is, abo\ Ls delegation of rit" and about the ■ » i strf l o: — is so irjportant that I ronderee if ou thought t the bill itself, in it , coverr t l] or '-hetlier an; rther restrictions shqulc be offeree", as J . j the istrator, or r he • -ould be sug';es1 el( ." (::•-. Frear, Ibid.lll.) (*) Section 5 (b) later became Sectior 10 (b) (**) Sections 3 (a) anc 3 (b) later eca:ie Sections 10(a) and 10 (b). - -121- "Of coursi I can troll understand /our concern, Congress- man; but I think that the poorer as unrest rid tec 1 .' n.cy '; ~s, "because thin, (Senator '.J;x ;tt. Ibid. Ill) •'as purposely clone as possible durin-": ;o mai:e ;hese em- cur.nge fron dr." to d; y. " (&) A reference tc th< sc r us to disclose 1 nance Committee h< rather o ) in ted oue r i r. ";p in the 3 1- rva. t. e ion on the "over of the President to amend codes and indicated that it uas the intention to permit the President to ahend codes -here the public interest nas he in;;. injured by the continuance . of the particular code.' "Senator La Follete! Senator "Tanner, did you and "our associates consider the advisability of . conferring porre'r upon the President to amend > r revoke _ these code's of fair competition in cases ^herc it \7as demonstrable that the public interest ■•'as being injured by their continuance? "Senator Wagner! modify, cancel 1 , or do anytb. (Hearings before the Committee States Senate, 73 r d Congress 1 i:. 2. 5755;. ?o, 21.) hat is right in the act. He m 11 i ii nee, United Session, S. I.712 and An analysis of the abovenentioned references discloses that one of the authors of this Act, -.hile not giving a. positive o.nstr.er, replied" in a vein- to suggest that under Section 10 (b), the president does have mover to amend codes vhen they are detrlnental to the public interest. There are other statements in the legislative history -jhich shorn, that the President has po*.7er to correct faulty codes and, likewise, a statement referring to Section 10 (b) that an- action could he taken. It may he ar.pteJ. Section 3 ( c >) '" "The President that the 'cover'", conferred n tiie rresicleni his ap; roval of any such code, impose such conditions (including reouirements for the making of reports and the keeping 0" accounts) for the protection 01 consumers, competitors, employees, and others, and in furtherance of the. public interest, anc" may ■ provide such, exceptions to and exemptions from 1 the provi- sions of such core, as the President in his discretion deems necessar - to effectuate' the olicy herein declared," is sufficient to -ivc r Jo^-cr- of amendment. The repetition of the vord "may" before the w ord "provide" .'chevs- an intention that no time condition should attach to or limit the mover to amend codes. Likewise, there is no statement that 'the i'voSed ^revisions must he ratified the industry, although the original application for a. code must he voluntarily sub- mitted. It vould soon that the use of the -ore" "impose" indicates that the eo'-er to amend, as conferred, by Section 3 ( a ) > VTas n ot tied to the voluntary 1 eatu res of the first mart of that Sect .on. 5 skU -122- Section 10(b) is the safest part of the Act ur>on v/hich to base the power of amendment (*). It may be reasoned that the powers contained in Section 10(a) with respect to the prescription of roles and regulations may be invoked for use as a po^er of amendment. The reliance upon this section should be predicated uietitors, consumers, em- ployees and others end in furtherance of the public in- terest . . . as the President in his discretion deems necessary to effectuate the policy herein declared." These limitations show that the power of the President to amend codes, with two exceptions, was subject enly to the requirement that the action effectuate the policies of the Act, which were stated in Section 1 of the Act. It would seem that a limitation of a mandatory nature upon this modi- fying power of the president results from the provisions of Section 7(a) of the Act, which, among other things, provides - "Every code of fair competition, agreement, and license approved, prescribed, or issued under this Title shall contain the following conditions ..." This language would appear to deny the right of the President. to substant- ially modify any code provisions required to be incorporated by Section 7(a). A., similar denial appears to have been imposed by Section 10(b) in- sofar as amendments of code provisions incorporate the substance of Section 10(b). 9844 -125- CIIAPTER II DEFIhlTIOII A1ID SCOPE 0? THE TEBii AiiEKDhEhT An amendment , in the ordinary application of the tern is - "An alteration or change for the "better; correction of a fault or of faults; reformation of life by quitting vices. "In public "bodies; Any alteration made or proposed to "be made in a "bill or motion "by adding, changing, sub- . .- stituting or omitting. "Lav;; Correction of en error in a writ or process." (*) The legal definition of the term "amendment" is as follows :- "Amendment in Legislation - An alteration or change of something proposed in a "bill or established as law. Thus the Senate of the United States may amend money-bills passed by the House of Representatives, but cannot originate such bills. The Constitution of the United .States contains a provision for its amendment. (U. S. Constitution, Article 5) "In practice - The correction, by allowance of the court of an error committed -in the progress of a cause-.. "Amendments at common law, independently of any statutory provision on the subject, are in all cases in the dis- cretion of the court, for the furtherance of justice. Under statutes in modern practice, they are very liberally allowed in all formal and most substantial matters, either without cost to the party amending, or upon such terms as the court thinks proper to order. (See Jeofaille) "An amendment, where there is something to amend by, may be made in a criminal .as in a civil case. 12- Ad. & E. 217; Com , v. Parker , 2 Pick. (Mass.) 550." (**) ho mention of the term "amendment " or "amend" is found 'in the Act, but Section 10(b) uses the term "modify". The ordinary meaning of this term is to alter or qualify. The word is synonymous with the term "amend" (**# ) , (*) - TJebster's her/ International Dictionary of the English Languag , Quarto Edition of the llerriam Series, 1934; p.. 69. (**) Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Ravle's Third Revision, Vol. 1, p. 187 (***) Roget's Thesaurus of English Uords and Phrases - I.iawson, Inter- national Edition. )844 - 16- The Administration recognized its >ower to amend code provisions, but "because of its imnediati s _ i concern over the codification of industry, no attempt was ma fine the term "amendment M (*)• The use of the term "modification" finds its origin for JLIBA use in Section 10(b), such use referring to the power of amendment (**). The terms "modification" and "amendment" aere used interchangeably "by 1IBA until May 5, 1934, at which time General Johnson, Administrator for In- dustrial Recovery, by Administrative Order 5-27, prescribed - ".. rules and regulations concerning amendments to, ;iodif iccitions .. of, .. approved codes .." The order defined the tern "modification" as follovirs:- "The term 'modification' shall include 'amendments' and all rulings whereby a code is amended by adding a provision thereto or ch anting or omitting any pro- vision thereof". The effect of this Administrative definition placed both the terra "modi- fication" and "amendment" on the same basis and incorporated the unof- ficial accepted meaning, at that time, of both terms; viz., changing of addition to, or omission of code provisions (***). This administrative definition continued, but after the period of codification of industry drew to a close and the requirements of code administration became more apparent, the popular use of the term "modification" gradually gave way to the use of the term "amendment" and, on or about September 1, 1034, (the date of the issuance of the Office Manual) administrative recogni- tion of this change in the reference to the power of amendment was me.de. Part II, Paragraph 5000 of such Office ijanual defines the term "amend- ment" as follows:- "l Amendment T, as applied to f2A codes, means any addition, deletion, or other change in any language thereof". Paragraph 5010 of such part of the Of- ice Manual states:- "To preserve uniformity of usage, the terms 'modi- fication', 'supplement' , 'revision', 'addition' and 'adjustment' will not be used to describe 'cunendments' ". (*) It is to be noted that the term "amended" is used in the order of approval of the code for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepoiri Industry, Code Ho, 2, July 26, 1935; Paragraph: 12 of the order of approval- of: the Cotton Textile Industry Code.IIo. 1, July 9, 1933 states "this approval is limited to the four months period with the right to as!: for modification at any time . . .". (**) See Office Order Ho. 44 - Hoyember 21, 1933, hSA files. (***) See also hKA Office Order Ho. 75 - March 26, 1934. 9844 -127- This announce lent effected a uniformity" of expression with respect to the term » amendment " i no. superseded - '.'all previous Office Orders and Memo- randa, including Administrative Orders and Executive Orders of general application to ISA"- (*) Examination of the definition set forth in Administrative Order X-27 and the Office Manual shows a similarity in the scope of the term ••amendment" in that it refers to additions, deletions and changes of a code "provision" (as stated in Administrative Order X-27) or code "lang- uage" (as stated in the Office Manual.) ITo other official administrative definitions of the term. have "been found and for purposes of this report the definition of the term "amend- ment" as set forth in the Office Manual, together with the explanation with respect to the terms "modification", "supplement", "revision", "addition" and "adjustment" will apply. (*) This Office Manual was ordered by the direction of the Admin- istrator and the order of issuance thereof was signed by G-. A. Lynch, the Administrative Officer. 9844 -128- CHAPIZR III DELEGAIIOiJ 0? POUER TO APPROVE OH DISAPPROVE AHEIIDi-Eh'TS The terns of the Act ar-tnorized the Preside.it to establish such agencies, to accept the services of and to utiliie Federal officers and employees, to prescribe their authorities, to delegate any of his func- tions e:id powers under the Title of the Act and to fix the compensation of such officers, agents end employees. It also authorized the appoint- ment of officers and employees (*). In accordance v/ith this authority, the President, on June 16, 1933, appointed Hugh S. Johnson as Adminis- trator for Industrial Recover,;- under Title I of the Act and further appointed a Special Industrial Recovery Board, the membership of which was the Secretary of Conmer ce , as Chairman, the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretar2 r of Agriculture, the Secretary of Labor, the Director of the Budget, the Administrator for Industrial Recovery 'and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. The order of appointment authorized General Johnson to appoint the necessary per- sonnel for the period of thirty (30) days and to conduct the work auth- orized under Title I of the Act (**). One month later, the president continued the appointment of Hugh S. Johnson as Administrator for In- dustrial Recover;'' and authorized him, subject to the general approval of the Special Industrial Recovery Board, to exercise the functions invested in the President under Title I of the Act, except the approval of codes, making of agreements, issuance of licenses or exercise of the power conferred by Sections 3(e), 6(c), 8(b), .9 and. .10, The., limitations of this order reserved the power of amendment to the president. Subsequent delegations of power of amendment were made relating to various phases of ISA codes and for purposes of orderly treatment they will be separ- ately set forth (***). PRISIDSIIT'S REEhPLOYlXET AGREEi.lS::! The difficulties of immediate codification of industry resulted in the initiation of the President's Reemployment Agreement, which was a general offer -to employers to cooperate with the President in the pur- poses of the Act (****). (*) Sections 2(a) end 2(h). (**) See Executive Order 6173 - June 15, 1933, HRA files. (***) it should be noted that the powers and the membership of the Special Industrial Recovery Board were transferred to the national •rgency Council, See Executive Order ITo. 6513, LIRA files. (****) See national Recovery Administration Bulletins No. 1, 3 and 4 - 1933. 9344 -129* The PRA acJres no mention of amendments or modifications thereof hut Para^- graph 14 permits applications ior stays pending investigation of individual cases resulting in hardship. The administration of the PEA and the appli- cations received under Paragraph 14 showed need for certain amendments of particular provisions of the PEA with respect to certain employers or groups subject thereto. Accordingly, on Eovember 22, 193", the President authorized the Administrator for Industrial Recovery - "to made modifications of .. said agreements, or any similar agreements hereafter entered into or approved "by me "by Executive Order, as he may, after investiga- tion, find necessary in particular instances in order to avoid undue hardship ". (*) This grant of authority to amend agreements related only to the PEA and the Executive Order expressly excepted the power of amendment of codes of fair competition. One phase of P?A which in some ways constituted amendments thereof, should be mentioned at this point. Paragraph 13 provides: - "This agreement shall cease upon approval "by the presi- dent of a, code to which the undersigned is subject ; or, if the ERA so elects, upon submission of a code to which the undersigned is subject, and substitution of any of its provisions for any of the terms of this agreement." This section caused a number of substituted "w age and hour provisions of the PRA, which were issued by permission of the ERA, the effect of which was to substitute certain provisions of proposed codes of a number of trades and industries for certain provisions of the PRA. The actual result of these substitutions was amendments of the PRA insofar as it affected and applied to various members of industries and trao.es who had submitted proposed codes and also obtained substituted provisions. The Administrative detail re- lative to the issuance of these substituted provisions was delegated to the PRA Policy Board, although prior to that time petitions for substitu- tions had been handled by the particular deputy administrator (*.*). ITo specific delegation of this power was made oy the president, although the terms of Paragraph 13 of the PRA indicate the delegation of power to the ERA to determine whether or not a substitution should be made. These sub- stituted provisions were issued on October 14, 1S33 by the Administrator with the approval of the chairman of the Special Industrial Recovery Board. (***) These acts of amendment of the PRA, even if not specifically auth- orized by the president, were subsequently ratified "oy him (****). (*) Executive Order Eo. G443, Eovember 22, 1S33, ERA files. _ (**) See Office Order do. 18, August 7, 1S33, ERA files. (***) See national Recovery Administration Bulletin Eo. S. (****) See Executive Order Eo. 6515, December IS, 1S33, ERA files. 5844 - 130- Th e Administrator retained the power to amend the PR.', and the in- vestigation has disclosed no other specific administrative delegations of such power or any other enl« ts thereon by presidential order. G0DI5 l ::pir s::giig:: r ;(a) As stated above, the President retained the power of amendnent of codes at the tine of his original delegations of power to the Administrate however, specific delegation of the power of amendnent was made to the Ac ministrator for Industrial Recovery on December 30, 1933 (*), This auth- I ority was enlarged upon "by the terms of Executive Order ho. 6590-A, February 8, 1934, in which the President authorized the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to prescribe rules and regulations governing amendmen^M to or modifications of codes of fair competition. A specific delegation of power relating to codes is found in Executii Order ".To. 675u-A, June 28, 1934, in which the President offered to enter into an agreement with members of certain service trades to be specified by the Administrator upon certain conditions. The order authorized the Administrator to supplement the provisions of the Executive Order by such rules and. regulations and amendments, as the Administrator in his opinion determined would effectuate the purposes of the Order and the Act. JOINT AAA Aid) ERA CODES The purposes of the iTIRA were industrial recovery and reemployment of labor engaged therein. The Agricultural Adjustment Administration was concerned with the rehabilitation of agriculture and under the terms of th( Agricultural Adjustment Act (**), the Secretary of Agriculture was appoint- ed cs Administrator of that Act. Some industries and trades are closely allied T :ith agriculture and on June 26, 1S33, the President delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture all of the functions and powers, With certain limitations, conferred by Title I of the Act with respect to industries and trades en -erticularly in the handling of milk and its oroducts and all foods and foodstuffs. The delegation was subject to the reservation of the power in the President to approve or disapprove provisions of any such code (***). Difficulties of this joint administration required some segregation of the power and on January 3, 1934, the President transferred the powers theretofore delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture to the Administrator for Industrial Re- covery insofar as the exercise of these por-ers affected certain industries ich -'ere stated in the order and which /ere to be the subject of sub- sequent agreement between the Secretary of Agriculture and the Administrate: for Industrial Recovery. Enlargement of these powers theretofore delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Administrator for Industrial Re- (*) See Executive Order No. G543-A, December 30, ID "3, IRA files. (**) Public Resolution No. 10, 73d Congress. (***) See Executive Order ho. 6182, June 26, 1933; Executive Order No. 6207, July 21, 1933 reaffirmed this delegation hRA files. .644 -131- covery was ir.dc by the president in Executive Order No. 67G4, June 2S, 1934, "by which the approval of any anendnent or modification of any pro- vision or provisions of any code of fair competition was to "be exercised by the particular officer with respect to those code provisions which such particular officer was authorized to administer. Ho record of any further Presidential delegations of authority with respect to AAA-EEA codes has been found. CESSATION OP EATIOEAL IEDUSTRIAL RECOVERY BOARD A change in the form of the Administrative Agency was made by the President when he created the national Industrial Recovery Board, sub- sequent to the resignation of General Johnson as Administrator for In- dustrial Recovery (*). The provisions of this Executive Order authorized the Board to exercise all of the powers theretofore conferred by Executive Orders upon the Administrator for Industrial Recovery. This transfer of power necessarily carried the power of amendment, the record of delega- tion of which is set forth above. DELEGATION OP PQT7ER TO LESSER OEEICIALS The power of approval of amendments of codes was exercised by the President until the time of delegation set forth in Executive Order ho. 6543-A. This power was then exercised by the Administrator as affirmed by Paragraph III, Section 3 of Administrative Order No. X-27, May 5, 1934. During the early part of 1934 the number of amendments submitted to ERA began to increase and further delegation of the power to amend seemed nec- essary, but the power of final ruling on these matters was retained by the Administrator (**). On April 9, 1934, the Administrator created the office of Administrative Officer end designated him to exercise the duties which would not require the Administrator's personal attention, including final approval in the name of the Administrator of - ".. codes and other documents requiring the Administrator's action . . " (***) The National Industrial Recovery Board, after its organization, authorized the Administrative Officer, subject to its general direction, to execute papers and documents and to exercise the power of issuance of orders of approval, or rules and regulations (****). TERRITORIAL ADEIEISTRATORS The formulation, promulgation and administration of codes in the territories of the United States presented, specific problems as to the method of exercise of the power of amendment, ho delegation of this (*) Executive Order Ho. 6859, September 27, 1934, ERA files. (**) See Office Order ho. 75, ERA files. (***) Office Order ho. 83, ERA files. (****) See Administrative Order X-93, September 28, 1934 and Administrative Order ho. X-107, November 1, 1934, ERA files. S844 -132- porer was iade to Territorial Administrators, although certain rules and regulations were set up whereby se territorial administrators were required to do certain acts, mostly procedural, trior to the actual approval of an amendment of a territorial code (*). RIC-IChAL Ox I 1 1 CIS During the latter part of the -pear 1934, the Administration in- stituted a decentralization of the administrative power with an at- tendant delegation of various phases of the authority conferred by the Act. Regional offices were established under the direction of a Regional Director and some delegation to these Regional Directors of the power to amend codes was contemplated, out never actually was made (**). LII..ITATIG1TS UPQIT LXEhCISZ OF POhlT: TO AhlhD Through the vehicle of codes, the Admini strati on frou time to tiue delegated various powers to code authorities; e.g., collection of re- ports, investigation of complaints, etc. ho example of unqualified de- legation to code authorities of the power to amend has been found, but various types of limitations upon the e::ercise of the power by ERA "ere set forth in certain codes. Some code provisions required the prior ap- proval of an amendment by a majority or fixed percentrge of an industry or trade; other codes required the approval of the proposed araendnent by the code authority (***). Other types of limitations were included in the codes; e.g., the presentation of the codes was not an ascent to any future amendments. The extent of the investigation in connection with these types of code provisions has been very limited, although questions do arise as to the propriety of such delegation or limitation upon the exercise of governmental power* and also the legal question of the effect of such a limitation upon the broad power set forth in the Act. (*) See Administrative Order 'ho. £-60, July 2, 1934; Office Order ho. 104, July 14, 1934, NBA files. (**) See hRA Compliance Division Field Letter No. 190, hRA files. (***) See the Iron end Steel Code ho. 11, Article XII, Section 1, Codes of Fair Comoetition. 9844 -133- CEAFTNR IV hZTHODS OP EXZKCISE 0? PONNB OR AIIEiTLIENT The power of amendment is evidenced in several -ways - (1) general Executive or Administrative Order, (2) order of ap ;roval of specific amendment, (3) conditional order of approval. (Strictly speaking this was not "amendment" since the code was only approved in consideration of the modification.) Prom time to time, legal and policy requirements necessitated the issuance of an Executive or Administrative Order whereby all codes ap- proved or to he approved were amended to conform to the provisions and requirements of the particular Executive Order (*). Likewise, Executive and Administrative Orderswere issued, which, although in the form of an administrative interpretation, may in some cases have had the effect of a general amendment (**). The usual form of these orders, which were in the nature of interpretations, is as follows: • ".. no provision of any Code of Pair Competition, agree- ment, or license, which has heretofore been or may here- after he approved, prescribed or is rued pursuant to said Title of said Act shall he so construed or applied as to violate the following roles end regulations ..." (***) iTo further consideration of the method of general amendment has been made for the purposes of this report because this method of administrative action is moreoof an exercise of powers of interpretation, and as such, will be treated in the stud" on interpretations. (*) Executive Order No. 6464, November 27, 1S33, prescribed rules and regulations which had the effect of amendments of any in- consistent provisions relating to commercial bribery provisions. Executive Order ITo. 5479, December 7, 1933, providing for the submission of statistical information by persons subject to codes amended every code of fair competition theretofore approved and imposed a condition in the order of approval of a code thereafter approved. See Administrative Order Ho. X— 51, June 15, 1934 for an example of an Administrative Order of general amendment, NBA files. (**) Executive Order No* 6b06-A, February 17, 1934; Executive Order No. 6606-P, February 17, 1934; Executive Order No. 6711-A, May 15, 1S34, NBA files. (***) Executive Order No. 6G06-P, supra.. -844 -134- An order of approval of a specific amendment was the most common method of e::ercise of this administrative power. Usually an amendment was proposed by on industry group and after aring and consideration "by N3A, it was approved by £_n A&nlnistrative Order relating to the particular amendment (*). A method of modification (erroneously called amendment) of proposed codes used frequently Vj 13A was the conditional order of .ap- proval. This form of administrative action is evidences in the order of approval of a code. Such order of approval sets forth the adoption and approval of the code, hut conditions approval upon the inclusion of a new section in the code not originally submitted by the sponsors thereof, or a modification of certain language of the provision contained in the code as submitted or the elimination of a particular provision (**). (*) See Code ho. 319, Amendment ho. 1; Code ho. 84, Amencment ho. 1; Code "o. 131, Amendment ITo. 1. (**) See order of approval of the 3oot and Shoe hanufacturing Industry Code, ho. 4h, October 3, 1933 for an example of an elimination of a portion of the Code; See order of approval of the Umbrella hanufacturing Code ho. 51, October 9, 1933, for an example of an addition of a provision; See order of approval of the Artifical Limb manufacturing Industry Code ho. 514, August 23, 1934, for example of a change in the provisions of c code. -135- CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF ALiElIDr.EMTS OP CODE S - fcjp CODE PROVISIONS APISCT2D TfP'i Investigation of "the records 'relative to amendments has resulted in a compilation of all of the amendments approved from June 16, 1933 to Llay 2, 1935. The "bulk of the compilation refers to specific amend- ments of particular codes and an attempt has "been made to determine what amendments were approved, what types of code provisions were amended, v/hat types of code provisions were added to or deletec. from codes. Some ef- fort has "been made to study the effects of such amendments upon the code structure and v/hat purposes v/ere sought or accomplished "oy particular amendments. The author was able to examine only labor and code authority amendments in the last mentioned phase of the study. The writer has had no opportunity to analyze the purposes end effects of amendments of trade practice provisions. AMENDi.ENTS AFFECT IIIS APPLICATION OP THE CODS One of the first problems co'.ifronting NRA in the codification 'Of industry was the- correct definition of industry and the elimination of the troublesome matters of multiple coverage, overlapping industry de- finition, classification and other questions relative to the jurisdiction of the code insofar as the industry products or activities thereto v/ere concerned. One method of solution was amendment of the definition of -the particular industry or trade, or member thereof, In sbne-cases, the scope of the code was enlarged and in others it was limited. The investigation disclosed that sixty-seven (67) 'codes had been amended, either as to the definition of the -industry or trade, or definition of the member of the industry or trade, -or products of the industry or' trade* The following tabulation lists the names of the'various codes so amended and the type of amend ients ITAiiS OP INDUSTRY ai.end:.:lnt NUMBER PROVISION AMENDED 1. 2. 1-7 o» 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Advertising Specialty 65-1' Air Transport 111-3 Baking : ■ 445-*2 Ban].: Instrument i.Ifg. ' 273 Beauty da Barber ■ Shop Mechanical- Equipment " 236-2 Bedding Mfg. ■ ' : . ' 219-2 Beverage Dispensing Equip. ' 534-3 Boiler Mfg. ' 53-1 Builder's Supplies 37-2 Candle Mfg. 302-1 Canning & jacking Machinery 75-1 Canvas Stitched Belt " 422-1 Cast Iron Soil Pipe 13-3 Chinaware d Porcelain Mfg. ' 126-3 Commercial Refrigerator ' 181-1 Definition of Industry Hawaii included in definition Definition of chain store baker Change in definition Definition of Industry Definition Definition Definition Definition Definitions Definition Definition Definition " ' Definition . '.' Definition 5844 •136- 16. Concrete Masonry 17. Construction Machinery 18. Cork 19. Cotton Garment 20. Cotton Textile SI, Dress Mfg. 22.' Earthenware Mfg. 23. Farm Equipment 24. Fuller's Earth Producing & Marketing 25. Funeral Supply 26. Fur Dealing Trade 27. Furniture & Floor Wax & Polish 28. Hosiery 29. Industrial Supplies 6c Dis- tributors Trade 30. Knitted Outerwear 31. Knitting, Braiding 32. Legitimate Theater 33. Lime Industry 34. Luggage & Fancy Leather G-oods 35. Lumber & Timber Products 36. Metallic Wall Structure 37. Millinery 38. Millinery & Dress Trimming Braid & Textile 39. Musical Merchandise 40. Heedlework Ind. Puerto Rico 41. Nonferrous Hot tfater Tank Mfg. 42. Novelty Curtain, Draperies, etc. 43. Oxy- Acetylene 44. Packaging Machinery 45. Paint, Varnish & Lacquer 46. Plumbing Fixtures 47. Print Roller & Print Block 48. Prison Equipment 49. Railway Car Building 50. Rayon & Synthetic Yarn Producing 51. Retail Trade 52. River & Harbor Improvement 53. Road Machinery 54. Salt Producing 55. Shipbuilding 133-2 Definition 223-1 Definition rjj-i Definition 118-1 Definition 118-4 Addition to definition 118-8 Definition (cotton wash dre 1-1 Definitions 1-2 Definitions • 64-8 Definition 322-2 Definition 39-2 Definition 356-1 Definition 90-3 Definitions 381-2 Definition 224-1 Definition 16-3 Definition 61-3 New definit Ion 164-2 Definition 32-1 Definition 8-1 Definition 31-2 Definitions (New Code) 42-1 Definition 9-8 Definition 9-13 Definition 9-19 Definition 9-32 Definition 84-A-l Definition 151-2 Definition 69-2 Definition 209-1 Additions t industry o definitions of 474-2 Definition (exports) 84-N-l Change in di sfinition of industry - 79-1 Definition - 155-1 Definitions - 72-2 Definition - 71-1 Definition 204-3 Definition 368-2 Definition •■ 84-M1-1 New definit ion 285-1 Definition 56« Shoe & Leather Finish 9844 • 14-1 Definitions - 60-3 Definition 434-1 Definition 68-1 Definition 20-2 . Definition 2-2 Changing definition to exclude boatbuilding 184-1 Definition -137- 57. Shovel, Dragline .& Crane 58. Soap & Glycerine .Mfg. . . 59. Steel Tubular & Firebox. • - . 102-3 Definition 83-1. . .Definition 62-1 Change in definition of products 249-1 Definition of member 374-1 Definition 235-4 Definition tile .125-1 Definition of member of . - industry- deleted 472-1 . . Definition . . . 196-3 Definition 115-2 . Definition 3-1 • Definitions 60. Tag Industry 61. Tanning Extract 62. Textile Processing 63. Upholstery & Drapery Textile 64. Warm Air Register . ... 65. Wholesale Food & Grocery Trade 66. Wood Plug 67. Wool Textile . . . Other types of the definitions set forth in the code were made subjects of amendments. Such matters as definitions of subdivisions of industries or trades, products, types of employers and employees, geographical sec- tions were submitted for gunpaflment , The foll.ovGng .tabulation. _ shows the types of definitions amended and the number thereof: DEFINITION ' NO. OF ' AMENDMENTS Industry '. . '. ..... '. ....... '. '. ... . 64 Member of industry. 17 Subdivisions of industry. .................. 30 Product s. 14 Employer 10 Employee. 6 Skilled employee.... 1 Territorial subdivisions of industry 5 Customer 1 Geographical area .11 LABOR PROVISIONS All types of labor provisions were submitted to amendment. In ad- dition, the attempts of N.R.A. to revise codes so as to bring them under the then existent policy resulted in additions of a number of labor pro- visions which incorporated such labor oolicy. The codes approved in the early days of N.R.A. were, in many cases, sketchy. Administrative exper- ience with the enforcement of such labor provisions prompted revisions and additions of various types of labor provisions* In some cases con- ditions in the particular industry resulted in inequitable situations, causing either an increase or decrease of the maximum hour provisions with an occasional attendant change in the minimum wage provisions. The following tabulations disclose the labor provisions amended and the num- ber of amendments relating to such provisions: HOUR PROVISIONS 9844 Normal maximum hours 54 Overtime hours. 13 Normal day period 5 Normal week period 8 Maximum hours for watchmen & firemen 14 Maximum hour exception for emergencies..,. Maximum hours - Skilled ho] y, 11 Exemptions . . 1 Salesmen and Executives. 1 Female 1 WA GE PROVISIONS Normal minimum wa t ;es 35 Overtime wages r 5 Skilled wages. . , 11 Apprentice wa^es 5 Learners wager. 6 Handicapped persons 4 Piece rate 9 e adjustment above minimum, 12 Sex wage differentials 8 Geographical wage differentials 20 G ENERAL L130R PFOVISIONS • Child labor 9 Home work 7 Safety & health standards , 26 Posting labor provisions,, 19 , . Handicapped workers^ ........... t 18 thod of payment of wages, .... ', .......... . 4 Dismissal clause . 1 Hazardous occupations. 7 All of the various types of labor amendments -set- forth in the above tabulation were not changes in the wording of existing provi- sions. All codes contained normal minimum wage 'and -maximum .hour provi- sions, and an amendment of these provisions "represented a change in the wording thereof. In a few cases deletions of existing provisions were made while a number of amendments were additions to the existing pro- visions. Most such additions were general labor provisions relating to safety and health standards , requirement of posting of labor provi- sions and provisions for handicapped workers. In some cases, maximum hour and minimum wage provisions were added for apprentice or skilled help. HOUR Aim '.7AGE PROVISIONS ' The investigation of labor provisions has resulted in a ompilation of the codes, the minimum wage provisions of viiich' were amend i up to May 2, 1935» An analysis of the original code provision and the amended provision was made to determine the effect of the amendment upon the original provision of the code as to all phases of minimum wage provisions, A similar analysis was made with respect to maximum hour provisions and the various compilations hereinbelow set forth are the result of such analysis and represent all changes, deletions and additions to minimum wage and maximum hour code provisions as approved up to May 2, 1935. The following list, shows the various 'codes which ^vere amended as to minimum wage provisions and likewise, sets forth the type of provision amended: 9644 -139- NAI.IL OP jODE 1. Artificial Flower & Feather . Artificial Limb 3. Baking 4, Li turn incus Coal 5. Blouse & Skirt Mfg, 6. Lull dors Supplies 7. Can Mfg, 8. Canning 9. Cart Iron Soil Pipe 10. Chinaware & Porcelain Mfg, 11. Coat & Suit 12. Concrete Masonry 13. Cotton Garment AMENDMENT PTMPER 29- 1 514-1 445-3 and 5 24-1 24-2 2^-3 194-2 37-2 152-1 PROVISION AMENDED 14. Cotton Textile 15. Dress Mfg, 16. Floor & TTall Clay Tile Mfg, 17. Fresh TTater Pearl Button 18. Funeral Service 19. Fur Dressing & Pur Dyeing 20. Graphic Arts 21„ Knitting, Braiding, etc. 22. Leo. the r 23. Legitimate Theater 24. Light Sewing, Except Garments 25. Lime Industry 26. Lumber and Timber 27. Macaroni 28. hen's Clothing 29. Garter, Suspender & Belt 10. Millinery 31, Paper & Pulp 32, Peanut Butter 33, Railway Car Building 34, Refractories 35, Retail Pood & Grocery 9844 446-4 18-1 18-3 126-5 5-1 5-2 133-2 113-1 and 3 118-7 1-1 64-5 92-2 31.0-1 384-5 161-5 287-5 and 8 32-1 21-2 8-1 226-3 31-2 9-1,3,7, 9,10,17,21 234-3 15-2 94-2 151-2 120-3 373-1 285-2 168-1 182-3 Wage s Wages for apprentices Wages, special employees, adjustment Minimum wage scale New basic wage scale Wage rates for District "G" Exemptions from minimum wage Wage s Territories & possessions wage district Exceptions to deductions of wages, minimum wage for Hawaii District. Geographic wage differentials Wage adjustment above minimum Equal pay for "omen "'ages (Geographical district) New Geographical wage dis- trict, wage provision for all cla.sses of employees, female wage differential Wages, minimum wage, Wages on certain types of garments Minimum wage differentials; wages for employees. Wages; above minimum Wag e district Wage district Wage adjustments Wage (general provisions) Wages Wage s Wages Wage adjustment above minimum Wage s Wages of learners Wages, adjustment Wages Wage differentials Wages on certain types of garments. Wages of apprentices Wages Wage provisions Wage adjustments above minimum Wage adj us tment s Wage provisions; adjustment above minimum. Wages - 40- HAhil .. FROVISIC ■ .'J../3:. Ai..T:;:3U 36. Rin^ Trrveler i../ . 517-1 37. Sac! lei* . 45-1 &eo ra hical rage differ** entials; wages for '• o ien. 38. Ski - buildij 8- Wage adjustment 30. Structural Clay Products 12 -1 d. of C°o & ra'ohical District 40. Transparent Materials Con- verting 382-12 '-" rovisiens 41. '.Tall Paper Mfg. 19-1 Equal nay for women ■'■. . Thole sale Food •"•. G-roc 196- r- yment of wages 43. ',7hole sale Tobacco 463-1 ge rates 44. TrecldLiij -■■ Salvage I -1 es A list relating to hours, similar to the for.:: or . list as to - - ments of irtiniraum - b ,e orovisions, is as follows: NAM3 07 CODI Ai..3 il 'T TYP1S 01 PROVISIONS MUiEU * 65-1 Hours 37,5— p Hours 29-1 Hours ol4-l Hours 17-2 Hours 1. A'"-.- y. ti! i: Specialty 2. Art ".Teedlei r ork, • 7 . Artificial Flower e* Feather 4. Artificial Limb 5. Autono'jil Mfg. 6. Automotive I arts & Equipment . .'_• 10w)-l Hours - )rocessiii i: tenance 9£uoloy \ i , of fie sal? pi 3 ; c "" lor- than $•" ">. r • i ! . ■ 7. Balding Industry 44 - Hour? for semi-hpn^ica*r^ec' em >loyees 8. Beverage Dispensing Equip. - 334- Hour— exenntio'ns for sales-* men a: executives ; ■- gency ere* s 9. Bituninous Coal -1 Hours-7 hour-S telz 10. Bui! Supplies 37-2 Hours 11. Cast Iron Soil Pi;DO 18-1 Hours 12. Coat ... Suit , 5-1 Hours 13. Concrete . asonry 133-2 Hours for watchmen 14. Cotto. mt 116-7 Hours - rr.f t . era lo; 15. Cotto:. Textile 1-1 Hours of labor, r - : l:r 1—2 Hours o: outside em loyees X: cleaners 1-j Limitiri finishin .i:ie tc t- o 40 hr. shifts 16. Earth - . : ' . " - ■ Ho 17. Elect I'oty.iiv; .• Stcr -- t; in 179-1 .r-.i. tu . .ours not to ot 20; : ' d minimum 18. : t 39-2 Hourf or wetchmi sr.ee tion to nr ; 984'r -141- nam~ of CO] B'iE CYP3S CF PROVISIONS 19. Funeral Supply 20 . Fur D r . .■ s r i ng & Dy e i ng 21. Glass Container 22. Graphic Arts 23. Hair & Jute Felt 24. Hosiery 25. Household Ice Refrigerator 26. Knit tec 1 . Outerwear 27. Knitting, Braiding, etc. 28. Lree LIf . 29. Leather 30. Legitime. to Theater 31. Li m I ndus t ry 32. Lumber C Timber 33. i-Iaiiganese . Industry 34. Mil line 17 35. Hot ion Picture 36. Mutual Savings Banks 37. Qyster Shell Crushers 38. Oxy-Acetylene 39. Paint, Varnish & lacquer 40. Photographic & Photo Finishing 41. Refractories 42. Retail Food & Grocery 43. Rotai l Trade 44. Ring Traveler 45. Robe C-. Allied Products 46. Sac .c" lory i.f . 47. Shipouil."'in L 48. Silh Textile 49. Textile la , 50. Tentile Print Roller Zin^ raving 9844 90-1 161-1 36-1 237-2 & 8 73-1 15-1 & 2 16-3 183-2 16 L-2 3! 1-1 6-3 21-1 8-1 31-2 9-11 425-1 151-2 ]_;,-> Z'_4 5 3-1 4 >2— 1 155-1 71-1 362-2 166-1 182-3 60-5 60-8 51 7-1 211-1 45-1 2-3 43-1 27-1 324-2 Hours for engineers, fire- men, oat si do delivery men, emergency renair crews Hours for working in fancy dressing end rabbit div- isions. Deleted in amend- ment no. 6. Hourr,, ha pic & for rratchmen Hours; maximum hr. exceptions Hour:; Ma chine ho ur s Hours (productive), be sic ho ui s and e xcep t ion s Hours Hour ; 5- sic, of engineers, wa tch ion ; exemp tio:" s ; limitations of •Hours Hours; Maximum & machi ! Hours for special groups of workers Hours Hours (general d ex< . jtions) Allowable hoars of operation Hours, hoist men, punrp men Hours (general) Hours Old hours deleted for new Hours Hours Hours Hours Basic hours Hours, salesmen, watchmen, service & maintenance employees; executives. Reduction of store lion hour exemptions Hour exemptions for cli of labor; hours for watchmen & guards Hours; exceptions for re— •a i r c rev: s ; e ye cut i Tr o s ; fiiaximura hours for salesmen Hours Hoar , has ic Hour-, basic Hours for outside crevs Hours, basic Hours -1 ' • NAH3 01 CODI A:.: TYP1S GF ?HOVISIO"S _M2JjL- 51. Textile rrocessi 235-3 Hours, opening & Closing 52. Undervrec r L allied Pro ducts • . 23-2 & Hours, machine 53. Upholstery & Drapery Textile 135-1 ors, i ener»l & exception 54. Ur.ec" Textile Bag 267-1 Hours, for perk periods 55. Wholesale Confectioners 458-1 Hour orcvision 56. Wholesale Food St Grocery Tradel96-3 Hours 57. Y.'ooi Textile 3-1 Hours, basic Examination of the original hour and wa^e provisions and the amend- ments thereof of the above listed coder di- closes the following informa- tion: TYPHS C7 CCI~ FHOVISIOH Ai.II-H.oD ^C . OF Ai 3 _ . 73 1« '.': : imum hours (?) Amendment resulting in no change in the normal maximum hour provisions 20 (b) Amendment re suit in in increase in normal maximum hours 48 (c) Amendment resulting in decrease of normal maximum nours 9 2. iformal Minimum ; .7s (:) Amendment resulting in no change in the normal minimum wage provisions 5 (b) Amendment resulting in increase of normal minimum wages 22 (c) Amendment resulting in decrease of normal minimum wages 14 3. Overtime Wages (a) Amendment resulting in addition of or revision of minimum overtime wages 13 (b) Amendment providing Tor maximum hours for overtime work 28 4. watchmen (?) Amendment providing maximum nouro for m en 19 (o) Amendment providing minimum es for' tclimcn 4 9844 -143- typhs o> io:", r-RCvisiO'f a ; d'PTJ ^o. ci' amu ~iy 3, Oi'i' 4 co and Sales Ir.roioycos' (a) Amendment providing minimum V7ag.es and •naximum hours for this tyne of employee — — ?, (a) Amendment excepting office and soles employees from minimum wage provision's 16 6. Skilled Employees (p) Amendment as to minimum wages 7 (" ) Amendment, as to maximum hours 6 7." ilon— skilled Employees (?.) Amendment as to minimum wages J '5 ("b) Amendment as to maximum hours 13 8„ Ap'j rentices ...... ,- : (a) Amendment. defining- "a-> irentico" 1 (o) Amendment, as to ..ia.r.imu.i- kovtr's 3 (c) Amendment ~s to- pi&iraum wages 7 ( 224 287 287 357 141 31 31 347> 421' 15 84 151 Machinery & Allied Products Marble Quarrying & Finishin Men*s Clothing Metallic hall Structure Millinery Needlevrork Ind. in Puerto Hico4?4 Novelty Curtain, Draperies, Bedspreads & ITovelty Pillow 79 Oil Burner 25 Ornamental Moulding 360 -X •5 •8 «2 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 -A-l -2 -1 January 1 , 1 " 33 November 22, 1934 D -comber 18, 1334 August 14, 1934 April 37, 1934 August 28, 1934 April 22, l9 r "o August 31, i: i December 7, 19 34 October 10, 1 June 23. 1934 December "}"] , K34 November Q ■1 c r '" December pc ,1933 July 17, X ,"'_• October 12, 1. ■-:•!• July 6, 1 I eoru ; ',';>■ 1S3 July 12, 1'^' July 3, -1954 Au : \'15, '-1934 April 30, 1933 February 1, 1954 October 32, 1934 February 10, 1934 April 1, 1935 13, 1951 October 24., December 18, 1933 October 30, 1934 November 9, 1934 July 20, 13 4 August 34, 1 September 17, 1 April 28, l r ' 9844 - ■P nam:: of cod: ]?. DAI'-. 3?. Paint, Varnish & Lacouor 71-1 rch ">, 1 33. Photographic <.-. Photo Finishin 362-2 34. Plumbing Fixtures 204-:: 35. Printer's Rollers 106-) 36. Rayon & Si IV. Dyeing 172-4 37. Restaurant 282-2 38. Ring Traveler 517-1 39. Robe & Allied Products 211-1 40. Shipbuilding 2-1 41. Shoe & Leather Finish 184-1 42. Soft Fibre Mfg. 393-2 43. Textile Bag 27-1 44. Textile Processing 235-3 45. Throwing 54-2 46. Umbrella 51-2 47. Ur p \r c Allied Products \; rz <~2 48. Upholstery & Dra-oery Textile 125-1 49. Sail Paper fcifg. 19-1 50. Warm Air Furnace Mf . -2 51. Wholesale Lillinery 201-33-1 52. V/ool Felt Mfg. 143-1 TPAD31 PRACTICE PROVISIONS rch ', l" r "' ; April 2' 7 , 1934 November 37, 1934 pch 1°, IS December l r , 1934 December l r J, 1S34 April 26, 1934 October 10, 1933 August 2, 1034 October 25, i°34 De comber 33, 1933 August 6, 1934 April 19, 1 Jul* 27, V 34 May 10, 1. '4 Fcbruary 6, 1935 December " , 133o June 27, l c ' August 30, 1934 ' November 30, IS t? tot IM The majority of amendments referred either to code authority or trade practice provisions, but the number of actual provisions affected related to tre.de practice rules. The types of trade practice rules set forth in various codes covered a number of subjects and no attempt has been made, for the purposes of this preliminary reoort, to set out each particular trade practice rule. ?\i,: v- riety of such rules makes such a tabulation too much of s task at this time, however, the author ; a r ; attempt- ed to compile certain information regardin Ldments of traae pr-: ;tice rules. The . following classification is used as a basis!- (a) Trade practice rules having basis in la , (o) Tr-de practice rules having some basis in l r ' . (c) Desirable tracn price systems 45 Uniform cor>t accounting 29 Production control 7 Machine hour limitations 7 Prohibition of nev installations of machinery a. The author of tnis report has had no opportunity to examine the reason? why these various trade practice rales were amended, whether or not the amendments were sponsored by industry or NRA and what effect Ihese amendments had upon the cede structure. It is hoped that this Preliminary report will give some idea of the questions presented. I.'I GCZLLA/'jQUS CCD5 P'OVIGICNS ■ The formation of codes resulted in some instances of impro v oor wording which, because of the tremonduous administrative job-presented were not noted at that time. Legislative draftsroansh.ro required s correction of the s e mi stake s ( * * ) The change of the form of administration from that of an individual administrator to a "board resulted in a number of amendments substituting |fehe words "llational Industrial Recovery Board" for the word " Administrator" (*) A few examples of the classification hereinabove set fort n may be helpful. Types of code provisions which have "been included in Class (a) are - commercial bribery, false advertising, liquidated damage agreements, false invoicing, defamation of competitors, and secret rebates. Glass (b) includes "orovisions such as - design piracy, imitation of trade marks, style piracy, splitting of commissions, prohibitions against advertising allowances anc 1 optional standards clauses. Class (c) includes orovisions such as - uniform discount anc credit terms, loss limitation, prohibition of consignment sales, prohibition of future contracts, requirement of inclusion of transpor- tation cost in purchasing ''.'rice, etc. (**) See Amendment No. 30, Lumber and Timber Products Code - January 31, 1835 (the word "industry" changed to "industries"). See Amendment No. 2, Metallic. Jail Structure Code - March 7, 1933 (the words "and/or offer for sale" were added after the word "sell". The original intent being that offers of sale were included in the word "sell"). See also Amendment No. 4, Electrical Manufacturing Code - Aoril 25, IS 35. (***) Sec Amendment No. 1, The Curled hair Manufacturing Code - February S, IS 35. 9844 -143- On e number of occasions co"'; rovisiou , iause oi ^oor drafts. ian~ roper expression of the intent of ' i censors, ambiguity or other reasons, resulted in situations ! the wording v??s not subject to in- terpretation sufficient to cover the ori, jii al intent or remove the ambi- guity. Soi.ic provisions were si • bible to interpretation, but such interpretation might result in a distortion of the language (*). On some occasion? actual interpretations were in effect beyond the interpret? tivo scope of the code provision and of necessity required amendment. The author of this report has had little opportunity to examine such situations, vrhich actually led to amendment of the code, but this cause of amendment is mentioned and is suggested as a phase of the study fit for further in- vestigation. Investigation discloses that seven (7) amendments related to the effective date of the code, all of which extended the expiration date (**). (*) See Amendment Ho. 1, Prison Equipment Manufacturing Code - November 6, 1934. (**) See Amendments Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 of trie Automobile Manufacturing Co; . 9844 -149- C HAPTfR VI IYALUATI01TS A1TD CChCLUSIOhS It was required that the policies of the Act be given ex- pression in codes of fair competition. The power of code-maxing embraced the full purpose of the Act and was the fundamental reason for the exercise of power, A companion power '"is that of amend- ment of codes. Guarantees of this tower and its proper uso meet tno most fundamental rules of administrative law. Therefore, a complete evaluation of and well considered suggestions regard- ing ITfA amendments insofar as the power to amend was exercised is a requisite of this report. Chapter I discusses the various legislative sources of the powar to amend codes. Ho mention of the power is definitely stated except in Section 10(h). Construction of the provisions of some sections of the Act at least gives some basis upon which this ad- ministrative power may be predicated. The legislative history refers to an intention to confer such power but the bases found and inferred are not as perfectly set forth as was possible so to do. The idea of voluntary axe- imposed cooes caused doubt as to the existence of the power to amend voluntary code provisions. It is therefore suggested that new legislation, if any, contain adequate and specific reference to the power of amendment of codes; that either a distinction as to exorcise of the power be made between amendments of voluntary codes and revisions of imposed codes or that no such distinction be made; that full oower ho conferred with resoect to the time of exercise thereof; viz., at time of code approval or any time thereafter. The limitations of administrative discretion are few, as dis- cussed in Chapter I. The power of amendment, being such a far- reaching weapon, should be subject to well defined standards of discretion. The policies of the Act are a oasis, but it is sug- gested tha.t standards, generally incorporating the reasons for amendments, particularly those offered oj industry and tra.de and conceded beneficial policy requirements of 1TBA, ho legislatively established as a guide to and limitation -.n the administrative agency. A complete definition Df the term "amendment" so far -as the use of the power and the scope of its application are concerned, is suggested. The discussion cf this part of the subject in Chapter II is sufficient to warrant the suggestion. Chapter III presents a record of the delegation of the power of amendment. Ho serious deficiencies appear, although the refer- ence to and use cf the power to "substitute" PPA provisions could be clarified and specifically brought under the power to "amend" . 9844 -150- retention of tb by the Administrator and the l>.ti; -.1 Industrial Rec v ard is deem policy and legislative limitations upon dele ;ations to lesser officials are suggested. There appears to be no criticism of suggestit n ^s to the use of an cider of approval of a specific a .it. Use of a general order of amendment and a conditional order of approval is dependent upon the extent of the legislative statement Qf the power, (*) If broad discretionary powers are to "be set forth, it is suggested that the power to generally amend 1 e included therein. In addition, the use of cenditi ns should be limited so that this exercise of the power of amendment will be don nly when th ndment bears a relation to the policy of the Act.(**) The analysis of labor amendments discloses the results of iPA'S leadership p.nd policy of improvement of labor provisions and the additions of provisions incorporating labor policy. It appears from the tabulations that most amendments of labor provisions related to special types of employees; e.g., watchmen, apprentices, etc. The number of changes of area and geographical rates of pay discloses t le trouble encountered by this form of wage and hour-fixing but also shows the advantage of a flexible code prevision. It should be' noted that the majority of revisions of maximum hours permitted an increase thereof and that most of the changes of normal minimum wages resulted in increases. The amendments of code authority provisions covered all features of code administration. Many were brought about by the policy and regulations regar 1 cede authorities. Amendments relating to contributions, assessments, labels, collection of statistics, labor and trade practice complaints committees c d to the Adminis- tration's suggestions. (***) The conferri; additional general powers in most cases represented industrial subscription to model code provisions relating tc code authorities. The amendments whereby the election and membership of code authorities were affected usually affected industry or trade repre- sentation; e.gi, subdivisions of industry or trade, non-association groups, and trade associations. Liethods of notice, balloting and (*) Se ; comment in this . ■, supra. (**) See Pert thr . it f, : r IV, for discussion re. c nditions. (***) ;:.A 3ulletin ilo. 7: utive Ord r r'o. 6479; Executive Crder ilo. 6678, f3A ils. 08 44 -151- other matters inci ent to meeting s likewise were incorporated in such amendments. The content of this report with regard t - amendments of tra.de practice rulrovisions 6.2 Codes under Sec. 3( a ) pn< i Sec. ]>(urpo: es 7.2 Effects 7.21 On general code stricture 7.22 Industry 7.23 Labor 7.2U Consumers 8. NRA initiation of anendments 8.1 ,'Causes 8.11 Adjustment to policy 8.12 Legality £.13 Code administration difficulties S.lU Compliance S.15 Enforce - lent _.lb Recognition of protesting groups £.17 Overlapping definitions 8.1S Clarity and draftsmanship 8.19 Increa.se of exemptions 8.11_ dor— susceptibility of interpretation of code provision 8.12 Geographical reasons 8.1j[ Simplification of code structure S.IJJL Consolidation of codes 8.132 Co::s^li-dr>.tion of industry divisions 8.1JS3 Model Code 8.1^4- Enlargement of scope of Industry Easic Codes (as distinguished from ERA Easic Code,) • 8. lh Modification of Code Authority set-up 8.15 Limitation or enlargement of powers of Code Authority 0.I0O the r p irp se s 3.2 General disc lss! n of E.E..A. requirement that application for amendment opened the entire Code for administrative study and revision 8.21 Purposes 8.22 Effects 9« Analysis of applications for amendments and amendments of code provisions with respect to 9.1 Code definitions 9.11 Industry or subdivisions thereof 9.12 Members of industry and classification thereof 9 .13 Distribution agencies 9.lU Co::: :o di ties 9.2 Labor provisions 9.21 Maximum nous 9.211 I'orrrl week period 5.212 ITormal day period 9.213 Overtime tolerance 9.21U Peal: neriod 9SUU -156- 9.22 Minimum rages 9.221 : ■ : . trade 5,2211 Hourly rate 9.221.? piece rate 9.2213 weekly rate 9.222 Overtime rate 9.223 Apprentice rate 9.22U Skilled rate 9.225 Union contract rate 9.23 Child labor 9.2U Apprentice limitations 9.25 Handicapped ":orl:ers 9.26 Standards of safety and health 9.27 Korae Trork 9.28 Stretch-out 9.29 Scrip payments 9 • 21 Equitable readjustment of wages above the minimum 9-22 Posting 9.2^_ Collective bargaining 9.2U Miscellaneous 9.25. Development of labor policy with respect to amendments 9.26 Legal aspects of labor provision anendients 9»2J_ Evaluation of experiences 9.«3 Trade practice provisions 9.31 General anal "sis and discussion of trade practice provisions being grouped as follows: 9.3H Generally accepted in law 9.312 Desirable but not fully accepted in law 9»313 Desirable but no basis in law 9.31^ Undesirable 9.315 Unenforcible 9.32 Price policy 9.321 Price fixing 9.3211 Pi::ed prices 9.3212 Lovest reasonable price 9«3213 '.odel nark-up 9.322 Price control 9.3221 Loss leaders 9.3222 Loss limitations 9.323 Open price systems 9.3231 Institution of system 3.3232 Particular contracts 9.3233 - et-.od of operation Note: Por purposes of discission bid depository systems are included under this sub-division 9.32^ Cost provisions:- 9.32-!-l Sales below cost 9.J>2-!-2 Obsolete goods 3.J2U3 12:erf:ency disposals 9»32UU Competition 93UH -157- * 9.;i2 n , Accounting systems 51 Necessity of approval of Administrator 3*7>?J)2 Complexity of system Difficulties of installation 9o2o Sales re >orting systems 9.^ Amendaentr; of Code Authority provisions 9.Ul Necessities of amendments 9.^2 Amendments affecting rights of Code Authority 9*^3 Amendments affecting obligations of Cole Authority 9.^ Amendments ineor-oorating suggestions and regulations of U.H.A. 9.U5 Legality 9.1+6 Policy 9.^7 Finances 9 • ] 4& I ii c rp oration 9«-+9 Tr "e association participation 9.5 Labels 9.51 Necessity for use of labels 5*52 Types of amendments submitted as to 9.521 Control 9.522 Policy 9.523 Finances ( j.53 Types of industries submitting label amendments 9.6 Statistical Reports 9.6l Executive order of December 7. 1933 j.G'd Types of amendments submitted as to 9.b21 Govemimental reports 9»o22 Code Authority reports 9.7 Conditional orders of approval ij.71 Amendments submitted incorporating conditions 9.72 Amend '.ent :-, cha nging condi ti ons 9«S Miscellaneous co".e .-'mendnent s 10. period of amendment 10.1 Duration of Act 10.2 Duration of Code 10.3 Te mp o r ary 10. h Emergencjr 11. Amendments of orders 11.1 Executive and administrative orders of general application 11.2 Orders of approval 11.21 Codes 11.22 Amendments 12. Procedure as to amendments 12.1 Application by 12.11 Industry member 12.12 Industry 'roup 12.13 Code -utdority 12.131 national 12.132 Local 12. Ik Instituted 'oy N.R.A. 12#lUl Industry Division 12.1U2 Legal Division 12.1^3 Advisory boards- 9SUU -158- 13- lU. 9SUU 12.11& Pi eld offices 12.1-:-5 Other departments of ...... 12.15 Government agencies other than P. P. A. 12.16 Labor 12»l6l Individual 12.1 $2 Group of employees .1621 Uno rg j ua i z ed 12.1622 Union 12.2 Consideration of application 12.21 3y deputy 12.22 advisory Boards 12.23 Research r.nd Planning Division 12.2U Legal division 12*25 Adr.iiiis tret ion members and Code .: .t" ority 12.26 Review division 12.27 Extent of consideration by boards, etc., and li; :i t; tions thereon 12.28 Division aduinistrators 12.29 Hi her officials and President 12.21_ Extent of consideration of briefs pro and con 12.22 Pi eld offices - f.Z-..A. 12.3 Due process rccpiirement 12.31 Applications submitted to hearing 12.311 -"fpe, form and extent of notice 12.312 Place of hearing 12.313 Record of hearing 12.32 Applications submitted to an op :■ mity to be heard 12.321 'Type, form and extent of notice 12.33 Application receiving no ^rablic consideration' 12. 3*+ General legal aspects Pinal action 13.1 Porm 13.2 Notice Analysis of procedure and time consumed in the handling of appli cations for amendments lU.l Interoffice lU.2 Intraoffice lU.3 Pield offices lh.U Due process lU.5 Extra — P.P.... reference lU.6 Effect of policy rulings lU.7 Protests lU.3 Comparison -it": procedure of other v ment -pencies ■ lU.9 Causes of delay lU.l Effects of .".elay Analysis of auendnents 15.1 --viendncnts submit t 'ival ' c 15.11 Effects upon code 15.12 Effects upon industry 15.13 Effects upon labor 15.1^ Effects upon consumers 15.2 Amendments instituted by P.P. A. 15.21 Effect s upon industry 15.22 Effects upon labor 15.23 Effects upon P.P. A. 15 .2U Effects upon consumers -159- 16. Substantive problems 10. 1 -'hat rights of sj/onsorsdi,; of amendments should, be granted? lb.2 What consi eration of amendments should be afforded industry and labor 07 1 ,L ,A. 16.3 Should, bhe po e: 1 of general amendment of all coo.es be utilized? lo.h .'hat participation should industry anc labor have in the issuance of orders of general amendments? 16. 5 What require: :e:its of due process should be adhered to by NBA? lb. 6 Should. IDA institute amendments on its ov/n notion? lb.7 Effect of aicnd.ents on priorly granted exemptions (See Outline 0:: Exemptions and Exceptions) 16.8 Should field offices be granted poorer to amend codes? lb.9 Should d.d.A. open a code for general revision upon the submission of an amplication for a specific amendment? 17. Effects of amendment s on 17*1 Co de st ructure 17.2 Declared purposes of the Act 17»3 Large business units 17.^1- Small enterprises 17.5 Monopolies 17.6 N.R.A. policy 17.7 Legality 17.S Industry 17.9 Labor 17.1 Consumers IS. Evaluation 19. Conclusions 20 . Eibl i ography 9SUU -160- PART FIVE : CONDITIONAL ORDERS OF AP^ROVaL By ' • ■ . Chubb 9844 -161- iNTrio:.'iTC?io M The "Administrative Problems Review" was set up to make a re- view of certain key problems which presented administrative difficulties during the oeriods of code formulation and administration and to examine some of the methods developed for handling them, Such problems had, on one nand, to do with Classification, Over- lapping Definitions and Multiple Code Cov-rage wnich were fundamentally inherent in any attemot to codify industry and, on the other hand, to do with -roblems of adjustment to developed policies, and of methods and machinery for reconciling and adapting the administration of codes under tne various difficulties met due to practical conditions. This latter type of problems gave rise to the use of such devices as Conditional Orders of Approval, Amendments, Exemptions, Stays and Interpretations. All of the above nroblems and also a collateral study of the subject of Uncodified Industries are being reviewed and discussed in sep- arate renorts. The accompanying btudy covers only conditional oroers of ap- proval and because of its nature, does not, to any great degree, tie in with the otner studies, but in common with the general objects of all ff these studies, emphasis has been nut u^on an analysis of the experiences during tne code period pointing toward substantial guides for the drafting of new legislation and plans for its successful administration.- All codes have been examined for conditions imposed in the order of approval and the various tyoes cf conditions classified in Appendix "3" herein. A representative number of typical cases have been analyzed as to, the function performed or attempted oy the use of this device, its successes and failures, and the legal nroblems generated by its application. In Appendix "2" hereto will oe found a detailed outline which was originally orenared witn great care for an exhaustive treatment of the subject. Lack of time and the difficulty of locating records under present conditions prevented this exhaustive analysis of all cases, but anyone desiring to make a more complete examination of the subject will find that outline and the references ^iven to be very useful. The princinal phases of the subject that have important bearing as guides in the preparation of new legislation and subsequent adminis- tration thereunder, have been prepared in tne form of questions and this review has only attempted to collect data adequate to answer these ques- tions . The present sub-title embraces a review principally of conditional orders of approval of codes, agreements and amendments as issued by the President, the Administrator and the "MI5B, but also to a limited extent, conditional orders of approval of minor administrative actions by the Administrator and by division administrators in such cases as code authority elections, by-laws, trade practice complaints committees, etc. 9844 -163- CHAPTER I. . ■ FART FIVE. WHAT POWERS OF AFFROVAL OP CCDSS , A'" .'.' " -O AMENDMENTS WERE .CONFERRED BY THE ACS? In order to obtain a proper orientation for this review, it is first necessary to examine just what specific powers of approval were con- ferred by the Act and if the language be not clear, to go back to such evidence of intent as may be shown by hearings before the Congressional Committees prior to the passage of the Act. (*) (a) VOLUNTARY CODES Section 3 ( a) of the Act conferred powers upon the President to approve codes voluntarily applied for, as follows: "Section 3 (a) • Upon application to the President by ■ * * * associations or groups, the President may approve a code or codes * * * if the President finds * * * (l) * * * no inequitable restrictions or admission to membership * * *truly representative * * * * and (2) * * *code or codes * * * not * * * promote monopolies or eliminate or oppress small industries * * * Provided'* * * shall not permit monopolies * * *; Provided further * * * nothing * * * shall deprive (certain) persons of right to be heard prior to approval * * *. The Presiden t may , as a condition of his approval of any" such code , impose such conditions * * * for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees and others in furtherance' of the public interest, and may provide such exceptions to and exemptions from the provisions of such code, as the President in his discretion deems necessary to effectuate the policy herein declared." (b) PRESCRIBED CODES Section 3 (d) of the Act conferred power upon the President to prescribe and approve a code under the following conditions: "Section 3 ( d) Upon hi 5 ov;n motion , or if complaint is \ made to the President that abuses * * * are prevalent in any trade or industry * * * and no code * * * has been approved *** the President after * * * public notice and hearing * * * may prescribe and approve a code * * * which shall have the same effect as a code * * * approved by the President under subsection (a) of this section." (*) In the quotations following the underscoring of certain parts has been added by the author and does not .appear in the Act itself. 3S44 - i 63- ( c) AGBESMKJTS Section 4 (a) of the Act conferred power upon the President to enter in agreements with, and approve voluntary agreements between persons as follows: "Section 4 (a) The President is authorized to enter into agreements with, and to approve agreements "between and among, persons engaged in a trade or industry, labor or- ganisations, and trade or industrial organizations, asso- ciations or groups * * * if in his judgment such agreements will aid in effectuating the policy of this title with respect to transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, and will be consistent with the requirements of clause (2) of subsection" (a) of section 3 for the code of fair competition." (d) LABOR AGREEMENTS Section 7 (b) of the Act required the President to afford every opportunity to employers and employees to establish by mutual agreement standards as to maximum hours, minimum rates of pay and other conditions of employment and such agreements when approved by the President "shall have the same effect as a code * * * approved by the President under subsection (a) of Section 3". This implied the power to approve. Section 7 (c) of the Act conferred power upon the President to investigate labor conditions in a trade or industry where no mutual agreement concerning labor conditions had been approved under Section 7 (b) , and to prescribe a limited code fixing certain labor conditions, which "shall have the same effect as a code * * * approved by the Presi- dent under subsection (a) of section 3." (e) AMENDMENTS Section 10 (b) of the Act conferred power upon the President to modify any order, or approval issued under the Act. This established the power to approve or prescribe amendments. (f) LLC3NSING FEATURE Section 4 (b) of the Act conferred power upon the President under certain conditions to license business enterprises. This power expired June 16, 1934 and was never used, hence no conditional orders were involved under it. Inasmuch as orders of approval in their intended effect and in many c^s.^ their legal effectiveness departed far from the provisions of the Act, it is deemed important to analyze the sections outlined above carefully to determine just what was provided in the Act, particu- larly in Section 3 (a) and Section 3 (d) authorizing "conditions". 9844 _ 64- Considering Sections 3 (a) and 3 (d) of the Act together, it is apparent that the former was intended to provide the machinery for voluntary codes alone and the latter was intended to provide the machinery for p rescribed codes alone (often termed imposed or compulsory codes.) Section 3 (a) provided that "The .'President may, ns a condition of his approval of any such code, impose such conditions * * * as the President in his discretion deems necessary * * *" . (Underscoring added) It is very °vident that this wording in connection with a code voluntarily applied for, contemplated that conditions imposed by the President were conditions of and antecedant to the granting of his final approval, leaving the voluntary code in a suspended state of effective- ness prior to inclusion of or assent to the conditions imposed, and did not contemplate the authorizing Of arbitrary conditions in, his final approval of any code voluntarily applied 'for -without thereby rendering the code in fact a prescribed code. To preserve the voluntary nature of codes under Section 3 (a), any such imposed conditions must necessarily have been assented to or included by duly authorized sponsors of the voluntary code prior to its becoming effective or the code was a pre- scribed code. It is evident that no matter what might be the importance of an imposed condition, the principle is the same, for it clearly would be impossible to draw any line of demarcation based upon importance of the imposed condition. It has been generally considered that there were no codes prescribed under the provisions of Section 3 (d), but codes voluntarily applied for and approved with conditions in the order of approval unasserted to by the duly authorized sponsors must be con- sidered as falling under Section 3 (d) "upon the motion" of the President. If such codes were approved by either the Administrator or the National Industrial Recovery Board with conditions in the order of approval unassented to, the codes would appear to be legally non- effective because of lack of delegated power of approval under Section 3 (d) . (See Chapter II) The only code containing imposed conditions in the order of approval which appears to have had the conditions assented to and a further clear order of final approval issued, was Code Ho. 1, Cotton Textile Industry (discussed more fully later herein). Thereafter conditions, some of a vital nature, others unim- portant, were imposed in many orders of approval and the codes con- sidered effective by the NRA as voluntary codes without the issuance of subsequent orders of final approval after the conditions were satisfied by assent or otherwise. In many such cases (probably a large majority) the sponsoring bodies proceeded upon the basis of the con- ditional approvals and organized for administration of the conditionally approved codes and thereby tacitly assented to the conditions imposed. This probably legalized the approvals as voluntary codes although the j-AA -In- effectiveness as respecting individual industry members might still depend upon the form of authorization £ ;iven to the sponsoring body. Under Section 3 (d) for codes definitely prescribed by the President, it would be unlikely that any conditions would ever be re- quired in the order of approval since the President necessarily could control every provision prescribed therein. Under Section 4 (a) for voluntary agreements entered into, or approved by the President, no power to impose conditions was granted by the Act since the reference in Section 4 (a) to clause (2) of Section 3 (a) was only to the requirements thereof. Under Sections 7 (b) nnd 7 (c) for mutual agreements and for prescribed limited codes covering labor conditions, no specific povrer to impose conditions was granted by the Act. Such agreements or codes upon approval had the same effect as codes approved under Section 3 ( a) . Conditions in the approval order would therefore serve to render such agreements noneffective until assented to, unless specifically pre- scribed by the President himself. In the case of prescribed limited codes under Section 7 (c) it would be unlikely that any conditions would ever be required in the order of approval since the President could con- trol every provision prescribed therein. In support, if necessary, of the conclusion that Section 3 (a) covered voluntary codes only and Section 3 (d) covered prescribed codes only, rendering codes approved conditionally by the President, in fact, prescribed codes, attention may well be directed to the intent shown by the statements of Senator Wagner in explaining the original National Industrial Recovery Act on May 22, 1933 before the Senate Committee on Finance as follows: "Senator Wagner. * * * The national industrial recovery bill has as its singl e objective * * * reemployment * * * at wages sufficient to secure comfort and decent living. This * * * end is to be reached by * * * cooperative action within industry, encouraged by law and supervised by the President for the pro- tection of the public, and * * * expenditures for public works, * * * the bill centralizes authority in the President * * *. Despite this centralized power, the emphasis is upon voluntary action. * * * trade and industrial association or group to prepare * * * for approval a voluntary code * * *. When such a voluntary code is approved by the President * * * binding upon the entire trade or industry * * *. * * * no code shall be approved unless * * * (certain conditions are met as to true representation, no monopoly, no discrimination — embodies labor provisions of Section 7 (a) "Thus far I have discussed codes which are voluntary * * * and it is primarily upon such spontaneous action that the bill relies. * * * But if any trade or industry cannot or will not cooperate in the formation of voluntary codes, the President is authorized, after proper investigations and 9844 - hearings, to prescribe * * * codes * * * or if any trade or industry voluntarily arrives at some of the requirements of a code, and neglects others, the Fresident may in a proper manner prescribe these others and combine all in a general code. * * * in absence of need of general code * * * pre- scribe a lirited code dealing only with (labor conditions) * * * " Senator Gore. The three categories, what are they? "Senator Wagner. The voluntary code, the compulsory code, the licensing feature, which I will come to, and then there is the agreement provision." 9844 -167- 78AT DELEGATI )HS a?te2 ii I'D ■ ."" 'i C "," ' T *tt j£ .-^ riu. v AL LDE AKD 7 'AT POWERS 3 ETAIMSD T The first delegation of approval powers by tie President was made to tlie Administrator by Executive Order Ho. 6543-A, December 30, 1983, as follows: " (..) The approval Ox" codes of fair competition, v/itl the exception of codes for major in- dustries (being in general tiose industries normally employing in excess of 50,000 em- ployees) as so classified by the Adminis- trator for Industrial P.eccvery and with the exception also of any code of fair competi- tion i .posed under section 8 (d) of said title of the act. 11 (?) The approval of any amendment or modifica- tion to, exception or exemption from, or . elimination of any one or more provisions of any code of fair competition. "(3) Ko thing herein contained shall be construed as amending any previous delegations of power to any other Department o± the C-c v em- men t." Executive Order IT c. 64< to the Administrator to a from, agreements under Title approved by tie President. November 22, 1933 delegated power or grant exceptions to or exemptions ten or thereafter entered into or Executive Order Ho. 6590-A, February 8, 1934, delegated power to the Administrator to proscribe rales and regulations governing amendments, modifications, exemptions, exceptions and stays .and other forms of relief from approved codes. Executive Order Ho. 6750-A, June 27, 1834, delegated power to tie Administrator to enter into agreements under Section 4 (a) witi persons engaged in trade or industry in Puerto Pace, hawaii and Alaska. Executive Order Ho. 6764, June 29, 1934, delegated power of approval of codes covering in general food industries jointly to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Administrator except major in- dustries and codes imposed under Section 8 (d) and also delegated power of approval of amendments, etc. to eacu for the codes admin- 9844 -168- istered "by oac. respectively. Z c c the broad dele ti . Lstrator under 3xecutive 3r< . 6543-A. .3 Order 17o. 6859 , Septeriber 27 , 1934L-, redel elated, among others, all .-oners of approval t eretcfore delegated to the Adminis- tor, to t>.e National Industri 1 :ec:vc:- rd. Executive Order ITo. 6999, tlarch 50, 1935, redelegated all 3 functions and powers with certain specified exceptions, from the Secretary of Agriculture to the National Industrial Recovery . respect to five specified fooci industry codes. • -169- II WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES ATTSSKD ED ThE USES CT ThE DEVICE 07 CONDITION AI FhCVA L 0? (_) ChDES, (b) AOhhhhElhTS, (c) AUEHDiarTa aid (a) octes . :gi : h Ahlhlhl STRATI VE ACTIOKS? (a) Cede No. 1, Cotton Textile Industry was approved by the President July 9, 1933 oil thirteen conditions which were immediately referred to tlie industry, assented to, or satisfactorily adjusted and the con- .ii Lonaliy approved code amended accordingly. Prior to the designated effective date, tlie President issued Judy 16, 1933 a further Executive Order in which: "It is ordered that the condition heretofore imposed as to the termination of approval of the Code is now withdrawn and that the Code of Pair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry is finally approved with the condi- tions so proposed, as set forth in Schedule A attached hereto." This action conformed literally to the clause in the Act, Section 3 (a), "Tl:e President may, as a condition of his approval of any such code, impose such conditions *** as the President in his discretion deems necessary to effectuate the policy herein de- clared." Cede ho. 1 thereby retained a purely voluntary status and was effectively approved under Section 3 (a) of tie Act. Code ho. 3, Wool Textile Industry, was tlie next code approved conditionally. It was approved July 26, 1933 by the President on condition that "a V/ool Textile Industry Committee be created ***". In this case (is early as July 26, 1933) apparently tlie literal meaning of the clause of the Act, of Section 3(a) quoted above, was lost si gilt of, and this Code was by the terras of the Order in a state of suspended approval until' the condition was complied with. Code ho. 6, Lace Manufacturing Industry, approved August 14, 1933 by the President on condition that a Lace Manufacturing Indus- try (Code Authority) be elected. Code History states (p. 27) that three days later the industry with 90/j present held a meeting to elect such committee, thus satisfying the condition. Code No. 12, Photographic Manufacturing Industry, approved August 19, 1933 by the President on condition that a Photographic Manufacturing Committee be created. This condition was not met until October 30, 1934, over a year later, apparently through mis- understanding that the required committee necessitated an election and. was not satisfied by the group of seven appointed as the code committee. Tlie legality of considering the code effective as a 9344 -170- voluntary cc leantine ave successful!" been challengec 1 haf i r, ortr.it cases i .. Coco No. 1;'', "': ' , roved August 1$, 1933 by the Prosidenl id lent "as soon r.s cticable" of -lrrs, nflict v 'ith Section 3 (") (l) of the Act. , code could not have been legally approved rnc! • - one -ithout viol-" tin;; a cific requirements of the Act. Code No. \h t ?«ayon and Synthetic Yarn i irauf acturing Industry, rover" August 26, If 33 "oy the President of the condition, compliance "iti. .. ii, hereby requirec, that reports shall be furnished fron tine to ti »c to the Administrator by each enployer n concerning labor inforna- J tier.. Manifestly, failure of any enployor to comply -ith this condition at .'-- tine '.ade the coe'e legally revert to a state of suspended r roro- There is no evic.ence that this condition --as let at any tine more than by lere accifent o" transmitting a copy of information ericiiar. ::o:;- ly nong aniy four of the principal nanuf acturers shoring ^7age r^tcs. This rras in no sense a remort. (Sec Coc"e Histoiy pp. lol-lo2.) The loyal effect Lvoness of the code could have been challenged until :■ orts ■ -ere submitted ''oy each enployor in accordance -'ith the order of rov-.l. Code i"o. 3l> Lime Industry, v -as approvec" Octover 3> ^-333 by the Fresidcnt on' condition thr.t the Association anend its by~lc."s. This is )orted to have been satisfied. Si;: months later an amendment ---as roved April 1, 1$35> "ith omtennive conditions in its orc.er of Jroval prrti~.ll;. - * id to by the industry arc. partially regarded by the industry as elininating fesirec inclusion of provisions absolutely nocessaiy for proper administration of the code. No assent to the con- c"itio:v lq order of approval yl the amendment appears from the record. Code No. 9» ' lendnent to Lv f r ' Tinber Products. Action October 9, 1S33 ^7 the Pros' . This is not a conditional order of roval, but is cited as an instance of en ineffective approval* (See "bound Volume I, ;yyc 703, Codes of Pair Competition). The Fresident has here leroly r i nee 1 - recortiendation addressee" to hi-: ^oy the Adminis- trator. Code No. 5 :, 3uff and Polishing "./heel Industry, nas approved 1'ovem- -' , :• the President on concition that one of the unfair trade prrctice rules be deleted -filch called for resr.le price maintenance. ■ .; to be no evidence of assent to this deletion other t". tacit .' Einization and -"unctioniny of the code at thority, Lch -vs th< up. sponsoring the code. Code No, 1?;, Unholstery and Drapery Ter.tile Industry rras approved Novenber 27, 1S33 oy the President on concition that certain classes of )ulc". elect not to be bound uoon notice given -'ith a ven time limit (later emtended to December 23, 1$330 Industry __ -171- arently cosirec" this condition mhich lade it possible for "then to get a coc'e, Piic. although the conditions r e -:.- not to have "been specifically assented to, the organization and operation of the code authority implied tacit assent. / Code No. I'd- , Can Manufacturing Industry, mas approved December 15, 1S33 "by the President if: t-vo con itioi , the second requiring subnis- sion of statistical in:" or vat ion to ITJA, T v re appears to he no record of assent to the conditions imposed but likewise there is no record of ob- iection anc" the co r e authority (.lection and operation lent tacit assent to the conditions, in the order of approval. Code ho. 202, Carpet ant" 3ag Manufacturing Industry, ssent Code Ho. k6$, Sulphonatod Oil hanufacturing Indus t: i.s r-uoroved June 2d, 1S3 1 * hy the Administrator on the condition' that certain provisions covering price filing and a ' Siting perioc be stayed. Indust^ die. not desire to stay r^it. by resolution of the code authority on November f, 153''- stated that the stay operated to prevent efficient operation under the code and nade it impossible to carry out the purpose of the Act and requested that the stay be terninated. This as not done because approval of wo.it in:; perio- election and functioning ( ts contrary to the /otic- af N3A, The he code authority probably constituted j.i^ :.c: assent to the code vrith the condition but the effectiveness of the code, against on;/ individual member of the incus try --'-io .light have \en;jcC. it as c "r escribed code, vas doubtful. Code ho. U9S, Corn Cob Pipe Industry, r ?as approved August ')• i » -- ~Dl~ the Administrate: on condition that a report be subnitted within :L days on a study of •inirruu rates of or.". This "ao not done ml thin the ,'ne coce, "Caere:: ore, T>i» 'ill iave been ruled in .0 days linit and . parently novo:: compliec" became non-effective SO J rys terns of the order of approval, anc probably court as never e ive because- of lach of C.\ ] bed authority in the Administrator to approve a vo?_untn.ry code changed > u a. prescribed con— dition. Cede T.o. 5^-ij riat Glass: Lianufai c L ou g to s -■& auoroved by |ect to the condition' that Section 2 (b) of Article ill ho section mrovided for tolerance in hours during r oeal; the NIH3, sub; be stayed", TI period r nd Tas considereo 1 a vital part o:' the code "oy certain sianufactu- rers. The approval mith: this condition unassented to, rendered the coce and as such the KIZD • r as -'ithout delegated authority to effectively approve, T-o nerbers of the Industry pro-tested* The code committee refused to organize the coce authority under the provisions of the code until the condition 'as later removed by m order terminating the "stay", ("hich stay had not been specifically ordered). In the mean- tino, the co r e com lit tee clainec. the code -cr. not 1 ;ally effective. Serious compliance oases hinged upon the effective date of this code, ■■hich hoc, not born settler 1 at the tine of the Sc r Decision. (b) AG-hhhhh A representative number of riiscellaneaou! agreements, Iiave been revievred as folio 's: orders of- approval, or -17 - (a) Agreements by the Prcsid it proving labor provi- sions of AAA co-' . (b) Agreements o. 'tidily completed codes, "Hied to the Cotton Tortile Industry. These -ere or cert 'in provisions -'hich received, the President' s fomal approval in r.c.v.nce of a -reci-icnt upon the "hole codes. Such partial agre* aonts -.'ere : ir.de subiect to the sane conditions as applied, to the Cotton Textile Code. "Pith the final roval of the Cotton Te.mtile Cod.o these conditions -ere automatically satisfied. ITo administrative difficulties or other interruptions to tlie • regular procedure in handling these cr . , ue to the added conditions of approval, rrc recorded. (c) A.IffXyHTS A large number of orders o roval of amendments to codes --ere reviewed, and ver-- Ic- conditions in the orders of approval found. In general, amendments --ere not subject to pressure :'or approval. They -ere so carefully c.-^C crlr.l2r considev at changes as required -ere Made and assented to prior to presentation for approval-. Such conditions as appeared r ere in the main simple (eicample shpvm belo' ')•(*) and. not vital to the Industry, and loreover, ooulc he pres- cribed -ith full legal effectiveness by reason o:; the .revisions of Section 10 (b) of the Act, and 1 , the delegation of those po - ers of modi- fication to the Administrator "vS later to the NISB specifically by Executive orders l~o. jfv5-A'm" No, -f"3 respectively, (d) 0THE2 L3B02 AD::iiIIST?ATIv3 ACTIOHS A vast nuriber of minor ; dninistrative actions -ere acconplished by approvals of the Administrator, t fcional Industrial Hecovery Hoard, the Division Administrators, r-.:v' the Assistant Administrative Officer for Code Authority Budgets, for such tattexs as approval of methods of code authority selections, code authority elections, by-la-s, trr.c'c prrcticc complaints' committees and pirns, budgets, etc, A large proportion of these approvals -xre subject to conditions in order to adjust the documents to 31.1ft, )olicy, The for. -:.:( retire- ments for these documents -ere promul istrative ore ers from time to tine, rnc P. hority to i lpose cone itionr t.s inlierent, 3 i position of conditions -- , n the vast lajority x' c"ses, to permit the functioning of the - einistr-.tive rgency involved, ••here only minor "/."just :ents to "olicy - r ere deemed necessary •hich -'oulc. (*) E: : C. lent Indusi • A tent ITo. ] oved V.r.~ 11, 1$35 by K.I.m.3. subj ct tc conditions: (1) f.'/t a tr-dc prrct: i Lcablc to ont to U.S. Government at " rates be stayed, to afford ti ic for further stuc . (.".) That Article covering nor— consent to lodification b^. dctctcd. i -IV. 5~ not prevent proper functioning. These cnne.it ionr. 1 . oro.crc of approvr-l pre sontoc 1 no difficulties in rr.l , er.ccpt in obtaining; evidence of satisfactory conpliancc rith ;. 'terns ■ lioro further action \rv.s rccruin V. p^ ^ -17 - 3 . IV WHAT ATTEMPTS ME TC O BTAIN j F OG33E PBOPONBNTS TO CGxTDITIGNAL CI-J3KR8 C. . .."",JV Frior to the conditionel n i irovals I >ars to have been, in general, considerable effort in most codes to bring them into conformity with policy, but due to the pressure to get codes approved, impatience with the last adjustments pfter prior extended delays resulted in abandon- ment of efforts to obtain nssent to these lost changes, deletions and additions and the -oractice of taking care of them by conditions imposed in the orders of approval. In code No. 1, Cotton Textile Industry, and code No. 6, Lace Manu- facturing Industry, effort was made and asseat to adjustments received before the effective dates of the cedes. In the other codes condition- ally approved, which have been reviewed, there seems to have been little or no attempt to obtain prompt assent of the proponents to the conditions, in many cases months elapsed, and in some cases no attempt -as made to obtain assent. 9844 -177- CHAPTER V HAT ".^RS THE iuOST FRSQAJ.r/T TYPES OF CONDITIONS IN CHEERS OF APPROVAL? The Orders of Approval of 557 Codes "'ere examined for conditions. Of these codes, 261 were found to contain froia one to f^ur or five con- ditions, some more, a rough examination of many wore supplementary codes atroears to silo 1 -' an even greater oroportion approved conditionally. Uost conditions were of only routine import in their effect upon the conduct of their business by members of the industry concerned, but a number "ere of vita], import and amounted to forcing a code upon the industry. (A tabulation of details of various types of conditional orders is .given in Appendix "3" hereto.) The most frequent types of conditions ^ere; (a) In early codes, the condition that an administrative body be created. This led to the code authority. (b) Condition that the by-laws of the participating association be changed to correct discriminatory provisions. (c) Condition that reports on labor statistics be submitted. (d) Condition that attempt to interpret or modify Section 7 (a) of the Act oe eliminated. (e) Condition that provisions for classif ic»tion of custom- ers be stayed pending investigation. (f) Beginning about February 1, 1934. Condition that waiting period between filing of prices and effective date thereof be stayed and hearing held thereon. (g) Condition that homework oe prohibited and a study of same made. (h) Condition that hearing may be held, at option of Administrator on any provision and subsequent orders have effect of condition of approval. (i) Condition that a "hedge" clause reserving consti- tutional rights if the code be modified r 3s to be deleted-. (j) Condition that provision prohibiting coupons or pre- miums be stayed. (k) Condition that code authority submit recommendations to adjust hour and wage provisions to conform with other codes. 9844 -178- CHAPT3R VI mu? icciqSiti^g or adiii:;i q. 3l^t..j ly cpiditioital OHDERS 0? APPROVAL? The principal necessities of condition?! orders of ap roval as used were to expedite the approval of coles "here sponsors -rare tardy or difficult to roach in assenting to changes, or adverse to the changes which established policy required. Many codes were subjected to orocrastination so marked as to make it ap 5ear they were being puriosely delayed by the sponsors by the de- vice of including provisions re-D-ugnrnt to administration ->olicy. The Administration was loath to specif lordly utilize Section 3 (d) of the Act and the alternative 'selected was the conditional order of approval as a supposed moans of prefferving a voluntary status under Suction 3 (a) and force a code on the stalling industry. There is verbal evidence that some conditions of ppproval were in- serted at the instance of sponsoring comuttees to take from those con- mi ttees the onus of failure to include or orccludc provisions conforming to the desires of certain members o:~ their industry, but "hich the H3A would not oermit. In other words to "save the face" of the committee. 9844 -179- CHAPTEH VII i/i liT fvifGdCd of coiipiia:;^ or? hoi^coddLiAiicz: uith coitdiipxts or approval s^: 10 :c found? t/iiat "a s the legal ddirdCT of :.oi^coi.i?Luifc^ ? In the cases of code IIo e 1, and code No. 6, heretofore discussed, conditions were incorporated in the code or fully satisfied end con- nlied with* In other cases the compliance was usually very tardy where action by industry agencies was required and even though a time limit was set, conroliance was often not complete before that date. (As instances see codes No. 12; ITo 14 and No 493.) In numerous case::, a condition of approval required reports on hours an:-, wages from all members of the industry which was not complied with generally or fully without strenous effort on the -oart of the deputies, once the code was approved* In the cases of conditions in the orders of aroroval for minor actions compli P ncc wa,s usually prompt or satisfactory adjustments made and very little difficulty experienced. The legal effect of non- compliance with conditions in the approval order for code w< s in general to render those codes non-effective in many instances by the very wording of the order and in many instances where approval by the President was to render such codes in fret proscribed codes. Many conditions of approval carried time limits for the carrying out of the condition and th code ; "-err legally effective u i to that limiting date, but thereupon because ineffective until the condition was satisfied. Still other codes were approved subject to the condition that all members of the industry make reports from time to tine. Such codes effective at the st^.rt legally lapsed into a non-effective status whenever one member of the indus- try failed to render p required re )Ort. Many codes after January 1, 1934 were approved by the Administrator or by the "AI3A with conditions vitally adverse to some or all the members of the industry, without industry assent. The effect was tha.t the... codes cere, in f-ct proscribed, and as such the Administrator and the 'dlllA were without dele.™: ted authority to arrorove. Such codes wore non-effective legally. 9844 -180- A?TS3 VI : I COULD T EKED COhDITICfS •'.AVE 3 S5I T I'fC: R~ hhT ED n: t.t: c: pis •5""T v a; pe lvis" ;yi?j.(-ut ui : duj : difficulty? In a very large majority of cases the conditions imposed by tlie order of approval of coles were of a miner nature and with very little further effort assent to incorporation within tie code itself could nave "been readily obtained, definitely pre- serving the voluntary nature of such codes and obviating the danger of legal non-eff ect-veness through failure of compliance. In many ot.. or- cases where the conditions required were of an important nature and assent not obtainable, or the industry was using these required provisions to stall off approval^ there* was still the avenue of the prescribed code under Section S (&) of the Act. There is n: doubt but that Section 3(d) should have been specifically used frequently. Such action would have greatly speeded codification and removed the tendencies of many industries to stall off approval. It would .also have brought bettor cedes in tne later stages of codification. 9844 -131- CHAPTER IX FROi.i AN EVALUATION O P ThP EX~EPI ZP3Z P^ LaTED ABOVE ;T HAT CONSTRUCTIVE SUGGESTIONS CAN 3E hATI TO GUIE3 KEE 7 LEGI SLATION A*03 PROPER PLANS FOR APMIHISTPu A/.'ION TOUCHING- UPON TIJZ U3 U OP CCl-jy.lICV-'LL C'-JPEilS OP APPROVAL ? The principle as set forth in Section 3(a) of the Act fcr voluntary codes is believed to be sound, namely that the President should have the power tc impose conditions that must be met in a voluntary code as a requisite precedent to his approval out the wording should have been so clarified as tc indicate that every cede approved as a voluntary code was definitely that, and that it should contain nothing not actually assented to, so that in every such case necessarily a clean order of approval could have been issued. Failing assent the required eliminations, additions or alterations should have been made in the code itself, indust^ invited to assent thereto, and failing to do so, the code should have been promptly prescribed under Section 3(d) of the Act. Much confusion as to legal effectiveness would thereby have been avoided at the time of approval or subsequent thereto. The provision under 3(a) of the Act should be reworded somewhat as follows: tt The President, as a requisite precedent to approval of any code voluntarily a rnlied for, may require the elimination, addition or alteration of such provisions therein as he deems necessary for the protection of consumers competitors, employees and others in furtherance of the public interest, and any such code voluntarily applied for shall, upon full assent when altered as so required, be approved as a voluntary code. In the ab- sence of such full assent of the proponents, the pro- visions cf Section 3(d) snail an ply. The President subsequent to his approval of any voluntary code may grant such exceptions to, or exemptions from any pro- visions thereof which may be applied fcr, and as in his discretion he deems just and necessary to effectuate the policy herein declared." 9844 —isc- pa: lT ?IVE a p p : : : 3 i c 2S 9844 -183- JLFF3HDIX No. 1 WJEXFLOEZD S0UKC2S 01' I^TiniAL L'Oli FUHTIGB STIDY. The Code Histories should contain nuch valuable information on con- ditions in the orders o ' ap >roval« Chester II, Section 1-4, is allocated this subject b j the standard Code History Outline. Administrative- Order's, includin ■ the scries under the different codes, should show conditions thr t vrero included in any ord rs issued as code ad- linistrrtion rets in conjunction with the a-roroval of stays, amendments, rations and exceptions, classifications, rulin ;s, etc. Arxndi:: JTo, C-cutliu s the subject of this part of the study in detail and will be found to suggest areas for further research. 9344 umm .. appendix no . 2 conditional orders of approval (Outline) '. . "*'i"73 Appendix No. 2. PART I Conditional Orders of Approval of Codes, Agreements and Amendments. 1.0 Introductory 1.1 Statement defining subject and field embraced 2.0 Basic sources covering subject 2.1 Provisions in NIRA 2.11 Powers conferred upon the President 2.111 Concerning codes voluntarily applied for 2.112 Concerning codes imposed 2.2 Delegations of power of approval made to Administra- tor and the NIRB 2.21 Authority for delegation 2.22 Reasons leading to delegation 2.23 Executive Orders making delegation 2.24 Reservations in delegation 3.0 Use of conditional approval 3.1 By the President 3.11 First code for which used 3.111 Purposes of conditions 3.112 notification to proponents 3.113 Portion of industry actually affected 3.114 Evidence of industry assent 3.115 Reaction of industry and labor 3.12 Other codes for which used that presented unusual circumstnnces (3.12, 3.13, 3.14, etc.) 3.2 By the Administrator and NIRB 3.21 First Code for which used 3.211 Purposes of conditions 3.212 Notification to proponents 3.213 Portion of industry actually affected 3.214 Evidence of industry assent 3.215 Reaction of industry and labor 3.22 Other codes for which used that presented unusual circumstances. (3.22, 3.23, 3.24, etc.) 4.0 Development of Policy 4.1 Policies announced in Executive Orders, if any 4.2 Policies announced by the Administrator and NIRB 4.21 Use of provisions of Office Orders Nos 63.63A and 633, January 27, 1934 4.3 Circumstances attending first use of conditional order of approval 4.31 Facts presented and recomendations 4.311 By Division Adninistrator 4.312 By Deputy 4.313 Reports of Advisory Boards 4.314 Legal comment 9844 —loo-* 4.32 Considered by •-.'horn and analysis made 4.33 Statement of policy, if made 4.4 Policies, if any, announced on subject by policy groups, viz: 4.41 Policy 3oard created by 0.0. #35, Sept, 16, 1933 4.42 Policy 3oard reorganized by 0.0. 7 r55, Jan. 6, 1934 4.43 Policy Committee created by 0,0. #58, Jan. 12, 1934 4.44 Policy Boards created by 0,0. #74, Mar. 25, 1934 4.45 Assistant Administrator for Policy under 0.0. #83, April 9, 1934 4.46 Advisory Council created by 0.0. yf89, May 21, 1934 5.0 Discussion of legal requirements dictating necessity in orders of approval for certain conditions 6.0 Substantive analysis, of all conditional orders of approval (Codes - Amendments). 6.1 Frequency of use Codes Amendments Total orders of approval to May 27 , 1935 Without condition Containing conditions 6.2 Classification of codes as to groups where conditional orders of approval were most frequently used 6.3 Lost usual forms of conditional orders- of approval in successive stages of code making. 6.4 Conditional orders of approval in specific cases which industry or labor regarded as altering code vitally 6-5 Evidence of degree of industry assent 6.51 Specific assent 6.52 Tacit assent 6.53 Opposition 6.6 Types of conditions imposed 6.61 Hours, wages, tolerances, other labor provisions 6.62 Administration 6.63 Classification 6.64 Trade Practice 6.65 Reports required 6.66 Control of production and allocation of business 6.67 Price or cost accounting 6.68 Other 7.0 Substantive Analysis Agreements under Section 7 (b) of the NIEA. (Breakdown to be developed upon examination of data.) 8.0 Evaluation 8.1 Justification for use" 8.11 To avoid approval delays 8.12 To override opposition to established policy 8.13 To protect labor interests 8.14 To protect consumer interests 8.15 To protect industry interests 8.151 Small companies 8.152 Large companies 8.153 Overlapping industry interests 8.16 To avoid illegality 8.17 General discussion of other reasons 9844 ■I - 1 •- 8.2 Reaction of industry or labor 8.21 Compliance 8 . 22 Non-compliance 9.221 »ct 3.222 Opposition 8.223 Challenge of authority under voluntary code application 8.23 Enforcement, if any required 8.3 Discussion of compliance or non-compliance vfith the conditions imposed 8.31 Stays, modifications or terminations of oonditions imposed. 8.32 Subsequent extension of time limits specified 8.33 Efforts of IT.R.A. to enforce compliance 8.34 Effects of non-compliance 8.341 Legal effect upon code itself C.342 Effect upon industry 8.343 Effect upon labor 8.344 Effect upon consumer 8.35 Effects of compliance 9.0 General conclusions and constructive su>Yjestions 10.0 Bibliography (Partial suggestions) HIHA Exec. Order ifSl'75 Exec. Order 7 f6543-A Exec. Order ?f6859 Exec. Order -/6205-3 Exec. Order ^6750-C Exec. Order ,,=6949 Administrative Orders in Code Record Section Kinutes of meetings of Policy Groups Vols. II, A and 3 of codes involved 9844 1 T ' —1' J I — FART II . Appendix No. 2. Conditional Oriers of Approval - i.linor Administrative Acts. 1.0 Introductory 1.1. Statement defining subject and the field embraced 2.0 Basic Sources covering subject 2.1 Administrative actions setting up co^e nuthority concept 2.2 Frovision for administrative approvals and delegations of power to approve indicating any limitations of powers • 2.21 Method of election of Code Authority 2.22 Election of Code Authority 2.23 3"~La , "s 2.24 Trade practice complaints plan and committee 2.25 Ir;bor complaints and disputes plan and committees 2.26 Stays and exemptions or terminations thereof 2.27 Budgets -(treated by Code Authority Finance Unit) 2.28 Frice systems 2, '29 Co -it Systems 2.2JL Time extensions for required actions 2.22 Other code authority agencies 2.23 Standards of safety and health 2.24 Lints of haz'arccus occupations 2.25 Applications for increased capacity 2. 26 Flons of allocation of production 2.27 Classification of customers 2.2J3 Lowest reasonable cost 2.29 Modal markup Etc. Etc. 3.0 Use of conditional approvals ( excluding all instances involving correction of unimportant clerical errors) 3.1 By the Administrator 3.12 First important administrative orcer for which used 3.121' Furpcses for which used 3.1211 Legal requirements 3.1212 Administrative requirements 3.1213 To conform to established policy 3.1214 To avoid delays 3.1215 To provide for further study of conditions imposed 3.122 Notification to applicants 3.123 Units affected • 3.124 Evidence of compliance 3.125 Reaction of units affected . 3.126 Discussion of effect of conditions 5.1261 On industry units affected 3.1262 On labor 3.2 Discussion of other typical cases of use of conditional approvals by the Administrator, by the NI3B, or by Division Administrators segregated into the following headings: viz: 3.21 Method of election of code authorities 3.22 Election of Code Authority 3.23 By-laws 9844 -183- 3.24 Trade practice complaints plan and committee 3.25 Labor complaints and disputes plan and committees 3.26 Stays and exemptions or termination thereof 3.27 Budgets (treated by Code Authority Finance Unit) 3.28 Frice systems 3.29 Cost systems 3.21_ Time extensions for required actions 3.22 Other code authority agencies 3.23 Standards of safety and health 3.24 Lists of hazardous occupations 3.25 Applications for increased capacity 3.26. Flans of allocation of production 3.27 Classification of customers 3.28, Lovest Reasonable cost 3.29. !:o dal markup Etc. Etc. 4.0 Development of Folicy 4.1 Folicies announced "by Administrative Orders 4.2 Discission of policies, if my, announced "by the various policy groups 4.21 Policy Board created "by 0.0. #35, Sept. 13, 1933 4.22 Folicy Board reorganized "by 0.0. #55, Jan. 6, 1934 4.23 Policy Committee created "by 0.0. #58, Jan. 12, 1934 4.24 Folicy Boards created by O.C. #74, Mar. 26, 1934 4.25 Assistant Administrator for Folicy under 0.0. #83, April 9, 1934. 4.26 Advisory Council created by 0.0. #89, May 21, 1934 5.0 Discussion of legal requirements dictating necessity for conditions in various orders of approval 6.0 Substantive analysis of all orders of approval of 25 selected codes 6.1 Frequency of use of conditional approvals Total orders of approval considered Without conditions ( *) Containing conditions (*) 6.2 Classification of administrative actions where conditional orders of approval were most frequently used. 6.3 Most usual types of conditions imposed in successive stages of NBA development of Code Administration 6.31 Requiring deletions 6.32 Requiring material amendment 6.33 Requiring future actions (Other than documentary alternations) 6.4 Evidences of compliance with conditions of approval 6.5 Evidences of opposition by industry to conditions imposed 7.0 Evaluation 7.1 Justification for use 7.11 To avoid delays in beginning operation (*) Required typographical corrections not to be considered as conditions ■ 9844 -185- 7.12 To override opposition to established policy 7.13 To protest labor interests 7.14 To protect consumer interests 7.15 To protect industry interests 7.151 Small companies 7.152 Large companies 7.153 Overlapping industry interests 7.16 To avoid illegality 7.17 General discussion of other reasons 7.2 Reaction of industry or labor 7.21 General discussion 7.22 Compliance 7.23 Non-compliance 7.231 Neglect 7.232 Opposition 7.24 Enforcement (if any) required 7.3 Discussion of compliance or non-compliance with the conditions imposed 7.31 Stays, modification or termination of conditions imposed Extension of time limits specified Efforts of N»H.A. to enforce compliance Effect of non-. compliance 7.341 Legal effect upon code administration 7.342 Effect upon industry or industry members 7.343 Effect upon labor 7.544 Effect upon consumer 7.55 Effects of compliance 8.0 General conclusions and constructive suggestions 9.0 Bibliography Executive Orders Administrative Orders (X series; Code Administrative Orders in Cod.e Record Section Deputy Riles 7.32 7.53 7.34 9844 -1? - appeiti:: no. 3 Details of Various T^pes of Conditions in OHDEEtS Or APP30VAL Covering all Basic Codes of Pair Co:roetition 9844 -191- APPROVPP CODS Industry Cotton Textile Industry* ( Condi t i onally approved by the President 7/9/35) *;.ICTE: Executive Order of Jul" 15, 1053, gave final approval to the Code, as air ended with the assent of the In- dustry, raid satisfac- tion of such of the conditions as. were finally required by the President. COITDITIOITS I" ORDER OR APPROVAL (1) Limitations on use of productive 1 machinery not to apply to tire yarns or fabrics for rubber tires for 3 weeks (2) Planning Committee of Industry will submit question of emolo"ee pur- chase of homes in mill— villages, especially in the South, to Admin- istration before Jan. 1, 1954 look- ing toward eventual enrol oj^ee hone- ownership Approval of minimum wages — subject may be reopened if and as con- ditions improve. Office employees be included in the benefits of the Code The existing amounts by which wages in the higher-paid classes, up to workers receiving $30 -oer week, e::ceed wages in the lowest paid class, shell be maintained. Time and one half to be paid in case of overtime for repair shop crews, engineers, electricians and watching crews Cleaners and outside workers excep- ted until Planning and Supervisory Committee submit schedule of mini- mum and maximum hours Jan. 1, 1934 It is interpreted that maximum hours include every employee, whether work- ing for one or more employers. Minimum wage means minimum rate of pay whether compensated on a tine rate, Mece work, or other basis Amount of work of employees after July 1 8 1955 shall not be increased because of minimum wages Any person not consenting to Code shall be given hearing and a tempor- ary stay of liability wending such hearing (12) Approval limited to 4 months with right to ask for modification or renewal (15) Administration to be given right to appoint 5 members on Planning and Supervisory Committee of Industry , without vote (3) (4) (5) (6) (?) IS) (9) (11 9844 -192- . .0. 12 14 19 20 23 pa APPROVED CODH Industry T.'ool Tertile Industry (approved 7/26/35 by the President) Lace ilfg. Indus bry (approved B/14/33 by the President) Photographic LIfg« Ind. (u- .roved 8/19/33 by the President) Fishing Taclcle Industry (approved 8/19/53 by the President) Rayon r;id Synthetic Yarn Pro due i ng I ndus 1 ry ( approved 8/26/53 by the President) "all Pr.-oer ilfg. Ind. (approved 9/7/35 by the President) Salt Producing Indus try (approved 9/7/55 by b President) Undertrear and Allied Pro due t s I'f g« I ndu s t r y ( approved 9/10/3" by the President) 3ituuinous Coal Industry (approved 3/10/33 by the President) coeditioits r 3 or approval Industry committee to be created as a Plaining and 3?air Practice agency; 5 representatives of industry and 5 uithout vote for Adninistration One condition. 3 above. Sane t/-oe r.s Code l T o. One condition. Sane type as Code ""0. 3 above. Association 5y-La-'s to be amended to contain no restrictions as to Asso- ciation membership* Reports required to "be submitted b3^ each employer as to uages, hours, and otherwise as the Administrator nay recniire One condition. Sane tyoe as Code "5o. 5 above. One condition. Sane tyoe as Code "o. 5 above. 5 4 ' "' of 14 da _ 's "or nmufacturers to shov cause "liy the - ' should not be in- cluded under the Code (Sec. 1(c) of definition) (l) Sane type as Code "*o. 14 above (5) Saoe type as Code : T o. 3 above (5) llininon rates not fined in Schedule A nay" be approved or 'prescribed prior to effective date of Code by a supplementary Order. (4) Attempt to interpret Section 7 (a) of the Act in Schedule 3 (Code Sec. (b) of Art. ") stricken out ( ) Clerical rearrangement of linitr>- fcio.n 0: 'inition of e - rolo" r ee placed in Art. Ill instead of Irt. II -193- APPROVED CODS go. Industry 25 Oil Burner Industry •^ approved Q /1 3/33 "0- the President) C-asoliiie Pump Llfg, Ind. (approved 9/13/33 by the President) 23 Transit Industry (approved 9/1 /35 by the President) 31 Line Industry (approved 10/3/33 by the President) 33 hoiler Mfg. Industry (approved 10/3/33 by the president) 39 Pam Equipment Industry (approved 10/3/33 "cy the President)" 41 TTonen's Belt Industiy (approved 10/3/33 b; r the President) 43 Ice Industry (approved 10/3/33 o^ r the President) 44 Boot and Shoe lifg, Ind. (approved 10/3/33 by the President) 3 Silk Tortile Industry (approved 10/7/33 by the President) !0'OITI0I r 3 I" O'rDKl OB APPROVAL One condition. Sane type rs Code ' o. 3 above. One condition* Same type as Code " T o. 3 above. (1) "lorkinr hours in contracts which nay be r en ened shall not be in excess of the minimum recuired by the code (2) Sane tjroe as Code ITo. 13 above Sane t"-roe as Code ITo. 13 above. One condition. Sane type as Code ho. 24 (4) above. One condition. Sane type a,s Code ho. 24 (4) above. One condition. Sane type as Code "0. ..13 above. One condition. Sane t;~oe as Code ho. 3 above. One condition. Sane t"~oe as Coc'.e ho. 24 (4) above hininum wage to apply to lovrest class of workers only t exempting skilled and semi-skilled workers. rrr *&9J3?wtK&fl0* -19 - . o, 3 64 rs ss 10 ; CODE Industry :. Industr , by e President) brella 'T . •, Industr irovec! 10/' /33 by e President) evioos Industr - * 10/. o/:;: by j President) Dress hfg« . I ■roved 10/: 1/ . by bhe President.) Advertising SpeciaJ lajtry roved 10/Sl/oi the President) Icy r nd Pla ; n- duatry (;v rovoc" 11/4/33 ! the President) nd Polishi (:- -roved 11/4/33 by the President) Llachine Tool ! lachinery Industry*' (approved 11/8/33 by the Preside: 3 I3ITI01TS I! '■ • AI-FdC One condition. Sane type as Code ] ■). 3 r.bove. One condition* Srne type as Code 'do* 3 above. One condition* or. -e t"~oe as Code "o* 3 above* (1) '.'■-. ;e scale in .estern area (Art* 71, Sec. 5) stayed until durther hear- ing (S) Pending such stay ninirnta rate shall $14.00 (Art* IV, sec. 7) (3) Application of cod.e stryed r> to manufacture of dresses in cliie? of cotton content until such hearir. (l) '•. 3 and hour provisions shall he srseded by those of the Print- ing Industr* tzhen approved ( L.) Sazae type as Code do. 3 above One cond.ition* .Provisions for ti;ae c;v~. ore- • - dor overtine stayed until iary 1, 19: . Ltion* 5ta~ oi (Art. VI] » Sec* ::) -orovision attenpting to fir: wrices. One condition* Reservation of right on revie 1 o disapprove or modify an;*" action taken ~oi r the supervisor"" 110 Sotton Garnent Industry (approved 11/] the President) (l) 3e1 reouirenents. for acceptable St te prison labor Codes Srne tyoe as Code do. 64 (1) dbove . -19! - , approved cod: Industry co DiTioiis i:t cfjdzs. o? approval 119 ilersTsrint Industry (approved 11/17/35 by the President) 120 ?? >er and Pair Industry (annroved 11/17/35 the President) 12? dot el Industry (aop: oved 11 '17/: 3 by - ■ President) 124 iiotion Picture I. : • (;- roroved 11 (', 7 '[ v. by the President) 1 25 U i ho 1 s t e r: ~ a:- :c Dr a - ■> e r; 'tile Industry (approved 11/27/3! by the President) Provision made "or hearing for determin- ing aderuacy of nininum T7ages established "oy ore code. One condition* Sane type as Code do, 113 above • (1) (2) (3) nod CD (S) ( ) (') ('") (6) (1) Sane bype as Code do. 24 (4) above Sane type - s Code do. 11C above lurthor order shall, constitute a ification od the Code, • tyoe as Code "o. 103 above ?.i dit of rehova! of any nesfoer or the dode /.uthorit"'" and substitution therefor, di ;ht to insure proper represen- tation of the erroloyers or the code uthority Suspends provisio;i regarding ences— sive compensation to executives pendir ■ urther investigation "driters, authors rrd dranatists exerroted ?ron certain code provi- sions, join-; considered in "crea- tive vord" S re t"~oe as Code do. aoove, Grants e::enr>tion fron this Code to manufacturer r/ho has ^oeo:\ opera- tin; ■ "rider another code if do so elects and files intention (") Provision that loon nr" r rot operate t- -o 40 hour shifts "oer Tee:: stayed dor 1loyers, and such re- pealed to local or boards (2) Administrator 'lay within 3 months-, require this industry to bee one -r rt of G-r.aphic Arts Industries and without change definitions or administrative Drovisions, 9844 -197- I ITo. AFFS0V3D CODE Industry ! lo to-Engraving Ind, (approved 12/23/32 by ".etr.il rood and Grocery (approved 12/30/33 by e President) 194 Diouse and Shirt I.fg. Industries (approved 12/30/33 by the President) 196 'Tholesale rood and! Grocery Trade (approved 1/4/34 by the President) 202 Carpet and Rug Llanu- f r cturing Industry (approved 1/12/34 by the President) 204 Plumbing Pixtures Ind. (a Toroveo. 1/13/: the Administrator) 217 .Dental Labor at oi\y Ind, (approved 1/22/54 by the Admini s trator) 231 Surgical Dressing Ind. (approved 1/27/34 hy the Adtiinistrator) CO DITIOITS I'/ OPDEP, OP APPROVAL (1) Same type as Code l'o. 179 above (l) (2) Same type as Code ITo. 179 above (?) (1) Provision purporting to set minimum transportation charges to me reliant stayed 30 days oending hearing (2) Provision previous^ covered V/_ Pederal statute eliminated (3) Same type as Code ITo. 103 above. One condition. Manufacture and sale of specific articles stayed as coming under code until hearing to determine whether or not such nrooerl _r cones under the code. (1) Stay of 30 days on setting up classification of customers (2) Scoe type as Code 182 (l) above (3) Paght of U. 5. './hole sale Grocer's Ass'n to representation on code .authority to be considered (4) Sane type as Code 182 (2) above (5) Same type, as Code 103 above One condition* Volume discount pro- vision stayed. . (Art. VII, Sec. 19 (a) One condition. Sane 196 (1) above tyce as Code "0, One condition. Limitation of hours shall be 40 ewce-ot where there is only one employee in the laboratory when it shall be 44 One condition. Same type as Code ITo. 13 above. BS44 - ..0. APPROVED C0I2 Industry 232 '. ierchandise 'Jr rehousing Trade ( proved 1/27/34 by the Administrator) 233 Railway Erass Car and, Locomotive Jotirnal Dear- inga and Castir s . Industry (approved 1/29/34 "o; r the Administrator) 234 hacaror.i Industry (approved 1/20/34 by the Administrator) 235 Co oh in;; and Heating Ap- pliance Lifg. Industry (approved 1/30/34 by the Administrator) 237 Alley Casting Industry (approved 1/30/34 by the Administrator) 239 Porcelain, Breafcfast Fur- niture Assembling Ind. (approved 1/30/34 oy the Administrator) 240 Advertising Display In- stallation Trr.de (approved 1/30/34 by the Administrator) , • 241 Chewing Sam LIfg, Ind. (approved 1/30/34 by the Administrator) 243 'Slide Fastener Ind, (approved 1/31/34 "by the Administrator) 9844 I0IT8 I" 0?D2 YAL , ' •- Cod? " T o. 13 abov . One condition^ Seme t;^e as Code "o. 13 above. (1) Same type as Code ho. 151 (3) above (2) 0?>en price filing stayed for 60 cays. One. condition. Stay of waiting period between filing of prices and effective date of revised -rice list for SO days (1) Same type as Code ho. 13 above (2) Same type as Code ho. 236 above Ore condition. Sane type as Code ho. 235 above. One condition. Sane type as Code ho. 235 above. One condition* Same type as Code ho. 236 above. (1) Same type as Code ho. 13 above. (2) Same type as Code ilo. 236 above. -199- U)VED CODE CONDITIONS IF OPJ3E3 OF APPROVAL No. Industry 245 Corrugated and Solid Fibre Shipping Con~ tainer Industry (approved 2/l/S-x by the Administrator) One condition. Same type as Code No. 236 above. 2-*6 -paper Disc i.ilk Pottle' Cap Industry (approved 2/l/34 by the Adninistrator) 2<±7 Food -^ish ana Pulp and Paper PI te Industry (approved 2/l/3-± by the Administrator) One condition. Same type as' Code No. 236 above, coupled with oro-vision for hearing within 90 d-\ys if so dec- i red by the Administrator. One condition. Same type.s Code No. 2<±6 above. 2^8 Glazed and Fancy Paper Industry (approved 2/1/34 by 'the Administrator) One condition,. Same tyoe as Code No, 24-6 above. c9 Tag Industry (approved 2/1/34 by the -Administrator) One condition. 2-^6 above. Same tvpe as Code No. 250 ""ire, Pod, and Tube Pie I ldustry (approvea 2/l/3<± by the Administrator) One condition. 236 above. Same type as Code No, 252 Cylindrical Liquid Tight Paper Container Industry (approved 2/l/2*t by the Admir.istra.tor) One condition. Same tyne as Code No. 2^6 above. 25t Athletic Goods Mfg. Ind, •(approved 2/2/01- by the Administrator) One condition. Same type as Code ir o. 13 above, coupled with provision for hearing within 90 days if so desired by the Administrator. 257 Printing Equipment In- dustry and Trado (approved 2/2/3<± by the Administrator) ■"ne condition. * Same' tyoe as Code No, 236 above. 34-*e as Code To. 151 (3) above (2) Same type as Code No. 264 (l) above 267 Used Textile 3ag Ind. (approved 2/8/34 by the administrator) One condition. Same tyt>e as Code No. IIS above. 268. Secondary Aluminum Ind, (approved 2/8/3-* by the Administrator) Cne condition. Same type as Code No. 236 above. 269 Carbon Jdlack Mfg. Ind. . (approved 2/8/34 by • the Administrator) Cne condition. Same type as Code No. 236. 98<*-* - APPROVED COD?. COTJDITIOrS III ORDER 0? APPROVE Industry 2V0 ;' ; ood Heel Industry (approved 2/9/34 \)y the Administrator) 272 Unit Heater and/or Unit .Ventilator Mfg, Ind, (approved 2/10/34 by • the Administrator) One condition. 23C above. One condition, 236 above. Same type as Code Fo, Same type as Code No, 274 Sa 1 ?' and Steel Products fjfg. Indust 1 ";. (approved 2/ 10/ 34 by • the Administrator) One condition. Stays filing of prices for period of 60 days or until a com- pletion of a study of open price asso- ciations "oy NRA. 276 Pleating, Stitching and Bonnaz and Hand Embroid- ery Industry (approved 2"/ 10/ 34 by the President) One condition. Same as Code Fo. 119 above. 278 .Trucking Industry (approved 2/10/34 by the President) 280 Retail .Solid luel Ind (approved 2/14/34 by the President) One 'condition. Vehicles engaged in w rehousing 01 furniture shall register with Code Committee of proposed Code for Household Goods Storage and Loving Trade and if approved, thereafter with the Code uthority. One condition. Same type as Code Ho. 174 above. 281 Laundry Trade ■ (approved 2/ 16/ 3-* by the President) .282 Restaurant Industry , '■ (approved 2/16/34 by the President) (l) 5 conditions setting uo trade areas and control boards therefor. (1) Provisions regarding spread of working hours and number of shifts per day stayed. (2) Work week shall not be increased prio-r* to date of order. (3) Further investigation of stop loss provision ordered. (4) Same type as Code Ho. 119 above. 98<±4 .. No. APPROVED CCIG Industry 285 Railway Ci r ,-uilding Ind. (approved 2/l6/3<± "by the Administrator) 286 Beauty nnd Barber Shop iaechanical Equipment Mfg. Industry (apt) roved 2/16/3^. by the Administrator) 287 G-ra-ohic Arts Industries (approved 2/17/34 by the President) 288 Daily Newspaper Publish- ing Business (approved 2/l7/3<± oy the President) 289 Cloth -eel Industry (approved 2/17/3^ by the Administrator) 290 Photographic kount Ind, (approved 2./l7/3<* by the Administrator) CONDITIO I" 03DER C7 APPROVAL (1) Definitions of Industry and of members of the Industry varied. (2) I. ax i mum hours of po^er nlant em- uloyees decreased. (3) Same tyne as Code No. 13 above. One condition. Same as type in Code No. 236 above. (1) Power given to Labor Board in Sec. 2*, p-Tt I given to code authority and compliance boards, and Section setting up board deleted. Labor Board set up by Administrator with powers and duties. (2) I aximum hours set up not to be con- strued as minimum. (3) Provision for hearing on definitions and other provisions in code. (4) Provisions for -costing code pro- visions as to hours, wages and em- ployment as "ell as the Order. (5) Same type as Code No. 13 above, (6) Same type as Code No. 118 (l) (1) Determination of hours and wages for ne'-'s department workers shall be made not later than 60 days hence. (2) Administration members shall give particular attention to minors de- livering and selling newspapers. (3) This was inserted to give notice that regardless of the hedge againsj modifications under Sec. 10 (b), Pre^icent could utilize the pro- visions of Sec. 3 (d) of the Act. Cne condition, above. One condition. 2 tC aoove. Same tyne as Code 236 Same tyoe as Code No, 98^ -2C3- APPPOVTD CODE CONDITIONS III ORDER OF A'P^OVAL ivO, Industry 291 Wood Cased Lead Pencil Lfg. Industry (approved 2/17/34 by the Administrator) 292 Chillea Car Vhcel Ind* (ap roved 2/17/34 by the administrator) One condition. Same type as Code No. 13 above. Price structure stayed pending further investigation. One condition. Same type as Code No. 13 above. 293 Gumming Industry (approved 2/17/34 oy the Administrator) One condition, 2*6 above. Same type as Code No. 29^ Gummed Label and Embossed Seal Industry (approved 2/17/34 by the Administrator) One condition. 2-.. 6 above. Same type as Code No. 295 r ,aterp^oof Pacer Industry (approved 2/17/34 by the Administrator) One condition. 246 above. Same tyne as Code No. 296 Fluted Cup, Pan Liner and Lace Paper Industry (approved 2/17/34 by the Administrator) 297 Advertising Distributing Trade (approved 2/17/34 by the President) One condition. 246 above. Same type as Code No. (1) Boys 14 and 15 may be employed not to exceed 3 hrs per day be- tween 7 a.m. and. 7 p.m. (2) Same type as Code No. 287 (3) above (3) Fffects of hours and rates of pay of office workers to be reported in 90 days. 298 Wiping Cloth Industry (approved 2/17/3* by the Administrator) One condition. Same type as Code No. 119 above. 300 Lye Industry (approved 2/19/34 by the Administrator) 301 Sample Card Industry One condition. 2-*6 above. One condition. 2*6 above. Same type as Code No, Same type as Code No, 98** - 34- No . APPROVED CODS Indu~.tr;'' 3C4 Outdoor Advertising Trade (approved 2/24/34 by the Administrator) 305 Fibro Can and Tube Ind. (approved 2/24/34 by the Administrator). 306 i!ica Industry (approved 2/24/34 by the Administrator) 307 Stay U£g. Industry (approved 2/26/34 by the Administrator) 308 Fishery Indus t (approved 2/26/34 by the President) 311 Ready Mixed Concrete Ind. (approved 2/27/34 by the Administrator) 312 Narrow Fabrics Ind. (approved 2/27/34 by the Administrator) 313 Steel Tfool Industry (approved 2/2 p ./34 bv the Administrator) 315 Industrial Safety Equip- ment Industry and In- dustrial Safety Equipment Trade (aporoved by the Adminis- trator 3/1/34) 319 Newspaper Printing Press Industry (approved 3/5/34 by the Administrator) 323 Die Casting l'£g. Industry (approved 3/8/34 by tne Administrator) [017S I"-" OEDEH CF APPROVAL One condition. Sane type as Code Ho". 236 above . One condition. Sane type as Code "o 246 above . (1) Importers must be shown to be a representative group before in- clusion. (2) Seme type as Code No .246 above. (1) Same type as Code No .287 (3) above (2) Same type as Code -No .24 (5) above One condition. Sane type as Code "0 . 151 (3) above. One condition. Sane type as Code l T o 236 above . One condition. Stay of homework in the Industry and provision for a study of situations relative thereto One condition. Same type as Code No 235 above . One condition. Same type as Code Ho. 236 above . One condition. Firemen limited to 45 hours rather than 48 -oer week. One condition. Same type as Code lTo . 13 above . 3844 ~2C - APP^OVT.D COHi cosditiOjS i " O-OEZ o;- A??: -OVAL : o . Industry Eorseshoe and A13 ied Products dip.;, lid. (approved 3/8/34 by tae Administrator) 327 Machine Applied Staple and Stapl ing I lachine I nd , (approved 3/10/34 by the Adi lini s trat or ) (1) Same type as- Code : T o .233 above (2) Same t;;pe as Code ITo . 93 above (1) Same type as Code Ho. 236 above (2) Same type as Code do . 13 above 329 Upholstery Spring and Ac- (1) Saue type as Code y'o . 236 above cessories Vf^' Ind. (approved 3/10/34 by the Administrator) 330 Scrap Iron, ITonferros Scrap iletals and Paste ] at e r i al s T race . (approved 2/12/ the President) 331 lull: Drinking Strap, Wrapped Drinking Straw, Wrapped Toothpick and Wrapped Ilanicure Stic 1 : (approved 3/14/34 by t he Ac .; lini s t rat or) 332 Ladies' dandbag lad. (approved 5/14/34 by the Administrator) 333 Canvas Goods Ind. (approved 3/16/34 by the Administrator) i34 Beverage Dispensing Equip* nent Industry (approved 3/16/34- by the Administrator) One condition. Code Authority and/or Administration I'enber shall report whether supplemental code necessary or desirable. (1) Sane type as. Code 17o.. 236 above (2) hinimum and maximum hours made to apply to pea 1 " periods only not exceeding 12 77eeks per year (0) Same type as 'Code do . 96 above (4) Same type as Code do. 153 above. (1) Definition of "semi-skilled" em- ployee stayed until suitable one presented to Administrator. (2) Same type as Code do. 3 above. (1) Same type as Code do. 24-6 above (2) Provision for a general labor s tudy . (1) Same type as Code do. 256 above (2) Same type as Code do. 96 above 341 Fibre and Petal dork Clothing Button lifg.Ind (approved 3/ 17/ 34 by the Administrator) 345 Collapsible Tube Ind. (approved 3/17/34 by the Administrator) One condition. Same type as Code do . 24-5 above . One condition. Same type as Code do. 312 above . One condition. Same type as Code do. 13 above. 9844 APPROVED CODE 3 DITI '3 I" CEDE F .APPROVAL 17o . Industry 347 Llachiner}' and Allied. Products Industry (approved by 3/ 17 the President) '. 349 i ."ay onnai s e I : i< •us t ry (approved 3/21/34 by the Administrator) 352 Flag Mfg. Industry (approved 3/21/34 by the Administrator) 353 Insulation Board Industry (approved 3/22/34 by the Administrator) 354 Snail Arms and Ammunition Hfg. Industry (approved 3/22/34 by the Administrator) 356 Puller's Earth Producing and ! larks t i n Indus try (approved 3/23/34 by the Administrator) 359 Preformed Plastic Pro- ducts Industry (approved 3/23/34 by the Administrator) 360 Brush Mfg. Industry (approved 3/25/34 by the Administrator) 362 Photographic and Photo Finishing Industry (approved 3/23/34 by the President) 363 Ken's Heckrrear Industry (approved 3/24/34 by the President) 364 Clay Drain Tile Mfg. Industry (approved 3/24/34 by the Administrator) (1) Sane type as Cole Ho. 13 above (2) Same type as Code " T o . 287 (3) above (1) Sane type as Code Ho. 151 (3) above (2) Same type as Code " T o . 246 above (3) Hours of Y'atchmen limited to 56 rather than 63 One condition. Same type as Code 312 above . One condition. Hours and wages to Hawaii shall be stayed pending fur- ther order. (1) General amendment to the hour provisions (2) Relative to resale prices (3) Some type as Code Ho .288 (3) above One condition. Same type as Code No. 246 above . One condition. Same type as Code : T o 245 above One condition 238 (3) above One condition, 235 above . Same foe as Code No Same type o.s Code Ho One. condition. Provision made for study and report on the schedule inimum piece rate wares. One condition. Same tyoe as Code Ho 246 above. 9844 ' ). APPROVED CODE indnstr - 365 Sand-Lime Brick Ind. oved 3/26/34 by the Adm inis t "at or ) ' Hetp.il i'onuinent Industry (approved 3/26/3' 1 . by the Administrator) 367 Iletal Treating Industry (approved 3/26/34 by t he Adm i ni s t rat r ) 369 Expanding and Specialty I per Products Industry (approved 3/26/34 by the Administrator) 370 Open Paper Drinking Cup end Round lies ting Paper Pood Container Industry (approved 3/26/34 by the Administrator) 371 Sanitary i'.ilk Bottle Closure Industry (approved 3/36/34 by the Adninistrator) 372 Shoe Rebuilding Trade (approved 3/27/34 by t he pre s i dent ) 373 Infants' and Children's Wear Indus try (approved 3/27/34 by the President) 374 Tannin,;; Extract Industry (approved 3/29/34 "by the Administrator) 377 Reclaimed Rubber Iff g. Ind, (approved 4/2/34 t the Administrator) 378 Peanut 'Butter Industry (approved 4/4/34 by the Administrator) C0i3)ITI0::5 Id 02E3 ! F API -CVAL One condition. Same type as Code To 246 above One condition. Same type as Code ;*c 246 above One condition. Same type as Code "do (1) Sane type as Code No .246 above (2) Hearing ray be had at option of Administrator en any provision, and subsequent orders have the effect of conditions in approving tde code . (1) Same type as Code ITo . 246 above (2) 5' me type as Cede do . 369 (2) above (1) Same type as Code ITo. 246 above (2) Same type as Code do . 369 (2) above One condition. Sane type as Code 3 T o . Three conditions prescribed to avoid overlapping definitions \?ith other codes. One condition. Same type as Code do. 359 (2) above One condition. Sane type as Code ITo . 246 above . (1) Same type as Code Ho .151 (3) above (2) Same type as Code ]Jo . 246 above 9844 APPROVED CODE coin) T r ions iit o.Jiid oi :val Ho. Indus - 382 Transparent Materials Converters Industry (approved 4/4/34 by the Administrator) 384 Funeral Service Industry (approved 4/4/34 "by the Administrator) 385 Railroad Special Track Equipment 1 [fg . Industry (approved 4/ 6/34 "by the Administrator) 586 Umbrella Frame and Um- brella Hardware ilfg. Ind (approved 4/6/34 "by the Administrator) 388 Sandstone Industry (approved 4/b/34 by the Administrator) (l) Sa is t pe rs Code Ho. 246 above (:) S- .3 as Code No. 369 (2) above One condition. Provides that a certain trace practice shall not supersede any Stnte La"'. One condition. Sane type as Code No. 246 above (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) Saae type as Code "Jo . 245 above Same ti'pe as Code ITo . 312 above Insignia provisions stayed until further study be made by NBA.. Code Authority- reorganized to be more representative. Same type as Code No. 13 above. Same t;pe as Code ITo . 246 above Hot a true condition but a rational- ization containing a disclaimer of precedent by I7BA for other codes. In event of revision of labor pro- visions of Limestone Code, Sandstone Industry shall submit like re- visions . 390 Steel Plate Fabricating Industry (approved 4/o/34 oy the Administrator) 391 Insecticide ana Dis- infectant Ilfg, Industry. (approved 4/6/34 by the Administrator) 393 Soft Fibre ::fg. Industry (approved 4/9/34 by the Administrator) 394 Lightning Rod Ilfg. Ind. ( .proved 4/19/34 by the Administrator) 397 Spray Painting and Finish- ing Equipment Ilfg. Ind. (approved 4/19/34 by the Administrator) 9844 One condition. 369 (2) above Same type as Code ITo . One 'condition. Same type as Code ITo. 236 above . One condition. Certain provisions regarding price filing stricken out (1) Sane type as Code ITo. 246 above (2) Same' type as Code ITo . 13 above (1) Sane type as Code Ho . 236 above §-:. 110 APPROVED COZE Ind ustry 398 Barber Shop Trade (approved. 4/19/34 "by the President) 401 Copper Industry (approved 4/21/34 by the Administrator) 402 Sewing Machine Industry (approved 4/21/34 by the Administrator) commons in cam; op apfroval (1) 5 conditions as to designating trade areas, local administrative Boards and assents from represen- tative Trade members before code effective . (l) Substitutes an entire nev; Article VII on Marketing -provisions. One condition. .Some type as Code Ho . 13 above . 403 Bleached Shellac lifg.Ind. One condition. Seme type as Code Ho. (approved 4/21/34 by 236 above. . the Administrator) 406 Boatbuilding and Boat- repairing Industry (approved 4/24/34 by the Administrator) One condition. 235 above. Same t T 'T>e as Code Ho 407 408 Dr. - ' Color Industry (approved 4-/25/34 ty the Administrator) One condition.. Same type as Code No 288 (3) above . Undergarment end Negligee (l) ■' Study and hearing prescribed to Industry (approved 4/27/34 ~'oi r the Administrator) determine whether code authority is representative. (2) Same type as Code !To . 333 above (3) Uo reduction of wages to be made pending above study. (4) Sets up Industrial Relations Board (5) Watchmen and non-manufacturing em- ployees prescribed a maximum hour rate . 4C9 Flexible Insulation Ind, (approved 4/30/34 by the Administrator) 410 Retail Rubber Tire and Batters r Trade (approved 5/l/34 by the President) One condition. Seme type as Code Ro . 236 above. (1) (2) (3) If Administrator determines that an emergency exists, he may determine a lowest reasonable cost. Same type as Code ! T o . 236 above . Code Authority to submit recom- mendations to render hour and wage provisions similar to other codes. 9844 tarn ■I -21 - APPROVED CODS Ho. Industry 412 Loose Loaf and Elan!: Book Industry (approved 5/l/34 "by the Administrator) 413 Pasted, Shoe Stock Ind, (approved 5/3/34 "by the Administrator) 414 Bobbin and Spool Ind. (approved 5/3/34 "by the Administrator) 415 Commercial Fixtures Ind, (approved 5/3/34 "by the Administrator) 416 Leather Cloth and Lac- quered Fabrics, Window Shade Cloth and Roller and Book Cloth and Im- pregnated Fabrics Ind. (approved 5/3/34 "by the Administrator) 419 Soft Lime Rock Ind. (approved 5/7/34 by the Administrator) CONDITIONS IH CEDES of approval (1) Same type as Code lTo . 236 above (2) ; Saiae type as Code No. 369 (2) above (l) Same type as Code ITo. 369 (2) above (1) Hours cut from 48 to 45 as maximum for maintenance creus, engineers, firemen, etc. (2) Same type as Code 'Jo. 236 above. One condition. Same type as Code Fo . 13 above . (1) Srme type as Code Ho . 236 above (2) Same t'-pe as Code ITo . 96 (3) Same type as Code Ho . 288 (3) above (1) Sane type as Code ITo . 236 above (2) Code Authority to submit evidence that averaging hours is necessary in the Industry 420 Gypsum Industry (approved 5/7/34 by the Administrator) 421 Marble Quarrying and Finishing Industry (approved 5/9/34 by the Administrator) 423 Drop Forging Ind. (approved 5/l0/o4 by the Administrator) 424 Spice Grinding Industry (approved 5/ll/34 by the Administrator) (1) Same type as Code No, 236 above (2) Saane type as Code ITo. 419 (2) above (1) Same type as Code Ho. 236 above (2) Seme type as Code Ho. 410 (3) above (3) Same type as Code Ho. 419 (2) above (1) ; >.::imura hours lowered for peak periods, seasonal demands, con- tinuous processes, etc. (2) Sane type as Code 'Jo. 288 (3) above (:) Same type as Code No. 236 above (4) Srme type as Code Ho. 13 above. One condition. Same type as Code No. 151 (3) above. 9844 -211- APPROVED COEE COUDI'TIOIIS HI OKDE31 OF APPROVAL . Industry 426 Paper Inkers' Felt Inc (approved 5/ll/o4 by the Adra i ni s t r a t or ) 450 Package Medicine Ind. (approved 5/15/34 by the Admini s tr at o r ) 451 Toll Bridge Industry (approved 5/17/34 by the Adi tinistrator) One condition. Same type as Code iTo . 236 above . One condition. Sane type as Code T o . 373 above . (1) Sane type as Code Ho. 373 above (2) Sane type as Code Kb. 13 above (3) Provision made for publicly owned toll bridges to become members of the industry. 432 Specialty Accounting Sup- • ply Mfg. Industry (approved 5/17/34 'ov the Administrator) 433 Cotton Pickery Industry ( appr ove d . 5 / 17 / 34 by the Administrator) 436 Pur Mfg. Industry (approved 5/19/34 by the Administrator) 437 Bicycle Mfg. Industry (approved 5/ 21./ 34 by the Administrator) 444 Shoe Pattern Mfg. Ind. (approved 5/26/34 by the Administrator) 445 Baking Industry (approved 5/28/34 by. the President) 446 Canning 'industry (approved 5/29/34 b? the president) One condition. Same type as Code Ho. 235 above . (1) Provision that nothing in the Code shall apply to export trade stayed pending filing of objections for 10 days. (2) Same type as Code No. 410 (3) above. (1) Sane type as Code Ho . 151 (3) above (2) Same type as Code Ho. 274 above. (1) Same type as Code Ho. 14 above (l) . Same type as Code Ho. 236 above (1) Same type as Code Ho. 236 above (?) Stay of provision prohibiting the giving of premiums and coupons (3) Same type as Code Ho. 14 above. (1) Committee appointed for standards of quality and labelling re- quirements, to make report in 90 days. (2) Some type as Code Ho. 14 above. 9844 -'I' - No. APPROVED CCDI! Industry hk8 Optical 7holesa?.c Industry and Trade Approved 5/31/3' ; - by the Adrainistrator U5O Dog Food Industry ( approved 5/31/3''- by the Administrator U5I Candled ck Bedspread Ind. (approved 6/I/3H by the Administrator) ^■55 Metal Etching Industry (approved 6/U/3U "by the Administrator) h^6 Ice Cream Cone Industry (approved 6/h-/3^ "by the Administrator) U58 Wholesale Confectioners 1 Industry (approved 6/o/3-r by Admi ni s t rat r) U59 Bottled Soft Drink Ind. (approved 6/7/3'+ by the President) U60 ' preserve, ilaraschino Cherry and Clr.ce Fru.it Industry (approved 6/0/3^ by the Adninictrrtor) U62 Wholesale Tobacco Trade (approved 6/3/3*!- by the Administrator) conditions IE oiue?. or approval (1) Maximum r of hours made iden- tical reg rdless of population. (2) Cccde Authority net riven power to arbitr at.e labor disputes. (3) Same type as Code No. 19 6 (1) above. (h) Same typo as Code No. 35*+ (2) above. One condition. Sane type as Code No. 2"^6 above. (l) Minimum prescribed for homework and a study and hearing provided therefor. One condition. Same type as Code No. 236 above. (1) Same type as Code No. 23*+ above (2) Same type as Code No. kk^ (2) above (1) Same type as Code No. 236 above (2) Srne type ; s Code No. UU5 ( 2 ) above! (3) Same type as Code No. 151 (3) above| (h) Junctions of wagon jobbers as to maximum hours stayed. One condition. Sane type as Code No. 1 } 4 above. (1) Same type as Code No. 236 above (2) Same type as Code No. 6^ (l) above (female rates and audit oyster)) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Merchandising plan stayed until agreement reached with Cigar In- dustry and Retail Tobacco Trade. Same type as Code No. 236 above. Same type as Code No. 2fk above. New section substituted for price cutting and declaration of an emergency. Hour and wage provision not to become effective for two weeks. SSHU -213- No. APPROVED CODR Industry U63 Candy Mfg. Industry (approved 6/11/34 by the President) 464 Cocoa and Chocolate Mfg. Industry (approved 6/l?/~jM- "by the Administrator) 466 Retail Tobacco Trade (approved 6/15/3^ by the President) 467 Cigar Mfg. Industry (approved 6/l3/3 ! !- by the President) 469 Sulphonated Oil Mfg. Industry (approved 6/26/3H b2 r the Administrator) U70 Aluminum Industry (6/26/34 by the Admini strator) 471 Trailer Mfg. Industry (approved 6/26/34 by the Administrator) U72 Warm Air Register Ind, (approved 6/2S/34 by the Administrator) 474 Needlework Indus try In Puerto Rico (approved 6/2S/34 by the President) CONDITIONS IN ORDER OP APPROVAL (1) Same type as Code No. 236 above (2) Same type as Code No. 445 (2) above (3) Same type as Code No. 151 (3) above (4) Same type as Code No. 119 above. One condition. Seme type as Cede No. 443 (2) above. (1) Same type as Code No. 462 (l) abo^e (2) Same type as Code No. 236 above (3) Same tyoe as Code No. 274 above (4) Same type as Code No. 462 (4) above (5) Same type as Code No. 462 (5) above (1) Same type as Code No. 462 (l) aoove (2) Same type as Code No. 236 Lx. n „ a z _( /-i_._ n -f\ apove (3) Same type as ^oae no. 2/4 aDove (4) Same type as ^ode No. 4(o2 (5) above (l) Same tjnpe as Code No 274 above (1) Code approved for trial period of 90 days. (2) Same type as Code No. 174 above. (l) Same type as Code No. 236 above Stay of provision saying members shall not sell belor; their indi- vidual cost until good cause to the contrary shevm. (3) Same type as Code No. 13 above. (1) Differential discount to large purchasers deleted. (2) Same type as Code No. 471 (2) above. (1) Members .given e::e - iption from cer- tain enumerated related codes. (2) Code Authority to submit plan to issue uniform lrbles rith U.S. Industries. (3) Homeworkers to be paid defficiency they would receive if working at the factory under the Code. 9S44 -214- APPROTTID CC: No . Industry , 474 (continued) 4:75 Yeast Industry (a /proved ?/2/34 by the Administrator) 476 Hatters' Fur Cutting Ind. ( approved 7/3/34 by the Administrator) 477 Public Seating Industry (approved 7/10/34 by the Administrator N 478 Secondary Steel Products Warehousing Trade (approved 7/10/34 "by the Administrator N 479 Cold Storage Door Mfg. Industry (approved 7/11/34 b ,T the Administrator) 480 Structural Steel and Iron Fabri eating Industry (approved 7/11/34 by the Administrator) CONDITIONS IN OltDFR OF APPIIOVaL (4) Commission set up to make recom- mendations for possible code modifications. (5; Study of wage scale and piece work "basis orescribed. One condition. Minimum wage rate in- creased from 40 to 45 cents tier hour. One condition. 151 above. Same ty oe as Code No, One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 236 above . One condition--Code only a) proved for 90 days. 1) Hours and wages staved temporarily until cause shovm why they should not become effective. 2) Members to comply with provisions sending above stay. 1) Same type as Code No. 236 above. 2) Same tyoe as Code No. 13 above. 1) Drection work to be governed by Construction Industry. 2) New wage rate substituted with ex- ception as to hours for watchmen, etc. 3) No employee to be dismissed for reporting alleged violation. 4) Same type as Code 408 (1) above. 5) Lew "selling belo- 1 cost" provision added. Firm of public accountants to make within two months a report of direct and indirect charges. Same tyoe as Code 288 (3* above, i inimum rates of pay set uo by districts. Net.' trade oractices a.cded: purchas- ing belo v - advertised orice; ship- ping in transit privilege to other "ooints than specified in order. (10) Same tyoe ps Code No. 369 (2) above, 6) 9844 ~ !"! F5 A3 - ROVED ClDE Industry L82 Dental Goods and Fqaipment (1) Trade ( ■ >roved 7/13/34 by the Administrator) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) CONDITIONS IN ORDER OF APPROVAL Same tyoe as Code 369 (?) above Came type as Code 480 (2) above Sane type as Code 408 (4) above Model orovision substituted ^s failure to pay assessments under bud -e t . Com;:li~";ce witn code nnd oavment of assessments to enti^l^ member to participate in selection of Code Authority and enjoy benefits. Frohibi. tion of consignment of eqaioraer.t exceot on contract qa- oroved by Code Authority. Fayment of r~batps revised, by new section. 483 Electric Hoist and I cno- rail l v, f£. Industry (aporoved 7/13/ 34 by tne Administrator) One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 15 above. 484 "Thole sale Monumental Marble Industry (aporoved 7/14/34 by the Administrator) (1) ware rat^s and overtime orovisi^ns aooroved pending 90 day stud.v (2) Provision re method of oavm^nt of wqg^s stayed until stav in Retail Trade \o^c- b c ~ determined. 485 Cottm C-innin- Machinery (1) Mfg. Industry- (2^ (approved 7/16/34 by . the Ad.ministra.tor) (3) Sane type as Code 236 above. Maximum hours of heat firemen stayed 60 days. Southern wage rate to be recon- sidered after oeak oeriod in industry. 486 Commercial Vehicle Body Industry (approved 7/16/34 by the Administrator) 488 ffe It Mfg. Industry (aporoved 7/20/34 by tne Administrator) (I s ! Same type as Code 373 above (2) Samp type as Code ,T o. 119 above (3) Same type as Code JTo. 3 above. One condition. Maximum hours of watch- men revised. 489 Safety Razor and Safety Razor Blade Mfg. Ind. (approved 7/21/34 by the Administrator) (1) Sane type as Code No. 13 above. (2) Frovision for sale only thro, recog- nized wholesalers stayed. (3) Penalty p or imitation of labels, etc. stayed. 9844 -■ ^5- AFFP.OVED CODE CONDITIONS IN l^DEl i^ APPROVAL No, Industry 490 Imported Date Packing Ind, (approved 7/22/34 by the Administrator) 492 Stereotype Dry Mat Ind. (approved 7/27/34 by the Administrator) One condition. 236 above. Same typ<= as Code -No. (1) Same tyoe as Code No. 236 above (2) Study orovided for oossibilitv of upward revision of female enrol oy- ees. 493 Industrial Oil Burning Equipment lafg. Industry (aoproved 7/30/34 by the Administrator) 495 Steel Joist Industry (aooroved 8/1/34 by the Administrator) 497 Textile Examining, Shrink- ing and Refinishing Ind. (approved 8/ 6/ 34 by the Administrator) One condition. Members of this industry given blanket excmotion from Oil Burner Industry Code (1) All wage rates and districts set up in Schedule A eliminated and a basic wa^-e with a Southern dif- ferential substituted therefor. (2) Uoon termination of code, only liabilities shall be liquidated damages or unpaid assessments. (3) Same type as Code No. 369 (2) above (1) Same tyne as Code No. 373 above. (2) Same type as Code No. 13 above. ipe Industry 498 Corn Cob (approved 8/7/34 by the Administrator) 499 Refrigerated Warehousing Industry (approved 8/8/34 by t.ie Acministrator) 501 Manufacturing and .Vhole- sale Surgical Industry (approved 8/9/34 by tne Administrator) 502 Upward-Acting Door Ind. (approved 8/11/34 by the Administrator One condition. 119 above. One condition. 369 (2) above. Same ty:>e as Code No, Same tyne as Cod<= " T o, (1) Same type as Code No. 369 (2) above (2) Same type as Code 288 (3) above (1) Sane type as Code No. 13 above. 9844 f— AFPEGVfiD ^GD£ Industry 503 Pretzel Industry (approved 8/11/34 by. the Administrator) 504 Animal Glue Industry (approved 8/ 83/34 by. the Adm ini s t r a t o r ) • 507 Surgical Distributors Trade. (approved 8/24/34 by the Administrator) 508 I nous try of wholesaling Plumbing Products, Heat- ing Products and /or Dis- tributing Pipe,- Fittings and Valves, (approved 8/25/34 "oy the Administrator) 509 f arine Equipment Mfg. Industry (app roved 8/27/34 by the Administrator) 510 Assembled Watch Industry (approved 8/27/34 by the Administrator) 9844 C.CEDITK S I".: CPiDER 17 APPROVAL One condition. Code Authority to inves- tigate within 60 days and report on the ef f e< t of machine operators and oven men and general male labor as to wages. (l) Present hour and -vase provisions, with exceptions thereto, to be ao'oroved for 60 days, and then either those provisions or new orovisions therein prescribed shall be effective, according to the pleasure of the Administrator. (1) Same type as Code No. 369 (2) above (2) Definitions o^" outside salesmen and collectors revised. (5) Hew wage rates and hours prescribed with exceptions thereto provided.. (4) Provision "or handicapoed persons inserted (5) .Vages above minimum not to be re- duced. (6) Provisions made for safety and health of employees (7) Model provision for collecting information from industry (8) }Je^ provision prescribed for imi- tation of design, etc. (9) Same type as Code No. 354 (2) above (1) Same tyoe as Code No. 373 above. (2) Same tyoe as Code No. 236 above. (1) Same tyoe as Code No. 235 above. (?) Provision deleted attempting to tack on freight and other cnar- ?es as cost. (3) Same type as Code Ho. 373 nbove. (1) Substitution of provision for re- turn of defective products. (2) Amended Provision r<= breaching of contracts with' competitor^ (3) I odel hours for office employees/ (4) Same type as Code No. 369 (2) above/ -218- £PFROV£I r : " No . Industry 511 Corrugated Rolled Culvert Fipe Industry (approved 8/27/34 by tne Administrator) 514 Artificial Limb Mfg. Ind. (approved 8/28/34 by the Administrator ) 30NDITI \S IH ORDER CF APPROVAL (1) Same tyie as Co^e No. 369 (2) above (' N Same type ts Code "Jc. 235 above (1) Same tyoe as Code No. 369 (2)above (2) Sane type as Code Hto.507 (3) above (3) No member shall file revision up- ward of filed ofice within 48 hours. 51? Sing Traveler Mfg. Ind. (approved 9/7/34 by tne Administrator) 518 Shuttle I fg. Industry (approved 9/7/34 by the Administrator (1) Order to become effective within 10 days unless good cause shown to contrary One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 517 above. 519 Natural Cleft Stone Ind. (approved 9/11/34 by the Administrator) 521 Adhesive and Ink Industry (approved 9/19/34 by the Adm inistrator) One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 41 S (2) above. One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 410 (3) above. 522 Automotive Chemical Specialties I f g. Industrj' (approved 9/27/34 by the Administrator) 524 Pickle Packing Industry (approved. 10/4/34 by NIEB, G. A. Lynch) 525 Retail Trade in the Ter- ritory of Hawaii (approved in/ 15/34 by NIPJB, G-. A. Lynch) 528 Pecan Shellin - Industry (ao Droved in/ 23/ 34 by NIRB, G. A. Lynch) one condition. Same tyoe as Code No, 4in (3) above. One condition. Same tyoe as Code No, 4in (3) above. (1) Same type as Code No. 373 above (2) Kinimum wag p s as to outside sales- men stayed (3) Minimum wages as to employees en- gaged at least 6n^ of time outside stayed (4) Same type as Code To. 517 above One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 410 (3) above. 9844 -219- APP.aOVED CODE Industry 529 P • iceutic [ ti< '_ lo- in I lc \i3 try 10/ ,""'5/ iTIRB, S. A. Lynch.) 1 Stained ana Leaded Glass ": is try (approved ll/s/34 by NIEi: , W. A. Ha.rriman) 534 Ho r ; e Hai r Dre ss in _~ Ind . (approved 11/ A/ A by 3, '7. A. Harriman) 535 3rattice Cloth Mfg. In . ( a jp r o ve d 1 ; / ' . 5 / T - ; - b y I7IP3, 7. A. : - rri mj 536 Chlorine Control Appa- ratus Industry an Tv (approved 12/18/34 by NIHB, TT. A. Earriman) 538 Women's ITeclrwear and Scarf Mfg. Industry (approved 12/19/34 by NIHB, W. A. Harrim. n) 54r Retail Meat Trade (approved 12/21/34 by the President) CCT-I TIC'S IA OPISh OF APPROVAL One condition* ^Statistics to be gather- ed o;v Code Authority in 4 months with the view of amending or otherwise, the hours and wages provisions in the code. Or : condition. Providing for submission of evidence to support "-age differentials based u ■■■or. classes of products. h . condition. Sam< type as Code ho. 517 above. condition. Same type as Code Ho. 517 above. condition. Same type as Code Ho. 517 above. (l) Exemption given to manufacturers of dresses where such nechvear made in conjunction with the dress in the same shop (?) Same type as Code Ho. 64 (l) above (3) !!aximum cash discount provision stayed pending study, and a maxi- mum provided during that period. (1) Definition of industry amended, .as well as that of "establishment". (2) Same type as Code Ho. 336 (4) above (o) Following provisions stayed until suitable substitutes may be found: . Isrcpresentatlon 'of non-conforming articles; misbranding or labeling; pricing provisions, during emergency other '.vise. 541 Plat Glass Mfg. Industry (approved 12/22/34 by HI?lB,.H. A. Harrino::) 543 Motor Vehicle Maintenance Trade (approved 1/18/35 by the President) One condition. Stay of" exceptions to maximum aours during pea]: periods set up by Ir his try. (1) Some type as Code Ho. 373 above. (2) Price cutting, emergency and. re- coil of bid provisions stayed until further" order. 1844 543 'OYED CODE 1 . stry 544 Auto Rebuildi finishing Trade ( ,r a'oved 1/24/35 "by Preside 545 - i Or anic Products I v us try ( •. ■■ roveo 1'' ,5/55 by ri S, v:. A. Harriman) . rade ( "proved 3/2/35 by IRE, W. A. ! Timan) Ci g ire t te , Snuff , Chew- ing and Smoking Tobacco' .. •r r Industry ( pproved .: '9/35 by the President) 551 Clock Mfg. Industry r >ved 3/26/35 I ■ fl .3, W. A. Harri 552 iiusic Publishing I - Lstry roved 5/4/ .3'? b; 4113, W, A. Harri . 553 Restaurant Trade in the I rritory oj ii (approved 3/5/35 by iTIRB, "V. A. Harriman) 554 G-raghic Arte Industry in ^ rritory of Hawaii ( >roved 3/ ?/35 "cy - , ". ... : rriman) 555 Zinc 4 stry (a; • roved 3/26/35 by , ". A. Harrii 556 -320- :io: t s J"" : a o: approval (.') ; t participating in ... rse'ss- , etc. until after t. ' ■ is initially (l) . - : 4 (3) above. (l) Sane type as Code ho. 333 above. One condition. Provisions guarantee- ing against decline of price either be- fore or '.fter delivery, or canceling of contracts to -.void mrket loss V26. pending further order. (l) Study by Research and Planning on rages and hours provided for rath reservation to Board to take action after due notice as it deems necessary. .0 condition. Same type as Code Ho, 369 (2) above. condition. Approval of code shall not condone or sanction any acts alleged the petitior filed in case now pend— in U. S. District Court, or any de- crees which may be entered therein. (1) Same type as Code ITo . 474 (1) above (2) Same type as Code Ho. 517 above. (1) Same type as Code No. 474 (l) above (2) Same type as Code ho. 517 above (1) (2) Wholesale tail Auto- (l) mobile Sales, Supply Repair, (2) Maintenance and Service In- (3) dustry in the Territory of ii (approved 3/36/35 by .: , W. A. .-.• rriman) 9844 # Same typo as Code No. 419 (2) above Impartial investigator to review conditions in South as to code wages with possibility of revision in 90 da Same type as Code ho. 474 (l) above Same type as Code ho. 517 above. Entire "^rice structure ( jpen price filing, emergency an' 1 accounting provisions) stayed pending showing of need therefor. OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION THE DIVISION OF REVIEW THE WORK OF THE DIVISION OF REVIEW Executive Order No. 7075, dated June 15, 1935, established the Division of Review of the National Recovery Administration. The pertinent part of the Executive Order reads thus: The Division of Review shall assemble, analyze, and report upon the statistical information and records of experience of the operations of the various trades and industries heretofore subject to codes of fair competition, shall study the ef- fects of such codes upon trade, industrial and labor conditions in general, and other related matters, shall make available for the protection and promotion of the public interest an adequate review of the effects of the Administration of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the principles and policies put into effect thereunder, and shall otherwise aid the President in carrying out his functions under the said Title. I hereby appoint Leon C. Marshall, Director of the Division of Review. The study sections set up in the Division of Review covered these areas: industry studies, foreign trade studies, labor studies, trade practice studies, statistical studies, legal studies, administration studies, miscellaneous studies, and the writing of code his- tories. The materials which were produced by these sections are indicated below. Except for the Code Histories, all items mentioned below are scheduled to be in mimeo- graphed form by April 1, 1936. THE CODE HISTORIES The Code Histories are documented accounts of the formation and administration of the codes. They contain the definition of the industry and the principal products thereof; the classes of members in the industry; the history of code formation including an account of the sponsoring organizations, the conferences, negotiations and hearings which were held, and the activities in connection with obtaining approval of the code; the history of the ad- ministration of the code, covering the organization and operation of the code authority, the difficulties encountered in administration, the extent of compliance or non-cc^pliance, and the general success or lack of success of the code; and an analysis of the operation of code provisions dealing with wages, hours, trade practices, and other provisions. These and other matters are canvassed not only in terms of the materials to be found in the files, but also in terms of the experiences of the deputies and others concerned with code formation and administration. The Code Histories, (including histories of certain NRA units or agencies) are not mimeographed. They are to be turned over to the Department of Commerce in typewritten form. All told, approximately eight hundred and fifty (850) histories will be completed. This number includes all of the approved codes and some of the unapproved codes. (In Work Mate- rials No^ 18, Contents of Code His to ries , will be found the outline which governed the preparation of Code Histories.) (In the case of all approved codes and also in the case of some codes not carried to final approval, there are in NRA files further materials on industries. Particularly worthy of mention are the Volumes I, II and III which constitute the material officially submitted to the President in support of the recommendation for approval of each code. These volumes 9768—1. -ii - set forth the origination of the codes, the sponsoring group, the evidence advanced to sup- port the proposal, the report of the Division of Research and Planning on the industry, the recommendations of the various Advisory Boards, certain types of official correspondence, the transcript of the formal hearing, and other pertinent matter. There is also much offi- cial information relating to amendments, interpretations, exemptions, and other rulings. The materials mentioned in this paragraph were of course not a part of the work of the Division of Review. ) THE WORK MATERIALS SERIES In the work of the Division of Review a considerable number of studies and compilations of >.ata (other than those noted below in the Evidence Studies Series and the Statistical Material Series) have been made. These are listed below, grouped according to the char- acter of the material. (In Work Materials No . 17 , Tentativ e Outlines and Sum m arie s of Studies in P rocess , the materials are fully described) . I ndustry Studie s Automobile Industry, An Economic Survey of Bituminous Coal Industry under Free Competition and Code Regulation, Ecnomic Survey of Electrical Manufacturing Industry, The Fertilizer Industry, The Fishery Industry and the Fishery Codes Fishermen and Fishing Craft, Earnings of Foreign Trade under the National Industrial Recovery Act Part A - Competitive Position of the United States in International Trade 1927-29 through 1934. Part B - Section 3 (e) of NIRA and its administration. Part C - Imports and Importing under NRA Codes. Part D - Exports and Exporting under NRA Codes. Forest Products Industries, Foreign Trade Study of the Iron and Steel Industry, The Knitting Industries, The Leather and Shoe Industries, The Lumber and Timber Products Industry, Economic Problems of the Men's Clothing Industry, The Millinery Industry, The Motion Picture Industry, The Migration of Industry, The: The Shift of Twenty-Five Needle Trades From New York State, 1926 to 1934 National Labor Income by Months, 1929-35 Paper Industry, The Production, Prices, Employment and Payrolls in Industry, Agriculture and Railway Trans- portation, January 1923, to date Retail Trades Study, The Rubber Industry Study, The Textile Industry in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan Textile Yarns and Fabrics Tobacco Industry, The Wholesale Trades Study, The Women's Neckwear and Scarf Industry, Financial and Labor Data on 9768—2 . - iii - Women's Apparel Industry, Some Aspects of the T rade P ractic e S tudies Commodities, Information Concerning: A Study of NRA and Related Experiences in Control Distribution, Manufacturers' Control of: Trade Practice Provisions in Selected NRA Codes Distributive Relations in the Asbestos Industry Design Piracy: The Problem and Its Treatment Under NRA Codes Electrical Mfg. Industry: Price Filing Study Fertilizer Industry: Price Filing Study Ceographical Price Relations Under Codes of Fair Competition, Control of Minimum Price Regulation Under Codes of Fair Competition Multiple Basing Point System in the Lime Industry: Operation of the Price Control in the Coffee Industry Price Filing Under NRA Codes Production Control in the Ice Industry Production Control, Case Studies in Resale Price Maintenance Legislation in the United States Retail Price Cutting, Restriction of, with special Emphasis on The Drug Industry. Traia Fractice Rules of The Federal Trade Commission (1914-1936): A classification for comparision with Trade Practice Provisions of NRA Codes. Labo r Studies Cap and Cloth Hat Industry, Commission Report on Wage Differentials in Earnings in Selected Manufacturing Industries, by States, 1933-35 Employment, Payrolls, Hours, and Wages in 115 Selected Code Industries 1933-35 Fur Manufacturing, Commission Report on Wages and Hours in Hours and Wages in American Industry Labor Program Under the National Industrial Recovery Act, The Part A. Introduction Part B. Control of Hours and Reemployment Part C. Control of Wages Part D. Control of Other Conditions of Employment Part E. Section 7(a) of the Recovery Act Materials in the Field of Industrial Relations PRA Census of Employment, June, October, 1933 Puerto Rico Needlework, Homeworkers Survey Administrativ e Studies Administrative and Legal Aspects of Stays, Exemptions and Exceptions, Code Amendments, Con- ditional Orders of Approval Administrative Interpretations of NRA Codes Administrative Law and Procedure under the NIRA Agreements Under Sections 4(a) and 7(b) of the NIRA Approved Codes in Industry Groups, Classification of Basic Code, the — (Administrative Order X-61) Code Authorities and Their part in the Administration of the NIRA Part A. Introduction Part B. Nature, Composition and Organization of Code Authorities 9768—3. - iv - Part C. Activities of the Code Authorities Part D. Code Authority Finances Part E. Summary and Evaluation Cjde Compliance Activities of the NRA Code Making Program of the NRA in the Territories, The Code Provisions and Related Subjects, Policy Statements Concerning Content of NIRA Administrative Legislation Part A. Executive and Administrative Orders Part B. Labor Provisions in the Codes Part C. Trade Practice Provisions in the Codes Part D. Administrative Provisions in the Codes Part E. Agreements under Sections 4(a) and 7(b) Part F. A Type Case: The Cotton Textile Code Labels Under NRA, A Study of Model Code and Model Provisions for Codes, Development of National Recovery Administration, The: A Review of its Organization and Activities NRA Insignia President's Reemployment Agreement, The President's Reemployment Agreement, Substitutions in Connection with the Prison Labor Problem under NRA and the Prison Compact, The Problems of Administration in the Overlapping of Code Definitions of Industries and Trades. Multiple Code Coverage, Classifying Individual Members of Industries and Trades Relationship of NRA to Government Contracts and Contracts Involving the Use of Government Funds Relationship of NRA with States and Municipalities Sheltered Workshops Under NRA Uncodified Industries: A Study of Factors Limiting the Code Making Program LeRal Studies Anti-Trust Laws and Unfair Competition Collective Bargaining Agreements, the Right of Individual Employees to Enforce Commerce Clause, Federal Regulation of the Employer-Employee Relationship Under the Delegation of Power, Certain Phases of the Principle of, with Reference to Federal Industrial Regulatory Legislation Enforcement, Extra-Judicial Methods of Federal Regulation through the Joint Employment of the Power of Taxation and the Spending Power Government Contract Provisions as a Means of Establishing Proper Economic Standards, Legal Memorandum on Possibility of Industrial Relations in Australia, Regulation of Intrastate Activities Which so Affect Interstate Commerce as to Bring them Under the Com- merce Clause, Cases on Legislative Possibilities of the State Constitutions Post Office and Post Road Power — Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Industrial Regula- tion? State Recovery Legislation in Aid of Federal Recovery Legislation History and Analysis Tariff Rates to Secure Proper Standards of Wages and Hours, the Possibility of Variation in Trade Practices and the Anti-Trust Laws Treaty Making Power of the United States War Power, Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Regulation of Child Labor? 9768—4. - V - THE EVIDENCE STUDIES SERIES The Evidence Studies were originally undertaken to gather material for pending court cases. After the Schechter decision the project was continued in order to assemble data for use in connection with the studies of the Division of Review. The data are particularly concerned with the nature, size and operations of the industry; and with the relation of the industry to interstate commerce. The industries covered by the Evidence Studies account for more than one-half of the total number of workers under codes. The list of those studies follows: Automobile Manufacturing Industry Automotive Parts and Equipment Industry Baking Industry Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Industry Bottled Soft Drink Industry Builders' Supplies Industry Canning Industry Chemical Manufacturing Industry Cigar Manufacturing Industry Coat and Suit Industry Construction Industry Cotton Garment Industry Dress Manufacturing Industry Electrical Contracting Industry Electrical Manufacturing Industry Fabricated Metal Products Mfg. and Metal Fin- ishing and Metal Coating Industry Fishery Industry Furniture Manufacturing Industry General Contractors Industry Graphic Arts Industry Gray Iron Foundry Industry Hosiery Industry Infant's and Children's Wear Industry Iron and Steel Industry Leather Industry Lumber and Timber Products Industry Mason Contractors Industry Men's Clothing Industry Motion Picture Industry Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade Needlework Industry of Puerto Rico Painting and Paperhanging Industry Photo Engraving Industry Plumbing Contracting Industry Retail Lumber Industry Retail Trade Industry Retail Tire and Battery Trade Industry . Rubber Manufacturing Industry Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry Shipbuilding Industry Silk Textile Industry Structural Clay Products Industry Throwing Industry Trucking Industry Waste Materials Industry Wholesale and Retail Food Industry Wholesale Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Indus- try V/ool Textile Industry THE STATISTICAL MATERIALS SERIES This series is supplementary to the Evidence Studies Series. The reports include data on establishments, firms, employment, payrolls, wages, hours, production capacities, ship- ments, sales, consumption, stocks, prices, material costs, failures, exports and imports. They also include notes on the principal qualifications that should be observed in using the data, the technical methods employed, and the applicability of the material to the study of the industries concerned. The following numbers appear in the series: 9768—5 . - vi - Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Industry Business Furniture Candy Manufacturing Industry Carpet and Rug Industry Cement Industry Cleaning and Dyeing Trade Coffee Industry Copper and Brass Mill Products Industry Cotton Textile Industry Electrical Manufacturing Industry Fertilizer Industry Funeral Supply Industry Glass Container Industry Ice Manufacturing- Industry Knitted Outerwear Industry Paint, Varnish, ana Lacquer, Mfg. Industry Plumbing Fixtures Industry Rayon and Synthetic Yarn Producing Industry Salt Producing Industry THE COVERAGE The original, and approved, plan of the Division of Review contemplated resources suf- ficient (a) to prepare some 1200 histories of codes and NRA units or agencies, (b) to con- solidate and index the NRA files containing some 40,000,000 pieces, (c) to engage in ex- tensive field work, (d) to secure much aid from established statistical agencies of govern- ment, (e) to assemble a considerable number of experts in various fields, (f) to conduct approximately 25% more studies than are listed above, and (g) to prepare a comprehensive summary report. Because of reductions made in personnel and in use of outside experts, limitation of access to field work and research agencies, and lack of jurisdiction over files, the pro- jected plan was necessarily curtailed. The most serious curtailments were the omission of the comprehensive summary report; the dropping of certain studies and the reduction in the coverage of other studies; and the abandonment of the consolidation and indexing of the files. Fortunately, there is reason to hope that the files may yet be carec for under other auspices. Notwithstanding these limitations, if the files are ultimately consolidated and in- dexed the exploration of the NRA materials will have been sufficient to make them accessible and highly useful. They constitute the largest and richest single body of information concerning the problems and operations of industry ever assembled in any nation. L. C. Marshall, Director, Division of Review. 9768—6 . t n i dajz nor STORE ROOK U. S. National recovery ad- ministration. no. 74 Work materials. ISSUED TO no. 74 MltlM* UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08542 5220 iKaltmlVilQtiiJP. < ■■:■■ H '■ a saBBBta '■•■■■■■ 1Sb»ift*S ■'.•■■■ • • tJKKv imre '■..;'