The following tabulation represents the use of foreign labor in agriculture in the United States from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1950:

1 "Workers contracted" represent the actual number of new entrants placed under contract at the regularly established contract centers. (Harlingen, El Paso, Eagle Pass, and Calexico.)

2 "Workers contract extensions" represent a renewal of a contract for an extended period of employment for the same employers. Distinguish from "workers recontracted" in which case workers are transferred to a new or different employer. The term "recontract" is often used to connote either or both of these operations without identifying which action took place.

Requests for foreign labor processed by U. S. Employment Service, Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1949

1 Mexican nationals were contracted by an employer having operations in Colorado and Montana. Reports from contract center do not distinguish clearly the allocation of workers to the 2 States by the employer.

2 Some employers of British West Indian labor used the workers in 2 or more States in cases where the employer had operations in other States. Generally the transfer of workers interstate occurred during peak harvest conditions and was for temporary periods ranging from 15 to 30 days, after which the workers were returned to their original location of employment. Authority for such transfers had been granted.

3 An over-all authority was issued for the employment of Canadians in the woods industry. It covered employment in all the lumber-producing States of New England. Re-
ports of hires under the program do not distinguish the number of hires by States. Thus, the total is recorded against the State of Maine.

The data assembled in this report are secured from the most current and reliable sources which include payroll records, bond riders, and contract-center activity reports. They
are the most complete records available and include recontracting operations in contracting centers only. Entries under the column marked "Number of employers" include several
employer groups or associations who represent in some cases many individual farmers. The actual number of users would therefore be several times the number indicated by these
figures.

Mr. BAIRD. What we are referring to, if we are going to be charged an average price of recruitment and transportation to the borders of this country, I think that the great masses of these workers, this will show, are to be used in California, Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Arizona, New Mexico, and those areas down in there. Missouri uses quite a number. But we fail to see the justice in heisting the figure on us to subsidize the movement of workers up in that area when they have not used them in the past.

Senator THYE. Mr. Baird, how many months, approximately, do you use the worker in your area—that is, in Mississippi? You request these workers for what months in the spring?

Mr. BAIRD. We have not used them in the past for chopping cotton. We have applications for some 1,500.

Senator THYE. That would be what month of the year?

Mr. BAIRD. May, June, and July-3 months.

Senator THYE. You use them in May, June, and July. Is that the end?

Mr. BAIRD. And September, October, and November for picking our cotton.

Senator THYE. So that when you bring a worker in and he arrives in your area along in May, he will continue for at least 6 or 7 months? Mr. BAIRD. Yes, sir.

Senator THYE. So it is not a question of you getting this worker in, finishing the need of this worker sometime in midsummer, and then this worker would be sent on to some other area of the United States for the harvest where the need of this seasonal worker would be?

Mr. BAIRD. It would not be practical. We would not have a period of over 2 or 3 weeks. We would have to make work for them before the cotton harvest.

Senator THYE. So there is no question, once the workers come from Mexico and arrive in your area, they will remain there for the entire cropping season?

Mr. BAIRD. Yes.

Senator THYE. It is not a question of that individual being sent to some other area of the United States?

Mr. BAIRD. No, sir.

Senator THYE. So you have no concern about getting a pro rata of the expense to some other area of the United States; you have no interest?

Mr. BAIRD. We have no opportunity of getting any pro rata share back; no, sir.

Senator THYE. In other words, just your obligation of getting a man to your area and getting him back from your area to the border? Mr. BAIRD. Yes.

Senator THYE. That is your only obligation or only concern?

Mr. BAIRD. Yes; unless there can be some need developed, say, from the 15th of November on, in which case we could recontract to some other area, but I do not know of any.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you need as many people in the early part of the season as you do in the cotton-picking season?

Mr. BAIRD. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So the number of people you would use in April, May, and June would be minor to what you would need in September, October, and November?

Mr. BAIRD. It would be, say, 1,500 then, and fifteen or sixteen thousand in September. It would be hardly 10 percent.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Senator THYE. What percent of your cotton harvest is now by machinery and what percent is hand picking?

Mr. BAIRD. I would say about 6 to 8 percent is machine. Those machines cost about $8,500 a piece, which limits their purchase over a broad area. And then our area is a very rainy section of the country. It may rain the 1st of October and keep us out of the fields for 2 weeks with those machines, and then it may rain in the middle of October and we cannot use them again until December. If we have a dry season, we can increase that percentage quite materially, but we cannot calculate on it in advance.

Senator THYE. Therefore, you must have the hand picker?
Mr. BAIRD. Yes, sir.

Senator THYE. You have no way of substituting for that hand picker?

Mr. BAIRD. No, sir; there is no way of substituting at all.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you through, Senator?

Senator THYE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Mr. Baird, with further respect to the use of labor in the spring, let's say for Mississippi during the spring season you may require as many as 1,500?

Mr. BAIRD. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. But for the cotton picking you may need 15,000? Mr. BAIRD. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, how much space of time expires between the chopping time and the picking time?

Mr. BAIRD. Approximately 2 to 3 weeks, depending on weather conditions.

The CHAIRMAN. Two or three weeks?

Mr. BAIRD. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So these 1,500 that would be employed for the springtime would have a lapse there of 3 weeks?

Mr. BAIRD. We would have to make work for them.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand. Would it not be practical to send these choppers, say, a little farther north to keep up the same kind of work of chopping, and then get the rest of your labor in the fall when you need them for picking?

Mr. BAIRD. We have never considered that possibility.

The CHAIRMAN. You have not?

Mr. BAIRD. I doubt, Senator, if that would be feasible, because, for instance, Missouri is going to have their choppers in a good deal earlier. They start chopping in May or June, too.

The CHAIRMAN. You find no difficulty, then, in giving these people, the early comers, work throughout the entire time they are on the farm?

Mr. BAIRD. We have through our council, which is an organization of farmers, stressed that responsibility of the individual to carry out the intent of his contract, and we have some very successful users of Mexican labor, and they do make work for them-clearing off ditch banks and new ground, just any number of things. The Mexicans are happy about it.

81261-51-8

Senator, before our testimony is concluded, Mr. Keith Mets would like to file a supplemental statement. He is a member of our group. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Are there any further questions? Senator MUNDT. I have some.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Mundt.

Senator MUNDT. I notice, in looking over those charts, you have been using these Mexican laborers down there in 1950 and 1949. Does it go back quite far beyond that-1948, 1947, 1946?

Mr. BAIRD. 1948 is the first year we were able to get them in, sir. Senator MUNDT. You have not used any before 1948?

Mr. BAIRD. Before 1948, see, this program was under the Department of Agriculture during the war, and we had German PW's at that time. We had PW camps all through that area, but we were never able to get Mexican nationals during the last war. We were never in the picture of negotiations or anything.

Senator MUNDT. During 1948, 1949, and 1950, then, it was a completely individual enterprise and you made your own arrangements with the Mexicans?

Mr. BAIRD. No, sir.

Senator MUNDT. Was there legislation at that time to bring in Mexicans?

Mr. BAIRD. There has been since 1948 an agreement between our Government and the Mexican Government, by negotiation by the State Department, for the importation of these laborers under certain rules and regulations.

Senator MUNDT. But no legislation?

Mr. BAIRD. No, sir; no legislation.

Senator MUNDT. Is the purpose of having it done by legislation something that the Mexican Government has wanted? Is that the

reason?

The CHAIRMAN. It was done under legislation before, Senator.
Senator MUNDT. It was?

The CHAIRMAN. That is, it permitted the entry of these laborers, as I understand it, and the farmers were called upon to give a bond, which they seriously objected to, for the return of the Mexican laborers. And when a time came to renew the contracts that were about to expire-by the way, they expire June 30-it was because of differences of opinion between our Government and the Mexican Government that it was thought wise to discuss these matters before another contract was entered into. So what we are doing here is more or less to conform with these new agreements or understandings that have been entered into between our Government and the Mexican Government.

After this bill is passed, it will form the basis of future contracts between us the the Mexican Government.

Mr. BAIRD. May I add one thing further in clarification of what is in his mind, I think?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. BAIRD. The Mexican Government-you see, our over-all needs here, with this mobilization draining our workers off the farm, and the over-all production increases that we are going to have to meet, are necessitating probably over all an extra pool of labor of four or five hundred thousand workers. Our only close available source for labor in volume is our neighbor in the South.