I
3# ='::7
«■
^—7.
- /;
• • '/ ~
&■■■ '
& -■.. ■
7/ ■ -/.-/is.
//.'v..
• 7.7";
-•• ■ <
■■'J*
m
*.3?i
■ x
vm-
■SI
9
•\, 8
■ #
-7
vx> U> 77' /
U.S.FEDERAL WORKS AG3NCJ
Work projects administration
Workers, migrants, and jobs by
John N. Webb
7 f$
y':-. A-* '
;
a. 7
>'■
m
4 <
■
, 1
' - ':7^sn.-
,V- -<?* ■
$£ ' > -• * "
fy • . X"'-
' • . • :. :x.
■ yX';- .
, :, ■' ' "* •'
x- /^:X- " . :: sf',-7
■':■ X , ? "X ' k
7. \$k ; 1-7-^7 'V;\
- - "" ■ '
'77 X4... . if
. . 7 ^ -•*'•" " s;-\ \ ^ A.'
f t .\J; ;• *, -t f
| :X' •< -s '
: AA - •" .77 ;7°'i . ;-VX
; :-;C i. • *
^ f%# -O'V- " 77
' -
.X'/.;/- *--'n . - - v
■ 7r "T? " >.„
f$i". x ' ■ m
,' • ' X >
^7? 7 7
B
-•> -is7".
*ys
x, -7^
,-•'7
:;.#77
i'r^i
jr
7-•:
-■877
;7Ss>v'S
; :
■ , ".A : :
- -
:;«S77C
:>s«
•^;.7 : •■•:.
<7.-ri'-STi; / . •••. . 7..•'>••
"• ?^w-:
X'"" 77-
/^'S; 7'
■: XrX|'
V :
7V7
'T'f;
^77#
■X.'-N,'; ' ;-7'
:7<777
S
X"
'777 ;/7-
a «7V'7:-
; - V7--
1 If^'r ■
v <. 7
^'5
a v
S,W.7
V 777 7 "■
'••:i . ;y:. "'J;' " VT'' - —*-«7.
yp' ' " 'f' "X '
\& ■
■¥ -.'Tiv:
7
'•••/7;" • •' "
'7
■:'4'- 7 ;;
: S
. d"'
7
7- i" 7-- '7 , ; v 7' ~ » .
mm&A umtm* m
~~ by
John N. sebb
fork Projects Administration
Migration has played many mc varied roles in the world's
history. The no ti voting for owe have at times been religious or
political non-confomity, at times the imperialistic aims of states¬
men, and at times the pressures arising out of the economic distress
of particular groups In the population.
from the record of the past it seems fairly evident that
the more important migrations have had their beginnings in periods
of social and economic readjustments. In fact, it might be said
that the oomnon element in all migrations is ths attempt to solve
some problem at considerable importance to the individual or to the
group participating.
In approaching most social and economic subjects the student
has the choice of alternative methods. He may Ibllow the theorist and
attempt a solution by way of logic| or he may take ths more pedestrian
way of the statistical Mescrlptionist" and defer an attempt at solu¬
tion until he has gathered and classified all the facts within reach.
The student of migration, however, is likely to feel that the theoretical
The writer Is Indebted to Albert Uesteffeld, Division of Research, ,
for much assistance in the preparation of this paper.
- 3 -
and, he went on to say, "the epeciea of industry — of which the
produce is likely to be of greatest value ... every individual, it
ie evident, can, in hie local situation, judge much better than any
2
eta teaman or lawgiver can do for hiau"
Labor mobility, from this point of view, was not in itself
a problem; the problem arose out of misguided attempts to control it
by state regulation. In Adam Smith's logical scheme, the mobility of
labor was a corollary of his basic assumption that laft to himself
every man would be governed by the material advantages to be gained
from his actions, tovioualy, then, under such a system, workers, like
commodities, would flow almost automatically from an area where they
were in lees demand to one wher® they were in more demand. But Ada®
Smith was a keen observer of the contemporary scene as well as an ac¬
complished logician. In another section of his -«ork he notes the fact
that wages in a large town may actually be 20 to 25 percent higher
than at a few miles distant. This, he says, does not seem sufficient
difference to transport a man, although it would bring about an im¬
mediate shift of the meet bulky commodities. He explains this apparent
failure of the individusl to act in his best material interests with the
statement thnti
After all that has Wen said of the levity and
inconstancy of human nature, it appears evident
from experience that man is of all sorts of ,
baggage the aost difficult to be transported,
^Op. cit., p. A00.
^Op. cit., p. (i?»
- A -
These quotations from "The Wealth of Nations" provide both
an indication as to hoc migration was to fit into the logical schema
of the economist, and a vary clear warning that observations on human
behavior did not fully sustain the theory. But Adam Smith apparently
had no doubt that the tendency of workers to move in accordance with
economic advantage was sufficiently like that displayed by commodities
as to require no further inquiry.
Nor did the followers of Adam Smith feel that labor mobility
offered any special problem when they discussed the supply of, and the
demand for, labor. Labor mobility was for each of them an assumption
which required no more discussion than -did their assumption about the
basic forces that controlled all human actions in the pursuit of the
"material requisites of wellbeing."
Indeed, Alfred Marshall, writing more than a century later,
had gotten no further on the subject of migration than Adam Smith.
Compare the following statement from Marshall's "Principles of
Economics"^ with the citation frcm "The wealth of Nations"!
Sines, however, no one can deliver his labour in
s market in which he is not present, it follows
that the mobility of labour and the nobility of
the labourer are convertible terms j and the un¬
willingness to quit heme and leave old associations...
will often turn the scale against a proposal to
seek better wages in a new place,
*8th Edition, p. 567.
- 5 -
The assumption that labor mobility una one of the obvious
responses of th® -worker to differential economic advantage is under¬
standable in view of two facts. In the first place, the prevailing
concept of human nature was that the economic motives of every man
were controlled solely by a rational self interest; in the words of
Adam Smith, "The uniform, constant, and uninterrupted effort of ever;,'
man to better his condition."5 jn the second place, the general pattern
of economic theory was formed before there was any systematic collection
of factual observations upon economic behavior.
The increasing interest in migration during recent years sug¬
gests to me that consciously or unconsciously students are unwilling
to accept the assumptions of the neo-classical economists aa a full
explanation of the motivating forces. On this point 1 should like to
offer an interesting bit of evidence. In the excellent bibliography
included by Dr. lorothy i, Thomas in her work "Migration Differentials,"
the year 1885 (the ye fir of Iiavenstein's work) is the earliest entry.
Between 1885 and 1918 only 6 studies are listed. For the years 1920
to 1929 there is a list of 23 studies, and for the period 1930 to
1937 there are 87 studies.
Thia growing interest in migration comes at the end of more
than a century and a half of population mobility on a scale and with a
^ A dm Saith, op. clt., p. 376.
- 6 -
degree of successful relocation thst are not likely to be met with again,
let we have neither a clear understanding of the forces th«t initiated
and directed this mass movement nor any well-defined theory of population
mobility to serve as an integrating factor in studies at the present
time.
Economic betterment is too pronounced an element in migration
to allow self-interest to be ruled out as a partial explanation; but
at the same time we have too much evidence on human behavior in respect
to migration to accept the asevaaptlon that it is p.lwsys rational. ttuch
of migration that has taken place in tie past 10 to 2D years has clearly
been a waste of effort; and from a purely logical point of view, a grest
deal of migration should have occurred which did not materialize.
Under the circumstances we hsve tended in our studies of migra¬
tion to employ a method that has served investigators in many fields.
,Ve have put aside, for tin© present si least, any attempt to say why a
particular individual does or does not migrate, and have turned our
attention to the factors that are associated with migration. @e do not,
for example, either accept or deny the assumption that mobility is ®
function of differential economic opportunity; we consider economic
opportunity as one factor and study a group of migrants for the purpose
of finding out iiow their response differs from the response of a group
of non-migrants in as nearly rts possible the same economic situation.
- 7 -
Out of this procedure there is in the making a body of in¬
fer mat ion which, although It resists generalisation at the present
time, is gradually providing the basis upon which we may confidently
expect to generalise in the future. Moreover, we have already found
that not one, but many, factors are operative in initiating or in
preventing migration, and that the relationship of these factors to
each other ie extremely variable. In the remainder of this paper I
want to discuss a few of the factors that are related to one aspect
of migration - tho adjustment of workers to jobs by Mans of labor
mobility.
Among the personal ae distinct from the economic character¬
istics of migrants, age Is the one differential factor on which all
statistical analyses of migration seem to agree, rtudies of such
different groups as rural-urban migrants, immigrants from abroad,
migratory workers, depression transients, and migrants from stranded
areas, show that the proportion of workers below middle age is distinct¬
ly higher than the comparable proportion in the resident populations
fro® which they cne.
Let me cite one or two examples i In the Michigan study**
of migration, based upon a sample of workers from the entire State,
"Michigan Census of Population end Unemployment, January 1935* See
Wsstefeld, Albert, "Michigan Migrants," Division of Research, ^'orks
Progress Administration, Kerch 1939.
- 8 -
workers with one or uore move© during o 57-aonth period had e median
ag® of 34*5 years coopered with a median age of 40.2 /ears for workers
who uade no move during the period.
A more striking example of the age differential in labor
mobility is provided by a recent survey of the depressed coal mining
areas in southern Illinois.' A complete census of 7 towns in the 3
most important ooal producing counties showed a decline of 8 percent
in the population between 1930 and 1939. Whan, however, the decline
in specific age groups resulting fre® migration was calculated by t he
survival ratio method, it was found that the greatest losses were in
the age groups 15 to 34* and that there was actually a considerable
increase among persons 65 years and older. In general, it may be said
that these depressed communities have suffered a severe loss of young
workers and at the same time have gained older workers through migra¬
tion.
While there is little question that age is a selective
factor in migration, it is not entirely clear whether it is more
effective in determining who migrates than in who succeed® in migration.
There is evidence on both sides. In the depressed coal counties of
Southern Illinois, age seemed to be more important in determining the
'grown, Malcolm, and Webb, John K», "Seven Depressed Coal Towns,"
Division of Research, ffPA (in press).
- 9 -
success of migration. With long unemployment affecting as ouch as two-
fifths of the totfl labor force, aud with no prospects for improvement,
workers of ell ages readily admit that they should move. "*hat pre¬
vents tli© older worker , particularly the displaced miner, from leaving
is not his age but his knowledge that the chances of finding a market
for his specialised skill is small outside the coal fields.
Among unattached, i.e., nonfaally, migrants aided by the
federal transient relief program, age seemed to be core important
in determining who among the resident unemployed took to trie road
than in determining who succeeded. With the demand for workers, young
as well eo old, near the vanishing point, the chances of success were
low regardless of age. For many In this group, migration was primarily
a means of escape fro® inactivity at home.
Other personal characteristics, including sex, family si so
and composition, rr.cc, and marital status, have been studied as part
of the general search for migration differentials, while relation¬
ships between migration and various personal characteristics have
ueen found by some investigator©, the findings have been much less
cn si? tent than has been the case with age. for example, numerous
writers, including Hsvenstein, have asserted that females are more
likely to migrate than male*. Several recent studies have found Just
- 10 -
the contrary« in the Michigan study raales in every age group were
aore mobile than festales. As a reeult of such conflicts, it is
difficult to draw generalisations about ifoct personal characteristics
in relation to aigratian.
with the improvement in techniques for gathering informa¬
tion and the accumulation of material, more and more Interest hae
bean shown in the industrial aspects of labor mobility. Speaking
in broad terns, industries can be groused according to the extent
to which they depend upon a mobile labor supply. At one extreme
are such Industries as lumbering, fishing, canning, oil extraction,
bridge and dam construction, xhieh, because they usually operate
in sparsely populated areas, are very largely dependent upon awhile
labor. Almost equally dependant in some area® are such crops es
fruit, sugar beets, berries, lettuce, spinach, hops, and cotton,
which require a labor foree for peak operation far in excess of
wh*t the resident population will provide. At the other extreme are
the trade and sendee industries, e.g., local governmental services,
retail trade, banking aid brokerage, which draw their labor almost
exclusively from the resident population. Between these extremes
are to be found varying degrees of dependence upon labor mobility.
Now, it may be asked, just what is the nature of the rela¬
tionship that exists between industry and migration? Do certain
- 11 -
induetrl&s exist because of s mobile labor force, or do workers cove
in direct reeponse to the needs of these industries? So far as I
know s clearcut answer cannot be made, largely because of the inter¬
relationship between industrial needs and labor mooillty.
Th«re can be little question thaat some industries survive
only because of the availability of a mobile lsbor supply. Agri¬
culture provides the best illustrations, although examples are to be
found in the other extractive and in the i»anu factoring industries.
The competitive advantage that permits the profitable growing of
berries, fruit, vegetables, and cotton, In certain areas of the
country is in large part the result of the low labor costs «aade
possible by migrants. One evidence of this is the persistent, In¬
tense, and often misleading campaigns conducted by growers in the
fleet and routhwest to attract migrants to harvest crops at a wage
too low to attract resident laborj so low, in fact, that public
assistance at a subsistence level Is considered by the growers to
have an adverse effect on the labor supply.^ Here, in effect,
migrants provide a subsidy that allows areas to remain in a type
of production which, from the national point of view, does not make
the beet use of soil and geographical advantages.
0
See aroim, Malcolm, and Cassmore, prin, "Migratory Cotton Pickers
in Arisen®, "Division of Research, flPA, 197) •
- l? -
Regular migratory workers represent, for the meet pert, a
residual group in the population w 10 hare been forced cut of more
stable employment by s complex of causes outside their control, the
work they do on the road is neither of their own choosing near can it
be considered a differential opportunity except in the sense that
leas than subsistence wage# are an advantage over no wages at all.
In the a&nuf actoring Industrie*, migration ia, generally
speaking, a precede by which necessary adjustments of the labor supply
to the needs of Industry are accomplished. Rut here again it Is
difficult to view migration as © wholly rational procedure.
Undoubtedly, both industry and labor benefit from the ability
and willingness of workers to move from places where their services
aro not needed to places where their services are in demand. In the
Michigan study,^ inquiry was directed, therefore, toward finding
out why migration so often failed to bring worker and job together.
One of the more obvious conclusions reached was thr t the migrant seldom
has sore than a very imperfect knowledge of the work opportunities
In the community to which he moves. The part that imperfect knowledge
plays in wasted effort may be illustrated by the experience of workers
moving into the automobile manufacturing centers of Michigan. When the
month of move was plotted against a curve shewing seasonal activity in
^See Webb, John N., and Sostefeld, Albert, "Industrial Aspects of
Labor mobility," Monthly Labor Review. April 1939.
13 -
the automobile industry, it wee found that the t t'ssonal peak in nigra—
tion to the automobile o eatere was reached four months before the peak
in employment. There can be little doubt that nigration in advance
of work opportunities is not only wasteful of the worker's time, but
is of ouch frequent occur rertce as to be the rule rather than the
exception.
In this connection it bosks important to point out that
Michigan migrants moving short distances, i.e., within the county or
between Michigan counties, had more success in finding employment
within one month of reaching their destinations than did migrants mov¬
ing long distances, i.e., interstate. This fact, of course, agrees
with the general finding in studies of internal migration that short
distance moves outnumber long distance moves. But it also suggests
that the greater frequency of short distance moves may be largely
the result of the fact that the worker has more accurate informa¬
tion about a lcbor market near at hand than scout one at some distance.
Som shift in the industrial attachment of workers ae a
re cult of migration is a natural expectation, roeae of the workers
employed in agriculture in the place of origin will find work in
manufacturing at the destination, worae workers formerly attached to
the trade will shift to service or tr? asportation Industries, and so
forth. In order to obtain a measure of the industrial shift brought
about by migration, the employment statue snd industrial attachment
- U -
of migrants immediately before end Immediately after migration m
determined for one group of Michigan workers. To avoid ambiguities
introduced by short distance moves, the group examined was limited
to interstate migrants.
The most pronounced shift involved unemployment itself}
almost twice (32 percent) as many workers were unemployed immediately
after arrival in Michigan as were unemployed (17 percent) before leav¬
ing the place of origin. But, about three-quarters of the workers
unemployed immediately before migration found work within a month after
their arrival in the state. Thus, the increase in unemployment does
not show the full orient of the shift that took plsee.
The shifts in industrial attachment among workers employed
irnediately before and after migration, while not so pronounced as
in tiie case of unemplqyaasnt, were striking enough to warrant further
investigation. A comparison of the two Industrial distributions -
industry of last Job before migration and industry of first Job In
Michigan - yielded only a more or less random series of plus and
minus values for the several industrial groups. A second comparison
was then made by which the Industrial distribution of the first job
after arrival In Michigan was placed alongside the industrial distri¬
bution of resident workers (1935 data). Immediately it warn evident
that these two distributions were strikingly similar, although the
number of migrants was small relative to the number of resident
workers.
- 15 -
It ae«ned plain, from this comparison, that aort of the
oh If ting that oocurrsd both among th« unemployed and the employed
migrants resulted from the fact that the industrial employment pattern
In Michigan differed from the pattern® in the States of prior resi¬
dence. Those workers who found employment first were those who either
had experience in industries aindlnr to those in Michigan or experience
closely enough silled that the shift was easily accomplished. Thus,
the chances that the migrant would find a job sere conditioned, among
other things, by his past experience in relation to the prevailing
pattern of work done in the community to which hm moved.
There is one additional factor that I should like to discuss.
That is the relationship of relief to mobility#^ In general, It has
been believed th*t relief r -stncts tne movement of workers, because
In the majority of cases general relief is available only to persons
who have been pelf-supporting residents (usually for a minimum of 1
year) of the community in which they apply for assists!ee. This re¬
quirement, pins the fact that the applicant aust remain in on® place
while receiving relief, leaves little doubt that, considered by itself,
relief should act as a check upon the migration of unemployed workers.
In so far as relief is the means of assisting the working
population of a community to remain where it may again be absorbed by
10fee 'Xebb, John., end TTeatefeld, Albert, "Labor Mobility and Belief,"
loathly Labor Review. January 1931.
- 16 -
industry, relief acts as * brake on wasteful migration. But when local
relief nfree*es" the unemployed worker in a community where industry
cannot ur>on revival reabsorb him, it prevents a desirable migration
and tends to create or to perpetuate stranded populations.
The relationship between relief and mobility is not s simple
end direct one. Nor can it be said, from what lets are available,
that workers who have received relief are less mobile than workers who
have not. Under some circumstances a worker say move for the express
purpose of obtaining relief, as when he returns to his place of legal
residence in order to be eligible for assistance. Under different
circuses traces ® worker on rel! ef may move to another community in
order to escape the necessity of remaining on relief in his home
community.
En the Michigan study the mobility of workers who had re¬
ceived relief at spy time within a 57-oonth period w®e found to be
higher than that of workers who had not received assistance. At
first this finding appeared to question the assumption that relief tended
to reduce mobility. But further inquiry showed that over three-fifths
of the moves made by workers who had received relief had no direct
connection with their relief status, that is, relief neither immediately
- 17 -
preceded nor followed the novo. In fact, it vu found th-jt the mare
moves these workers made the less likely they were to have received
at either origin or destination. It soon became evident that the
higher mobility of relief recipients was not directly related to
giants of assistance, but rather that both nobility and relief were
related to a third factor - unemployment.
The illustrations that I have presented are only a few of
those available today fro® the growing litersture on migration.
Viewed separately the findings of these studies provide rather un¬
certain ground upon which to raise generalisation about migration.
But the studies do sheer th«t many of the differential factors in
migration can be isolated and measured. With this steady Increase
in knowledge it does not see® impossible that we shall eventually
understand this intricate process well enough to derive the broad
conclusions so badly needed by agencies of the government confronted
with the problem of doing something about migration. When and if
that time arrives, w# will, I believe, be able to formulate on a
basis of actual observation of human behavior a more satisfactory
theory of migration than can be constructed on any single assumption
of how individuals will react to the complex of factors that control
material wellbeing.
" • : \ M ! £ I i
>: ' v - . ■ •:. ^
• - . >- '.. :• T - '-- ' '/-