Here we have a contract "at the rate of" so much per annum, "payable monthly." It can not be an entire contract for the year in the sense that no pay would be due unless the employee served a full year.

* * *

Contracts of employment, payable only by the year, are so unusual in modern times and conditions, that courts avoid a construction leading to such result, a result attempting a definite term at a fixed wage.

"At the rate of so much per annum, payable monthly," may obviously mean merely the fixing of the rate, not the duration of employment.

Indulging the presumption heretofore recognized, and looking to the writing alone, in the absence of averment of custom or accompanying circumstances indicating a different intent, it will be so construed.

The decision of the circuit court was therefore affirmed.

Compensation Not Assignable in Payment of Prior Debt

LTHOUGH the Tennessee compensation act does not forbid an settlement of a claim, for advance payment by the employer to the employee to be deducted from compensation when awarded, it does provide that an employee can not assign a portion of the compensation claim to the employer in payment of an antecedent debt, according to a recent decision of the Tennessee Supreme Court. (Gregg v. New Careyville Coal Co., 31 S. W. (2d) 693.)

The decision of the court was based upon section 18 of the Tennessee workmen's compensation law (Pub. Acts, 1919, ch. 123) which provides that, "No claims for compensation under this act shall be assignable, and all compensation and claims therefor shall be exempt from claims of creditors." The facts, as shown by record, are in brief as follows:

Gregg, an employee of the coal company, was injured. The coal company recognized its liability to its injured employee but expected the insurance company that carried its compensation insurance to settle the claim. Gregg understood this and understood, too, that the insurance company was delaying the settlement. Pending settlement Gregg needed supplies for himself and family but was unable to obtain credit. In order to obtain the needed supplies, he entered into a written agreement with his employer that when the amount of his compensation was fixed that any sum then due for goods purchased by him from the defendant should be paid out of the award, and that as much as $12 a week should be deducted if the award was settled in partial payments. He accordingly executed a written order to the defendant to this effect. Upon the faith of this agreement and written assignment, Gregg bought goods and was extended credit by the defendant for the sum of $285.05. He also agreed that the company should deduct from his compensation so awarded the further sum of $28.90 on account of supplies furnished before he was injured.

Gregg, being unable to adjust the claim of compensation with the insurance company, filed suit against the coal company to obtain an award under the compensation act. After the suit was commenced the insurance company agreed to an adjustment of the case and compensation was fixed at $900. It appears that $228 was paid Gregg in weekly installments prior to the date of the award. Therefore a judgment for the lump sum of $672 was entered in favor of Gregg against the New Careyville Coal Co. From this award the employer deducted the amount of $285.05 and also the $28.90 according to the agreement between the employer and employee. Thereupon the employee filed suit to recover these amounts, contending that the

company had no authority to retain the money to cover its account for supplies. The suit was dismissed by the Chancery Court, Campbell County, and upon appeal the Court of Appeals, taking the view that the money could not be retained under the assignment made by Gregg to his employer because violative of the compensation law, reversed the decree.

On appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court, the court said that "the compensation act does not forbid the employer and employee from contracting in good faith, pending a settlement for the claim for compensation, for advancement by the employer to the employee either in money or merchandise, nor does it forbid them contracting that such advancement shall be deducted from the amount of compensation when awarded. But such an agreement and assignment could not cover antecedent debts of the employer [sic] without violating the letter and the spirit of the compensation act."

The deduction of the employee's antecedent debt of $28.90 was declared by the court to be in direct contravention of the compensation law and therefore void. The judgment of the lower court was therefore modified and affirmed.

LABOR TURNOVER

Labor Turnover in American Factories, November, 1930

THE

HE Bureau of Labor Statistics presents herewith its labor turnover indexes for manufacturing as a whole and for eight separate manufacturing industries in November, 1930. The indexes for manufacturing as a whole are made up from representative establishments in over 75 industries employing at this time about 1,250,000 people. In the eight industries for which separate indexes are presented reports were received from representative plants employing more than 25 per cent of the employees in such industries as shown by the Census of Manufactures of 1927. In the automotive industry schedules were received from plants employing nearly 200,000 people. Firms reporting for boots and shoes and cotton manufacturing employed 100,000 people in each industry. The foundry and machine shop firms reporting had approximately 175,000 people on their pay rolls. The furniture industry is represented by firms having over 40,000 people, and iron and steel by firms employing approximately 225,000 people. Reports were received from representative sawmill and slaughtering and meat packing firms who had between 65,000 and 75,000 employees per industry.

The form of average used in the following tables is the unweighted median of company rates. In determining the median rate the rates for the several establishments reporting are arranged in order from lowest to highest. The rate falling in the center of this arrangement of rates is the median. In other words, it is the rate that has as many company rates above it as below it. The number of employees used as a basis for computing these rates is the average number on the company pay rolls during the month of November.

In addition to the quit, discharge, lay-off, total separation, and accession rates, the bureau presents the net turnover rate. The net turnover rate means the rate of replacement. It is the number of jobs that are vacated and filled per 100 employees. In a plant that is increasing its force the net turnover rate is the same as the separation rate, because while more people are hired than quit the number hired above those leaving would be due to expansion and could not justly be charged to turnover. On the other hand, in a plant that is reducing its number of employees the net turnover rate is the same as the accession rate, for while more people leave than are hired the excess of separations over accessions is due to a reduction of force and therefore can not logically be charged as a turnover expense.

The net turnover rate for manufacturing as a whole has been the same as the accession rate since November, 1929.

Table 1 shows for all industries the total separation rate subdivided into quit, discharge, and lay-off rates, together with the accession and net turnover rates presented on a monthly and an equivalent annual basis.

133

TABLE 1.-AVERAGE LABOR TURNOVER RATES IN SELECTED FACTORIES IN 75

Comparing November, 1930, rates with those for October, 1930, there is a decrease in the quit, lay-off, discharge, and accession rates. The quit rate, the discharge rate, and the accession rate are all lower than for any month since the compilation of these figures by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While the lay-off rate is lower than for October, it is higher than for every other month of this calendar year except July and August.

The November quit rate, 0.57, was about one-third of the quit rate for November, 1929. The lay-off rate, 1.21, was a little lower than the lay-off rate for November, 1929. This is the first month in 1930 showing a lower lay-off rate than the corresponding month of the previous year. The accession rate is less than one-half the November, 1929, accession rate.

The charts following show in graphic form the information contained in Table 1.