Five of the 12, as well as 3 others, dealt with the medium for notifying the accused.

Most of the 12 constitutional changes concerning specificity of charges stiffened existing requirements. For instance, the Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employes' union made the following changes in its constitution in late September 1959:

When any charge or charges are preferred against any member or members, such charge or charges shall be in writing and shall be specific. [Italicized words added by amendment.]

In other unions, the amendments were more detailed. For example, in 1960 the Operating Engineers made the following change:

All changes must be preferred in writing, signed by the complainant and filed with the recording-corresponding secretary. . . . charges shall be specific, stating clearly, concisely and as accurately as possible the time, place, nature, and circumstances of the offense alleged. [Italicized words added by amendment.]

Section 101 (a) (5) (A) requires not only "specific charges," but also that these charges be "served" on the accused. Most of the unions making changes in this area required that charges be served in person or by registered mail. Formerly, most of these constitutions either contained no specific requirements for service or merely stated that the accused must be "notified." There were varying interpretations between unions as to how best to implement the "service" requirements of the act. For instance, the Commercial Telegraphers constitution formerly provided:

When such charges are preferred against any member, the president or general chairman of the division shall within 10 days mail a copy of such charges to the accused member.

However, in 1959, after passage of the act, the requirement that a copy of the charges be mailed. was dropped, and the words "shall furnish the accused with a copy of the charges" were substituted. On the other hand, although the Boilermakers constitution formerly allowed service either by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail, since 1961, the constitution provides only for service by registered or certified mail.

Eighteen unions adopted amendments which reflected the 101 (a) (5) (B) requirement that an accused member be "given a reasonable time to

1..

"A reasonable time, but in no event less than 10 days."

1 Where different time limits were specified for the local and international trial levels, the local level provision is given.

Eight of these constitutions already had designated specific periods of time for the preparation of the accused's defense, and in each instance the period was increased.

The two unions which specified "a reasonable time" previously contained no reference on this matter. On the other hand, two unions which formerly specified "a reasonable time," changed their constitutions by specifying the number of days. For example, the Commercial Telegraphers formerly specified a "reasonable time, not to exceed 30 days," but since 1959, the constitution provides that "30 days shall be allowed [the accused] in which to furnish a defense."

The third requirement in section 101(a)(5), namely, that an accused be "(C) afforded a full and fair hearing," was also reflected in conforming constitutional amendments. Thirteen unions incorporated the term "full and fair hearing" into their constitutions; 10 applicable to trials at the local level, 1 at the international level, and 2 at both trial levels. In some of these constitutions, such as that of the Typographers, the full and fair hearing requirement was superimposed on a number of existing specific safeguards, such as the right to introduce evidence, to testify, and to require witnesses to testify under oath. On other constitutions, such as the Cigar Makers, there had been few, if any, specific safeguards.

In 12 other unions, where the term "full and fair hearing" was not incorporated, a variety of hearing safeguards were added. For example, the Allied Industrial Workers amended its constitution by providing a number of due process guarantees, namely, the right to introduce evidence,

to testify, to invite witnesses, and to cross-examine witnesses.

Two of the unions adding a full and fair hearing clause, as well as two others, also adopted specific provisions to assure an impartial trial board. By far the most detailed of these was that of the Masters, Mates and Pilots, adopted in 1960, which stipulated two sets of rules for the selection of a trial body, depending on the presence or absence of the accused.

Summary Discipline. In addition to the positive requirements of section 101(a)(5), the overall effect of the section, it would seem, is to prohibit or sharply limit summary discipline of members for reasons other than nonpayment of dues."

Twenty of the constitutions studied were amended to abolish some or all forms of summary discipline. The Furniture Workers, Boilermakers, and Railway Carmen abolished summary discipline entirely. The constitution of the Printing Pressmen was amended to abolish summary discipline of members for reasons other than nonpayment of dues by the addition, in 1961, of the following section:

Notwithstanding any other article or section of this constitution, any provision thereof which provides for the imposition against an individual member of any penalty, forfeiture, suspension, expulsion, revocation, or any other disciplinary action, is hereby amended to require the filing and service of written charges against any member of a subordinate union charged with a violation of any article or section of this constitution and laws, except nonpayment of dues, a reasonable opportunity for such member or subordinate union to prepare a defense which is defined as not less than 15 days following the service of said written charges and a hearing thereon before an impartial trial board constituted in accordance with this constitution and laws. . . .'

Other unions abolished summary discipline for certain offenses. For instance, the Auto Workers

7 The legislative history indicates that the 101 (a) (5) requirements are applicable only to members, and not to officers, in the following language: "In paragraph (5), relating to safeguards against improper disciplinary action, it should be noted that the prohibition on suspension without observing certain safeguards applies only to suspension of membership in the union; does not refer to suspension of a member's status as an officer in the union." (H.R. Rep. 1147, 86th Cong., 1st sess., 1959.)

Some observers have questioned whether this section prohibits all summary discipline of members. For example, Edward Joseph Hickey, Jr., has said: "On its face, section 101(a)(5) of the act would prohibit summary action of any kind, but possible correlation of its provisions with the right of a union under section 101 (a) (2) not only to adopt reasonable rules as to a member's responsibility to his union as an institution but also to 'enforce' such rules, may save the provision in section 101 (a) (5) from this unrealistic application." (See "The Bill of Rights of Union Members," Georgetown Law Journal, Winter 1959, p. 236.)

and Masters, Mates and Pilots constitutions no longer permit summary discipline for resort to court, while those charged with dual unionism may no longer be punished summarily under the constitution of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees. On the other hand, the Potters appeared to have added summary discipline for resort to court, by adopting the following amendment, effective July 1, 1960:

Any member or members . . . attempting to, or actually resorting to court action in an attempt to redress an actual, or so-called grievance against any member. . . or an act of the convention or any authorized agent or agents thereto, without first exhausting every possible effort to redress the grievance under the . . . constitution, shall be considered as a (sic) violation of the constitution [and dealt with under appropriate laws of the International Brotherhood of Potters] and suspended by the Executive Board. [Bracketed words deleted; italicized words added by amendment.]

A third group of unions, which included the Clothing Workers, Communications Workers, and Bricklayers, amended their constitutional provisions relating to summary discipline for nonpayment of dues to conform to the 1959 law. The nature of these amendments was to limit summary discipline strictly to the nonpayment of dues, as against nonpayment of fines and assessments. Thus, for example, the Communications Workers in 1960 made the following change in its constitution:

A member in default, without good cause, in the payment of any installment of dues (or any fine or assessment] for 60 days from the day such amount becomes due, shall be automatically suspended...[Bracketed words deleted by amendment.]

Some of the summary discipline amendments provided protections beyond the requirements of the 1959 law. For example, the Clothing Workers not only limited their summary discipline provision to nonpayment of dues or assessments, but also further specified that even nonpayment of dues would not result in summary discipline if the member "is unemployed because of a plant shutdown, inability to obtain work, or illness." The chairman of the Committee on Law and Constitution reported to the Clothing Workers 1960 convention that the foregoing amendment "affords our members greater protection than that required by law." In other unions, protections that appeared to go beyond the requirements of the law were in the form of deleting summary discipline

8

for officers. For example, in 1960, the Railroad Trainmen amended the provision of its constitution dealing with the duties of the international president, as follows:

He shall not have power to suspend or remove any subordinate lodge officer or committee or board member except when they are charged with violation of the constitution or of their obligation as an officer, and not then until said officer or committee or board member shall have had a fair trial in his own lodge. [Italicized words added by amendment.] Although numerous other changes in discipline provisions were made in union constitutions, they followed no particular pattern. In 1960 constitutions, changes were noted that were obviously the result of the 1959 law. For instance, in 1960, the Operating Engineers adopted the following amendment:

Any . . . member publishing or circulating literature of a defamatory nature in violation of his responsibility toward the international union or any of its subordinate bodies as an institution . . . may be disciplined . . . [Italicized words added by amendment.]

It will be noted that this new language "responsibility . . . toward the [organization] as an institution" is drawn from the "free speech" provision of the 1959 act, section 101 (a) (2). The Marble, Slate and Stone Polishers constitution was also amended to conform to the free speech provision, in the following manner:

No ... officer . . . or member ... shall send out or publish any circulars, letters, writings, or printed matter of any kind or give out any interviews for general distribu

tion, either privately or publicly, villifying or impugning the honesty or character of any officer or member... [without first submitting such circulars, letters, writings, printed matter, or interviews to the General Executive Council and securing its consent and approval thereto...] [Bracketed words deleted by amendment.]

Other Changes. In some constitutions, amendments could not be explained by specific requirements of the LMRDA. On a number of subjects, moreover, the direction of the changes differed among unions. For instance, with regard to whether a decision is stayed pending an appeal, seven unions adopted new provisions authorizing the appeal body to stay the decision at its discretion, while three unions adopted provisions prohibiting a stay. To indicate the divergence further, with regard to five constitutions that previously had no provision concerning the status of an accused during appeal, two adopted "no stay" provisions, two adopted "automatic stay" provisions, and one adopted an "optional stay" provision.

Lack of uniformity was also noted in other areas. For instance, the Airline Dispatchers adopted a provision requiring charges to be filed within a year of the date of the alleged offense; the Seafarers, on the other hand, dropped a provision which called for charges to be filed within 90 days from the date "the grievance arose."

Section 101 (a) (5) applies to members only. See footnote 7.

1 Changes adjusted to allow for introduction of 1950 population data in 1953' inclusion of data for Alaska and Hawaii in 1960, and 1960 population data in 1962.

year-to-year fluctuations in the rate of growth have characterized the whole period. The average annual increase from 1947 to 1962 amounted to 850,000, but over-the-year growth in the labor force during 1955-56 averaged 1.5 million, and in some years, e.g., 1954 and 1957, the yearly increase was as little as 400,000 (chart 1).

The labor force has continued to grow at a very uneven pace so far during the 1960's. On the basis of long-term trends, its expansion during these years would have amounted to a little better than 1 million a year, with the worker rates for adult women continuing upward. The labor force did register very large over-the-year increases in early 1961; however, the data for both the first quarter of 1960 and the first quarter of 1961 were affected by an unusually large amount of sampling variability. During the next few months of 1961, over-the-year labor force growth (about a million) was in line with long-range trends; however, from the fourth quarter of 1961 through the second quarter of 1962,3 it dropped to an average of only 400,000 above the level of a year earlier. A pickup later in the year brought the average gain for 1962 as a whole up to 700,000, compared with an annual increase of over 1 million for 1961. During the last 2 years, the general slowdown in labor force growth reflected especially large drops

in worker rates for teenage boys and older men as well as a slowdown in the reentry of adult women into the labor market.*

Teenage Boys. Labor force participation of teenage boys dropped sharply during the 1960-61 business downturn, from 47 percent in the spring of 1960 to about 43 percent in early 1961 (seasonally adjusted). The rate then leveled off and at the close of 1962 was about the same as a year earlier. (See chart 2.)

Throughout the postwar period, labor force activity of these youngsters was related to the general level of business activity more closely than that of other groups. Although their worker rate has been falling generally throughout the postwar period, the downtrend was accentuated during periods of declining business activity, as in 1954, 1958, and 1960. Moreover, the 1960-61 recession affected teenage employment somewhat more severely than did previous downturns.

Older Men. The decline in the worker rate for men past 65 was also accentuated during 1961 and 1962. Although this was a period of relatively high unemployment, the work status of older men has not been too closely associated with the state of the economy in the past. For example, rapid declines occurred in prosperous periods, such as 1951-52 and mid-1956 to mid-1957, and again when business turned down in 1958. Worker rates for men between 60 and 64 showed the impact of the 1961 social security legislation, which lowered the minimum retirement age from 65 to 62. The worker rate for these men dropped

These comparisons take account of the downward effect of revised population data on labor force estimates. Figures for periods prior to April 1962 are not strictly comparable with current data because of the introduction of 1960 Census data into the estimation procedure. The change primarily affected the labor force and employment totals, which were reduced by about 200,000 each. The unemployment totals were virtually unchanged.

Groups whose labor force rates are changing are the ones most difficult to measure in the short run. Adult women, teenagers, and older men typically have the largest month-to-month fluctuations in worker rates. Such variable and temporary factors as weather, holidays, and the timing of school openings and closings may have a marked effect on their rates in a particular month. Response error is also more of a factor for these groups simply because their work patterns are more variable. Gross change data suggest the magnitude of the measurement problem. During their period of publication, they showed that teenagers had a 20-percent labor force turnover rate (average of entrants and withdrawals between one month and the next as percent of level in the base period), while turnover among women and older men approximated 8 to 10 percent.

Month-to-month changes are also difficult to interpret because of the large absolute sampling error associated with so large an estimate. In addition, the rotation group system used in the household survey produces certain short-term variations which tend to cancel each other out over time, but which complicate cyclical and other short-run analyses.