Experimental projects developed by North Star Research and Development Institute to test these features will be implemented shortly in the Middle Western States. These three projects will include a mix of the 12th grade students and dropouts who are both economically and culturally deprived. Models in the Southeastern States will follow during the next year.

The Manpower Development and Training Act institutional and onthe-job training programs, even though not designed exclusively for youth, enroll many youth workers. Youth are enrolled in training courses on the same basis as other age groups. It is believed on the basis of experience that many youth benefit from exposure to more mature persons and the training program assumes more of the workplace environment than the traditional classroom setting which many young persons have rejected.

During fiscal year 1970, some 37 percent of total enrollments in institutional programs were in the 16 to 22 age group and indications are that in fiscal year 1971 this percentage may increase to 40 percent about 35 percent of the on-the-job training enrollees were youth.

In addition, we are not neglecting the more traditional approaches such as cooperative education programs to facilitate the transition from "learning to earning." The Department of Labor is now working with educators in 12 States on an experiment testing the effectiveness of cooperative programs in making education more relevant for alienated and disoriented youth. More than 3,000 enrollees participated in this experiment in 1970.

The enrollees went to school part time, and worked part time in a wide variety of establishments including restaurants, retail stores, libraries, schools, hospitals, banks, et cetera. An early assessment of the results achieved by the program indicated that the enrollees were absent from school fewer days and were tardy less often than students in control groups with similar characteristics.

Also, students in the experimental work program tended to show improvement in their school grades, while members of the control group did not.

Finally, youths constitute 47 percent of enrollees in the JOBS programs, which is run by the Department of Labor in conjunction with the National Alliance of Businessmen. JOBS is designed specifically to provide employment opportunities within the private sector for seriously disadvantaged unemployed persons, on a hire-now train-later basis.

All told, over two-thirds of all manpower program enrollees were youths last year.

Briefly, Mr. Chairman, this indicates the types of programs which are now being operated for the young members of our Nation's work force. It indicates that substantial efforts are focused on providing services and employment opportunities for youth, recognizing at the same time that there is more to be done.

The various manpower programs which we now have available are those which have been developed during the decade of the 1960's. They are primarily categorial programs which I believe we can view as largely of an experimental nature. It is now time to move onto a more systematic approach of providing a total manpower program.

PROPOSALS FOR THE 1970's.

Mr. Chairman, I think the most important single step we can take to reduce the current high youth jobless rates is to facilitate the development of the many new jobs needed. The best "job creation" program is a healthy economy. The President has proposed a bold, four-pronged effort to restore the economy to a sustainable level of expansion.

First, a full employment Federal budget in fiscal year 1972, calling for $229 billion in Federal expenditures over $17 billion more than will be expended this fiscal year.

Second, general revenue sharing, which in its first full year would allocate $5 billion in unrestricted funds to State and local governments.

Third, a $4.5 billion welfare reform measure, which would place a floor on the income of poor families and provide new manpower services, including creation of at least 200,000 public service jobs for welfare recipients.

And fourth, the Manpower Revenue Sharing Act of 1971, which has been introduced in the Congress.

These actions would have a far-reaching and impressive impact on the level of youth employment and unemployment. They should rank at the top of our priority list.

Within the manpower field, I believe that we must make sure that local officials are responsible for decisionmaking in solving local manpower problems. Programs must be tailored to meet local needs. Where there is a particular problem of youth unemployment, programs must be developed for them.

To some degree, we can move to utilize more local initiative under existing authority. However, in my view, the President's proposal for the Manpower Revenue Sharing Act offers the best promise of giving us appropriate authority to focus on local manpower problems. Our experience tell us that we must reform the statutory base for manpower programs.

The provisions of the Manpower Revenue Sharing Act, H.R. 6181, are well-known to members of this committee, and I urge favorable consideration of this bill at the earliest possible date.

To look at the teenage unemployment problem realistically, however I believe we must recognize that the problems are not just those generally associated with the job market. Therefore, the solutions are not going to be found totally within manpower programs. We must look also to the home, the school system, and other available programs. I believe that, first of all, we must be sure that we are not allowing young people to be discouraged in school and, therefore, we must assure that educational opportunities are available to the extent that each individual youngster desires such opportunities. By this, I am not suggesting that we push each young person into higher education, irrespective of his preference, but I think educational opportunities must be available to our young people.

As I have already indicated, one of the primary objectives of some of our programs is to assist youth to remain in school or to return to school if they have dropped out. We believe that we are succeeding in this effort. I believe that our efforts to provide well-coordinated services to youth would be even more effective by the President's

proposed reorganization for bringing education and manpower planning and operations together.

For the longer term, we must continue to work in improving our schools. We must make school curricula relevant to both the full intellectual development of our young people and to the job market. I am persuaded that that alone would help reduce dropouts. We should have as our goal universal exposure to the world of work of all students-whatever their academic goals. Every young person leaving school-whether upon completing high school or after college-should leave with a salable skill.

Developing an understanding of working life and employment opportunities should begin early so that even those young people who drop out early are not entirely ignorant of basic work skills, how to apply for a job, and some idea of their own occupational potentialities.

Mr. Chairman, I have attempted to give you some of my views on employment opportunities for youth, which are of particular interest to this subcommittee.

May I say again that I am pleased to meet with you this morning, and I will now try to respond to your questions and provide any additional information which you may request.

Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you, Mr. Lovell.

May I also thank you for the appearance before the committee this morning.

As I had indicated to you, you were the only witness that we had. Obviously, without you, the hearing could not take place. We certainly appreciate the time that you have given to us.

With respect to your statement, there are several points that I would like to get some clarification of.

On page 7, you speak of 150,000 summer jobs scheduled for disadvantaged youth by the National Alliance of Businessmen.

How firm is this commitment?

This committee in discussing the matter with some of the members of the National Alliance of Businessmen did not get the impression that they could meet that commitment this summer.

I am wondering whether or not you have a firm commitment that 150,000 jobs will be provided by the National Alliance in view of the fact that companies are laying off many employees, and in view of the extremely critical situation.

It was not the consensus of this committee that 150,000 summer jobs would be provided.

Mr. LOVELL. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to realize that the number of people currently employed today is close to an all-time high. Although unemployment is also at 6.2 percent, a much higher rate than we want to have, there are still a great many job openings in this country. In the summer time, there are a number of jobs opening because of vacation schedules and things of that character.

It is not unrealistic to expect the American business community to go out of its way to make sure that jobs, 150,000 jobs, can be located, for youth.

In terms of the nature of the pledge, this organization has frequently been accused of playing a numbers game when what they are trying to do is set reasonable goals. They have made surveys. They have

tried to get an honest evaluation of what they can do. They think they can do this. Maybe they cannot. But they are going to try.

They have got really, I think, quite an impressive network. Over 120 cities have NAB establishments where businessmen serve on their own time to get pledges and to encourage big and small companies to take on youth and other people under this program.

Of course, as you know, some industries are doing better than others. We are stressing in the NAB program today the service industries that are growing rather than some of the industrial enterprises which are not having such favorable employment activity. We think it is a reasonable figure. We hope they make it.

Mr. HAWKINS. I am certainly not critical of their effort. I think they are putting forth a very excellent effort.

I listened a few weeks ago to the President of the Chamber of Commerce in which he was trying to explain why they have been unable to keep their commitment with respect to hiring veterans.

In view of the fact that 350,000 veterans are going to be on the street this summer, also, and that there is a strong effort to get the businessmen to employ veterans, this also will lessen the chances that they can meet this particular commitment, as well.

If they can't meet the commitment to hire veterans, which in a sense have been given preference, then it would appear that it is somewhat unrealistic to think that they can meet both commitments at the same time.

Mr. LOVELL. I think, sir, that the kind of job that the current Vietnam veteran is looking for and I certainly agree that this is a high priority need in our economy-is frequently not the same kind as the teenage youth who is looking for a job for the summer and who is planning to go back to school in the fall.

I do not think it is inconsistent to try to address ourselves to both of these responsibilities. The school student who is looking for a job for the summer is satisfied with a lower-paying job; it does not have to have the same status; it does not have to have the same future opportunities that the Vietnam veteran properly believes he should have.

So, I think there are different kinds of jobs. We have some 83 million people

Dr. ROSEN. There are 79 million people working now, one of the highest figures we have had.

Mr. LOVELL. And jobs keep changing. There is a lot of turnover. It is a very active market, indeed.

Mr. HAWKINS. That may be true that that many are employed today as compared with the number of persons in the civilian labor force. The fact still remains that we have 6.2 percent unemployment. Actually, the number of persons unemployed is higher on the percentage basis. That is the thing that we are faced with.

Mr. LOVELL. We are all concerned with that. I certainly hope nothing I would say would suggest anything other than great concern over that fact.

Mr. HAWKINS. You use the figure of 609,000 youths in the NYC program and indicate that that was a substantial increase.

Translating that into 10 weeks rather than 9 weeks, would we not have to reduce that if we are going to compare that with last summer? Mr. LOVELL. Yes; surely we would.

Mr. HAWKINS. You are spreading the same number of dollars among a larger number of young people.

Mr. LOVELL. Not the same number of dollars. Last summer, we spent $195 million on this program. This year, we are spending $273 million.

So that is about $78 million more this summer than we spent last. We decided that it would be better with an unemployment rate higher this year than last to spread the work and, therefore, to have more 9-week opportunities than we could with 10.

Mr. HAWKINS. You could reduce that to 5 weeks and probably come up with an astronomical figure of the number of youths employed. Mr. LOVELL. We are not trying to impress anybody with figures. We are trying to deal as effectively as we can with the problem. If any sponsor feels that it is better to have them work 10 weeks than 9Mr. HAWKINS. I think the sponsor would prefer having more money. Mr. LOVELL. As you know, it is $78 million more than last year. I suppose we could spend $78 million or $278 million, but we have to have some judgment on what is possible when you have a $20 billion deficit.

Mr. HAWKINS. No mention has been made of the figure for transportation this summer as you had last summer. Has there been any change in that?

Mr. LOVELL. That is the same. It is about $1.5 million.

Mr. HAWKINS. So, approximately the same amount will be made available this summer?

Mr. LOVELL. Yes, and the same way with recreation, about $12.8 million.

Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Esch?

Mr. Escн. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate, Mr. Secretary, your coming here.

As you have indicated, it is not a very bright picture but it is a realistic one that you have painted for us.

I have one or two specific questions. I think we would want to reiterate that part of the cause of the problem has been the increase in the number of individuals who are seeking employment because of the increase in population. Surely this is of the more considerable variables.

I was especially interested in your testimony on page 14 relating to co-op programs and the relationships between manpower training programs and other listing educational institutions.

Some of us feel very strongly in this committee that there has been somewhat of a distance between the Labor Department and the Office of Education in this area. Specifically, it permeates down to the local level where less than full utilization is made of our school systems for job counseling, for placement, and in setting up cooperative programs. You have indicated that you have had some research programs in that area. I wonder if you would want to comment.

Would you concur that one of the really untapped sources in terms of placing people in summer school programs could be a fuller coordination with the local school districts?

Mr. LOVELL. Mr. Esch, as you know, I have long been an advocate and supporter of our public school system. And I have been and continue to be actively seeking ways to bring closer ties between the manpower programs and our educational system.