343
MANUFACTURING-PLANT FOOD SERVICES
AS MARKETS FOR FISH AND SHELLFISH
SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT-FISHERIES Na 343
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FISH UNO WILDLIFE SERVICE
United States Department of the Interior, Fred A. Seaton, Secretary-
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arnie J. Suomela, Commissioner
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Donald L. McKernan, Director
MANUFACTURING-PLANT FOOD SERVICES
AS
MARKETS FOR FISH AND SHELLFISH
Prepared in
Branch of Economics
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Special Scientific Report — Fisheries No. 3h3
Washington, D. C. : May i960
ABSTRACT
This report identifies and examines the market for
fish and shellfish afforded the fishing industry by the food
services maintained by manufacturing establishments for their
employees. Important differences in the use of fish and
shellfish are found, depending on number of employees, location
of plant, species of fish, type of product, and other factors.
Other points covered include buying practices, inventories,
and availability of freezer space.
ACKNOWIEDGEMENTS
This report is based on a survey of manufacturing-
plant food services for employees conducted by the Marketing
Services Company, a division of Dun and Bradstreet, Inc.,
under contract to the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The
Fish and Wildlife Service made special arrangements with the
Department of Agriculture to have the survey broadened to
cover fishery products. Because of certain difficulties
encountered by the contractor, completion of the survey was
delayed. In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Service had
agreed not to release the data until the Department of
Agriculture published its reports. Careful examination of
the data leaves no doubt that, while the survey period was
for 4 weeks in January and February of 1956, the results are
pertinent to the current situation. The report was prepared
for publication by DeVora R. Alexander, Commodity Industry
Analyst. Funds made available by the Saltonstall-Kennedy
Act, approved July 1, 195U (68 State. 376) were used to
finance the coverage for fishery products.
li
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction 1
Summary 2
Use of fishery products 3
Types of products : h
Fish: h
Fresh and frozen fish h
Canned fish 6
Shellfish: 6
Fresh and frozen shellfish 7
Canned she llf ish 7
Conditions of purchase 8
Principal products : 8
Cod 8
Haddock 9
Ocean perch 9
Canned salmon 9
Canned tuna 9
Peeled shrimp 10
List of statistical tables:
Table - 1. — Aggregate quantity of fish and shellfish
used in k weeks, January - February 1956 11
Table - 2. — Percentage of plants using fish and shellfish
and average quantity used per plant in h
weeks , January - February 1956 12
Table - 3. — Aggregate quantity of fish, by type of
product, used in h weeks, January - February,
1956 13
Table - U. --Aggregate quantity of fresh and frozen fish
used in 1; weeks, January - February 1956 lU
Table - 5» — Percentage of plants using fresh and frozen
fish and average quantity used per plant in
h weeks, January - February 1956 15
111
TAB IE OF CONTENTS - Continued
Page
List of statistical tables: - Continued
Table - 6.— Quantity of fish and shellfish and number
of days supply in inventory at beginning
of survey, January - February 1956 17
Table - 7. — Percentage of plants having 0° F. freezer
space , by capacity 18
Table - 8. — Changes in 0° F. freezer space planned by
plants having such space 19
Table - 9.— Aggregate quantity of canned fish used in
k weeks , January - February 1956 19
Table - 10. — Percentage of plants using canned fish and
shellfish and average quantity used per
plant in h weeks, January - February 1956 ... 20
Table - 11.— Aggregate quantity of shellfish used in
h weeks, January - February 1956 22
Table - 12.— Aggregate quantity of fresh and frozen
shellfish, by species, used in h weeks,
January - February 1956 22
Table - 13. —Aggregate quantity of fresh and frozen
shellfish used in h weeks, January - February
1956 23
Table - ill. — Percentage of plants using fresh and frozen
shellfish and average quantity used per
plant in It weeks, January - February 1956 ... 2li
Table - 15. — Aggregate quantity of canned shellfish used
in k weeks, January - February 1956 25
Table - 16. — Type of supplier of fishery products by
plant size 25
Table - 17. — Number of fish purchases in h weeks,
January - February 1956 26
Appendix: Sampling and survey methodology 27
IV
MANUFACTURING-PLANT FOOD SERVICES AS MARKETS FOR FISH AND SHELLFISH
INTRODUCTION
Almost 6,000 manufacturing plants
with 250 or more employees — more than half
of all such plants in the country — main
tain food facilities, such as cafeterias,
restaurants, or other means of serving hot
foods to employees. The larger plants,
with a thousand or more employees, gener-
ally have regular food services while only
a third of the plants with 250 to U99
employees have such facilities. The pur-
pose of this report is to examine and
identify the market opportunities these
facilities may afford the fishing industry
in general, and distributors of fishery
products in particular.
Self-service cafeterias are operated
by 75 percent of the plants. Large plants
make greater use of cafeterias and res-
taurants than do smaller companies (with
fewer than 500 workers). The latter group
makes considerable use of mobile food
carts and canteen operations.
Almost all plants serve a lunch.
Two-thirds of the plants serve a second
meal --frequently a breakfast or a dinner.
Seven percent of the food services are
open continuously. In a "typical" plant
about half of the employees eat meals
daily at the plant food service facilities.
Two out of three factory restaurant
services are contractor-operated and there
is some evidence of a trend from company
operation to contractor operation. In
many instances — even when the food services
are nominally on a break-even or profit
basis — rent, utilities, and other oper-
ating expenses are not charged to the
facility itself. About 60 percent of the
plants with company-operated facilities
directly subsidized their food services
by making up the difference between re-
ceipts and expenditures. About a third of
the plants whose facilities are leased to
a concessionaire either guarantee a mini-
mum profit, or have a cost -plus -fixed-
fee arrangement with the contractor.
A report (Employee Food Services in
Manufacturing Plants 1/) published in "
1959 by the Marketing Research Division,
A.gricultural Marketing Service, U. S.
Department of Agriculture, presents infor-
mation on the market manufacturing plants
provide for food products. It contains
data on kinds of plants that are included,
types of facilities offered, management
appraisals of food services, attitudes to-
ward company versus contractor management
of such services, financial arrangements,
purchasing practices, and appraisals of
suppliers.
A summary of the preliminary findings
including comprehensive data in tabular
form, by major category and for numerous
individual food items, on expenditures for,
and use of food in manufacturing -plant
food facilities will be found in Buying
Practices and Food Use of Employee Food
Services in Manufacturing Plants If,
published in 1959 by the Marketing Re-
search Division, Agricultural Marketing
Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
1/ Marketing Research Report No. 325,
Superintendent of Documents,
U. S. Government Printing Office,
Washington 25, D.C., 50 cents a copy.
2/ Marketing Research Report No. 326,
Superintendent of Documents,
U. S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C., 75 cents a copy.
SUMMARY
Fishery products accounted for
8814,000 pounds, or 8 percent, worth $U55
thousands, of the 10.7 million pounds
($h.9 million worth) of poultry, meat,
and fish used in manufacturing-plant
food services during the Ij-week survey
period in January and February 1956.
The combined quantity of poultry,
meat, and fish items accounted for 11 per-
cent of the total of almost a hundred
million pounds of food used during the
survey period and for 2$ percent of the
dollar value of about twenty million
dollars.
ucts used and shellfish for 23 percent.
However, shellfish comprised 32 percent of
the dollar expenditure. Of the total
pounds of fish used in the U-«eek period,
frozen items made up the largest part — UU
percent. A little more than 25 percent
each was fresh and canned. There were wide
differences according to region, plant
size, and form of operation.
Some fish or shellfish was used in 85
percent of the plants during the survey
period. All 85 percent used fish while
only 52 percent used shellfish. The lowest
incidence of use (75 percent) was found in
the South.
Areas used
Northeastern and north-central plants
formed the bulk of the market for fish and
shellfish (35 and U2 percent, respectively),
while southern plants used 18 percent and
those in the West only 5 percent.
Plants with a thousand or more employ-
ees used 70 percent of all the fish and
shellfish sold to factory food services,
with medium-sized firms accounting for 21
percent, and small companies 9 percent.
Contractor or catered operations used
slightly more fishery products than com-
pany-run facilities.
Oh a pound basis, the use of fish ac-
counted for 77 percent of all fishery prod-
More plants (73 percent) used canned
fish than other forms. Almost half served
frozen fish and about a third used fresh
fish. While about a fourth of all plants
used shellfish in each of its forms, i.e.,
fresh, frozen, and canned, there were
marked geographic differences.
The plants used an average of 151
pounds of fishery products during the sur-
vey period, broken down between 116 pounds
of fish and about 35 pounds of shellfish.
Of the total, U9 pounds were fresh, 62
pounds frozen, approximately 38 pounds
canned, and less than 2 pounds were cured.
If only plants which actually used these
commodities were considered, the average
was 175 pounds for all fishery products.
Use per plant during the lj-week peri-
od ranged from under Uo pounds of fish and
shellfish to more than 1,500 pounds, de-
pending largely on the size of the plant.
Individual fish and shellfish items used
by the average plant in quantities of more
than 10 pounds each during the h weeks *
were: fresh and frozen haddock — 21 pounds,
about evenly divided between fillets and
whole or dressed; fresh and frozen cod — 15
pounds of which about 11 pounds were fillets
and Ii pounds whole or dressed; canned tuna —
15 pounds; canned salmon — 13 pounds; fresh
and frozen ocean perch fillets — 12 pounds;
and fresh and frozen shrimp — 12 pounds.
The survey findings established that
most plants bought fish and shellfish from
one type of supplier. Foremost among, the
various types of sources were the so-
called secondary wholesalers mentioned as
sources by almost 8 out of 10 plants. Re-
tailers, primary wholesalers, processors,
and canners were cited as sources of
lesser importance, n majority of plants
purchased from a single firm.
Once-a-^week buying of fishery products
was the most common frequency of purchase
with 63 percent of the plants reporting a
1-week interval between orders. Personal
inspection was rated as most important in
buying fresh fish and shellfish. About
one plant in five bought on the basis of
brand names. With both frozen and canned
fish and shellfish, however, brand name
was the most telling consideration. Al-
most one -fourth of the buyers of frozen
fish made personal inspection and a few
used written specifications.
The usual quantity of fishery products
bought varied significantly by species,
product, and by size of plant. Average
quantities purchased at one time ranged
from llj pounds of peeled shrimp to 35
pounds of cod.
The price also varied substantially
by species and by product. In general
prices tended to be lowest in the South
and highest in the West. Also, small
plants — a relatively greater percentage
of which dealt with retailers— were more
likely to pay higher prices than large
plants .
Inventories at the beginning of the
U-week survey period showed a total of
U35,000 pounds of fish and shellfish on
hand in the factories providing food ser-
vices. Three-fourths of this inventory was
canned, 19 percent frozen, 5 percent fresh,
and 1 percent cured, smoked, dried, or
kippered. Based on the normal rate of use,
the fresh items were only enough for imme-
diate use. Frozen fish and shellfish in-
ventory was adequate for 5 days — slightly
under the average work week of 5.5 days.
Canned items, which keep and which are
advantageously bought in large quantities,
were found in amounts ample for just under
5 weeks for canned shellfish, and more
than 6 weeks for canned fish.
The above data were averages for all
plants, whether any inventory was present
or not. Actually, only 11 percent of the
plants had supplies of fresh fish; only 6
percent had fresh shellfish. Thirty per-
cent had a stock of frozen fish; half that
many had frozen shellfish. At least 7 out
of 10 plants, in all regions except the
South, had inventories of canned fish.
Detailed results of the survey appear
in tables 1 to 17, pages 11 to 26. The
methods used in conducting the survey are
contained in the Appendix, beginning with
page 27.
USE OF FISHERY PRODUCTS
Fish and shellfish in one form or
another are served in 85 percent of the
plants providing food services for employ-
ees. Use of fishery products in those
plants in the U-week survey period in
January -February 1956 amounted to 884, 067
pounds, valued at $It5u,957. Over three -
fourths of the total was used in the
Northeast and the North Central States.
Plants with more than a thousand
employees each accounted for 70 percent
and medium-sized firms for 21 percent of
the fishery products used. Contractor
operations used slightly more than company -
run facilities.
While 85 percent of the plants
studied used fish, only 52 percent used
shellfish. The coastal regions (Northeast
and West) had greater proportions of users
of both fish and shellfish than other
sections. The South had the fewest plants
serving fish, but that region was on a par
with North Central States in using shell-
fish.
Almost all large plants (97 percent)
used fish as compared with only three -
fourths of the small firms. Furthermore,
less than half of the plants with less
than a thousand employees used shellfish,
whereas 70 percent of large plants reported
the use of that commodity. More company-
run than leased operations served both fish
and shellfish.
The average plant used 151 pounds of
fishery products in the survey period.
Fish accounted for the larger portion— 116
pounds as against approximately 35 pounds
of shellfish. Northeastern firms averaged
more shellfish than both the north central
and southern plants combined, but their
use of fish was less than that in North
Central States.
Large plants with more than a thou-
sand employees used, on the average, three
times as much fish and shellfish as did
medium-sized plants. Compared with small
plants, the large ones used six times as
much fish, and nine times as much shell-
fish. Expenditures averaged $77.55 per
plant during the ii-week survey period, of
which $52.82 went for fish and $2^.73
shellfish.
In line with their greater use, north-
eastern plants averaged considerably
higher expenditures for shellfish than
other regions, and only $5 less than north-
central plants for fish. In company-
operated facilities, the average use — both
in pounds and dollars, and for both fish
and shellfish — ran well ahead of that in
leased services.
TYPES OF PRODUCTS
Fish
In h weeks, 682,000 pounds of fish
(fresh, frozen, canned, and cured),
worth $310,000 were used in manufacturing
plant food service facilities. Distri-
bution by geographic area, plant size,
and type of operation was very similar to
that of fish and shellfish combined,
since fish comprised 77 percent of the
joint volume in pounds.
Frozen fish accounted for a little
less than half the total use of fish;
fresh and canned each amounted to slightly
more than one -fourth of the volume while
smoked, cured, dried, or kippered fish
formed a negligible proportion.
More plants used canned fish than any
other fishery product. Almost half used
frozen fish; about a third, fresh fish;
and k percent used cured or smoked.
Only 58 percent of southern plants
used canned fish, as against 73 percent in
the North Central States, and more than
80 percent in the Northeast and West. The
Northeast was the only section in which
fewer than half the plants served frozen
fish, but more of the firms in that region
used fresh fish. The South was the lowest,
proportionately, in the use of fresh fish.
Company operations used canned fish
to a considerably greater extent than con-
tractor-run services, but the margin of
use was not quite so pronounced in fresh
or frozen forms.
Of the 116 pounds of fish used in the
average plant, 51 pounds was frozen, with
most of the remainder divided between
fresh and canned.
Southern and western plants averaged
smaller amounts of fresh fish than did the
northeastern or north-central plants.
Heaviest use of frozen fish (6h pounds)
was in the north-central region; lightest
(37 pounds) in the West. Northeastern and
north-central plants used more canned fish
(liO and 3k pounds) than did western and
southern plants (2li and 18 pounds, respec-
tively).
Large companiBS averaged about 2-1/2
times as much of fresh and frozen fish as
canned products. Small plants used as
much canned fish as fresh and frozen com-
bined, with the result that while they
used only an eighth as much fresh, and a
tenth as much frozen fish as the big
plants, they actually used a third as
much in canned form.
Company-run facilities averaged more
of each form of fish than leased services.
Fresh and Frozen Fish.-- Of the total
U89,216 pounds of fresh and frozen fish,
used in manufacturing food facilities in
the U-week survey period, about one-fourth
was haddock. Cod and ocean perch accounted
for 18 percent and lk percent, respective-
ly, of the total. Other major species used
were halibut, flounder or sole, pike,
salmon, and swordfish.
In the Northeast, a third of the
plants used haddock; 16 percent used
flounder and 13 percent used cod. All
other species were specified by fewer than
10 percent of the plants.
First in use in north-central plants
was cod (26 percent mentioned using this
species), followed by haddock (22 percent),
ocean perch (21 percent), and halibut (llj
percent).
Ocean perch was used by 28 percent of
the southern plants, haddock by 23 per-
cent, and cod by 15 percent.
In the west, 27 percent of the plants
used fresh or frozen halibut, 16 percent
used flounder or sole, 16 percent salmon,
11 percent haddock, and 10 percent used
fish sticks.
Large plants evidenced a greater
variety in their use of fish than did
medium-sized or small plants. Among the
plants with 2$0-h99 employees, haddock was
the only species mentioned by more than 10
percent. Of the plants with 500-999 em-
ployees, 25 percent used haddock, 17 per-
cent ocean perch, 15 percent cod, and 10
percent fish sticks.
Company operations showed more diver-
sity in the kinds of fish served than did
contractor services.
Only about 13,000 pounds of fresh fish
were found in plant inventories or enough
to last 1-1/2 days. Western and north-
central plants had more than 2 days1 supply
of fresh fish on hand at the beginning of
the survey period. Large plants and con-
tractor operations also were supplied with
enough to last almost 2 days.
The 63,271 pounds of frozen fish on
hand was enough for U.6 working days — a
little less than the average working week.
All areas, except the north central, had
more than a week's supply. Company -run
facilities had greater inventories than
leased operations. Although large plants
had 9 times as much in actual poundage as
the small plants, the latter had relative-
ly more supplies on hand, i. e., 6.5 days
as against U.6 days for large plants.
Two out of 5 users had no frozen fish
in inventory, but those plants still con-
sumed a third of the total volume of this
type of product during the h weeks. Among
those that had any frozen fish at the be-
ginning of the survey, the median average
for the most usual quantity fell between
2k and 25 pounds.
Three -fourths of the plants had 0° F.
freezer space for storing fish and other
frozen foods. A significantly higher
incidence was found in the larger plants —
85 percent of which reported that 00 F.
freezer space was available— than in the
medium and smaller plants, of which 72
and 67 percent, respectively, reported the
availability of such space.
In the Northeast, about two-thirds of
the plants serving food had 0° F. freezer
space, while in the rest of the country-
approximate ly 8 out of 10 plants were able
to accomodate frozen foods.
On the average, the amount of 0° F.
freezer space available ran around 21
cubic feet. This varied, however, from
10 cubic feet in small plants, to 18 cubic
feet in medium-sized operations, to 37
cubic feet in companies with one thousand
or more employees. In the latter group,
one in five plants actually had more than
one hundred cubic feet of 0° F. freezer
space.
About half the frozen fish used in
the survey period was in the UU percent of
plants having from 11 to 50 cubic feet of
0° F. freezer space. More than a fifth of
the total volume was used by plants (13
percent) with freezer capacities of one
hundred or more cubic feet. The 1;9 per-
cent of plants with from 1 to 25 cubic
feet of freezer space used a third of the
total frozen shellfish, while the 21 per-
cent of companies with one hundred or more
cubic feet capacity used 37 percent of the
total.
Over 70 percent of the plants which
had freezer space reported that it was
sufficient for their needs. The majority
of medium-sized plants were satisfied with
their current freezer space, but almost
one -half (hS percent) of the large plants
with 11 to 25 cubic feet of freezer space
and 35 percent of the small plants found
their space inadequate.
About 1 plant in 5 expected to in-
crease its freezer capacity in the next
year or two, while 7 in 10 would keep it
at the same level.
Plans to increase freezer space were
reported by 28 percent of the smaller
plants, by 18 percent of the large plants,
and by 10 percent of the medium -sized
plants. A greater proportion of plants in
the Northeast planned to increase freezer
space (27 percent did) than did plants in
the South, North Central and West.
Canned Fish. — Almost half of the
183, U30 pounds of canned fish consumed in
the survey period was tuna. Salmon, with
76,^16 pounds used in the same h weeks,
was not far behind. The only other
species of canned fish with any substan-
tial use was sardines.
Six out of ten plants used tuna,
varying from h2 percent in the South, to
81 percent in the //est. Salmon, which
was used by hh percent of the plants in
the country, as a whole, was consumed by
about one-third of the western and
southern plants and by more than one -ha If
of the North Central plants. Sardines,
used by an average of 13 percent, were
most popular in the Northeast and least
popular in the South. Plants with company-
run facilities had the most users of each
of the three kinds of canned fish.
Most of those buying canned tuna
bought it in U -pound cans or less. This
was true of all sections of the country,
plant sizes, and forms of operation. Of
those which used larger cans, the majority
were company-run facilities, and plants
with 500 or more employees.
In general, pink or chum salmon was
used by about 12 percent of the plants.
In the South, it was about on a par with
other species of salmon while in the
Northeast only 3 percent used that product
as against U0 percent using other species.
Canned fish formed the bulk of the
inventory in factory food-service units in
the amount of 282,000 pounds — a quantity
sufficient to last for just over 6 weeks.
In the South, the supply was ample for
over 9 weeks. All other sections of the
country had enough canned fish for more
than U weeks.
Of all kinds of fish found in plant
inventories, canned salmon (almost 150,000
pounds) accounted for the largest stock.
Next was canned tuna. Supplies of canned
salmon were adequate for just under 8
weeks, and of tuna U-l/2 weeks.
Only 9 percent of plants that used
canned fish were without any inventory at
the time of the survey. About one-fourth
had less than 25 pounds, and 28 percent
had one -hundred pounds or more. The
median average amount on hand was 5U
pounds.
Shellfish
Shellfish used by plant feeding
facilities during the U-week period
amounted to 202,039 pounds at a cost of
$lli5,070. Almost halT the total was used
in plants located in the Northeast, and
about three -fourths of the poundage was
used by large plants. Services operated
by contractors used somewhat more shell-
fish than company-run facilities, but the
differences in their dollar volume was
only slight, indicating a greater use by
company services of the more expensive
species.
Half the shellfish used in the survey
period was fresh and approximately a third
was frozen, with only 18 percent canned.
Plants with a thousand or more em-
ployees used the largest portion of shell-
fish in any form but used less than half
as much canned as frozen shellfish. Both
the medium-sized and small plants used
larger percentages of canned than of fresh
or frozen shellfish.
Between company versus contractor-run
facilities, the use of fresh shellfish was
equally divided; canned was almost as
evenly split, but leased operations used a
much greater proportion of frozen shellfish.
While about a fourth of all plants
used shellfish in each form (fresh, frozen,
and canned), there were marked geographic
differences. In the West, h3 percent of
the plants used canned shellfish, 30 per-
cent frozen, and only 18 percent fresh.
Quite opposite patterns of use were
characteristic of the South, where one-
third of the plants served fresh shell-
fish, 22 percent frozen, and only 10 per-
cent canned. In the Northeast there was
comparatively little variation by type of
product.
Analyzed by plant size, 3 to h out of
10 large plants used all three types of
product, with frozen showing up most often.
About a fourth of the medium-sized com-
panies used fresh shellfish; fewer used
frozen or canned. less than one in five
small firms served canned, fresh, or
frozen shellfish.
Slightly less than 35 pounds of shell-
fish were used in the average plant in the
ii-week survey period. Almost one-half was
fresh, while 11 pounds were frozen and 6
pounds were canned.
By far the greatest quantity of fresh
shellfish was used in Northeastern plants--
an average of 36 pounds. The west was
heaviest in the use of canned products — 19
pounds, almost twice as much as in the
Northeast. North central and southern
plants used very little canned shellfish
products, i. e., 5 pounds and 1 pound,
respectively.
Fresh and Frozen Shellfish. — Of
165,056 pounds of fresh and frozen shell-
fish used in plants in li weeks, U3 percent
was shrimp, 22 percent scallops, 17-per-
cent oysters, and 13 percent clams. Lob-
ster and crabmeat made up almost all the
remainder.
For the most part, the bulk of use of
all the different species of shellfish was
in large plants and in contractor opera-
tions. An important exception was found
in scallops, three-fourths of which were
used in company-run facilities.
A total inventory of about 7,000
pounds of fresh shellfish was reported on
hand — as with fresh fish, only enough for
1-1/2 days' supply.
The opening inventory of frozen she
fish showed over 20,000 pounds, a 6.9
days' supply. This commodity was usuall,
found in quantities sufficient for more
than a week, and in plants with fewer th
a thousand employees, the supplies were
adequate for almost 2 weeks.
About 6 out of 10 users of frozen
shellfish had an inventory of that commoi
ity ranging from less than 5 pounds to
more than 55 pounds. For plants which
used frozen shellfish, the most usual
quantities kept in inventory fell betweei
15 and 3k pounds.
Canned Shellfish. —Three -fourths of
the total of the 36,983 pounds of canned
shellfish used by factory food services
was clams. This commodity accounted for
U6 percent of the total dollar expenditui
for canned shellfish. Canned crabmeat anc
shrimp were the only other items used to
any great extent.
The northeastern plants lead in the
use of canned clams with Ii2 percent of th
total. Ninety-one percent of the canned
crabmeat was used in the Northeast and
plants in the North Central used UU per-
cent of the canned shrimp.
Canned shellfish was used in rela-
tively few plants - 12 percent used canne
clams, 6 percent shrimp, and only 5 per-
cent crabmeat. Plants in the West showed
the most frequent use. Southern firms
were the smallest users of all three of
these species of shellfish.
If only users are considered, the
average (per plant) ii-week use was canned
clams and shrimp, ll; pounds each; and
crabmeat, 10 pounds.
As with canned fish, ample supplies
of canned shellfish were in plant inven-
tories - a total of Ui,000 pounds. Only
in the South and in small plants was then
less than a l;-weeks' stock, and even in
those two segments there was more than
enough for a full working week. Contrac-
tor-run services had less on hand than
those facilities operated by the company.
The majority (83 percent) of compa-
nies that used canned shellfish had some
in stock. Almost one-fourth of all the
plants had less than 10 pounds on hand
while 37 percent of the total volume of
canned shellfish was used by lh percent
who had a hundred or more pounds in
inventory.
CONDITIONS OF PURCHASE
A secondary wholesaler is the most
important source for fish and shellfish,
particularly among larger plants. Ninety
percent of firms with one thousand or more
employees named this type of supplier com-
pared with three out of four medium-sized
plants and only 66 percent of the small
plants. Conversely, relatively more men-
tion was made of retail stores by the
smaller concerns, i. e., 16 percent of the
companies with 2^0-h99 employees and 12
percent of the middle-sized plants desig-
nated retail sources.
Primary wholesalers, processors and
canners were also cited as sources for
those products. Primary wholesalers were
used by 9 percent of the small plants,
7 percent of the large, and only U percent
of the medium-sized plants.
The majority of plants bought all
their fresh or frozen fish products from a
single firm. Where more than one supplier
was patronized, it was more likely to be a
large plant than a small one, and the
chances were greater that it was located
in the South or north-central region.
The average plant made four purchases
of fresh or frozen fish during the survey
period. In general, where the use of fish
was highest, the number of purchases during
the k weeks tended to be greatest. There
was one exception to this rule — the West,
which had the largest proportion of plants
that used fresh or frozen fish, also had
the highest percentage of companies making
fewer than four purchases of that commodity
during the survey period.
Personal inspection was the most fre-
quent buying method for fresh fish and
shellfish; 35 percent mentioned this
practice. One in five plants bought on
the basis of brand names.
With both frozen and canned fish the
brand name was the most important consid-
eration. Almost half the buyers mentioned
this factor in connection with frozen fish
and more than 6 out of 10 pointed to it as
a determining element in canned fish
purchases. About one in four buyers of
frozen fishery products made a personal
inspection.
PRINCIPAL PRODUCTS
Six of the principal fish and shell-
fish products were selected for more
detailed analysis. For those six, the
average amounts usually bought by plants
were as follows:
Average quantity
purchased
Pounds
Cod, fresh or frozen
35
Ocean perch, fresh or
frozen
28
Salmon, canned
26
Tuna, canned
19
Haddock steaks and
fillets, fresh or frozen
19
Shrimp, peeled, fresh
frozen
or
Ik
Cod
The size of purchase for cod ranged
from less than 10 pounds to more than
160 pounds. All of the really sizeable
purchases (80 pounds or more) were made
by companies with 500 or more workers.
Approximately half of the total used
was accounted for by plants that usually
bought 60 pounds or more at a time.
Altogether, 3h percent of the large
plants purchased in quantities of this
magnitude, as contrasted with less than
20 percent of the small and medium-sized
plants.
In four weeks, almost 88,000 pounds
of cod (10 percent of the total volume of
fish and shellfish) were used by manu-
facturing-plant food facilities in the
United States, a third of the trans-
actions, and almost half the volume was
at or within a few cents of the average
price of 3U cents a pound. Eighty-five
percent of the transactions were within
a range of 10 cents below or 10 cents
above the average.
In all sections of the country,
steaks and fillets were bought by more
plants than was whole or dressed cod.
The average quantity of cod steaks or fil-
lets used per plant was about 11 pounds
compared with h pounds of whole or dressed
cod. A larger proportion of north-central
firms bought whole or dressed cod than
elsewhere, but even here, not quite so
many bought them as steaks or fillets.
Haddock
The average quantity of fresh and fro-
zen haddock steaks and fillets used per
plant was almost 11 pounds . ( In addition an
average of 10 pounds of whole and dressed
haddock was used per plant). The fresh
and frozen steaks and fillets accounted
for about 7 percent of the total poundage
of fish and shellfish used during the
survey period. The average price for
those items was ill cents per pound but it
was reported as low as 2U cents and as
high as 70 cents. The major share of both
the number of transactions and the total
volume fell between 30 cents and kh cents
a pound.
Fifty-three percent of the small
companies bought less than 10 pounds of
haddock steaks or fillets at a time. In
the medium-sized plants, however, the most
customary order was between 10 and 19
pounds while half the large companies
usually bought between 20 and 39 pounds.
Not a single small plant bought as much as
IiO pounds at a time, but half the total
consumption was accounted for by large and
medium-size plants that bought IiO or more
pounds.
Ocean perch
This commodity, with over 70,000
pounds used in h weeks, constituted 8 per-
cent of the total fish and shellfish
volume. It was one of the lowest-priced
species of fish, averaging 33 cents per
pound. The average quantity used per
plant was 12 pounds. About 50 percent of
the plants used a total of less than 60
pounds during the survey period. While
16 percent used 200 or more pounds, most
of them were in the 200- to 299 pound
range.
In small plants, the quantity of
ocean perch bought ranged from under 10
to 1+9 pounds, with the largest proportion
buying between 10 and 19 pounds. Firms
with 500 or more employee sometimes went
as high as 160 or more pounds in a single
purchase. A third of the volume was used
by plants that usually bought a hundred
or more at a time .
Canned salmon
Approximately 9 percent of the total
u-^week use of fishery products was in
canned salmon.
The most usual procedure for buying
canned salmon was in quantities of be-
tween 20 and 49 pounds . More than half
the small (51 percent) and about two-
thirds of the medium- and large-sized
firms dealt in such sizes. A fifth of
the total volume used was by plants
buying in lots of 50 pounds or more.
Twenty-four percent of the transac-
tions for this item were for 1-pound cans,
and a similar proportion was in cases of
2U 1-pound cans. One -third were in cases
of U8 1-pound cans.
Salmon in pound cans ranged in price
from 30 cents to over 75 cents, averaging
56 cents a pound. Over half the trans-
actions in this size unit and two-thirds
of the volume fell between 4 5 cents and
59 cents j 6 percent of the transactions
and 10 percent of total quantity used
resulted from purchases at 75 cents or
more a pound.
In cases of 2li 1-pound cans of
salmon, transactions were found all the
way from $8.88 a case to $22.20 with a
$13.00 {SS cents a pound) average.
Around a third of the purchases were be-
tween $12.00 and $13.99 a case.
Canned tuna
Canned tuna accounted for about 10
percent of the 4 -week use of fishery
products. Prices differed considerably
by the size of the unit purchased. In
all, 26 different purchase units were
mentioned. Most popular were 13- to
lli-ounce cans, in 24-unit cases. The
same size in cases of 48 accounted for
9 percent of the purchases, as did cases
of six 4-pound cans.
More than half of both the small and
the medium-sized plants usually bought
less than 20 pounds of canned tuna at a
time, while 28 percent of the large
plants bought from 30 to U9 pounds, and
10 percent bought 50 or more pounds.
Tuna bought in cases of six U-pound
cans ranged in price from Ul cents a
pound to 68 cents, averaging 57 cents.
Tuna in cases of 2k 13- to lU-ounce cans
was reported from a low of U5 cents a
pound to 71 cents averaging 62 cents.
Peeled shrimp
Fresh or frozen peeled shrimp
amounted to h9,000 pounds or 6 percent
of the total fish and shellfish volume
used during the survey period. Regionally,
the use of shrimp varied only from 27 to
33 percent.
Shrimp had the highest average use
(eight pounds) for any single species of
fresh or frozen shellfish. Together the
use of peeled and in-shell shrimp was
twice as much, on an average basis, as
that of any other kind of shellfish.
While the average consumption in user
plants was 35 pounds, a fifth of the
plants used less than 10 pounds each. On
the other hand, one-fourth of the total
use was in h percent of the plants where
each used 200 or more pounds.
Purchases of this product tended to
be somewhat smaller than those of the
other kinds analyzed. Better than half
(58 percent) of the small firms, and 33
and 37 percent, respectively, of the
medium-sized and large plants usually
bought less than 10 pounds. A relatively
large proportion of the plants with
500-999 workers bought in quantities of
70 pounds or more.
10
STATISTICAL TABLES
(Note: In some instances the detailed data do
not add to stated totals because of rounding
to the nearest whole number.)
TABLE - 1.— AGGREGATE QUANTITY OF FISH AND SHELLFISH
USED IN 1* WEEKS, JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Region, employee size
group, and form of
operation
Total fish
and shellfish
Fish
Shellfish
Pounds
Dollars
Pounds
Dollars
Pounds
Dollars
All plants
881*,067
1*51., 957
682,028
309,887
202,039
11*5,070
Region:
Northeast
North Central
South
West
308,577
370,063
161,287
W*,ii*o
165,936
187,282
76,551*
25,185
209,21*2
318,91*0
122,871*
30,972
100,123
11*7,1*88
1*6,208
16,068
99,335
51,122
38,1*11*
13,168
65,813
39,793
30,31*7
9,117
Employee size group:
250 - 1*99
500 - 999
1,000 or more
82,026
188,650
613,391
1*9,805
93,719
311,1*33
66,277
11*9,199
1*66,552
37,01*1*
65,879
206,961*
15,71*9
39,1*51
11*6,839
12,760
27,81*0
10lt,l*70
Form of operation:
Company-operated
Contractor-operated
1*00,510.
1*83,526
215,11*8
239,809
307,113
37l*,9l5
il*l*,5oo
165,387
93,1*29
108,610
70,61*8
7k,b22
11
En
p
ra
Q)
ft)
P
o
F-i
I
■p 10 Tl «) 'H
EHtH ij 10
m *H O (D
fcO W m
cd +3 £
U P G 6
<3) C 3 rH
> to O P
<■! -H o E
P-~ ' Q)
0)
o to
rH •>
G
a p,«h
o
6 3 O
•H
"Be
to
•> bD K
rl
c o
O (I'm
a
•H N
O
b0-H
N JO 0\ PJ f^Os C^iH
C§
CM
XAMD Os OJ
On C^-cO
iH i-l CM
CO CO
CM i-l
xa
CM
rAXA-d fA
• • • •
XAnO CM O
CM CM CM fA
i-l OnXA
o . .
r— o c~-
rH CM fA
c-xa
. .
CO fA
CM CM
-J
CM
CM
XA
XA
CM
■P
c
fA
tt)
•
o
On
(h
-J
a)
(E,
P
c
r—
0)
.
o
r-t
f-.
cr\
XA
CO
i— I i— I MO CM
• • . .
HvOf^CO
H"\ iH fA rH
OnO Os-d-
....
_4"XAnO \Q
nO-cJ-JXA
CM \A P-^->
• • • CM
COH Jv
C— _J o o
• . • .
O (ACO-3
CO r— XACO
CO C— _d CO iH
"LIMA CM
•-I CM rA
o _g o
vO OMD
. . o
rH XAXA
O CM fA
nO C^-OO
nO XT\ CM fA
fNUNXAXA
i-l CM fA
fAXANO
CO O XA ON
rA r>-\ CM CM
On r-l MO CO
....
On co r— On
no CO On
CM CM fA
• • •
_3 fA r—
Is- CO ON
-J
On rH CO CO
.
e . o o
UN.
r-H NO -J rH
CO
ON CO t— ON
fA lAH OtO
UN CM O rH .
•a
ON CM 3
CM CM O
fA xaxa
caxa
MO -J
-J o
-d-d-
o no co xa o
O CO
CO no
ro On On r— J(\i O XAcO
XAXA
XA-J
t^C^rANO Ocor- C- On
_d On
P"\ CM
CO CM
(A O
On co
O On fA NO CM
_j rA r- J- O
r--CO On OncO
fi
fA On rH i— I r>-\
XA On _3- CO J
r^NNO _d rH r-
O
-
o
XA
O-dMD XA
CM lA rH CM
. . • •
O-J rH On
•-I rH
-
rA r-(
XAMD CM XA
c«- r— onIa
. o . o
C— rH NO XA
XA CM CM -
...
V\VA ON
fA t~- CM
CM
OnO O
OnO rH
...
-JIA CM
3 On O
fA
c—
_J mlAH
fA ONrH
fA
XA rH O CO
XA On_3"
h
Eh
ed
o
<
fcH
Eg
S
3
g
•N
<
CO
i=>
w
cy
w
13
§
<
o
g
J-
5
3
o
-a)
w
1
CO
1
JO
rA
1
H
c
©
O
u
Eh
Eh
cd
-p
o
Eh
O fo
1
P
(4
c
d)
<1)
(X
o
-1 *
c
ft fttn
o
g d o
•H
Q) o
-P
u s
Cfl
•> to K
r.
c o
0>
O -cO CO
NO CO CM
rA_d/ -H
CM On ON O
• • • •
On CO CM r-l
O rH CM pr>
Wl^rl
r— t>- o
• •
OO-H;
rA rA
-d/oO-d:
rH
O CM OO
rH CM NO
rA CM Un
• • •
nO OnnO
sO-^f NO
ft
d
2
r-^
bO 0)
rt
r.
r.
0) o
-P
n e
-P c
•H ON On
ca
to o
c3 o
CO On On Sh
•P
40\0
§
X
0) 1 1 O
rH
C -P -P
O r) In
p
p
>, o
ft
d
to
o o o o
•H O .O
O
0)
rlXAO •
r-i
03
CO
:s
0, CM UN rH
■a;
Pd
H
OO CM
r— CM
rA.
O O
UnUn
i— I rA
• •
<-* CM
ON On
1
-p
o
rA O rA_d
NO
rA <-H
rA c—
u
a
o
CM UN CM
CM
r—
-d/^A
Q)
©
r-{
ft
o
•o
■a
OO
•
CM O OnO
• • • •
_d CM
• •
CM
•
CM NO
• •
w
c
rH
On rH CO rA
CO CO
V\
O r-t
d
3
o
nO T-AM3 r- 1
t— 1
sO
rH
rA t —
o
a
rA
rH
CM
r—{ rH
Eh
,
p
O
J- r-T-A_-J
CO
^H
^4
CM CO
J-.
e
O
rA-d rH
CM
r—
-Ct 1A
0)
a)
rH
cu
o
U\ On
• •
CO CO
c— o
U\Un
-rfUN
On
r—
-S
O
r-
rA rA
-a
(D
p
• •
-o
rt
c
d)
Jh
o
P
OJ
•H
cfl
ft
rl
?
r.
a?
o
p
o
f?
a
«H
s
fn
O
§•
«
p
o
O
jlj
o
O
o
Cm
13
TABLE - U.— AGGREGATE QUANTITY OF FRESH AND FROZEN FISH
USED IN h WEEKS, JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Species
Quantity
Value
Pounds
Dollars
Haddock
123,798
i+9,193
Cod
87,622
29,531*
Ocean perch
70,51*3
23,573
Halibut
38, Wi
18,029
Flounder or sole
23,377
11,268
Pike
21,660
13,996
Salmon
12,728
7,309
Swordfish
12,033
6,983
Unspecified fillets
17,619
8,258
Fish sticks
12,799
6,01*7
Other 1/
68,593
26,930
Total fresh
and frozen
fish
1*89,216
201,120
1/ Includes small quantities of mackerel, red snapper, rock
and ling cod, sea and lake trout, sea bass, smelts,
whiting, and similar items.
Ill
rH
rH1
cO
<=*! -~t
ft
co
CD
0)
&
8ft
— ' CD
03
CD C
£ft -3
ft O U n)
^ O ^
MCh
-3
CM
CM
SO
OO
Os
SO
s
M co
CO +3
& C
CO
Os casO ca
• • • •
CM CM CM rH
rOCOCM H
r-t tr, t-- ^-»
• • • t*A
OO rH XA
• • •
rAXA-^t
rH CM fA
sO OssO
• • •
cm r-\ - 3
CM_Cf
CM CO
r— co
• •
1A Os
O
a,
OS CM
^
• •
r— co
§
r-t r-t
o
£m
CO cr\sO"l-A^ — ' CO XA Os
r-t r-t CM r-t r-t CM
CA XACMCOCM OsOcA H 0\ fl
r--so
r—
JrilAH
fA OS r-t
i— 1 rA
CA
lAHOO
1A OsJ-
OO-H;
1A
CM OH J
fAsO-J-
rH f—
sO
sO
1A
-H;
m
\A
XA
-3
-3
Os
-3
~3
Os
Os
fA
fA
CO
c
o
•H
P
a>
■p
T3 cO
CD H
•P CD
cd ft
U O
CO CD I
U ft U
0 O
1 +>
o d ftp
EHftOrHrHStOOOOO EC
S -HOOOCDrHlAO ^gOO
^•-^ M S IS CO |3 ftCMXArH COO
n, < r5 0 Ph
Eh
a
Oh
«
rf1
PU
_ xl j- ^5
C -P -P -p P >j
CD
N
•H OsOs
CO OsOs f-i
40\ O
CD
(1) I I 0H
tD rH
\ArH^J_^
CM XA Os_H/
• • • •
O
r-t-3 CM
XACO cA'-n
• • • rA
CSI OO XA^
C-^-sO CM r—
O-^tXACM
• • • •
C~- r-t f- Os
r— o sO XA
CASO r-t
fA CM XA
• • •
rH _Cf r—
r— xaco
XAOO r-^
• • •
r-t XArA
CSI
Os.
CO .
OO
is©
C— _-J fAXA rH
CA XA r-f O OO
XA WOH4
r-t r-t CSI r-t r-t
CSI O O
r-t CA
-3 rA Os
f- CM Os
• • »
rH XA r-
fA OS r-t
XA Os_H/
(AsO^f
u
-p
c
CD
O
ft
s
O CM
-3 00
sO XA Os fA CM
r-t CO [•— t^-sO
• • • • •
»_ O O
u a to o o o o
O O C) HIAO *6
5S CO S ft^J XArH G
E r°
T3
CD
-P
•• TJ cO
CD rH
-P CD
CO ft
Vt O
ft u
m O O
fn ft I +i
° ° &?c^
CO r4
ft-P
E C
O O
o o
15
J8c>l
g
(0
A!
o
•H
-P
to
f*3 _,
•a! P
R
O O
^ ,
co so
M T-fS
fa Os
I a
o <
fa t=
fa fa
m
CO
x! P
•H (3
CO CD P
O
•H r-H O
fa --i e
CD Tj
a. a>
•rl
CO -H
fa
fa
V *
U CO
O -H
fa
g
e
3
•"3
EH
3
fa
«
fa
w
CO
c!
o
M
CO
a
re o
CD (-i
p
rH
re
H XI 10
o § co
CO
p
3 -a 3
co fa
re
-p
o
El
Q) ,-N
N fa CO
Ct> -H O CD
bfl 10 CD
re p >>
fn p c e>
hicBh
> re o fa
«: <-i o s
fa^^ 0
1
fa
c
o
•H
1
3
2
o
13
cd
Mfa
n
0)
-d
C
N
re
o
■H
fa
H
co
o
M
*
o
CM
CO
fA
sO
\A
o
Os
oo
CM
fA
Os Os O sO <-* IA O
CM OO UN. CM
HHC0 J
23^
fA
0\ CM
• •
Os
CM
CM i-H r-_3 IAOJ
• • • • • • •
OO C— _3 O CM O OO
O-Cf -9
OlA §
Os Ov O fA
• • • •
CM in CM >-i
ia o <-nO
• • (A •
SO rH VS.
• • •
HIA4
vO r-CM
• • •
rH r-i-3
CM fA
rH IA
-s
in md
CM CM
O
fa
%
f-fTiAO _a"Lr\r-
JvOHvfl
IA
Os
C^sO
J- us
f— XA r«"\ *-»*-»
• • • (A fA
-3/ fA Os«-x^-'
sO lAoO
• • •
r-l CM OS
SO CM CM r-l CM fACO
• • • • • « »
c— r-i oo cm r- r— r>-
CM CM r-l CM
Os rH "9
u\-^ 3
fA r— t3
• • c
r-l IA 3
CMrH £
SO CO t— 0O t-^-LT^f^ r-ICM
• ••• • .« • ••
r--rH_3-rA iauma cm r-
r— us cm ao
• • • •
r-l CM r-l -^
_d-_d- OS (A
• • • •
0\JU\r>
r-\ CM
r-l CM OS IA CM
• • • • •
CM CM fA \A rH
Os r— O
• • •
r- r— os
• •
r—co
o
fa
JrilAH rnCNH iH fA
IA rH O CO \A Os-3- CO-=f
CM O --H _3 rAsO -J- H t>
*S »V »\ »\ •» »\ «•,
H fA| H H (V-\ r-H r-t
Os
sO
CO
O
O
IA
O
Os
sO
(A
CM
O
-4
CO
CM
f-
1A
IA
sO
fA
IA
TAOO Os O
ao co sO -J
• • • •
IA r-l so ao
oo r— cm os
0O OO rH CM
CM
fA
CM CM r-l VS.
1A-4 CO fA
• • • •
sO -H
OO O Os
rH (A--^.aO
• • -
• • •
-4 r— cm
CM
CM
w
p
O
u
p
I
fa
IS
rH
a)
Q
U
%
P
«
& CO
53
CD
-p
o
>H C
h re
M rH
«•
c
0)
P
55
H fa
o
fn
i-.
J
•H
o
o
o
•< rH
bflS S
CO
i=>>-4
CD
Of^
S
Os Os
Os Os
-J- Os
CD
0 I I O
P i>s O
co o o o o
S faCM IA rH
W fa
»CM| fA|
16
TABIE - 6.-- QUANTITY OF FISH AND SHELLFISH
AND NUMBER OF DAYS SUPPLY IN INVENTORY
AT BEGINNING OF SURVEY JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Type of
product
Daily
use
1/
On hand
Number of
working days'
supply
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
Days
Total fish and shellfish
U0.2
h3h.6
10.8
Fish: Total
31.0
362.7
11.7
Fresh
8.5
12.9
1.5
Frozen
13.7
63.3
U.6
Canned
8.U
281.9
33.6
Cured, smoked, dried,
kippered
A
U.6
n.5
Shellfish: Total
9.2
71.9
7.8
Fresh
U.5
7.1
1.6
Frozen
3.0
20.8
6.9
Canned
1.7
hh.O
25.9
1/ On basis of average work week of 5.5 days,
17
ft
O
?!
Eh
Not
ascer-
tained
■p
0)
o
•H
1
££§
•S
O Q O
CM -P\A
3
&
o
1*5$
H^S
ft
*1
El Til
t<> o
0 rt
ft
V)
-H
so c^-r— oo
C— CM1A
so c— co
-=}■
CM
\a cm moN
c\cm CM H
CNcO 1A
CNCM H
o
u
I
■A
73
bO o
-P a
•H On Os
oi a>
01 Os Os U
rt o
4(hC
> O
Ohh
p
VI
O O Q O
H^fN O •
•H O O
o
o
u
o
rt
ft
01
U
a>
N
•a;
n
3
-,
><
hH
0d\
^H
-• x!
•P C (IT) 0) Ifl
O C -H G Xi -H
E-H CO =H S W =H
o
<1)
^ -p
CD c
H O
en
CD
0)
&
O Oh
O S
CD
CO
>, •>
c
O (X
o
a o ^
•H
•p
e ^ o
id
Q) W CD 'C
&
C eg C
O
O -H CO
•H [0
HH
fcfl
O
0}
eg
J-
cA
fA
O
CA
fA
fA
fA
-J-
\A
CM
NO
fA
r—
r—
cA
1A
O O r-co
• • . .
C— <-• CM _-}
....
JOIAO
7-1 rH rH
.ON CM
•cm p-
...
r>- r^NQ
■i
cA cn.
o-\ t~- T3
fACO
tA cor~w CN
TA WOHJ
£
O 1r> CM fA CM On fA
O rH CO_3;
CM rH 7-1
C— On CM
CM
1ANO T3
• . d
NO <-H
£
lA
On
O
l CM O-CO
i lA CM NO
CO ON On O-
NO -3
fANO VA
fA
O O CO
fA co On
CM CM
fA
fA On CM cm
....
mHvO O
_;f 1A rn --
• • • i
NO 1A CM •
r— -j o o
....
onto J
co r- i-A co
• • . .
GO C— 1-r\0O
JtnVAH
IAHOCO
■s
CA
VOW J-?
O >h r-
O O
O
J- i-H On C^-
...
. .
H
•
....
co r-N0
XACO
^)
CA
HcDCOrn
r>-\ r^'LTN
1A CA
O
Ph
r-t
rH rH
CMArH
U\ ON CO
rH i_r\ CA
...
-3 CM I—
ITiCM t)
IAJ
C no co lr, O
«
O CM (A
nO r>-cO
C IA rH
...
O o°inO
nO t~-CO
CA On rH
1A ON^f
CANO-^J
fA
O OO 3
CO nO O
on-J "d
• • C
O On 3
CO NO O
rH 5 O O 0,-P
M rH
H
a
o
a
in
O O O O 6 C
Eh Ch
B
•H
o o
o
CD
HIAO « g O O
OiCM 1A rH R O O
S
3
H
M2 3
00
^;
a rH
rH
CD
rS £
tD rH
Pm
"-S
s
O" ■<
-no
rH
CM ON
rH fA
. .
r^iA
rH
On O-J-tA
....
CM TA C-- On
rH rH
8.6
11.2
1U.9
• •
O
Ph
On
cA
.
CA
C— rH 0O r-i
j--^r CA cA
....
lA-Ct
Otnn
CM CO On
...
rH rH NO
On On
O ON
• •
-Ct CM
rH CO
CM CA
lAcO fA rH CO
CM CM
-J- CM
NO NO
CA1A
OnnO
r— rH fTN, CM _J
rH CM 1A _3- CM
\T\nO
. .
•-{ On
1A CM
r-
J-mtAH
fA ONrH
rH CA
fA
1A rH O CO
1A On J-
fAN03
CO-d-
1A
WOHJ
rH C-
A
X!
-P -P
3 w
O CD
On On
On On
-3 On
I I
OJ
CD
>j O
O o o o
H1AO •
ftCM tTN rH
O
fa
o
o
'-'I
20
a
Xi
co
CD
CO
Xi fAj
CM|
t3
CD
d
c
•H
o
o
XI
a
a
3
o
x:
to
•H
O
co iH to
-P CD -H
OXi
• u
.a o to
H CO
C CD
CO
P
O
E-c
a
•H
co
0)
U
+3
CD
c
>
cd
■~
rH
(X
£, -
C
o a
n
a o u
•H
+3
g fn o
CU
CD hfl hh
rH
~ CD T3
&
esq
O'H CO
O
•H CO
^
bO
o
Q)
«
IA
-it
XA
O
XA
M
CO
-=>
co
CO XA O •-*
• • • •
r-l CM nO
On O t^
• • •
-5 fAXA
CO ■— I -J -CT
• • • •
oo^r r- o
i-l r-l CM
On OnXA f—
XA.J3 cAnO
OO O CM
-rjTA\A
fA
Is- CO
• •
1A r"A
CO
_d o- r-co
NO O O
ON ON
•
• • • •
• • •
• •
XA
On-H; fA-3-
OO-J^XA
O CM
ON
XA f-
ON CM r-H
•H CO
•
• •
• • •
• •
CM
CM O
fA On CM
On cm
fA
-jm^-f^l
Cu cm
ON pa
•
• « • •
• • •
• •
CM
no H cm r—
On CO On
XA O
i-l
H H CA
r-H
■-H rH
ON
CM _d NO On
CM fA On
r— i-i
•
• • • •
• • •
o •
r-t
IAnO On CM
On r- CO
CO CO
CM
fA H _"t
i—l i-l CM
CM i-(
o-
CO CM CA^-.
no o-=r
O CM
•
• • • -J"
■ • •
• •
--J-
CO 04
i-H XA-CJ CO
CO ("-IA ON
• • e •
nO CA ^O
O^f NO IA
CM XA i-l CM
O -3- i-l ON CM -3 i-l
NO r— f-A
O ON O
CA CM CM
e • •
oo fA r—
CO^O O
CM i
fA i
O nO t— On
CM nO O CO
CA CM CM
r-l NO MD
NO -a CM
On r— C—
i-l IA CM t— _a CM iH
r-l
r— cm rH-cf
rlWH
IA
CA cvj r- XA
nO CA-^f
•
• • • •
• • •
CO
CM C — XA On
\0 r-H
r— co co -3
U\COf>-3
3
C-nO CA
\A O i-H
• • •
rH O ("A
r-l i-H CM
_arAlAi— I OA On rH
IA i-H O CO \AOn_3-
CM O i-I -4 oanO J
•* «\ *v •* •*
i— I CM i— I i-H 0A
cy
a,
tuDS
Oh
CO
fn
-P
C
0)
o
ji
p
u
5
o
u
M
CM On
On fA
CM XA
O i-H
1AcO
O CM
fACO
NO rH
• •
CM On
nO On
CO^t
CO r-
ON rH
-3 r>-
On O
• o
O CM
ON^f
• •
nO On
^3- On
CO-H-
r— rA
rH pa
0O-3-
CO
•H
CO
XI
CU
•• XI CO
C CO fn
u
si
d co
O 0)
co 3
On on c
On On f_,
_S On 0
CO ' ' O
>5 O
O O O O
rH IA O •
ftfMlAH
W
O
& in
0 O
1 "^
b o
C CO
CO Sh
OhP
e e
o o
o o
co
rH
Oh
rH
O
CO r-i
S
rH
CO
cd
o
CO
co
CD
-S
»\
fl
CO
rH
r-l
o
•H
c
CO
M
p>
>H
CP
CM
P>
CO
•a
to
•
C
CO
H
e
CO
m
o
p>
•H
3
c^
CO
H
e
•H
a>
•H
p
•H
CO
HH
•
-a
o
CO
CO
-8
•H
P
a
o
•H
-8
-a
3 O
fO
3
•
rC
CO
»\
rH
u
x;
r— 1
o
CO
CO
•H
£
p
^
co
c
CO
O
w
o
o
0)
rH
T3
0)
»\
3
Dh
CO
rH
CD
O XA
rH
C
o
S^1
HH
O
CO
CO
H
•H
P
5
CO
w
rH
d-3l
rH O
cO •
£ Cm CO
W O fn
CD
CO >,-P
CO +5 CO
"2 •H >»
d p> o
o c3 -a
c s c
H rj3
HI
21
TABLE - 11.—/
.GGREGATE QUA]
JANUARY
WITT OF SHELLFISH I
- FEBRUARY 1956
fSED IN h WEI
3KS,
Region, employee size
Aggregate quantity used
group, and form ol -
operation
Fresh
Frozen
Canned
Thousand
pounds Percent
Thousand
pounds
Percent
Thousand
pounds
Percent
All plants
100.0
100
65.0
100
37.0
100
Region*
Northeast
North Central
South
West
61.3
16.8
19.3
2.6
61
17
19
3
20.5
23.6
17.5
3.1*
31
37
27
5
17.5
10.7
1.7
7.1
1*8
29
It
19
Bnployee size group:
250 - U99
500 - 999
1,000 or more
6.5
17.8
75.7
6
18
76
3.9
12.5
1*8.7
6
19
75
5.1
9.1
22.5
IS
2k
61
Form of operation:
Company-operated
Contractor- operated
50.2
249.8
50
50
2l*.9
1<0.2
38
62
18.3
18.7
U9
51
TABLE - 12.— AGGREGATE QUANTITY OF FRESH AND FROZEN SHELLFISH, BY SPECIES
USED IN h WEEKS, JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Species
Aggregate quantity used
Pounds
Percent
Dollars
Percent
Shrimp
71,772
1*3
59,771*
1*9
Scallops
35,91*7
22
2U,122
20
Oysters
28,190
17
22,690
18
Clams
20,632
13
5,1*00
1*
Lobsters
5,173
3
7,U89
6
Crabs
3,193
2
3,U*3
3
Other
fresh and frozen
U*9
(1)
116
(1)
Total
shellfish
165,056
100
123,031*
100
1/ Less than 0.5£
22
TABIE - 13 . —AGGREGATE QUANTITY OF FRESH AND FROZEN SHELLFISH
USED IN U WEEKS, JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Region, employee size
Species
group, and form of
operation
Shrimp
Scallops
Oysters
Clams
Lobsters
Crabmeat
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
Thousand
pounds
All plants
71.8
35.9
28.2
20.6
5.2
3.2
Region:
Northeast
18.6
30.9
10.6
18.1
2.1
l.U
North Central
31.0
3.9
2.1*
1.1
2.1
.1
South
18.0
.9
iii.5
1.0
.8
l.U
West
U.2
.2
.7
.1*
.2
.3
Employee size group:
250 - h99
h.3
1.8
1.5
2.3
•■
.1*
500 - 999
11,3
2.8
10.3
3.2
1.9
.8
1,000 or more
56.2
31.3
I6.it
15.1
3.3
2.0
Form of operation:
Comp any -ope r a te d
25.9
26.6
ll.li
7.7
2.5
1.0
Contractor-operated
k$.9
9.3
16.8
12.9
2.7
2.2
23
rH
B
S3 On
w .
tSJ I
O
« H
SI
S3
CO •
H co
H W
M
CO
(V. P-,
&h as
o
•
H
5
h
K
Q
W
&
X!
CO
I rH
c co
H X!
co
TJ
0
,-1
0
£
rt
■P
I
r-J W
rt ft\.
o o f*Vl
co i-i
co
CD
-P
&
m|
1
co
x>
f-.
3
co
■p
w
i
•9 ■+*
rt
rt
u
3)
o
e
CD
XS
CO
rt\
-P CNJ|
o
Eh
rt CO TJ 0) iH x!
-p i) C nH (o \
o tn rt o a> -h t-r\
Eh sh *h rC «h
a) ^
N «H CO
CO -H O CO
tlO CO CD
rt -PS
> rt O ft
ft^ CO
o
ft
r-l
3 e
|
2§
o
fn
0)
a.
13
a>
o
u
£
■s
CD
o
C-.
£
Q)
O
rH
£
CD
O
£
o
-NO
• • • •
XA CO CNJ
XAr— t—
• • • -3"
3-M ^
0\0O r-<
• • •
-J-JXA
co
•
NO
C~-nO O co
• • • •
C-CNJ CNJ r-l
On CO XA
• • •
CO
•
rH
nO On CNJ -J
• • • •
_h; C—nO nO
3 CO-3 CO
_3 VN.rH
• • •
r- C— On
CNJ COXA
co
XA
_H; co\ArH
UN rH O CO
CNJ O rH _H/
CO ON rH
UN CNJ
CONO-H/
nO CM
CNJ CNJ
£
£
1A C— TJ
,N§
O On
CO CNJ O
ft.
rH_H/ -Q
• • C
o oo 3
H £
CO
rH
•3
•
CNJ
•
rH
§
CM
rH
o
Cm
ONCO TJ
«cnj r- -3 CM
;§
o
a,
-s
-1A
£
rH_J •§
o
Ph
CM TJ
nO P-
£
1A On TJ
O NO 3
XA co O
P-,
rH CO U
CO -J CD
rH f- XI
co
co
XA
ft
■3
d
•• 73 rt
o
C CD Sh
u
O -P CD
rH
bo
more
rati
pera
r-op
rt
o
tH
co
g
+j d
•H On On
CD O O
U ft 1 -P
M
CO CO CO
-P rt o
rt •• x; x!
CO On On
B
5
-J On
CO
CD 1 1
O O >> O
c rt
Q ^ rt rH
CO
-h C3 -P -P
ft O T< U
-p
>5
2 ° B»12
rd
CO
q o o
o e S
^
•H O O
O
CD
rH VA O
•> g o o
3
-H_H/ OO
xa cm r—
r-l -J CO
rH O On
co C-nO
cnj xa r—
CNJ
fflHJ
On -Cj-3
• • •
rH XA
XA CO
rH O
NO >-l
CM 0O
CNJ CO
CO r-l
r— CO
CNJ C-—
CNJ O
o
NO
xago
xa co
^OnnO
-J CNJ
OO O
I CO rH
I NO CNJ .
On
-J COXA rH
Xa rH o co
CNJ O •-! -J
rH CNJ rH rH
HHj
NO CO CNJ
CNJ NO -J
HHt-
nO CO XA
XA CO CNJ
XAXA -H
rH NO
co On >H
XA ON_J
CO NO -J
CO J
o •->
rH O
• •
On co
CM J-
CM CNJ
-J- On
XA -=t
• •
CM CM
NO ON
CO J-
• •
r— cnj
rH C—
00 OO
-JXA
f- OXA
CO CO rH
f~--=f
O co CO'-^
rH NO 0O
cm r>-
CM CNJ
CO NO
NO J
CO co
ON CNJ
co O
• •
IAJ
CO CM
•-t co
Eh
S
3
Ph
• •
TJ
.. TJ rt
OS
o
C CD rH
BO
rH
rn
M
O -P CO
CD -H rt ft
(h -P fn O
a
n
u
■p
CD
Q rt y i
g fH ft rH
to
-P c
•H
On On
CO O O
S> co
CO CD
rt O
m
On On
fn ft 1 -p
•P
^t ON
° ° E?TO
O rH
a
o
Eh
21;
TAB IE - 15.— AGGREGATE QUANTITY OF CANNED SHELLFISH
USED IN h WEEKS, JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Species
Founds
Percent
of totaL
Dollars
Percent
of total
Clans
Crabs
Shrimp
Other 1/
27,587
75
10,068
U6
3,270
9
U,221
19
2,706
7
3,315
15
3,U20
9
U,U32
20
Total canned shellfish
36,983 100
22,036
100
1/ Includes small quantities of items as lobster tails, scallops and
oysters .
TABLE - 16. —TYPE OF SUPPLIER OF FISHERY PRODUCTS BY PLANT SIZE 1/
Supplier
All
plants
250 -
U99
500 -
999
1,000
or more
Secondary wholesaler
Retail store
Primary wholesaler
Processor
Canner
Not ascertained
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
79
66
80
90
11
16
12
h
7
9
h
7
k
h
h
5
3
h
5
1
3
5
3
-
1/ Percentages add to more than 100 because of multiple answers,
25
TAB IE - 17. --NUMBER OF FISH PURCHASES IN h WEEKS,
JANUARY - FEBRUARY 1956
Region, employee size
Number
of purchases
group, ana i ox in ox
operation
One to
three
Four
Five
or more
Perce
nt
Percent
Percent
All plants
27
63
10
Region :
Northeast
15
71
Hi
North Central
27
62
11
South
37
57
6
vfeSt
UU
U9
7
Employee size group:
250 - h99
3k
58
8
500 - 999
30
62
8
1,000 or more
19
67
111
Form of operation:
Company-ope r ate d
3U
53
13
Contractor-operate d
21
70
9
26
Appendix
SAMPLING AND SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The Universe From Which The Sample Was
Selected
In general, the universe from which
the sample was selected (for the entire
series of publications) consisted of
28,Lb6 manufacturing establishments which
had 100 or more employees during the first
quarter, 1953, according to the records of
the Bureau of Old Age and Survivors
Insurance (BOjiSI). Establishments which
had fewer than 100 employees in 1950 or
which were not in existence as of that
date, and all non-manufacturing establish-
ments, had a zero probability of inclusion
in the sample, and are therefore not repre-
sented in the survey findings.
For the purposes of the "commodity
reports", the survey was restricted to
larger establishments, i. e., establish-
ments with 2^0 or more employees in first
quarter, 1953. Although basically the
same procedure was used for sampling all
establishments, certain refinements were
introduced to improve the efficiency of
the sample of establishments with 250 or
more employees.
Design of the "Large Plant" Sample
The sampling method used for the
"large plant" sample may be described as a
self -weighting cluster sample, with clus-
ters chosen for inclusion in the sample
with probability proportional to size.
Prior to the selection of survey
respondents, primary sampling units (psu's)
were formed. Each psu was comprised of a
single county, or a group of adjacent
counties, with a minimum population of
fifteen manufacturing establishments with
250 or more employees. Excluded from the
universe (and from the sample) were nine-
teen "statewide" establishments; those
with no fixed place of operation and which
could not therefore be associated with a
specific psu.
In total, 267 primary sampling units
were formed, with a total population of
11,1*01; establishments. The remaining U70
establishments were in "unclustered
counties" and were placed in a separate
stratum. (A discrepancy of one establish-
ment in the published B0ASI statistics
was ignored.)
The psu's and unclustered counties
were stratified by four geographic re-
gions. The number of psu's in each re-
gion, the population of these psu's, and
the number of establishments in "un-
clustered counties" is as shown in the
following:
Area
Number Total
of estab-
psu's lishments
formed in psu's
Total
establish-
ments in
unclustered
counties
Northeast 75 U,l6l 0
North Central 92 1*,067 107
South 81 2,353 280
West 19 823 83
All regions 267 ll,l+0li
1*70
The probability of the inclusion of
any psu in the sample was proportional to
the size of the psu measured in terms of
numbers of establishments with 250 or more
employees. Separately within each of the
four geographic regions, a random start
and a sampling interval were designated
and a total of 50 primary sampling units
were selected. In addition, counties were
selected at random from the stratum of
unclustered counties.
Several psu's, because their size
exceeded the sampling interval, were
selected more than once; this was true of
the five counties in New York City (which
are treated as a single unit by the B0ASI),
the psu made up of Cook and DuPage
counties in Illinois, and the psu created
from Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange, Kern,
and Santa Barbara counties in California.
The establishments within each psu
were divided into three strata on the
basis of 1953 employee size: 250 to 1*99
employees, 500 to 999 employees, and
1,000 or more employees. For each stratum,
a random start was selected and an inter-
val determined which would provide a
self -weighting sample. The actual selec-
tion of establishments in sample psu's
27
was done by the BOASI, from its complete
listings of manufacturing establishments,
in accordance with the pre-arranged
specifications covering starting point and
interval. All of the establishments in
the seventeen unclustered counties were
included in the sample.
The number of primary sampling units
and counties included in the sample and
the total number of establishments from
which the final list of respondents was
selected is shown in the following two
tables:
Psu' s
in sample
Area
Number
Number of
establishments
Mortheast
'forth Central
South
V/est
17
16
11
6
1,6#»
1,920
50J4
1*57
All regions
5o
U,535
Area
Unclustered
counties in sample
Number
Number of
establishments
Mortheast
North Central
South
West
0
5
6
6
0
7
18
23
All regions
17
1*8
The sample, it will be noted, was
disproportionate by both size and region.
Specifically, all plants in the West were
over sampled, and all plants with 1,000
or more employees were over sampled.
The end result of the sampling pro-
cess was the identification of 892 estab-
lishments. The sample can be considered
to adequately represent all manufacturing
establishments which had 250 or more
employees during first quarter 1953.
Telephone "Screening" Interviews
A telephone screening questionnaire
designated the "T" interview was designed
and used to establish the presence and
nature of feeding facilities in establish-
ments with 250 or more employees in 1953.
Of the 892 establishments identified
through the sampling process the "T"
telephone interview was completed with
81*5. Interviews were conducted during
late December, 1955 and early January,
1956, and the respondent was usually an
individual in a personnel supervisory
function.
There were hi establishments with
which a "T" interview was not completed.
For the most part, the absence of an
interview was the result of the establish-
ment having gone out of business or having
moved out of the sampling area.
Subsequently, 2U additional "T"
interviews were completed with establish-
ments selected on a systematic basis with-
in certain psu's, where problems of non-
cooperation in the collection of detailed
food schedules made this desirable. In
total, then, 869 "T" interviews were
conducted.
Changes in Employment Size
Almost three years had elapsed be-
tween first quarter 1953, at which point
in time these establishments were classi-
fied by employment size by the BOASI, and
the early months of 1956, when actual
interviewing was done. Presumably, some
of these plants had gone out of business
during the period. Others, on the other
hand, had grown substantially in size.
Size of employment was also affected
in another way. It will be remembered
that the universe, and the sample, -was de-
fined in terms of "establishments". That
is, a company operating at more than one
location is required to submit a report
for the "establishment" at each location;
also, companies engaged in distinctly
different lines of activity at one loca-
tion are required to submit separate re-
ports on each "establishment" if the
activities are substantial in size. It
follows from the latter that at any
28
single company location several "estab-
lishments" may be represented.
Feeding facilities, however, are
rarely associated with a specific "estab-
lishment". Almost invariably, such facil-
ities are made available to all employees
at a given location of a company, even
though some of these employees may be en-
gaged in different activities than others,
i.e., may be employed by different "es-
tablishments". It was therefore necessary
to shift the frame of reference from "es-
tablishments" to "plants". A plant is
defined as all of the manufacturing activ-
ities of a given company at a single well-
defined location. (This definition is
obviously subject to interpretation. In
general, management's interpretation of
the scope and size of a plant has been
accepted.)
The number of employees at any spec-
cific plant location was obtained from
companies originally contacted during the
"T" interview and subsequently interviewed
in person. An estimate of employment
offered by a qualified representative of
management at the time of the personal
interview was accepted.
Subsequent Interviews With Feeding and
Non-Feeding Plants
The "T" telephone interview was, as
previously noted, primarily designed as
a screening interview and its primary
objective was to determine the incidence
and nature of feeding facilities among
869 establishments with which such inter-
views were made.
Subsequent personal interviews with
companies with 250 or more employees
during the first quarter of 1956 were
made with sub-samples of the 809 plants
which had 250 or more employees in both
1956 and 1953. Four types of interviews
were conducted with these establishments:
An "A" interview with management of plants
with feeding facilities; a "B" interview
with the managers of feeding facilities in
plants which have such facilities; an "R"
schedule which collected information on
inventories and purchases of food during a
four week period; and a "C" interview with
management of plants which did not have
feeding facilities. (Complete findings
of the "A", "B", and "C" interviews are
shown in the first publication of the
series entitled "In-Plant Feeding Facili-
ties". Relevant subjects and passages
from this report, however, are included in
the "commodity reports".)
The "A" interviews with plant manage-
ment covered a variety of topics. Princi-
pal among these were the reasons for es-
tablishing feeding facilities for employ-
ees, the advantages and disadvantages of
maintaining these facilities, and their
future plans with respect to feeding
facilities. Information was also obtained
on the characteristics of the employment
and the availability of nearby public
eating places, which were considered to
be factors possibly related to the estab-
lishment of feeding facilities.
In the "B" questionnaire the primary
emphasis was on the actual physical
operation of the feeding facilities.
Respondents were questioned on the types
of facilities operated and the hours at
which facilities were open to employees,
the types of meals served, the existence
of bakery and butcher shop facilities,
etc. They were also questioned on their
buying practices, their sources of supply,
and the terms of purchase used.
Cf the 3li3 plants without feeding
facilities identified during the telephone
screening operation, a systematic sample
of 85 were selected for more intensive
personal interviews. These interviews,
designated the "C" questionnaire, had
covered substantially the same ground as
"A" interviews with management of plants
with feeding facilities. That is, these
interviews explored the attitude of plant
management towards feeding facilities,
their previous experience, if any, with
feeding facilities and their future plans.
In addition, information describing the
characteristics of the plant and the avail-
ability of nearby public eating places was
also explored.
As to the "R" questionnaires, all of
the plants with which both "A" and "B"
interviews had been completed (378 plants
representing 390 establishments) were re-
quested to make available information on
their inventories of foods on hand on two
dates, approximately h weeks apart, in
January to February, 1956 and also on food
purchases during this period. In a number
29
of instances this information was refused.
In other instances it was found that the
records of the food facilities were such
that no accurate data could be obtained.
as a result of these two situations, form
"R" schedules were completed with 352
feeding facilities, in 350 plants. In two
plants, two separate feeding facilities
were audited. The 350 plants surveyed *
represented a total of 361 establishments .
Naturally, not all of the food sched-
ules covered precisely the same period in
time. For the typical or "median" facility,
the initial inventory was taken January 10,
1956 and the closing inventory February 8,
1956. All food purchases of this period,
approximately four calendar weeks, were
recorded and food consumption calculated.
The average period covered for all
facilities surveyed was 28.7 days. (These
are calendar days and the number of working
days covered is affected not only by the
number of week-ends but also by the extent
to which the plant may operate on a 5-1/2
or 6 day week.) A distribution of the num-
ber of calendar days covered in these
schedules is as follows:
Less than 27 days .... 6.6$
27 days 32.5
28 days 18.5
29 days 9.8
30 days 15. h
31 days 7.7
32 or 33 days 6.5
More than 33 days .... 3.0
'//eight ing System
The companies with feeding facilities
with which "R" questionnaires were com-
pleted were drawn from those companies
which had been identified during telephone
screening operations as having feeding
facilities.
Also as mentioned earlier, the basic
sample itself was disproportionate both
by size and by region, and a weighting
system was found necessary to restore to
this sample the proportionality which
existed in the universe. That is, the "T"
interviews were stratified by size and
region, and such weights assigned to each
region-employee -size cell as would effect
this restoration. This same need for
weights extended to interviews made with
sub-samples. Weights were also required
to take into account the effect of re-
fusals to cooperate during the survey.
The 391 "A" plants, the 378 "B" plants,
and the 350 "R" plants must all necessar-
ily be considered samples drawn from the
same universe (although biases are intro-
duced by the failures to cooperate) and
suitable weightings are needed in order
to make valid comparisons of materials
obtained in one questionnaire with
material obtained during another.
The universe, as will be remembered,
was originally defined in terms of "es-
tablishments" and in terms of the size of
these establishments as this was reported
to be BOAS I in 1953. Since the sample
was selected on this basis weights must
also be calculated and applied on the
same basis. However, it should be spec-
fically noted that while weights are
calculated on the basis of 1953 size of
establishment, tabulations have been
presented in terms of 1956 size of plant.
Generally speaking this procedure was
followed: The universe with which the
sample is associated was derived either
from BOASI statistics, or, in the case of
the universes of "plants with feeding
facilities" calculated on the basis of
telephone interviews. Then, a proportional
sample was devised on a twelve-cell "geo-
graphic area by 1953 plant size" basis, so
that the number of interviews in this pro-
portional sample in each cell was a con-
stant fraction of the universe of the es-
tablishments in the cell. The "propor-
tionate sample" in each cell was then
divided by the actual number of establish-
ments interviewed in that cell. The re-
sult, extended two decimal places was the
weight assigned to all establishments in
the cell.
Since the sample plants were drawn
from the same universe and in the same
manner as the sample of "establishments",
the same weights were applied to both.
Basis For Universe Projections
Data from the sample on food consump-
tion in in-plant food services have been
projected to indicate the magnitude of the
total market for food in such facilities.
Naturally, these projections have
30
been made to the "universe" from which the
sample was drawn; a universe which, as
mentioned above, embraces only manufactur-
ing plants with these characteristics:
1. At least one establishment
with 250 or more employees
in first quarter 1953 J
2. At least 250 employees in
early 1956;
3. That maintained employee
food services in early
1956.
The universe to which projections
have been made is not necessarily co-ex-
tensive with "all manufacturing plants
which at present have more than 250
employees and have regular food services
for employees". The sampling procedure,
and information obtained during the
survey, would clearly suggest that the
universe to which projections have been
made — and the projections themselves— to
some extent understate the actual situ-
ation. However, the precise degree of
understatement cannot be measured; and
lacking this information, no attempt has
been made to "adjust" the survey results
to eliminate this source of statistical
bias. The reader is nevertheless cautioned
that this situation exists.
COMPOSITION OF THE UNIVERSE TO WHICH PROJECTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE
Characteristic
Number plants with
food facilities
Region:
Northeast
North Central
South
West
1,720
2,3U9
1,U27
370
1956 employee size group:
250 - U99
500 - 999
1,000 or more
United States total
1,861*
1,972
2,030
5,866
31
INT.DUP. .D.C.60- 75 j7o
MBL WHOlUbrap- Serials
jLlilluillM
-'^HSE 01471