Skip to main content

Full text of "Work materials ..."

See other formats


3 9999 06317 oU' ' 








Ely C. Hutchinson 
D. L. Boland 
W. M. Chubb 


MARCH, 1936 

Oi''FIC.5 OF i'AMONAL -Ii;. CO VS. 11' ADi4llJIG'"PJLTI0N 
Division OF ^;VIE^ 


COrE Ai.iEirLj.iTNTS 


Ely C. Hutchinson 

D. L. Bolend 
W. li. Cliubb 

LiAHCH, 1956 



This stuciy is in effect a series of nrelinin-'^ry renorts on 
Exemptions and Exceptions, Stays, and iunendraents by Mr. D. L. Boland 
and on Conditional Orders of ApTjroval ty Mr. W. M. Chubb. An additional 
section, Part OKE, on Administration, by Mr. Ely C. Hutchinson has been 
added. The report was prepared by the NEa Organization Studies Section, 
Mr. William 7. Bardsley in charge. 

All of the devices here examined, i.e., "Stays", "Exemptions", 
"Amendments" and "Conditional Orders of Approval", were 'widely used by 
the National Recovery Administration in meeting and attennting to solve 
■oroblems arising either during negotiations on loroposed codes or under 
codes after their approval. The reiiort deals -Tith the legal and sub- 
stantive aspects of the subjects, but because of limitations of time and 
TDcrsonnel some administrative aspects of the subjects are not covered. 
Appendix Ko. I, in each of Parts TIL to PI\'3] inclusive, points cut areas 
for further study. Appendix No. II, in each of Parts T'ffO to FIVE in- 
clusive, gives a comprehensive outline for further study of its narti- 
c\ilar subject. 

At the back of this report will be found a brief statement of the 
studies undertaken by the Division of Review. 

L. C. Marshall 
Director, Division of Review 

March 24, 1936 


1A3LZ or cc:'v::.:^:s 



Part I 


Procediirrl Aspects ^ 

Tlo\: Cl'.art - St£,ys 6 

Plov; Cliart - Exeirrotions ? 

?lov/ Chart - Aiencjie.-its 8 

Coiicitional CrCers of Ao rovrl 9 

Stay;;, Lxemptions r:ir'. Zjxce:)tioi.;S, CoJ.e Aiuenc,;.;cnts. . 11 

Ac'j.iinistiTtivc Aspects 12, jiti.lation 14 

Conc.itio:irl Orders of Ai^roval, Frvorable Prctors. . 14 

Cov-'Mtionrl Orders of AT.rcvr.l, U:.frvor,rble Factors. 15 

Strys, E:'ei;iptions cnC Code A;.iena.ier.ts 15 


Introdtiction 13 

Clirpter I - leases of PoTTcr 21 

Chr;.pter II - IJole'jation of Po''er to G-rpnt Strys 23 

Chapter III - Defiriition of the ter.Ti "Stay" 25 

Types of Stays 25 

Chapter IV - ixthods of Lxtjrcise of, Stsys 23 

Chapter V - Cr'-ses of the Lxercise of Pov/er to Stpy - 

Types of Code Provisions Affected 28 

Tyoes of Code Provisions Suojected to Stays 33 

Labor Provisions 33 

Code Authority Provisions 3^ 

Trade Practice Provisions 35 

Time of Issuance of Stay 39 

Retroactive Str.ys 42 

Conditional Stays 42 

Denial of Stays 43 

Period of Stay 43 

Cha^oter VI - Evaluations pnd Concliv^ions 44 

9844 -ii- 

T.V2LB p y CC:T' ::iTS (Cont'd) 


Introduction 68 

Cligpter I 

Bases of Pov/er 71 

Chapter II 

Definition cjid Scope of Terms "Er.eiV! ition" onC. "Exception" 79 

Clifpter III 

I)ele/;ation of Pov/er to Grant or Deny Lxcr.iptions and 

Lxce^tions 32 

Presio.ent's Keeraploj-iaent A,;;;reenent 83 

Codes xuider Section 3(a) 83 

Joint AAA end ITilA Codes 84 

Crertion of rrtional Industrial l:-ecover;- Board 85 

i;ele.2;ation of Power to Lesser Officials 85 

Territorial Acrninistrators 85 

i.liscellruieous Dele;i'ations 86 

I.e^ional Offices 87 

Code Authorities 87 

Chapter IV 

Analysis of ApplicE.tions for rnd Orc.ers of IxeiMptions 

and Exceptions - Cjuses - T^^pes - Gcc^e Provisions Affected 88 

Labor Provisions 88 

Wage Differentials 90 

Child Lahor - Apprentices 90 

Trrde practice Provisions 91 

C-eo-raphical Ori;;in of A'plicctions 92 

Period of Exemption 93 

Retroactive Exemptions 94 

Conditional E7:eu itions 95 
98d4 " -iii- 

Chapter IV ( Contiraied) 

Hefnons - Denial of !IJ:ce. ; <tions 97 

Coc.e Activity as to l.xcia itions 98 

Generfl lixecv.tive riiC. AOinirii::tr; tivt iSxe- ijjtions 100 

IHxei.rition - By Code Provision 101 

Chapter ? 

Evaluations anC Conclusions 102 


Introduction 116 

Chapter I - liases of Power 117 

Liniitf.tions upon Povcr of Aiuencinent 123 

Chapter II - Definition and Scope nf the Terra Aiaendjnent !; 125 

Chapter III - Dele;:;ation of Pov/er to A^jorove or 

Disapprove Aaencj-ients 128 

P r e s i den t ' s H c c;;i 1 1 o ^ m en t Af :r e ei.ien t 1 28 

Codes Under Section 3(a) 130 

Joint AAA-IHA. Codes 130 

Creation of iletional Industrial Recovery Board 131 

Delegation of Power to Lesser Officials 131 

Territorial Aciministrr.tors 131 

Hegional Offices 132 

Li.iiitr-tion upon Exercise of Pov;er to Aiaend. 152 

Chapter IV - liethods ':>f Exercise of Power of itocucjuent 133 

Chapter V - Analysis of Amendments of Codes - Typec 

of Code Provisions A-ifectedt 135 

Amencanents Aiiectin^^ Application oi the Codie 135 

Labor Provisions 137 

Hour and. Wage Provisions 133 

Code Authority 144 

Trade Practice Provisions 146 

Liscellaneous Code Provisions 147 

Chapter VI - Evalu.ations and Concliisions 149 

Appendix llo. 1. - Pi.irther Research - Unfinished Phases of 

the Study 152 

Appendix ITo. 2. - Outline 154 

9844 -iV- 




Introduction 161 

Chapter I - Viu-.t lovers of Cjrii'ovcl of codes, a^jreeiaents 

and euendinents were coiii erred b/ tl?.e Act? ... 1G2 

Chapter II - Y/liat dele;;ations of pov.'er of approval were 

made and what powers retained? 167 

Chapter III- Wiat cii-c".ijnstrnces attended the er.rliest xises 
uf the device of conditional ap.u'oval of: 

(a) Codes 169 

(b) A:jreenents 175 

(c) Aiaencanents 174 

( d) Otlier minor ad'iiinistrrtive actions. . . . 174 

Chapter IV - Wiat atteupts v/ere made to obtain assent of pro- 
ponents to conditional ort'ers of approval? . . 176 

Chapter V - ITnat wore the most fretp.ent types of conditions 

in orders of approval? 177 

Chapter VI - What necessities of administration were served 

by conditional orders of aporoval? 178 

Chapter VII- V.'hat evidence of coiaplirnce or non-couplience 
v.'ith conditions of epproval are to be foui'.d? 
Uhat was the le/j?l effect of non-coi.plirnce?. . 179 

Chapter VIII-Coulc the desired conditions have been incorpor- 
s,ted in the codes tlieos elves v/itho"o.t vjidue 
difficulty? 180 

Chapter IX - Prou an evaluation of tlie e;:perience related 

above v/hat constructive s\''g^'estions cpji be made 
to fju.ide new legislation and iroper "plans fcr 
a..dministration touchinij ujon the use ef condi- 
tional orders of approval? 181 

Appendices 182 

ITo. 1. Unexplored Soig-ces of i-t-^terials for Further Study 133 

I'o. 2. Outline 184 

i'O. 3. I/etails of various types of conditions 
in orders of Fp;u'ovr:l, covering';; fll 
basic codes of ?rir coiapetition. 190 

9844 -V" 



This work is composed of five "Parts" snd is an assembly of so- 
called "preliminary drafts" of reports prepared 'Dy staff members of the 
Adiiiinistrative Protlems Review Unit of the KEA Organization Studies 
Section, Division of ?.cview» 

The reports treat "Administrative Aspects", "Stays", "Exemptions", 
"Ai^nclTiSiits^^- ■ and "Conditional Orders of Approval". With the exception 
of "Part One", each "Part" contains an appendix, thus eliminating a 
f;eneral appendi;:. 


_ ADHIlM I STPc^lTIVE ASPECTS . Part Oiie sets forth the high spots of the 
procedure whicxi used the powers of stay, exemption, and code amendment. 
Since conc'.itiorial orders of approval were in themselves, a means, in- 
cident to code approval, of staying or amending certain code provisions 
or of creating exemptions thereunder, tney also are discussed. 

"Plow diagrai'^s" showing the progressive steps followed by the 
organization in each type of action are shov/n Jind descrited. Actual 
records of elapsed tines for putting cases through the procedure are 

A recapitulation presents the factors n,s to conditional prdcrs of 
approval favoral^le and unfavorable to a.dministration and procedure, 
points to the influence of numerous opposed forces, all of which were 
present in the administrative pro>)lens of the NEA at one time or another, 
and records certain other of the autlior's opinions. 


STAYS . The stay as aji instrumentality for the administration of 
the National Industrial Recovery Act plaj''ed an inportant part wherever 
it was put into effect. It was used "both as a permanent and a tempor- 
ary means of meeting, reconciling and at times mandatorily settling 
the myriad, newly- experienced prohlems that developed with the ex- 
perience of administering the Act. 

It was one of several instrumentalities used in the same general 
way and each of these is a separate part of this report. This part 
deals particularly with the l&?;al rnd substf:ntive aspects of the 
adoption and exercise of the power of stay. 

Chapter I treats the bases of this power. Its delegation is 
outlined in Chapter II. Chapters III and IV define the stay and the 
methods of its exercise. Chapter V orings together the causes for 
the use of stays and the types of probleus to which they were applied, 
while Chapter VI evaluates the facts found and draws conclusions there- 




EXEI^tPTIO MS. In this Prrt the granting "by IIRA of exemptions from 
the provisions of codes is treated, especially as to the legal aind 
substantive aspects of such grants. An eiq)lanation and analysis of 
various types of exemptions is presented and the confusion in term- 
inology between stays and exemptions is discussed. 

Chapters I, II and III deal with the basis of the power of Exemp- 
tion, define the scope of the terms Exemption and Exception and dis- 
cuss the delegations of the power to grant or deny exemptions and ex- 
ceptions. Chapter IV analyijes the types of application for exemptions, 
their effects upon codes and the types of exemptions, such as r-^tro- 
active and conditional. Chapter V is the evaluation of the factors 
developed by the study and the conclusions drawn therefrom. 

The reader is referred to "History of General Exemptions", Work 
Materials No. 75, for a discussion of Executive and Administrative 
Orders pertaining to general exemptions. 


A]\fflHDMENTS . Although the power to amend codes was not definitely 
set forth in the Act, it was frequently and effectively used during 
the code period. Part IV of the study discusses the use of such power. 
Chapters I, II and III deal with the bases in the Act for the power 
of Amendment and its delegation. Chapter IV treats of the methods 
by which the power of amendment was exercised. Chapter V analyzes 
amendments and gives the types of code provisions affected by them, 
and Chapter VI sets forth the author's conclusions. 


CONDITIONAL ORDER OF APPROVA L. The first executive order issued 
by the President approving a code under the National Industrial Re- 
covery Act — that for the Cotton Textile Code ~ was a "Conditional 
Order of Approval." It contained thirteen conditions which had to be 
satisfied before complete approval could be granted. Final approval 
was granted subsequently by a second order. 

Following that first order, a great many codes were approved by 
the "conditional" method. The phrasing generally was such as to create 
doubt as to whether the codes so approved were actually effective as 
to those provisions which the NRA fully approved, until the conditions 
in the order had actually been met. This question is one on which there 
was no adjudication. 

This part of the study discusses the. various aspects of condi- 
tional orders of approval and includes a list of sucli orders and the 
conditions they contained. 

Chapters I and II are on the powers of code approval as conferred 
by the Act and their delegation. Chapter III discusses the circum- 
stances which attended the earliest uses of Conditional Orders of 


Approval. Chapters IV and V doal with such matters as proper repre- 
sentation of industry, assent of proponents and prevalent types of 
conditions. Ch;'pter VI is upon the value of the Conditional Order, 
administratively. Chapter VII deals with industries' compliance with 
the conditions and the legal effects of non~corrpliance, while Chapter 
VIII endeavors to answer the question whether codes could have been 
so written as to avoid the use of conditional approvals. Chapter IX 
is an evaluation and conclusions are drawn therefrom. 

It is questionable whether the Act contemplated or permitted the 
effective approval of voluntary codes when the order of approval con- 
tained conditions not specifically assented to. 

If, as appears, codes approved in this manner were really pres- 
cribed, as provided for in Section 3 (d) of the Act, there is reason 
to question the authority of the Administrator to sign the orders of 
approval. The reason for this is tha.t the delegation of power to the 
Administrator to approve codes specifically excepted prescribed codes 
under Section 3 (d) 

In general, little or no attempt was made, as a controlled pro- 
cedure, to obtain assent to the conditions contained in the orders 
of approval before the announced effective dates. As a rule, compli- 
ance vdth the conditions was tardy. 





Ely C. Hutchinson 




I . Procedural Asoects. 

All four of the title subjects of this study were instilments 
widely used ty the National Recovery Administrstion to meet or at- 
tempt to solve prolrlems arising in the negotiations over proposed 
codes or under the administration of approved codes. The authors of 
the parts of the study dealing with the particular subjects have treat- 
ed especially their legal and substantive aspects. Yet, their admin- 
strative use and the procedural aspects of such use are olivioiisly 
important pr.rtr, of the subjects. 

Stays, Adiaendments pud Exemptions and Exceptions were handled 
administratively in fairly unifonn fashion by all the industry divi- 
sions of K3A and generally in accordance with the requirements of the 
NRA Office Manual (*), after it was issued in Aagust, 1934. Prior 
to the issuance of the m^inual, procedure for the various administra- 
tive functions was established by office orders or memoranda ajid this 
sar.e practice was follo-.ved when it became necessary to modify the 
manual instx-uctions more quickly than the new manual sheets could be 
issued. Thus, the manual was never quite up to date but served, rather 
to record the changes already put into effect. 

Using the data, obtained from the manual, modified by later mem- 
oranda and supplemented by personal inquiry of qualified personnel, 
the author prepared a series of "flow charts" showing the procedure 
for the different types of actions (**). These charts are reproduc- 
ed on the next three pages in illustration of the manner as of April 
10, 1955, in \Yhich Stays, Exemptions and A-iendments were handled, 
according to the general practice. 'There were exceptions in some 
divisions, but none -were serious. 

Tile broken lines used in the dirgrnms to denote intermediate 
movements, conferences, etc. between the numerous administrative units 
should not be thought of as representing r?. simple and direct exchange. 
On the contrary, these exchanges and conferences were highly complex. 
They arose from a continuous and frequent Iv prolonged effort of the 
deputy administrator in charge of an action, to contact the people he 

(*) See KHA Office Msnual - Central Eecord Section - NRA Files. 

(** ) Report of the Committee for the Stud^/- of Administrative 
Procedure, Hay 21, 1935. Central .Record Section - NRA 





Any Int. Pty, 

^ Depo Adn. 

I Ind. 

Code Asst, 
— J — 

Div, Adn. 


Adr.u Off, r~ 


— yr" 

— TT" 

— 7r~ 


Advisory Boards 

Ind. - Industrial 

Lab. - Labor 

Con. - Consumers 

L.D. - Legal Division 

E&P - Research & Flapping 

Steps of Progress 

Intermediate wiove- 
nents, Conferences, 

In Exceptional Cases 

■•■- - After Signature 

1. Emergency Stay nay be signed. "Pro tenpore" by Division Administrator, 

2. Division Adiuinistrator may call public hearing. 

3. Field investigation by Compliance, 






Code Autho 




Any Int. Tty. 


Depo Adm 

I llndo 




Cede Ascto 

DiVo Adn. 

7<; — 

Advisory Boards 

Ind. - Industrial 

Lab. - Labor 

Con. - Consumers 

L.D. - Legal Division 

R&P - Research & Planning 

Steps of Progress 

Intermediate Move- 
ments, Conferences, 

In Exceptional Cases 
After Signature 


Communicate with U, S. Snpioyment Service, 

Field investigations by Complir.nce, 

Possibility of referring cases to Advisory Council, 

" " appeal . 
Emergency e::emptions nay be signed "Pro tempore" by Division Ad- 

Division Administrator may call public hearings, 

fcy be reff erred to Administrative Officer in special circuastancest 
Compliance Officer has authority to grant exemptions if Division 
Administrator fails to act within 3^ hours. 





Any Int. Pty 

^ Code Eec. 

Adv i s . 


Leg. D. 

y. .v. 

Advisory Boards 

R & P 

— 7S 

Ind. - Inaustrial 

Lab. - Labor 

Con. - Consumers 

L.D. - Legal Division 

E&P - Research & Planning 

Steps of Progr<=,3s 

Intermediate i'iove- 
ments, Conferences, 

In Exceptionrl C«ses 
..fter Signature 



was supposed to, within NEA, in order to get the views of some, recoro-' 
mendations of others and instructions of still others and to endeavor 
from all to effect a reconciliation hetv/een the views, often opposed, 
of members of the industry and NUA, 

As of April 6, 1935, there were nine rppli cations for stays still 
in progress through NEA which were more than thirty days old and still 
incomplotci. The actus.l time thus far in process for th-ese ranged 
from 41 days to 240 days. Two cases had "been between 61 and 65 days 
in progress. Three cases between 126 and 131 days; one case between 
201 and 205 days; and one case between 2S3 and 240 days. Between Sept- 
em.ber 1, 1934, and February 1, 1935, seventy three stays were granted. 
Tlie elapsed time for putting them through 1-IHA procedure ranged from 
1 to 20 days and 301 to 220 days. Tliere were two cases in the longer 
period. Tiie weighted average tine was 42 days. 

As of April G, 1935, there were in process of ITRA. procedure 293 
cases of proposed amendments more than thirty days old and incompleted. 
The actual time these cases had been in progress ranged from 31 days 
to 332 d.ays. The cases were well scattered between these extremes, 
with 43 cases aJready 150 days or more in the process of completion. 
Between September 1, 1934, and Febraary Si, 1935, there were actually 
concluded 204 amendments to codes and the time in process varied be- 
tween L-20 days and 301-320 days, there being one case in the latter 
bracket. The weighted average of actual completion tines was 100 days. 

As of Api-il 6, 1935, there were in process of NBA. procedure 300 
cases of exemption more thaxi thirty days old and incorapleted. The 
actual time these cases had been in progress ranged from 31 days to 
278 days. There were still in process 213 cases between the ages of 
175 and 278 days. Between September 1, 1934, and February SI, 1935, 
there were actually conclud.ed 580 exemptions. Tlie time periods for 
these varied between brackets of eight in 1-30 days and one in 201- 
220 days. The weighted average time for completion was 60 days. (* ) 

A. Conditional Ord ers of Approval. 

Conditional Orders of Approval of codes were the first evidence 
of the emergency pressure method of codification. Each industry was 
invited to prepare its own code of fair cpnpetition. Those industries 
commanding the greatest man-power were concentrated upon first by NEA 
in code negotiations, since their codification should get the greatest 
niunber of men back to work. Many provisions included in the earlier 
codes were copied into the ones that followed. This was the quickest 
way to get something together and since there was no NEA model code 
with official sanction until November 5, 1933, (almost five months 
after approval of the Becovery Act) ajid but few policy announcements, 
the method was open to cumulative error. 

(* ) Tliese figu.res are from the Eeport of the Committee for Study of 
Administration Procedure, May 21, 1935, Central Becord Files — 
(NEA files) 



■ At an early date doubts arose as to the truly representative 
character of some code sponsors. Protests and opposition to the ideas 
of coimnittees acting for the sponsors develpped at the public hearings, 
sometimes after weeks of preparatory negotiation between IIRA and the 

I'eanwhile, the declared policy of NRA. was that an emergency exist- 
ed and no stone should be left unturned to get industries under codes 
and men back to work. Time was of the essence in all procedure. 

Industries for the most part responded Cooperatively. But despite 
this,' differences arose between NRA and industry and between representa- 
tives of the same or related industries. Although most of them were 
amicably settled, times came when a few conflicting views were dead- 
locked and were, in the opinion of NRA, causing unwarranted delay. 

The prospect of continued disagreement in these and other circum- 
stances which tended to slow down industry codification, was met by 
accepting those parts of the codes as to which there was accord and 
issuing an order for their approvaJ, conditional upon the acceptance 
by industry of certain limitations proposed by the NRA to adjust the 
deadlocked issues. An executive or cidrainistrative order of this type 
was a Conditional Order of Approval. 

Sometimes tne conditions had the effect of modifying certain code 
provisions. Sometimes they nullified them. Sometimes the effect upon 
the code was permanent and at others, temporary. 

Usually the order approved the code conditionally upon the stay 
or amendment of certain provisions, the providing of exception there- 
from or the addition of other provisions. This procedure was generally 
successful in getting the acceptable parts of a code into operation 
without the delays which would most certainly have followed refusal 
of the NRA to act at all until the code was acceptable in all details. 
The method, nevertheless, frequently changed the status of a code from 
one voluntarily entered into, to one in which certain conditions were 
imposed by NRA. 

Provided that the industry to which a conditional order of approval 
had been issued had a code committee which was representative of the 
industry, the procedure generally resulted in the acceptance of the 
conditions by industry and the full effectiveness ef the code as thus ^. 
modified. But where the representation was in doubt, or where someone 
made claim that the application of the conditions was unjust, or where 
a claim was made that the conditions had not t?een submitted to the same 
procedure as that followed for the regularly accepted provisions of the 
code, effectiveness might be in doubt. 

It is not entended to create the impression that all conditional 
orders of approval were written with the intention of imposing condi- 
tions upon industry. Yet there is only one case of record in which, 
on acceptance of the conditions, a second, clear-cut order of approval 
was issued. This was in Code No. 1, Cotton Textile Industry. Hie 
first order of approval was conditional. The second was final and 




It appears clearly that as a matter of procedure there was no 
adiuinistrative provision by NUA. by -.Thich an entire industry could be 
heard on the conditions of approval made by HRA. 

jlji approved code, apart from coi.ditions in the order of approval, 
had been subjected to the full process of public notice and hearing 
and opportunity for all who were interested to participate in its 
fonnulation or, at least, to offer' objections. Tiie codes which v/ere 
subjected to conditional orders of approval, on the other hand, con- 
tained conditions inserted by IJRA. without public notice or hearing, 

.'^ . Stay s, Ecenipt i_ons_aiid Except ions, uo de .Araen dment s. 

A procedural application of the Stay w&.s established by Executive 
Order No. 6205-B, dated July 15, 1933, which provided that those who 
had not in person or by representative participated in establishing 
or consenting to a code and who claimed that applications of the code 
were unjust, should by applyin^^ within ten days after the effective 
date of the code, be given an opportunity -for a hearing and that no 
liability to enforcement, of .the code would be incu.rred by the applicant 
pending the determination of the issues raised. This provided a second 
line of protection for those who had not objected to provisions of a 
proposed code in the course of the procedure through which codes passed 
before receiving approva.l. 

Tlie Administrator wa.s not given the poT,'er to stay code provisions 
after a code had been approved, •until Pebr.iary 8., 1934, although he 
was given the power of approval of the "elimination" of code provisions 
on December 30, 1933. 

A request for a stay could originate v^ith the code authority or 
any interested panrty. It was referred to the deputy administrator in 
charge of the code involved. The deputy then sent notification of the 
request to the three advisory boards, Industrial, Labor and Consumer, 
and to the Legal Division and Research cjid. Planning Division, all of 
which discussed the proposal ainong themselvesj and sometimes with each 
other, and wrote their views to the deputy. Upon conclusion by the 
deputy, sometimes following innumerable conferences and adjustments 
as to the proper action for UPJl to tpice. he would have the order drawn 
with the assisteiice of the Legal Division, and would forward it to the 
division administrator's code assistejit. Ihen, for the first time, the 
Review Division was contacted to pass upon the conclusions of the deputy 
and to review them for policy and consistency. The Review Division 
had its own legal staff and it was not unusual for it to differ materi- 
ally with the members of the Legal Division. Vflien, in the opinion of 
the Heviev/ Division, the deputy's conclusion or its presentation was 
not as it should be, the file was returned to the code assisttint with 
appropriate comment. Thence it was returned to the deputy whose duty 
it then was to satisfy the requirements pointed out by the Review Div- 
ision, provided its recommendations were accepted as- being correct. 



The original action of the depiuty soraetifaes required weeks to 
consummate. The second action, at the instsaice of the Review Division, 
frftquently took as long or longer if the corrections were in contro- 
versial matters. Soiaetir.ies this process was repeated a third time 
tefore every view was satisfied or otherwise disposed of. 

As the procedure was organized, there was no provision requiring 
tact tetween the deputy and the Review Division while the deputy was 
first preparing his case, so that there could "be no assurance that 
his action would "be approved until it had been completely prepared and 

When finally all the interested units were either overruled or 
satisfied, the order went to the division administrator for approval, 
thence again to the Review Division, thence to the Administrative 
Officer for signature and thence to the Code Record Section for record- 

Except as to the number of steps required and_ the number of units 
of NRA to be referred torn as sho\mi by the "flow" charts above the pro- 
cedure for handling exemptions and code amendments was similar. 

1 1 . Administrative Aspects. 

Stays, exemptions and code amendments were indisjDensable instru- 
ments in the reconciliation of the manifold conflicts, controversies, 
overlaps of code jurisdiction, code authority aggressions, geographical 
labor provision disputes and other problems constantly appearing be- 
fore the administrative staff of the IIRA from almost. as many directions 
as there were industries and trades. 

The primary business of ITRA was of course the making and the ad- 
ministration of codes for industries and trades. Each code had certain 
tasic provisions, and rules as to their acceptability (*) were grad- 
ually developed from the days when codes were assembled largely on the 
basis of provisions in or experiences gained from those already approv- 
ed. Elsewhere there have been discussed the circumstances under which 
the code definitions of industries and trades were written, why they 
freq:uently overlapped and how problems of overlappiiig definitions, 
multiple code coverage and classification arose (**). 

(* ) National Recovery Administration Bulletin No. 2, Basic Codes of 
Fair Competition, June 19, 1933; also, Office Manual, Index 
11-1000-1999, Code Mailing and Amendment, September, 1934. 

(** ) "Problems of Administration in the Overlapping of Code Defini- 
tions of Industries and Trades, Multiple Code Coverage, Classifying 
Individual Members of Industries and Trade - A report of the Divi- 
sion of Review. NRA files. 



Adjustments were mnde frequently in these types of cases ty the 
use of stays and exemptions and amendments. 'Bie types of cases for which 
adjustment had to he made were many more than had "been anti ciliated. 
Then too, a great deal of ingenuity ras used in their presentation to 
NRA hy industry. The WRA in turn undouhtedly suffered from shortcomings 
of its own administrative concepts, or5;.aiization, personnel and proced- 

The wide discretion ai,ion._5 deputy administrators in some respects 
and the lack of divisional coordination resulted in closely similar 
problems "being settled in different divisions, and even in the same 
division, through widely differing administ'rcitive approaches. This 
situation was aggravated by the lack of a clear definition, administra- 
tively, betv;een, for ex;imple, exemptions, stays and exceptions; aaendmrnt 
and TTiodif ications;' intirrprift^tions and explanations. (*) 

At first the term "Exemption" included "Exceptions" and "Stays" 
as well (**). 

later the term "E:-:Gmption" was described as any ruling whereby 
an individual group or class " vithin cin industry " is released from the 
full operation of "a cc de provision '' (*** ) 

Still later the KHA personnel was ihstincted that "To preserve 
uniformity of iisa^e, the term 'Exceptions* will not be used as a synonym 
for 'Exenptions' " (****) 

Hie terms "amendment" rnd "modification" were used interchangeably 
until September, 1934, (***** j after which tne Office Manual permanent- 
ly established the term "amencfxient" '^md discontinued the hitherto more 
or less synonymously used terms of "modification", "supplement", "re- 
vision", "addition'! ?nd "adjustment." 

(*) See Administrative' Interpretations of NUA. Codes - A 

Eivision of Review report. 

(**) Administrative Order X-27, May 5, 1934. ' IIEA files. 

(***) Part III, par. 3210, Office Manual, Sept. 1, 1934. 

(****) Ibid. 

(*****) NiLV Office Manual, Part II, Inde:.'; 5010. 



The records show no noticeable unifoiroity in selecting any one 
instrumentalit/ as the proper means for reconciling problems in the 
same category. Tliey do, however, reflect an effort to keep the codes 
in order as far as possible by a consistent process of pjriendment when 
opportunity offered. On the other hand, code authorities were very 
cautious about requesting amendment of their codes, since they were 
aware that an opening of a code for araendment might lead to the pro- 
posal by NHA that more changes than those requested by the industry 
be made. 

Pending the working out of amendments, stays were used as a pro 
tempqri* -sclution of some difficulties and sometimes such temporary 
stays were so maintained as to have practically permanent effect. 
The service codes were virtually placed in suspension as to all pro- 
visions other than those pertaining to labor, by the exercise of the 
stay. At other times the provisions of dne code were summarily stayed 
by NEA to avoid hardship in cases of overlapping codes. Stays were used 
frequently to eliminate code provisions which IIRA studies or revised 
policy determined were objectionable. 

III. Recapitulation ; 

.Conditional orders of approval as used by ITHA were subject to two 
interpretations in administration: 

A. Favorable Factors 

1. Tliey were effective in short-circuiting the regular 
methods of code formulation, thus aiding the purpose 
of immediately getting industries under codes. 

2. They avoided delays in putting the immediate desiderata 
of codification (minimum wages, maximum hours for lal/or, 
reemployment, etc.) into effect. 

3. They effectively closed arguments between NBA personnel 
and industry representatives, featured by unwillingness 
of industry to modify its position to conform to policies 
of NHA. 


B. Unfavora'ble Pactors ; 

lo The conditions in the orders v;ere frequently of such nature 
.as to practicrdly chcnKQ the code's status from voluntary to 

2. If the conditions in the order were not met, there was 
question whether or not the code was legally in effect. 
(Flat Glass Mfg. Industry, Code Ho, 54l) and enforceable, 

3. The method of inserting so le conditions into an- order of 
approval evaded (intentionally or not) the orocesses of pro- 
cedure adopted for voluntary code formulation. 

4. The use of conditional orders of ap'oroval involved the 
question of whether they v/ere proper procedure and,' therefore, 
good administration. 

Stays, B:;emptions and Code Araendments : 

These instr\ii-ients of adr^iini strati on v/ere used widely to adjust and 
reconcile proDleras resulting from the policy and procedure of code 
malcing. In the earlier days each was apiolied lar/^ely according to the 
personal ideas of the III-iA official having the case in charge. There 
were no general rules rigidly regulating the use of each. To the end 
of the code period some deouty adiiinistrators differed in their opinions 
as to the proper application of sta^'^s, exemptions and amendments to 
certain prohlems of a6.ministration and frequently each could point to 
•erci sting exaftiples' in su]pnort of- his opiniono Ercpedicncy frequently 
dictated the selection of the instrument for accomplishing a desired 
ende Procedure for applying the instruments was cfomplicated oy the 
administrative practice of interposing additional checks wherever and 
whenever a new weakness or failure of organization appeared. 

The author's study of the administration of ITHA. in connection with 
this and other reports, has engendered som.e ideas vrhich are here re- 

Ic Wrapped in the prohlom of administering the IIIRA. \/ere 
definite elements which vraro opposed socially, economically 
and industrially, and few indoud of those responsible for 
the administration know ho'.7 to relate them, or what to ex- 
pect from them, v/ell enough to make the f-'ondamcntals plain 
to the men 'v7ho were to make the iHEA a success. A few of 
.thuso opposed forces \"crc: 

Capital and labor 

Honopolj'' and competition 

Controlled economy and Lais so z fairc 

Agriculture and industry 

Big business and little business 

Mechanization and unomplo;"ment 

Pair competition and destructive competition 

Now industrial products and old 

Seller and buj/cr 



2. Some of those forCv,s v.'crL nroscnt- in practically every- 
situation vdth -..iiich administration had to deal. 

3. The objectives of iJIPJl fut-orc as v/oll as .irosent, per- 
manent as v;ell as cmorgcnc;", \7crc never sufficient!;'' 
knovm to or understood by raanir of those entrusted uith 
the execution of its policies and procedure, to procure 
the o^^tinu:!! efficiencj'' in administration. 

4. For the nost p»rt, personnel v/as faithful and energetic 
and gave all it had in the effort to do what v;as inmed- 
iately in front of it, "but many officials had little 
idea v/hat it vras all aliout or the time to find o-at. 

5. In any large and grovring organization it is necessar;'' 
: ' to depend to a great e:ctent upon the juagnent and 

initiative of individurils to maintain the policies and 
carry out objectives. Hov; could this Dc done to best 
advantage i.Then the- philosophy and many objectives of 
administration wore obscure and little understood? 

6. The logical thing happened, namely, administration 
rules nere to correct errors v/hich occurred be- 
cause there had been no rules. Thtis, -.vhile this tended 
to -correct previous troubles it did not prevent the 
occurrence of ne'j ones. 

To conclude, it is believed that this chapter upon the administra- 
tive aspects of stays, e:;emptions and code amendments and conditional 
orders of approval, taken together with the individual reports (*) 
contain sufficient proof to confirm the statements that: 

1. . There v/as no comprehensive plan of classification of 

industries and trades upon vdiich to found a general 
administrative -oolicy and coordinate the procedure 
for industry codification. 

2, There v/as no authoritative unit vrithin I'tpJi. whose sole 
piorpose it was to correlate administrative experiences 
and engage itself energetically in advance planning of 
the procedure necessary to keep the organization aliead 
of its problems. 

It is not claimed that the removal of these two deficiencies 
\70uld have corrected all the troubles. It \;ould, however, have been 
effective in reducing the numbvir of problems and improving the pro- 
cedure and, consequently, the dispatch vdth v/hich the problems re- 
maining were handled* The cumulative effect v/ould have been greater 
administrative efficiency. 

(*) Parts II, III, IV and V hereof. 



D. L. Boland 



The NKA Organization Studies Section of the Divisiur jf Review has 
designated the subject of stays as r matter for separate study. The sub-- 
ject treats '?'ith the exercise of tnis particular form of administrative 
power by the National Recovery Administration. The various rroblems, 
questions, and difficulties attendant upon the administration of the 
National Industrial Recovery Act (*) were in many instances met and in 
some cases postponed by the use of the "stay". Its use ras widespread. 
Its purposes and intents covered all phases of NSA from the vie^fTDOint cf 
legality, policy, and administration. 

The evidences of the use of the stay are found in the KRji. files 
and records, from v/hich the bases of this report were derived. Invest- 
igation of the files for information relating to the various subject 
headings set forth in the table of contents were made. Compilation of 
the material obtained and the digesting thereof were conducted for the 
main purpose of presenting in this preliminary report various problems, 
which, to the author of the report, seemed primary and important. The 
investigations and the report thereof embodied herein concern'j tlie- 
issues presented by the exercise of the power of stay as a legislative 
problem. The bases of power set forth in the Act, the reasonable im- 
plications therein and deficiencies thereof, both real and apparent, 
have been the background of this investigation and preliminary report. 

This report tells of aoministrative action legislatively conferred 
and legally delegated. The latter phase has been a further subject of 
study and the report sets forth the various administrative delegations 
of power and references to unauthorized uses thereof. The phases of • 
administrative delegation of power i^hich are considered herein refer 
more to the actual exercise of the power in a suostantive manner rather 
than administrative details and procedure. Investigations and apprai- 
sals of the various administrative mechanics as to the handling of a.v^- 
lications, routing of papers and other procedural phases have not been 

A study in its entirety of the files, orders of approval of codes 
and of amendments,, and other official pronoujiceraents of the NRA relat- 
ing to codes which were in some way subjected to tne exercise of the 
power of stay was impossible, at least for tne purpose of this report. 
The study con-.erns itself with the orders of approvals of five hundred 
and twenty (520) codes, (Codes Nos. 1 to 520, inclusive). In addition 
a selected number of codes were investigated as to the use of the stay 
where this administrative power was used in specific cases other than 
in the order of approval of a code or amendment thereto. The list of 
such codes is as follov7s: 


Cotton Textile 

Shipbuilding and Shiprepairin g 

(*) 48 Stats^ 195 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) 



Yfool Textile 

31ectrica 1 K-nrnfacturinf.; 

Coat and Suit 

liice Manuf-'^.ctiiring 

Coriet r.nd Brr.ssior:; 

Legitmato Pull Leiijith Draniatic ?.nd Eusic-^.l Tho-^.tric^'l 

LuTibcr f.nd Tirrlber Product;:; 

Iron and Stee"" 

Photographic Manufacturing 

Pishing Tackle 

Hpyon and Synthetic Yarn Producing 

Men's Clothing 


Automohilo Manufacturing 

Cast Iron Soil Pip 3 

'iTall Pajier Manufacturing 

Sr.-lt Producing 


Motion Pictur:: Lahorrtory 

Undervroar and Allied Products Manufactiiring 

Bituminous Coal 

Oil Burner 

Gasoline Pimtp ivianuf--.ct"i.u:'ing 

Textile Bag 


Artificial Ploi;i^or and Feather 

Linoleum and Pelt Base Man^^fac-turing 


Knitting, Braiding and Wire Covering Mfc'/^liine 

Hctail Luiihor, L-uJi-hor Products, Building Materials 

and Building &)ecialties 
Laujidr;'- and. Dry Cleaning MftCxiinei^y M^imfictiiring 
Textile Machinery Manufactv.ring Container 
Builders Supplies Trade 
Boiler Manufacturing 
Parm Equroment 

Electric Storage and Yfet Primary Battery 
Women's Belt 

Li:iggage and P,nncy Leather Goods 

Boot and Shoe Mpnufacturing 
Sadd-lery H^-jnuiacturing 
Motor Vehicle P.jt?iiing Trade 
Silk Textile 
Oj'ti ca 1 Manuf ? c tur ing 
Autori3.tic Sprinkler 
Umo re 1 la M& nuf a c tu-r ing 
LIutua.l Savings Bar^'cs 
Conrpressed Air 
Heat Exchange 



Ptiinp Manufacturing 
Cap and Closuro 
Lferkin^^ Devi cos 
He tail Trade 

Paint, Varnish, and Lacquer Mr.nufr-^turing 
Business Furniture, Storage Equipment and Filing; Supply- 
Asphalt Shingle and Roofing tianufacturing 
Dress Manuf8,cturing 
Paper and Pulp 
Can Manufacturers 
Wholesaling or Distrihlxting Trade 
Scliiffli, the Hand Machine Ilmhroidery and the Embroidery 

Thread and Scallop Cutting 
Men's Keclcwear 
Cigar Manufacturing 

The investigation primarily sou: ht tjio jonerjl causes for the admin- 
istrative exercise of the power of stay and from the material noted atove, 
this report 3.tterrpts to sot forth some of the reasons why the Hational 
Hecoverj^ Administration, cither upon its own initiative or upon the app- 
lication of some interested party, deemed it nccoscary to either grant 
or deny a stay of the provisions of a code of fair competition. An ana- 
lysis of code provisions subjected to stays iias been made, with particul- 
ar stress being laid upon maximum hours and minimum wage provisions, code 
authority provisions and trade practice rules. The author stresses the 
preliminarjr nature of this report and the inability to ezihaust all re- 
cords, but intends to set forth as a result of the study already made, 
some answer to the question - "What did HEA do with regard to the use 
of the power to stay cede provisions?" and from the -answers thereto,' 
to submit suggestions and conclusions for legislative purposes and con- 



Bases o? p o^'s?. 

'Tlie Act ras anjrov' d by the President of tne United States on June 
15, 195o, An exar.inetirn of the provisions of the Act discloses nn use 
of or reference to thevord "rta^", tut throi:ighout the Act there are 
sufficient le^^islative declarations which warrant and justify the use of 
the DOwer of stay. The theory of the Act v^a^J a delegation of oower to 
the President trith certain limitations u.pon the exercise thereof, vhich 
delegs-tion required an exercise of administrative discretion as a means 
of oroper acainistration of the Act. Section 3 (a) of the Act contains 
pertinent language regarding the exercise of the power of the stay. Cer- 
tain standr.rds and requirements \:ev>.^ imposed upon the President as to 
the jrporovo.l of codes and the eection further provided that inhere the 
codes affected persons, the President could, as a condition of his ap- 
proval of a code provide "exceptions to and exemptions from the provi- 
sions of such code. " This thought of a power of discretion in the Presi- 
dent obtains throughout the Act. It is found in Section 10(a) in which 
the President was authorised to prescribe rules r.nd regulations and in 
Section 10(b), which authorized the Presid.ent to 

"cancel f^nd modify any order of approval, license, 
jrUe or regu].ation isr.ued * * *, n 

In viev; of these specific references in the Act to the power of the Presi- 
dent to nake exemptions and to cancel or modify his orders of approval, 
it is imru-estioned that the President in the exercise of this power and 
the discretion granted to him wb.o permitted to stay the provisions of the 
code if he fovjid that such action would effectuate the declared purposes 
of the Act, 

The Act orovides for various kinds of codes other than those speci- 
fically mentioned in Section 3(a) (*) but attention is directed to the 
statements in these -oarticular sections that the approval of these vari- 
ous t^'^oeF of codes or a<RTeements would have the same effect as a code of 
fair cojipetition approved by the President under the provisions of Section 
3(a). The power conferred by Section 3(3), when coupled v.'ith the gen- 
eral grant contained in Section 10(b), is of sufficient latitude to ao")ly 
to all forms of codes and. agreements authorized by the Act. 

The po'-'-er conferred upon the President to grant or deny stays was 
by the terms of the Act rather general. Limitations were imoosed, but 
the ambit of administrative discretion was of wide range. Section 1 of 
the Act ret forth the declared policies end. -ourrjoses of the Act and the 
President was empowered to exercise this right of stay when "necesse.ry 
to cari-j'- out the ouriDOsed of this title". Section lC(a) states:- 

H*) See Sections 3(d), end 7(c) 



"ns the President in his discretion deoias necessary to effectuate 
the policy herein declared" 

Section zi^) prescribes :- 

"for the protection of conuiirnors, coinpetitors, enployoes and others" 

"in f-artherrnce of the imolic interest" 

The oi^eratioii and effect of a stay is similar to that of an exemp- 
tion. The author has prepared a report on the latter subject and has 
considered in detail the "bases of DOwer for the use of this latter men- 
tioned form of administrative relief. It is sue^'gested that reference to 
the report on Exeinptions (Chapter I - Bases of Power) will show authority 
for the statement contained in the foregoini^ •Dara:::;raphs. For purooses of 
brevity and avoidance of duplication the content of such cha.-oter has not 
been set forth herein. 

The reasonable i.iiplications in the Act convey the existence of the 
power in the. President to approve a code or not or to approve part of a 
code, to imioose limitations or. exceptions or modifications u-oon the opera- 
tion of that code. This power connotes the meaninc^, purriose and effect of 
a stay aiid as such the use thereof by the President or any official to whom 
this pov/er has been properly delet-;ated is vvithin the scope and extent of 
the let,'islative declarations contained in the Act. 



On June 16, 1933, the date upon which the Act was signed by the Presi- 
dent, General Hugh S. Johnson was a-o-oointed by the President to be Adminis- 
trator for Industrial Recovery. This Presidential Order authorized the 
Administrator for the ensuing thirjry days to do such "other and necessary 
work as authorized under Title I of the said Act". The Executive Order of 
appointment also ap-oointed a Special Industrial Recovery Board composed of 
the Secretary of Commerce as Chairman, the Attorney General, the Secretary 
of Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Labor, the 
Director of the Budget, the Administrator for Industrial Recovery and the 
Chairman of the Federal Trade Coininission. The authority conferred upon 
General Jolmson was made subject to the general of this Board' (*). 
On July 15, 1933, the liower originally t.,ranted under Executive Order Ho, 
6173 was continued with certain limitations (**). On the same date 
(July 15, 1933) the President set up a regulation and modified any pre- 
vious Executive Order inconsistent with its terms. This regulation is as 
follov/s : 

"A:iy code of fair co'.rinetition approved by me shall be deemed in full 
force and effect on the effective date as stated in the code; but after 

(*) See Executive Order No. 6173 
(**) See E;cecutive Order Ko. 6205-A. 

the a'oorovrl of a cods and ?is an incident to the iminediate eni-orcement 
thereof, hearings way "be given "by the Adrainir.trator or nis designated 
representative to persons (hereby defined to include natural nersons, 
partnerships, asi.ociations or coroor/itionr. ) v/ho ha-ve not in person or "by 
a. represe;itative particioated in esta'blishing or consenting to a code, 
"but ii7ho are directly affected there"by, and vrho claim that anplications 
of the code in larticdlar instances are lorgust to them and vho apply for 
an exce-.tion to, or exemotion from, or modification of the code. Such 
"oersons so ao 'lying, within ten days after the effective date of the code, 
shall "be given an opportunity for a hearing and determination of the is- 
sues raised -orior to incurring any li,';."bilit >■ to enforcement of the code, 
and the Admi listrator shall, if justice requires, stay the application of 
the code to all similarly affected pending a determination Isy me of the 
issTies raised," (*) 

The su" of the a" quoted 3xec\i.tive Order specifically conferred 
UTDOn the Admii^istrator the oorer to stay the application of a code u-oon 
the recei -it of an arjplication for aji exception therefrom, not onljr as to 
the person -.iho mr de the a\)plicatior., hut also -oersons who were similarly ■ 
e,ffectGd, This i-xecutive Order makes tha first reference to the use of 
the term "stay" and is the first s lecific dv3legr:tion of power from the 
President, On Decem"ber 30, 1.933, the Presidrjnt delegated to the Adminis- 
trator for Industrial P.ecovery the po-'er of approval of the "elimination" 
of any one or more provisions of any code of fair competition. This order 
also pormitted the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to ap-orove excep— 
tions from the provisions of a code (**). 

The 'ooviev granted to the Administrator to act on aoplications re— 
ceived within the time period set in Execxitive Order Y-O, 62(. 5-B restricted 
the proper and efficient use of the s tey. On Fehr-oarj-- 8, 1934, the Presi- 
dent, "bj' Sr.ecutive Order ITq, 6590-A, authorized the Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery to prescri"be rules and regulations covering stays and 
other forms of relief from codes of fair conpetition approved under Title 
I of the s aid Act. This order extended, the TD0-.7er of the Administrator in 
such a ma:iner as to permit the use of the stay a.fter a code had "become 
effective a.nd did not restrict the use of t'ne power to orders of approvals 
of codes. 

These po'.rers which ha,d heen conferred uoon the Administrator were "bY 
the terms of Executive Order ¥,o. G859 - Septem"ber 27, 1934, transferred 
to the National Industrial P.ecovery Board, which Board, "by its Adminis- 
trative Orders, a.uthorized the issue-nce of orders of approval -Thich nec- 
essarily ir_cl"ded orders of stay "by the Administrative Officer (***), 

No f-jrther delegations of por/er to use the stay were st)ecif ically 
made. Tl.e pover to stay orovisions of codes as such was peculiarly con- 
fined^ to the Adjainirtra.tor and the National Industrial Recovery Board, 

(*) See Ex..^cutive Crdor No. 62Ct5-B 

(**) Executive Order 6543-A 

(***) See Aiainistrative. Order X-93, September 28, 1934 


liowever, thic method of administrative action vv.s, used in some instances 
"by lesser of^-'icials of tne National Recover:' AdrainiGtration, The po-.7er 
of approval of code exeimDtions, exceptions, and such forms of adminis- 
trative relief were from time to time dele;5:ted to le.-ser officials, the 
exercise of 'Thich req-.iired administrative dircretion. Often findings, 
protests, 73olicies, and other consiclerations resulted in an administra- 
tive stay of the intended relief, Fo form , of vritten delegation of this 
power v;a5 made as the i^se thereof was considered iTrplied and contained 
in the 2^o\7er cf exemption granted by the Aci.Liinir?trntor or the ITationcl 
Industrial Secovery Board to the T)articiilar officer, 

Acjninistrative action har, slvrays -jreser.ted the question of due 
procesG, For -our-ooses of tim.e-savin^ a)id e::Tediencv, it being nracticcll^ 
impossible to conduct hearings upon all matters submitted to the Adminis- 
tration, the Adrainistrator set up the procedure 'c.'.own as "notice or oppor- 
tunity to be heard". The operation of this procedure resulted in the ad- 
ministrative approval of a particular matter with a ten, fifteen, twent3'-, 
thirty, or sicty-da,y stay of the operations of the provisions of that 
particular matter in order that interested Dersons might, if they so 
wished, object. This power, when used by the Administrator or the Na- 
tional Industrial Recovery Board, wa^ in accordance with the Presidential 
delegations hereinbefore menticned, but when used by lesser officials of 
the National Recovery Adrainistration was in accordance with implied power 
which accompanied the particular delegated power rather than according 
to specifically'" delegated aixthority. 

The President's Reemployment Agreement provided in Par8,^raih 14 
thereof for a stay of the lorovisions thereof ^.'ending a su;nmary investiga- 
tion by the National Recoverj'- Administration (*), The official exolane^- 
tion of the PRa (**) makes reference to Paragraph 14 and in the explana*» 
tion thereof states that an individua-1 employer may make application 'for 
a stay in accordance i^ith the provisions of Paragraph 14. Interpretation 
No. 2, concerning Paragra,nh 14 (***) sets forth the procedure and its • 
effect a,E a temporary stay without further investigation pending decision 
by NRA, The interpretation states tha.t Paragraph 14 is not intended to 
provide for group exce^otions, but onlv to meet cases of individual hard- 
ships. 'This report does not concern itself with applications submitted 
to NRA in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 14 of the PRA. It 
is true the word "stay" is used in this -oaragra-oh, but in view of the 
fact the.t the paragraph is limited to esses of individual application 
the consideration of these applications are found in the NILl Organization 
Sections Study on Exemptions. No other Presidenticd delegation of power, 
to stay the operation of the PRA is foixnd. 

(*) See 131A. Ballet in No. 3, Jul:^ 2C, 1933, 

(**) See NRA Bulletin No. 4 

(***) See NRa Bulletin No. 4 





The 'jori "stsy" in its ordinar:^ nieaning is a "staying or stopping, 
or state of "oeing stayed; suspension of motion or progre,2sion, a h^lt, 
stc-jHc;, stoji, :;. stoppin;3, or nore -usually a suspension of procedure or 
execution Ly judicial proceedings or executive mands.te", (*) 

Tlie term "stay" in it's legal sense ms nany connotations. It relates 
to Gucii tilings as a stpy of foreclosure, a stay of court proceedings, a 
stay of an action of Ip.w, and Acts of a Legislature prescrioing a stay in 
certain cases set forth in the legislation, a stay of execution (**). 

As stated above, there is no reference to the terra "stay" in the 
national Industrial Recovery Act and at the heginning of the Administra- 
tion of the Act no administrative definitions or explanations of the term 
were issued. Chapter II refers to the use of the term "stay" in Para- 
graph 14 of the PPA. This reference -'as one of the first occasions upon 
which the term "stay" was used by the Administration. The fact that the 
interuretation of this paragraph made it apply .to individual cases showed 
a disx30sition upon the part of the Administration, to make the term apply 
to individu.£!.l applications for relief. As the iidjnini strati on of codes 
and of the PBA continued, reference to individual applications v^as made 
h?/ the tern "ereraption'' rather than tne term "stay". 

Early in the process of code form-olation, the Administration found 
that for "oui-'OOses of enfcrcement of policy or recognition of protests it 
"became necessary to sta^^, in the order of & Torovel of a code, the actual 
operation of -oart of the orovisions of th'.t code, either permanently or 
for B. limited period. of time. The use of this method of aministrative 
power resulted in the reference to the term "stay", which reference was 
actioally confined to orders of approval or modifications thereof. Later, 
experience in the administration of codes disclosed the necessity of ex- 
ercise of the power to stay provisions of codes alrea'iy ai^proved, either 
upon application to or initiation hy the iffiA. Consequejitly, the use of 
the terra "stay" wa-s enlarged to include modifications of orders of appro- 
vals of codes. The meaning of the term "stay" was that the stay affected 
all memhers of an industrj?- or recognized divisions, either geo.graphical 
or industricl, and that an> exemption anplied to a single individual or 
group of incTividuTils. 

TiO administrative definition of the term "stay" was made •'until Ma3' 5, 
1934, when the Administrator for Industrial Secovery, hy Administrative 
Order X-27, issued rules and regulations concerning the modifica.tion of 
and exemptions from approved codes of fair competition. In Paragraph 1 
of such Administrative Order it wa.s stated that the term "exemptions" 
shall include exceptions and stays and all rulings whereby an individual, 

(*) Webster's New International Dictionary, Merriam Edition, 1934, P. 2037 
(**) Volume 3, Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Hawle's Third Revision P. 31-55 

- 26 - 

group, or class is relcap.ed from the full ^Deration of a provision of a 
code. This definition partially confirmed the already existing unoffi- 
cial definition mentioned above and no chan^^o thereof v/as made in defi- 
nition imtil the issuance of the "N2A Office '.'anur-jl in Septemher 1934. 
The Office i'iaiiual states, in Part III, p. 3210:- 

"The term 'stay' includes any ruling whe;reoy an entire industry is 
released from the full operation of a code provision, (i.e., wherehy 
a code iDrovision is temiDorarily suspended)." 

This subsequent definition restricts the scope of the term "stay" to an 
entire industry, but stays issued after this official definition applied 
both' to an entire industry and subdivisions of an industry, so that the 
original unofficial intention of the aptilication of a stay actually per- 
sisted. In other words, the use of the stay would be invoked for the 
Construction Industry and the Painting and Pa^oerhanging Division of the 
Construction- Industry, whereas an ''exeirption" applied to a single indi- 
vidual or group or class of individuals. The meaning of the terra and 
the aivove mentioned limitation as to its application has been taken as 
a basis for the research conducted for pumoses of this report and the 
results obt$.ined from an analysis of various stays will ani^ly only to 
those stays Y/hich were issued against entire industries or recognized 
divisions thereof. 

An.. examination of the records of the various stays issued by the 
Administration discloses widesriread interchangeable use of the term 
"exemption" and the term "stay". The provisions of a code would be 
stayed as to a single individual and an entire industry would be exenioted 
from the provisions of the code. (*) The interchangeable use of these 
terms resulted in great confusion as to the nature of the administrative 
action taken. It is true that the result of the action -was the same, but 
this administrative division had been set up and, of necessity, required 
separate treatment. Delegations of -power differed as to these forms of 
administrative action. This fact requires more strict adlierence to the 
defined classes of action. As a matter of record, exeinptions were found 
which were in fact stays with the reverse situation equally existent. 
The files were equally disorganized. Proper classification of the records 
has been attempted, so that this report will be based \ipon evidences of 
"stays" as defined in the foregoing paragraph. 


The sc0T)e of the use of the stay varies as to its extent and appli- 
cation. The first type is known as a General Stay - one which stayed all 
of the provisions of a code and applied to all members of an industry. 
This form of General Stay was utilized very rarely at the time of the 
original code mailing. (**) 

(*) See ITBA Orders 72-13, and Order 259-37 

(**) See order of approval of the Millinery Industry Code (Code Ho. 151, 
December 15, 1933) and order of approval of Spice Grinding Industry 
Cod,e (Code No. 424, May 11, 1934) 


The use of the General Stay 'becfrrne snore ir-ides^read during the period of 
administration of codes, particularly i^dth respect to the orders of ap- 
provals of an^encljuentSc Any nuiiber of a'^endments of codes were approved 
vith ;\ sta;/ of the 0)err:.tion of the rmendinont provisions for a specified 
period of time. The stay applied to all raemters of the industry and ap-' 
plied to all of the of the amend^Tient. This form of stay was used 
particularly in connection with satisf ication of due procecs require- 
ments. (*) 

Another form of stay was one which was general in its extent as to 
code ■:irovisibns covered, but limited in its application to members of 
the TBrticiolar industry affected, Tliis type of stay was used on many 
occasions in the order of approval of a code and was also used at the 
time of the order of avprovel of en amendment to a code.(**) 

A t"~pe of stay issued hy the Administration was specific as to the 
extent of tlie code orovisions covered and jF^eneral as to the ariplication 
to meir-hers of the industry or trade affected. These types of stays were 
found, both in orders of a,pprovals of codep. and amendments, (***) 

(*) See the Ice Iv^dustry Code, iimendraent 1, Order 43-1, April 24, 1934; 
Metal Tallin Ind^osti'v Code, ii.menrijnent 1, Order 154-1, Aio^^ast 2, 1954 

(**) The order of aisproval of the Dresr. I'lanufacturing Code (Code lIo.54— 
October 31, 1933) stayed all of the provisions of the code as to 
manufact-.u"e of dresses whose chief content was cotton, both house 
and wtLsh, oending further hearing. The order of approva.1 of the 
Knitted Guterwee>r Industry Code (Code '3o. 164 - December 18, 1933) 
stayed all of the provisions of the code 'as to manufacturers of 
knitted outerwec.r for infants and cnildren, sized from infancy to 
age 15, imtil determination of their inclusion in the code. 

(***) In the orcer of the aii'oroval of the i.Iedium and Low Priced Jewelry 
ManufcvCt-oring Code (Code Ko. 75 - December 23, 1933) the "orovision 
of payment of time and one-third for all hoxirs over forty (40) 
hours per week to all emplojz-ees was staj^ed until March 1, 1934, 
In the orcer of a,-Dproval of the ria,g Manufacturing Industry Code 
(Code lo, 352 - March 31, 1934) the homework provisions in tha.t 
code -revQ stayed for a oeriod of thirty days, the effective date 
of the code. In the order of approval of the labor provisions of 
the Brewing Industry Code, the said provisions were stayed for a 
period of ten days. 



Another form of stcy is foiind - one 'vhich -'ag snecific as to its 
extent in connection with code -irovisions end also cs to its aoplication 
to members of industry ,, (*) 

CHaPML 11 

METHODS or i^xaacisi: or sr.^ ys 

The iise of the pouer of staj'- vras evide^iced in various forms of ad- 
ministrative action by the HEA, Trie President, on Ma"" 26, 1934, hy Ex- 
ecutive Order To. 6723, stayed all of the provinions of the codes of the 
service trs,des and industries exceot certain labor "orovisions, Tliis is 
an example of the exercise of the •oower of general stay by the President, 
Likeirise, the poT/er of general stay was exercised by the Administrator 
in Administrative Order X-5, of Pebruar?/ 2, 1934. Tlie operrtion of a 
prior aci:.iinistrative order (Adjainistrative Order X-4) vas stayed for a 
period of thirty days and later this same order ^^-as -oermanently stayed 
by Administrative Order X-8, dated March 3, 1934. In addition, the 
National Industrial Recovery Borrd, in Administrative Order X-136-2 sta;-ed 
the operation of Paragraph 2 of Adrainistrs.tives Order X-136 insofar as 
it related to the code authorities or agencies thereof i-'hich nere sneci" 
fically'set forth in the said Administrative Order X-135-2. 

The Administrator exercised the pcver of the stay in orders of e"o- 
provals of codes, amendments, pnd other miscellaneous matters. The ad- 
ministrative use of the sta"^ also is evidenced inse-oarate orders issued 
to extend, terminate, or modit;y a stay theretofore issued. On some oc- 
casions a separate order was issu.ed to stay som.e or all of the iDrovisions 
of a code AThich order, was not linked with an order of aporoval of a code 
or an amendinent, but a^ separate and distinct exercise of the "oower to 
grant stays. 

Causes op 711:; E]csi:-.ci3E op po-;,j]]p. 


Adiinistrative action, such o,s £i stay, may be made for one or vari- 
ous reasons. Primarily, its purpose is to afford relief from the equal 
application of code provisions; to enable the administrative agency to v 
maintain control of and adherence to its rioles and regulations; and also 
to prevent the ap-oroval of code provisions which are not in conformity 

(*) In the order of approval of the Ins-'olation Board Manufacturing Code, 
(Code i^o. 353 - March 22, 1934) the epiDlication of the '^'age and hour 
provisions was stayed as to the territory of Hawaii. In the order 
of approval of the Cotton Textile Industry Code (Code llo. 1 - July 9, 
1933) the provisions relating to limitation of machine hotirs were 
sta;'-ed insofar as they a,pplied to the prodiiction of tire yarns and 
fabric for rubber tires. 


with legal requirements or declared policy. The National Recovery Ad- 
rainintrr.tion -ran oresented with problems necessitating this form of 
administrative action. Some sponsoring t^rro-a-os submitted codes contain- 
ing illegal _oroviGions, Attei^ipts of the Administration to cause a dele- 
tion of these ohjectionahle ^orovisions often were of no avail and in 
such cr-ses the use of tae po^.'er of stay was necessary, in order to "prop- 
erly aporove the code. In sdcdtion, the Administration, "being presented 
with the -jroblera of codification of industry pnd the necessity of admin- 
istration thereof, naturally anno-oiiced various policies which were de- 
signed to cr.rr;'' out the purpose of the Act under which the program was 
progressing. Oftentimes code provisions as submitted did not conform 
to the pjinounced policy end for pun}0ses of consistency a.nd adherence 
to this polic;'- it bece-Tie necessary, x7.pon the part of the Administration, 
to exercise its power of stay. 

The Im3A, in its adiainistration of the Act, which involved the is- 
suance of rules paid reg-alations having the force end effect of law, nec- 
essarily wp,s presented with and obliged to follow due process require- 
ments. In the early stages of the codification of industry, all of the 
proposed, codes were submitted and considered at a public hearing. As 
the details of adiiinistration increared with respect to amendment of 
codes, interpretations, exemptions, classifications, Code Authority 
rights arxd obligations, and other matters, it was found to be a practi- 
cal impossibility to sul.ri^it. all of these matters, many of them routine, 
to 'the for: lality of a 'ijublic hearing. The recognition of this practical 
imoossibilitT' resulted in the set-un of the "orocedure commonly referred 
to as "Ifotice of Cp-'oortijnity to be heard". This particular form of 
notice involved the uss of the oower of stay. An order was signed re- 
lating to the particular ma.tter, but the or^eration thereof was stayed 
for a specified period during which interested oorties could object to 
the effective operation of the particalar matter approved. This form 
of stay T,a,s exteasively used by the administration. 

The inver,tigation of the' records of iIRA relating to stays was con- 
ducted along tvfo lines. First, -^jhe orders of aoprovals of codes (l to 
520 incl\isive) v;are examined and the orders of approvals of ejnendraents 
of such codes Y^ere also examined. Second, the records of the following 
codes: — 

Alu.T-'inran Graphic Arts 

Asohalt Shingle and Roofing Ice 

Automatic Snrinliler Ladder 

Automobile Iianufact\rring Lime 

Automotive Parts andL Equipment Lia-nber and Timber 

Bituminous Coal Men's Clothing 

Boot and Shoe Men's Kecla'rear 

Builders Su^oply Trace Iviillinery 

Business Furniture r^otion Picture 

California Sardine Processing Motor Vehicle Retailing 

Can Lianirfacturers Oil Burner 

Cabined Salmon Paint, Yarnish & Lacquer 

Cerpet and R-'og Ppperboard 

C£.st Iron Soil Pipe . Paper and Pulp 




Cigar Ilanufacturin^ 

Coat and Suit 


Cotton C-arnient 

Cotton Ter-tile 

Daily ITe'.7spaper Publishing 

Dress : xnufacturing 

Electrical Ma.nufacturing 


Fire Extinguisher 

Fishery (Basic Code) 

Floor C: Wall Clay Tile 

Funeral Sapnly 


Gas Appliance and Apparatus 

Glass Container 

Silk Textile 

Plumbing Fi::tures 

Puwp Manufacturing 

Ra:^/on and Synthetic Yarn 

Retail Drug 

Retail Trade 

Rafoer Mr.nui'acturing 

Riiliber Tire Manufacturing 



Set Up Paper Box 

Shipbuilding and Shinrepairing 

Steel Casting 


Wholesale Tobacco 

Wliolesale Trade 

Wool Textile 


Iron and Steel 

were exai.:ined for the Tounoose of deteraining v/hether or not a stay had 
been issued at a time other then the time of the order of approval of 
a code or amend-nient,, The codes examined disclosed six hundred and fifty- 
four (654) orders which contained a stay; five hundred and ninety-eight 
(598) of such stays were a part of orders of approvals of codes or amend- 
ments and fifty—six (56) orders of stays Here issued at a time other 
than at the time of the code or amendment approvrl. 

The orders were examined as to the particular code involved, pro- 
visions sta^^ed, and the reasons for the issuance of these orders. .A 
classification of the problems oresented shows tlte general causes for 
the issuc.nce of stays hereinbelow set forth: 



Geographical problems 

Recognition of protests 


I'lecessitv of further study 

(a) by l\iRA 

(b) by industry or trade 
¥RtL policy 

Pending amendment 

Industrial subdivisional problem^s 

Due process 

Sixteen orders of approvals of codes stayed the operation of the 
codes in entirety for various periods of time, (*) A few of these 
stays applied to certain t;^'pes of mrnufacturers; e.g., the order of 

(*) See ort'er of approval of the Coffee Industry Code (Code No. 265), 

the Fisheries Code (Code No, 3C8), Mayonnaise Code (Code No. 349), 

Peajiut Butter Code (Code No. 378), Spice Grinding Code (Code !To. 


ar>Tjroval of the Dres'^^ Manufacturing Code (Code No. 64) stayed all of the 
provisions of the code as to the manuf actiare of dresres v/hose chief content 
was cotton pending further hearing. The order of approval of the Knitted 
Oaterwear' Industry;- Code stayed all of the -orovisions as to manufactiirers 
of knitted outerwear for infants and children. In some cases the code 
was approved for a trial period and stayed in its entirety after a cer- 
tain specified date for ■oiu'-poses of further study or amendment, as in 
the order of approval of the Millinery Industry Code (Code Ko. 151) which 
stayed all of the provisions of the code six months after the date of 
the order pending submission of reconmendations regarding continuance 
or amendnent of the code. Stays of all provisions of codes were issued, 
either at the time of the order of approval or sutseo^uently, when objec- 
tions snd protests to such rirovisions were recognized". (*) 

The Administration issued a numher of orders of stays of amendments 
and the records investigated for the -ourTioses of this preliminary report 
show the following: 

Stays of cmenainQnts labor ■ 13 

Stsys of amendments code authority 85 

Sta^'^s of amendr^ients • trade practices — 34 

The entire operation of an amendment was usually stayed to meet 
due process requirements, i'^*) In some cases amendments were stayed for 
reasons other than due process requirements. (***) 

On some occasion;- the a'j --lication of a code was stayed for the uur— 
poses of effecting a consolidation of that particolar code with some 
other code, (****) 

Prom tine to time classification orjolems arose vjhich were caused 
either hy multi-^le cr ds coverage or overlapping definitions. . The pro- 
blems created often resulted in a stay of a code provision insofar as 
certain operations under tliat code I'ere concerned, or insofar as certain 
members of tne industr;'^ subject to that code were concerned. In the 

(*) See Administrative Order ITo. 48C-4 which stayed the operation of 
the Structural Steel and Iron Fabricating Code indefinitely and 
without the assent of the industry.' See also order of approval 
Ilrcc.roni Code (Code To. 234), 

(**) See Fabricated Metal Products Code So. 84, Amendment Ho.l; Retail 
Farm Ecvuipment Code Ko. 197, Amendment llo. 1; Printing Equipment 
Code To, 257, Amendment I-Io.l. 

(***) See Cotton Garment Industry Code IJo. 118, Amendment Wo, 15 

(****) See Wire Seinforcement Code, the provisions of which were stayed 
for the purposes of considering consolidation of the Iron and 
Steel Code; the Cleanser Manufacturing Code was stayed for pur- 
poses of consolidation with thei Soap and Cleansing Llanufacturing 
Code; e-nd the Manganese Steel Casting Code for the purposes of 
consolidation with the Steel Casting Code. 



Oriental Ruf, Irrocting Code ITo. 4o7, Sup:leri3nt !To. 1, the order stayed 
the provisions of the Wholesale and Distributing Trade as to f.'holesalers 
of oriental nogs in order to permit operation under the Importing Trade 
Code. Tliese classification problems often arose in connection with 
territorial protleins, especially v/here se-nurate territorial codes were 
being considered. (*) Likewise stsys "rere issued because of overlapping 
code definitions, (**) 

A number of orders of aporovels of embodied administrative 
action, v/hich vras in the nature of a stay, biit 7'ere more sweeping and 
decisive than the ordinary form of sta-.''. These orders by their terms 
"eliminated" provisions from codes and usually Trere invoked in cases 
where the particular provision ran counter to legal objections or were 
not in conforraitv with the announced -oolicy of the Administration. The 
effect of these orders not only stayed the operation, but rendered the 
particular provision n-'oll and void and deleted it from the code, Admin~ 
istrative policy announced that the so-called "merit clause" relating 
to the promotion of employees and increase of wages on a merit basis was 
against policy and in several "ases the merit clause set forth in the 
code was eliminated, (***) 

Provisions affecting the rights and obligations of code authorities 
also felt the effect of "elimination, " 

A'iministrative objection to Administration members of a code autho- 
rity being ap-oointed without ejroense to the industry \7as found to be 
objectionable in the Foimdry Equipment Industry Code No. 264, so the 
order of approval "eliminated" the ^Trords "v/ithout expense to the indus- 
try". In the same code labor policy objected to an exception from maxi- 
mum hour provisions T/hich included members of the staffs of executives, 
executives, and other specified emplovees. The recognition of this' 
objection resulted in elimination of the terms "members of their res- 
pective-staffs". (****) 

(*) See Order LTo. M6-4 relating to persons engaged in canning pine- 
apple and can manufacturing in Hawaii. MA files 

(**) See Orders Nos. 287-2-i and 288-2-A relating to conflict between 

the 7ewspaper Publishing Code and the G-ra.phic Arts Code, I\iBA file's 

(***) See Orders of approvals of the Boiler lianufacturing Code No. 38; 
Boot and Shoe Industry, Code No, 44; Hotel Industry Code No. 121; 
Ox^re^cet-rlene Industry Code. No. 155, and the order of ap-oroval of 
the Bituminous Qoal Code No. 24, where a "weighing" clause was 
eliminated, ERA files 

(****) It shoiild be noted that this order eliminated parts of a code 
provision rather than the entire provision itself. For a re- 
cognition of objections to labor provisions, see also the order 
of approval of the Steel Joist Industry Code No. 495, NEA. files 



Trade practice policy often required the exercise of the nov/er of 
elinination vith respect to trade practice orovisions, (*) All of the 
rtove e::araples conts,ined clauses or oortions of clauses vhich if per- 
mitted to in the code vroiild have conflicted vrith lep;ality or the 
policy of the Administration relating to lahor and trade practice pro- 
visions, IiBA insignia; and the like, fjid as a resuJLt, this -oo'7er of 
"elimination", which '.Yas in the nature of a stay, was exercised hy IIRA., 


The use of the power of stay covered oractically ever-^ t-roe of 
code provision submitted to I'M - labor, code autuorit:)'-, trade practice 
and general provisions ^ 


An exa^-nination of the code provisions stayed, discloses some rather 
interesting information. The use of the power of stay 'oy the Adminis- 
tration was nost usuall-- applied to trade pra,ctice provisions, and in 
a lesser degree to lahor -Drovisions of codes. Of the latter, the maxi- 
mum hour and minimum ve-^e -orovision of codes were the ones most usually 
stayed, "but the various general la.tor provisions likewise met with the 
exercise of this adninistrative power. Tabulation of the records in- 
vestigated relating to lahor provisions shovrs the following: 

See order of anproval of the Horseshow and Allied Products Code 
1^0. 325 (price list provisions); Bulk Drinking Straw Industry Code 
llo, 331 (unaerselling clause); Beverage Dispenser and Equipment 
Code To, 334 (sales contrary to ouhli^hed price list clause); Opti- 
cal IPnolesale Code Ho, 443 (unifor.a discoimts); Metal Hat Die and 
Wood Hat Block Industry Code T'^o. 221 (clauses regulating the use 
of IIBA insignia')? Cigar Container Industry Code Ko, 135, Amendment 
i\ro, 1 (Code Authority oontrihutions clauso). I'IHA. files 


-34- ■ 

STAYS or L.^BO::i PIIOVISIOFS of C0D3S (* ) 


Minimum T/rises 22 

IJinimum iTages (Geographical prea) 4 

IJinimiii:-! xrages (industrial subdivision) — ■ 4 

MaximiTin li.iurs — 23 

Maximum luturs (CT-eograohical area) — 1 

Maximum houi's (industrial subdivision) 3 

Definitions of t^'pes of employees 2 

Home v;ork provisions 8 

Child labor provisions 1 

Piece rs,te — — 1 

Method of pajonent of ?7ages 1 

Handicapped worl'-ers 1 

Equitable adjustment of fiages ■ 1 

Most of the stavs of the maxim.uia hour pjid miniraiim nage provisions 
were made as a result of protests bv interested parties, either the 
wages v/ere too high or too lot/. This fs,ct is more strongly borne out 
by the above table showing administrative recognition of difficulties 
as to geographical sections of an indiistry and also industrial divisions 
thereof. The stavs of home work provisions were the result of labor 
policy e.s announced by MA, ns were the "eliminations" which ^ere mostly 
deletions of the so-called "merit clause". All other stays of labor 
provisions were granted because of exceotional conditions existing in 
the industry sAid. the need for particular relief fron the operation of 
the particulrr provisions, 

C0D3 AUiiioairx Pr:ovisio::s 

■jhen the President issued en'^orcement of an order of approval of 
a code, problems in its administration were e:cpected and, as the codi- 
fication of industries Txrogressed, various policies were announced to 
meet the difficulties seen at that time. In adaition, the National 
Industrio-1 Recovery Act imposed certain requirements upon the Adminis- 
tration as to the truly representative nature within the industry of 
persons or groups participating in the f emulation of the code, (**) 
The enforcement of these legislative requirements and policy announce- 
ments were sometimes evidenced by stays of code authority provisions; 
i.e., the code provisions which created the code authority as an in- 
dustrial s,d:ainistering body with certain rights thereto and obligations 
thereon. The t^npes of code authority provisions subjected to stays, 
insofar as the investigation for nurooses of this report is concerned, 
were : 

(*) In addition, it should be noted that thirteen (l3) amendments of 

labor Tjrovisions were stayed and seven (?) "eliminations" of labor 
provisi''-ns or oarts thereof were issued. 

(**) Section 6 of the Act 



Election of Code ^i.uthorit-'- - participr.tion 

of as.:ociation 3 

Insignia •— 1 

Reports end schsdiiles — ■ ~- 3 

Coda autiiority finances 81 

Liabilit-;- of code authority 1 

Incorporation of code authority 1 

Label provisions 1 

Adjustment of vrages above the rainia'iiin ~ code 

authorit;/- proposal — ■ 1 

Code authorit"* po?/ers of classification 

(a) Industrial or trade — 1 

(*) (b) Geographical 2 

Legal objections (the reouirei.ients of Section 6 of the Act) caused 
the stays of the code authority election provisions in the three cases 
tabulated above. The rtays of the label, incorporation, liability and 
insignia provisions above noted, prevented the conferring of e:xcess 
power upon the code authorities involved. All of the code authority 
finance provisions, i^'ith the exception of nine (9), were stayed in 
order to meet due process requirements; the remaining nine (9) provi- 
sions were sta.yed insofar as Paragraph 3 of Administrative Order X— 36 
(relating to a,ssessraents upon the major line of business of a member 
of industry) vas concerned. The stays of code authority provisions 
relating to classifications were the res'jJ.t of protests by the several 
Advisory Boprds of the Administration, 


Trade practice Drjvisions of a code involved various ty^^ies of 
trade regulations, Troxde practice rules can be classified as follows:— 

(a) r-oLes renerally a.cceoted in law 

(b) rules desirable to indtistr?/ or trade, but not fully 
accepted in law 

(c) rales desirable, but no basis in law 
(a) imdesirable rules 

(e) unenforceable r-iles 

The hopes of industries and trades in the sponsorship of codes 
were hi:;h. It was e:cDected oy many members that the approval of the 
code would result in the solation of all their industrial or trade 
troubles. Consequently, trade practice rules in all of the above class- 
ifications were submitted s-nd strenuously urged by code snonsors. The 
early promulga.tion of codes for e.cknowledged reasons of expediency and 
the sincere attempt to effectuate the iromediate reeroplo-'/-ment of American 
labor resulted in the inclusion of undes-irfble and ^menforceable provi- 
sions in coc'es. As Ad; .inistretive e?rperience increased, various 

(*) These vrere two eliminations of code authority provisions, both of 
which related to objectionable feat^ores of the code authority fi- 
nance x^hase of administration, 


policicr. y'ere en-unciated, ror^tricting t:ie r;cope of r.ccepta'ble trajde 
practice provisions, v;hich policies rrn contrary to the form of the 
provisions contained in the above nentioned earl;'^ co.les. This situa- 
tion caused code s-oonsors to stress their positio't nore strongly nnd 
to refuse consent to '.7ithdrn,v; or delete the particular ohjectionahle 
trade practice provisions. In addition, the o.ovjlopraent of Adminis- 
trative e:;perience required the initiation of various studies and in- 
vestigations to determine the value of particular trade practice rules, 
their effect upon small enterprise, cons-ujaers, laoor and other in- 
terested groups, the tendencies thereof to\7ards raonopolj'', price fixing 
and other evils and also the acljninistrative prohleras presented. In 
short, the use of a stay in connection vith trade practice provisions 
carried exit the Acliiinistration's determination to adh.ere to announced 
policies as far as possible, thereby overriding objections of incoistry 
or groups thereof, and at the saiae time enforced the ordinary re- 
quirements of administrative lavf. Kiis exercise of foresight did not 
obtain in the cases of all codes and, aS a resixLt, the po'jer of stay ' 
was exercised at a time subseqixent to the approval of a code tr.:on a "' 
shov.'ing to or finding by IJRA. that the pr.rticular approved code or pro- 
vision thereof nas resulting-; in unreasonable and xmfair aPrlica.tion. 

perhaps a correct approach to a study of stays of trade practice 
provisions would be an examination of the psxticular code provisions 
affected, bearing in mind' the classification of practice rules 
set forth in t/ie opsnin.'^ paragraph of this subsection. (*) iJo attempt 
has been made at this time to classify/ the various trade practice 
rules, but the results of the investigation shous certain types of 
trade practice provisions vrhic. had been subjected to stays, all of 
-.Thich are tabulated as follo'js;- 


ResoJe price maintan.-jice 10 

Requirement of charging trans ■;orta.t ion costs to merchant 5 

Prohibition of sale of existing stock 

(Distress raerchpjidise) 1 

Kethod of determining price differentials 1 

Definition of "transportation charges from wholssaler 

to customer" 1 

Provision for pa^Tiient of volurae allcaaices to retail stores 1 
Establishment of differential discoimts betiveen vholesalers 

aiid other classes of purciiascrB ■ 2 

Open price filin^-; systems 19 

V/aiting period - open Tarice systems 183 

Ilerchandisin-^ plans 5 

Prohibition of adulteration nnd v.; i sir abiding 1 

Provision prohibiting con^-racto:- to cut nr.torial for 

msiiufacture of garment 1 

Percentage' limitation upon retail price 2 

Provision incorocrating Federrl Pood and Dn^g Act 1 

provision fi--ing ..laxiniim disco-or.ts and tarns of s.^le — 15 

Provision including employees ' contract in "int^.rft,i-ence 

v,'it]i competitors' contrp^cts" clause 1 

Provisions perraittin-; man-'of acturor to su--gc;'t res;'Ie nini- 

::.tua prices- 3 

(*) See Ghapter~y ~ 

9344 ■ ■ 



ProhilDition of receipt of ".crip for payment of merchandise- 2 

ProhilDition againct dictri tutors -onaer'rellin.;; jottern 1 

Prohibition of r.alen contrary to r)ub].ished price lists 2 

Prohioition of production of custom-made goods comparable 

to standard points 1 

Uniform conditions of S'^le and nethods c:f estinates and 

quotations 1 

Definition of "contractor" 1 

Fixed minimum ter..iP of sale 8 

Linitation of credit period on goverrj.-i8-.t Tourchase^ 1 

Fixed estimate foruula 1 

prohibition of future sales and deliveries 

(requirement of report) 1 

Hequirement of agreG.uent betreen jobber'j and distributors 

to fi^-e price schodales in accordance with code 1 

Peauirement of a,~rcement to resell in accordpn.ce T;;itl,. 

code provisions ' 5 

Prohibition of c.uota,tion of "-TlceG other than f.o .c .factory 2 

Special rules regardin bids to governuuntal agencies 15 

Prohibition of cou2'ions and preniui 8 

Prohibition of "breaZ: end tol.e" merchandise distribution 3 

prohibition of assumption of conscquental daJ-ia/jes 2 

Prohibition of furnishin^;; detailed shop drav,'in;?;s of prodiicts 9 

prohibition of fti^-nishing shop drai^inp^s iTithout chrrge 3 

Prohibition of destructive price cittin- 9 

Prohibition of "pooled bu;"in.':" 5 

Prohibition of "trade-in" allovrances 11 

Provisions settin~- forth proper trade, mark rules 8 

prohibition of diEcem.ination of false inforiiation regarding 

products . 6 

Prohibition of consignir-ent sales 1 

prohibition of inducement of .breach of contract 5 

Provision prohibiting sales in evasion of code 4 

Mandatory reciuirenont of registration of agents, dis- 
tributors, -etc. . 1 

Provision permitting free advice and consultation services 

to ourchasers 1 

Prohibition of absorption of inspection oherges 1 

Provision enempting sales to export trade 1 

Uniforn acco'OJiting and cost-finding syste'i 7 

Prohibition of giiE',rantses 1 

Prohibition of rent-^l of -oroducts 1 

prohibitio'^. of discoiuits except cash dirco'.'.nts 1 

Establishment of tne uniform pgenc" contract 1 

Provision requirin;;; p-ablicp.tion of prices covering in- 

stallatio:i of prod-acts ■ 1 

prohibition of allovfcnces for advertising 1 

Prohibition o- attaclxient of IIRA label to o garment not 

made u;ider the code 1 

TOIi\L 403 

Ten of the above list of trade practice provisions were stayed 
through the process of "elimination." Those provisions irhich were so 
elii.iinated as follows: 



Resale price nrlntonance 1 

Ssto.lDlishjnent of i.:p~i:.i-ui;i disccjJits 1 

Prohibition of futare nales ryjl fijit^^ro deliveries 1 

Prohibition of salef? contrar;' to published price list- 1 

Prohibition of imdersellin*?; jobbers bj distributors — 1 

Provision pernitting suggestion of Miniau.: resale price 1 
Inclusion of employees' contracts in "int.-rf orence 

v;ith competitors' contract" clause • 1 

Inclusion of Federo.l jTcod and Dr-ug Act 1 

Provision prohibiting adulteration and misbranding 1 

It should be noted from the above tabulations tJi-.t nost of the 
trade practice provisions stayed related to price provisions, either 
with respect to uininui,! prices, resale price maintenance, maximum dis- 
counts and terms of sale or open price filin;- systems. The tabulation 
shows stays of provisions ^,^nich ordinarily -roulo. be classified as de- 
sirable and enf orceo.ble; e.g., adulteration pnd misbranding clauses - 
interference i--ith mothers' contract. Exe.mi-nation of the stays of these 
particular provisions discloses that the stay was issued not because of 
the p'urposes of the particular provision but rather that the provision 
was improperly dra,fted pr too stringent or extensive in its scope and 
application. Ilethods of obtaining iiniform prices, or at least in- 
formation as to the cost, equally fell under this gavel of administrative 
action. Uniform cost systems, methods of estiiaa.ting pjid Quotations were 
submitted by various code-sponsoring pf^roups, but such contemplated pro- 
visions ran afoul of either tho legal or policy req_uirements of UEA 
resulting in a stay of the orovision. 

The exanination of the records of the trade practice provisions 
subjected to sta.ys did not in o,ll cases disclose reasons wiiy the paj-- 
ticular stays had been applied. In addition, the author has not had an 
opportLinity to fully oxploro all of tlie records relating to these 
various stays, however, some of the files pracl orders examined did dis- 
close some res.sons and, for purposes of this report, certa,in classifi- 
cations of reasons have been made end a te.bvLlation thereof set forth, 
'"'hich gives some picture of wh^' ITTIA. exercised this a^uiiinistrative 
re.iedy. The tabulation is as follows; 


For further investigation 7 

For determinant ion of advisability of a;v^roval 

of code provisions 2 

Consideration and determination by ilRA 2 

Consideration of objections to provisions 8 

Stays resulting from general studies initif.ti^d by !I2A 188 

Further investigation and hearing 5 

Pendin:- recognition of code authority 1 

Due process requirouents 75 

Pending future corapa,ct 1 

Industry reauest for additional time for str.dy 1 

Pendin submission of evidence by industry 14 

Pending satisfactory arrangement for confidential treatment 

of price information ■ 2 




It iG rc?,lizcr. tlv--t the p.tove r^oneral clr.nsif icc.tions of reasons 
do not g'io'.-' th3 pTSTponoT of tiio "fiirtlier iiiveTti£;?,tions and lioaring", 
the ''ntu-'.ien initirtsu "b • "TRA or ih3 olDjections beinf] considered. 
In cases partic-jlr.r circ:.iiist^'ji.cer; may j^avc existed in particular 
industries ■ hich roquircd fintlier stucy or investigation. ( *) To delve 
into these reasons, a fortii r rjid more orJiaustive study must be con- 

The above tabulation sho";s soi^o one hundred and eighty-eight (188) 
trade practice provisions stayed becaus-! of studies beingr conducted by 
WRA. Th' majority of these stays 'related to the v.'aiting period betveen 
the tii-ie of filin:^: of price lirts with a code 8.uthority and the effect- 
ive date of .ruch price listr. Office Order ITo.63, issued by the di- 
rection of the Adiinistrator on January 25, 1934, announced that a 
stud3" as to price ch,?jajros '.vas being ;.iade and that code provisions re- 
l3,tin^' to open price associations 7;ould be stayed in the order of 
approval of the code. The scope of this order was later modified, (**) 
but its result vras a great nu.iber of st^ys of the waiting period pro- 
vision of open price systo'As. 

It is of int'^i'est to note that oi^T-hteen (18) stays of trade prac- 
tice provisions nere is'~aied, i.'hicj- '•ostponed the effective dates of 
fa,ir trade practice provisions .( *^''*) 

The investigation of the recorde of stpys of trade practice pro- 
visions discloses that nost of the stays wore issued at the time of the 
order of a.pprov3l of th~ code and tha,t in s'\ch orders either one or • 
several provisions of the code were affected thereby. It is ftirther 
disclosed that two hur.dred and eight (206) codes, practically half of 
the codes exanined, contained a stay of trade practice provisions in 
the order if approval of the code. A list of rush is set forth 
in Append.ix ITo . 2, hereto attached. 

Ti:s 01' loS^jju^gs or stay 

As stated in Chapter IV, ante, the po'-er of stay -'pr- exercised by 
the Actoinistration at other than the tine "f the order of approva,l 
of the code £jid investigation wa,s directed to certain codes to study 
ord.erc of stays issued at a ti:.;e siibsequent to an order of approval of 
the code. The examination discloses that nost of such stays had been 
issued as a result of a;pplication by a particular industry or trade 
and that the code provisions from whica relief was sought referred to 
maximur-i ho-ju.-s or mininun wages, although a. few such orders of stay re- 
lated to relief from trade i3ra.ctice provisions. The schednle set forth 

(*) The order of jpproval of tiie hotic.i picture Code, Code llo .124, 
stayed, cert? in trade prrctice provisions relating to the pa],""- 
ment of excessive salaries to executives and other employees. 
This provision si"fected th.e sala'ries of motion picture stars 
and the effect of the limitation upon these salaries \7as un- 
known at the ti-ie of the order of. approval of the coc-e. As a, the "orovision was stayed xuntil YUA had an opport-'onity to 
investigate the effects of tl^e provision. 

(**) See Office Orders yos . S3-A and o::-" - Jan-uary 37,1934.KRA ZTiles. 

(*=■*) See Order 1^0. 47-3, lanhers Code - Order "Jo. 454-2, Optical 
Retail Trade Code. ItfJA li'iles . 



in Appendix ITo . 3, att.-ched hereto, is helpful in detenninin-;: the codec 
and code provinions affected and the rea::'>onG advanced for the grant of 
a stay sulDsequent to code appr.'-oval . (*) 

Appendicen ITor,. 3 pr^d 4 oaid the conment reif-.ting thereto dis- 
closes that codes rere li':el/ to he rAihJected to.strys ?.t an" tine 
diiring the period of its approvaJ. of ac-"'»i'.iir. tration. Some codes had 
no stays for anj' ptirposes 'Whatsoever, others only one md still others 
a nui-nhor of stays. The follovin/- schedule lists tlie variotis codes 
exajnined i,7hich hac. i.iore th.;,n one str,,7: 


1. Cotton Textile : 13 

2. Shiphuildiuf :Xid Shiprepairin," 2 

3. Wool Textile ' 4 

4. Electrical iTJivifacturinj 2 

3. Liraher and Timher — 5 

18. Cast Iron Soil Pipe 2 

21. Leather 4 

23. Underwear and Allied Prciucts 4 

24. BitTouinous Coal 5 

25. Oil Burner ■ 2 

33. ?.eto,il Lui-iher 3 

38. Boiler Jianuf acturin.- 3 

39. Farm EqudpLient 3 

46. Ilotor Vehicla Hetailin,-^ 3 

.48. Silk Textile -^ 3 

54. Throning . 3 

60. Retail Trade 9 

64. Dress J.'anuf'.ictiro-in? 4 

68. Road ilachinerjr ■ 2 

69. liillinery aji^: Dress T'-in'-iin^ 2 

82. Steel Castin; 4 

84. Eahricated Uetel Products--- 4 

88. Business Furniture, etc. 5 

93. '.feshin.'^ and Ironing Lachinc 4 

95. Buff Slid, polishing TTlieel 2 

102. Shovel, Dra/^line and Crane 2 

118. Cotton Garment 9 

121. Hotel 3 

124. L'otion Picture 3 

125. Upholstery am' Drapery 2 

128. Cenent ■ 2 

142. Retail Jerrelry : 3 

151. Millinery 4 

155. 0^y-Acetylene 5 

157. Hair Cloth Kanui^acturin-- 2 

175. Paper Distrihutin.^ 2 

182. Retail Food a:". C-rociry 4 

(*) The infor'iation set fortli i^i t'le tabulation v.'as obtained partially 

fron the author's exajiinatior. of the JTRA records relatin,f7 to 
exemptions ca\C. also the records relating; to stays. The interchangeahle 
use jf the term "staj''" and "exerjvption" resulted in the interchajageahle 
filing of stays and exemptions, however, for i3vr-ooses of the talnala.tion, 
the records relate only to exemptions or stays which '7ere .-ranted to an 
entire industry or a recognized suhdivision thereof. 

-41- . 

coHEs HAvii'g iio:ic ' TA': o-:s stat (cc:ti::;j:d) "O . o? stays 

195. TTaolesr.le Food r.ri/' Orocox"'' 3 

201. V'-olenpl'; or Dir-trib-ati-.v:- 5 

204, pl-unbinr;; FiictureG 3 

234. I'o.cp.roni 5 

2;37. AlJ-07 Ca-tin- 5 

2'J:9 . Tag- 2 

25C . "ire ?.od and Tu-te 2 

237. printing Equipment 2 

250. Ornsiiental ilouldinf 2 

264. Foiondry Eauipraent 3 

256. Inleoid U-ater Carrier 2 

257. Used Textile Ba£: 2 

274. Sav7 a:id Steel 3 

232. Restaurant 4 

285. Beauty and Barber Slio-ri 2 

287. C-rapMc Artn 5 

298. Uipin^: Cloth 3 

313. Steel TTool 2 

206. ii'ica. 4 

308. Ficliei-/- 5 

311. P.eady I'irced Concrete ^ 2 

319. ITev/spaper Printing Pres3 2 

327. lachine-Applied Strple, etc. 2 

329. L^Dholsterj'- Sprinr— 3 

332. Ladier5 Handbaj 2 

334. Beverage Dicpensin"; 3 

341. Fiber and I.'etal 7or]c lutton-^ 2 

347. Tachinery and Allied Products — 9 

354. Snail Arns, etc. 3 

353. l.en's !7ec];near 2 

355. Sand Liae 2 

367. ;;etpl Treati-.g 2 

37C. peanut Butter 3 

3C6. Unbrella, Prajpe 4 

393. Soft Fibre 2 

337. Spray Painting Eqixipvient 2 

399. liousehold Goods Stora.'ve : 3 

410. pLetail Rabbor Tire 3 

414. Bobbin and Spool 2 

416. leatlier Cloth Fabrics 2 

421. Larble Quarrying 2 

423. Drop Forging 2 

445. Barring 5 

451. CandlBT/ick Bedspread 2 

454. Optical Retail-- 2 

4-58. Uholesele Confecticners- 4 

450. Preserve, Maraschino Cherry ■---'■ • 2 

452. Uliolesale Tobacco ' 3 

453. Candy Ilanuf.act-aring 4 

465. Hetail Tobacco ■■ 3 

467. Cigar ]';amiio.ctiJiring 2 

471. Trailer hrn-of acturing 2 

474. ITeedleuork - Puerto Rico 2 



478. Secondary Steel 2 

480. Structural Steel 3 

485. Cotton GinniHf^ llacliineri'' 2 

490. Imported Date Paching 3 

508. TJliolesale Pluialjing, etc. 2 

509 . i.iarine Equipment 2 




Fabricated Hetal Products 44 

B^^sines^. Furniture, etc. 2 

Autonotive Parts and Equipment 3 

Vfliolesale and DistriTDutinf,; '■ 5 

Chemical liamife-cturing 3 

Hacliinerj and Allied Products 33 


IJo examples of retroactive sto,7'.5 '-'ere found. 


A fevf stays \7ere found to 'jhich vere a,ttached conditions imposed 
upon the persons seeking the relief in the stay. Stays of laoor pro- 
visions often conta.inod a condition as to the payment of an overtime 
rate foi- hours ^'or':ed in excess of the maximum hoijir5.(*) Sta';''s of 
trade practice provisions in some cases contained conditions. (**) 
The ahove examples of conditional stays v/ere ones issued after the 
time of the approval of tha code. In some cases a stay in an order of 
approval of a code contr.ined a condition lay -'hich certain parties 
afforded the relief of the staj/" woijld he required to do something r;ith 
respecy to the continuajice or termination thereof. (***) The author of 
this preliminary report has considered the suoject of conditional 
exemptions. (****) 

( *) See Order 151-25, in 'hich a stay from the provisions of a 

code requiring payment of time aaid one-half for overtime 'iras 
granted on condition that a,n overtime ra,te of time and one- 
third 'be paid. In this order a fiu"ther condition was im- 
posed - that the industry --orh its employees the first five 
(5) dr.ys of the week. See a-lso Order 457-2. ITRA Piles. 

(**) See Order 50-105, st£\y of loss limitation provisions on con- 
dition that no sales he made to memhers of the industry at less 
than six per cent {&p) ahove cost. (1I3A Piles) 

{***) See Order 41 - Order 347-15. IIEIA Piles. 

(****) See Preliminary Report on E:;emptions pjid Sxcentions. ICIA 

Organization Studies Section, Division of :^.evie-.7, IIRA Piles - 
Chapter IV, Page 40. The legal phases of exemptions heen 
discussed therein and since it is the opinion of the author that 
a stay and an exemption are to all practical extents the same, 
it is suggested that reference he ma,de to the treatment of 
conditional exem'otions hereinhefore mentioned. 




The records of the oruoro of ar>r^°'V3.1n of coden and amendments 
dif.cloGe no denials of stays as the"- all referred to grants of sta^s 
or else vrere silent on tlie su'bject. The author has had no opportunity 
to exojnir.e the records of the various coc'es in v/aich applications for 
stays or considerations hy IIRA of protests, had caused conteiirplation 
of a stay, which stay did not materialize at the tine of the order of 
approval of the code. In addition, there has heen no opprrt''ar.ity to 
ex?imine the records of various codes with respect to applications for 
Etrys received Idj . in accordance \.'itli the rule and ref;ulation set 
forth in Sxecutivf O^der Ho. G2C5-B, suit a , ho\:evcr, exrjnination of 
the records of stays is;3ued after op^'roval of a code shows that one 
stay W3.S denied. (*) 


Administrative disr-.rotiou with respect to the .^rajit of stays 
includes deterrninafion o.s to duration thereof, ^f. necessity, ajid 
properly so, this phase of discretion is m-oosed in the administrative 
a-jency. The URA e:rercised thl:; hy <=::-a.ntir\5 stays for various 
poriods of time, rrn'^^in- froi.; one day to an unlimited period, in some 
occasions, it heca^e necessjr-'- to e-:ten5. the period of sta'y and in some - 
cases r'hen the need of •, st-\ was no longer evident, either uroon 
ap';dica.tion hy particular interested parties or iriitia.tion h-/ MA, the 
duration of the stcj was terminated. (*=•=) 

The followin,-; tabulation discloses t'le periods of for vrhich 
strys v/ere -ranted; 


To June 16, 1935 8 

One year 1 

Sir racntlis to one year 8 

ninety days to sir: nontlis : 20 

Sixtj*- to ninety days 26 

Thirty to sixty days ?0 

Fifteen to thirt " days V3 

Ten to fifteen days 120 

Two to ten days 14.- 

One day '1 

Pendina- study-. IV 

Pending fva-the>r order ■ 220 

■ Pending amendiaent or hea,ring 13 

Pending su^brnission of evidenc:"^ hy industry or trade 16 

Pending election of code authority 2 

(*) See Order No. 88-18 IJPA Piles hy whicn the Steal Shelving Division 
of the Business Furniture, Storage Equiphient and Piling Supply 
Code v.'r.s denied a stay of the trade practice provisions relating 
1 mar he t ing . 

(**) See Order ITo . 4-15-13, Pr,l:in- CoTe - E-tension of r stay; also 

Ordprs llos. 467-33, 467-40,467-46, 457-48; see Adj-iinistrative Order 
X-B, teruination of stay. NHA Piles. 



A nxuTitc-r of or'lero of ztrrj- do. not disclcne the purticulpr period 
for v'hich the nt-,' v/ar, -ranted. In .'.dditi^'n, r.orue orders of ctr.ys re- 
lated to severr.l provisions of tho code - one provision vrould "be stryed 
for a period of sixty (60) da^'s ,?jid a.notli3r provir.ion stayed for a 
period of thirty (30) days - s,ltlioii,.-]i one or er is involved, the various 
periods cf time l%ave "been included in the r.'bove tatiilation. 

As stated alcove, due process requircnonts '/cro met nith jm order 
of stay v/hich v/as laiov;n as a "notice of opportunity to' c'bject ." The 
majority of such staj's involvin<'^ due process requirements were either 
for a period of ten (10) days or fifteen (15) days. A great number of 
stays v/hich nere issued "-oendin ■ further order" v.'ere the result of (l) 
show cause order (somewhat in the nature of p. "notice of op jortuiit]'' 
to oe hoard" and involving due process requirements) (2) Office Order 
ilo . 63, su'ora , which referred to the comoD.etion of a study of open 
pricu filing systeis. 

Other orders of stay varied as to dui'ation. T'e stays for long-er 
periods of tine were for t.e urooses of study of -oarticailar industrial 
evils which were a.ttempted to V.e removed through the vehicle of code 
provisions which ITEA was hesitant to ap'orove . The shorter periods of 
stays were to meet temporary situations e::istinv^: in industries; e.g., 
necessities of overtime for inventory taking - tine lost through 
holidays and other emergency requirements. 



The purjioses of a stay pre similar to those of an exemption (*). 
Its use and exercise depend upon legislative grajit. zjid. administrative 
1e,w dictates that the exercise of this power should "be fair and reason- 
able. No mention of the term "stay" or any power thereof is found in 
the Act. Any such power is "basec purely upon a construction of the Act, 
the wording of-^v:hich is sufficient for an implication of a •':rant of 
power. In view of this lacl: of specific mention of the term and state- 
ment of power, it is s-aggested that contempla.ted legislation, if any, 
make special reference to the povrer of stay and that full and adequate 
provision be made whereby the agency charged with the a.dministration of 
the Act be permitted to exercise this pov/er at any or all times, either 
generally or specifically. 

It is the a^uthor's opinion that the sa,fest r:liajace upon the basis 
of power to grant a stay is found in Section l'^(b) supra . The chronicle 
of the delega.tion of power to gi'ant stays as set forth in Chapter II, 
supra , discloses that genera^l power had been conferred trprn the Adminis- 
trator but tha.t the powers conferred bj"- Section 10, were expressly re- 
served to the president. It is time that specific mention of power to 

(*) See Preliminary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions, NRA. Or- 

gajiization Studies Section, Division of Review - Chapter V, page 
48, IIRA Files. 


grant r,tayc is found in Executive' Ordor 350 j-B, "but delegation 
is limitcJ. to certain a-.plications received from specified individuals 
witliin a definite period of time. On Eccembor 20, 1933, Frccidcntial 
delegation of power referred to " er.e.n-itions and eliiniiiationsO , but still 
no power of stay was mentioned. _ It may bo argued that tiio powers of 
stay were so si-iiilar to tliose of elimination and exemption that there 
was no need of specific mention. It issabraittcd that the actual exer- 
cise of the power of stay should be based UDon delegations specifically 
uentioning the power a;ad that, in view of the fact that a stay relates 
to an entire industry or a rococnized subdivision thereof, cither 
•f^eO;^raphical or industrial, the delegations shovld be limited to the 
Adininistrator or Administrative Board, with a possible delegation, if 
necessary, to an officer authorized to handle grants or denials of 
stain's and exemptions (*). 

Chapter III hereof sets forth tie various attempts to define the term 
"stay". No legislative definition loft a charted course for ;JPJL in this 
respect. Various definitions of t-^c power differed from its actual use, 
7ne line of demarcation -v/^s arbitrary and many times it -Tas disrein;arded. 
Interchangeable use of such tcri'As as "exemption" ," stay" and" exception" 
caused adininistr tive co. fusioa. The term "elimination" likewise finds 
no legislative guide. LTo li.itations were imposed- as to when a "stay" 
or aji climiation" should be invoked, ^ords as such are mere vehicles 
but when used adi'ninistrptivcly, subst?j.ico and procedure demand defini- 
tions and clarity. It is therefore su.ggcsted that legislative defini- 
tions of the terms " st?y'' and "elimination" should h'-ve been made. 

A suggested definition of the term "stay" is - adiiinistrativc action 
whereby an individual, group of individuals, either geographical or in- 
dustrieJ., or an entire industry is relieved from the operation 
of the provisions of a code, in whole or in part, by the order of 
approval of the code. (**) 

ho suggested definition of the term " oli;;-iination"is made. Its use 
depends upon the policy of and approa,ch to code-malting. Approval of a 
code ca^ be witldield until all objectionable fea,tares taererf are de- 
leted, thereby -el imina,ting need of this form of aduinistrativc action. 

(*) See Preliminary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions, IIRA Organization 
Studies Section, Division of Review - Oha:ptcr V, Page 53. 

(**) See Proliaiinary Report on Exemptions and Exceptions, IWA Organization 
Studies Section, Division of Eeviev; - Chapter V, Page 52 



If the oppocite procedure- is adopted, a full lerislative definition 
of the term shouli' be snt forth. 

The grant or denial of a stay involve e the exercise of administra- 
tive discretion subject to certain lirnitatjont; set forth in the law. 
Limitations imposed "by Coaeress in the Act were in effect "to effectu- 
ate the policies of the Act", whicn ijolicies were set forth in Section 1 
thereof. It is admitted tiiat tnese limitations T^prnitted an ambit of 
wide administrative action. The necessities of fair=^«" reasonable use 
of the ;oower of, stay within administrative discretion are apparent and 
some criteria therefor should be set forth. The criteria should take 
the form of standards set forth legislatively whereby power could be in- 
voked upon proof and finding that the particular situation is one "'hich 
comes within the limits of tne standards. It is- sugsestec that ^^he 
creation of these standards be based upon the experiences of N"RA in its 
use of this power. Thp sources of tnese experiences could be found, in 
the various reasons why codes or code provisions were staj'^ed. Some 
treatment thereof is set forth in Chapter \ of this report. 

This report has been concerned with stays and has limited itself to 
those which affected entire industries or. a recognized subdivision there- 
of. All tjrpes of stays were found as a res^ult of the investigation - 
some aoplying to entire industries; other aonlying to separate individ- 
uals. In actual administrative practice, tne term "stay" was synonymous 
witn that of "exemption". The files and records "^rere treated in the 
same manner and the author finds that the problems of and reasons for 
the use thereof were alike. 

The use of conditional stays often amerir^ed code -r^rovisions. The 
practice of attaching conoitions to orders of stay or exemption may re- 
sult in invalidity of the condition, deoending uoon its relation to 
the purooses of the Act and the exemotion (*"). 

(*) See Part Three hereof, Chapter IV. 



Part .Hvo 
Apoendix No. 1 

i??{En EZbi.\;.c-: - 'j^'^ivib:.'-^ ? . -S .s op ."is study 

Ttiis reiDort has been ^ri-Tfiarily concerned with infomation vmich 
would bo on benefit to le^gislative com.iit tees or confereacvs. A cony 
of thtj outline (*) sug-sests ^. more detailed review of the suoject. A 
nuaijfr of t-ections of such outline hrve not oeen considered in this 
re-Qort. Questions of -procedure, admiuistr- tive details, routing of 
applications, considerations had by various Advisory Boards and the 
metuod of final administrativo dotermma&ion arc not considered herein. 
The analysis of the ty-ocs of code provisions subjected to stays dis- 
closns that this adminir.trutive power was utilized to meet due -oroccss 
requirements. The form of such a stay, ivs effectiveness as a form of 
notice to interested parties and also the question whether or not its 
use met with the le^jal requirements of due process are all subjects 
which are im-oort.-;iiit to a rounr^ed and complete re-^ort of thr- subject. 

Tiie advisability of the use of "elimination" as an administrative 
weanon in the orocess of code-nakiag is dependent uoon tae questions 
of -orocedure .and policy relating to the snonscring and requirements of 
code aTorovals, therefore, the so-ondness of administrative nolicy as to 
the use of " iliminaoion" is a subject worthy of consideration. 

The use of the power of stay for substantive reasons oftnn was 
without notice to ind-uscry, labor or other interested groups. The 
questions as to vfhether or not the intended use of the power cf stay 
should ue nade the subject of prior notice and, .if neccssarj?- subjected 
to ouolic nearin^^; ,also consi ierations of due process have not been 
touciicd in this report. 

Administrative use of tao 3t:;y was evidenced in a,pprovals of a 
number of code administration matters; e.^., code authority by-laws, 
trade -oractice complaint .pla_is , budgets and other matters. ViTnat NRA 
did v;itn respect to these phases of its activities insofar as tne 
subj'^-ct of stay in conctrue.d is not covered, oy this report. 

A complete analysis of tne types of code provisi-ins subjected to 
stays and the reasons for such stays saould benefit tue study. It is 
true that this phase of the subject is covered in this report in a 
preliminary form. There could be furtaer developmLont of this section 
f the s tudy . 

The axLthor nas not been ■t.ble to .o:^.lo-re the records of those 
situations which resulted in the denial of stays and tue reasons for 
such denials 'would be a contribution to tne further study of the subject. 

(*) Appendix lo, 2 




1. Introduction. 

1.1 Objective and scrope of study. 

2. Bases in the Act. 
2.1 Section 3 (a) . 

2.2' Application of Sec. 3(a) to Sec. 4, Sec. 7(b), and Sec. 7(c). 

2.3 Sec. 6(e) pad 6(b). 

2.4 Sec. 10(a) and Sec. 10(b). 

2.5 Limitations, if any, u-oon the President. 

2.6 Heasonable 

3. Definition. 

3.1 Ordinary definition. 

3.2 Legal definition. 

3.3 Administrative definition - cnanges thereof. 

3.4 Discussion of relation to terms "oxomption" and "exception". 

4. Delegation of power to grant stays. 

4.1 Necessity of delegation and extent tnereof. 
4.11 To the Administrator. 

4.111 P.H.A. 

4.112 Oodes. 

4.113 J'orm of delegation 

4.114 Limitations on dele;.rc..tion. 

4.2 Retentions of power by President. 

4.3 Transfer of pov-er to IJ . I.v.a.:3 . 

4.31 Rules and reg-olations of X.I.R.B. re£-arding executive 
grants or refusals of stays. 


-49- Part Two 

Apoendix No. 2. 

4.311 Form of approval. 

4.312 Formalities of issuance. 

4.313 Ciianges. 

4.4 Additional delegations of, liraitaticns or conditions on 
power granted to i\I.I.;.i.B. 

Note: For purposes of study of subsequent delegations of pciver to 
lesser "boards and of-ficdrs tne Administratdr and l.I.H.B, 
will be considered together. 

4.5 Delegations to lesser "boards and officials. 

4.51 Necessity 

4.52 Early phases of N.R.A. adrainistrati on. 

4.53 Delegation to Division Administrator permitting 
temporary and energency stays. 

4.54 Limitations upon delegation. 

4.55 Delegation to territorial administrators. 
4.55 Legal aspects of such delegations. 

4.6 Delegation of power for purposes of appeal. 
4.61 Industrial Appeals Board. 

5. Itmds of stays. 

5.1 General - stay of all provisions of a Code. 

5.2 Partial - stay of some provisions of a Code.' 

5.3 Grovip - stay of all or some provisions of a Code, 
affecting a group, 

5.4 Typical cases. 

6. Time of issuance of order of stay. 

6.1 Approval of Code. 

6.2 After approval of Code. 

6.3 Ap.'^roval of amendment. 

6.4 After approval of amendment, 

6.5 Aporoval of Code administration matters. 

6.6 After approval of Code administration matters. 


Part T^TO 
Appendix "Jo. 2. 

7. General causes of sta^s of codes or amendments. 

7.1 At time of Code ap iroval or Code amendment. 

7.11 Legality. 

7.12 Legislative clariy and draftsmanship. 

7.13 ?or purposes of study. 

7.14 Gonilict \/ith other Codes. 

7.141 ApJi'oved Codes. 

7.142 Codes pending approval. 

7.15 Enforcement of policy. 

7.16 i\ecognition of protests. 

7.17 Coordination or conflict v/ith other governmental 

7.171 Federal. 

7.172 State or municipal. 

7.18 Sec. 5 and Sac. 6(a). 

7.19 True representation. 

7.11 Dif "^riculties of administration, compliance and 

7.12 j.iefusal of industry to accept adininistrative cnanges. 

7.13 Otaer causes. 

7.2 After time of Code approval or Code amendment. 

7.21 Legality. 

7.22 Cnanges in policy. 

7.23 Dif-Ticulties of administration, compliance and 

7.24 iion-cooperation 'of industry. 

7.25 Geographical problems. 



Part Two 
Appendix No. 2. 

7. 25 iiultiple code coverage. 

7.27 Increase of exemptions. 

7.28 foreign competition. 

7.29 Pending amendment. 
7.21 Otner causes. 

8. Types of code provisions subjected to stays. 

8.1 Code definitions. 

8.11 Industry or subdivisions thereof. 

8.12 Members of industry and classifications tnereof. 

8.13 Distribution agencies. 

8.14 Commodities. 

8.15 Analysis of bases of applications and industries affected. 

8.2 Labor provisions. 

8.21 Maximiom hours. 

8.211 IJorraal week period. 

8.212 Normal day period. 

8.213 Overtime tolerances. 

8.214 Peak: period. 

8.22 i/IinimujB wages. 

8.221 Normal rate.. 

8.2211 Hourly rate. 

8.2212 Piece rate. 

8.2213 TTeekly rate. • 

8.222 Overtime rate. 

8.223 Apprentice rate. 

8.224 Skilled rate. 



Part T^vo 
Appendix No. 2. 

8.225 Union contract rate." 

8.23 Ciiild lator. 

8.24 Apprentice li'nitations. 

6.25 Handicapped \¥orkers. 

8.26 Standards of safety and health. 

8.27 Home work. 

8.28 Stretcn-oiit. 

8.29 Scrip payments. 

8.21 Equitable readjustment of \/a5es atove the minimum. 

8.22 Posting. 

8.23 Collective "bargaining. 

8.24 i.iiscellaneous. 

8.25 Bases of applications for stays of labor provisions. 

3.2^ Analysis of industries which v;ere subject to stays of 
labor provisions 

8.22 Development of labor policy vdth respect to stays. 

8.28 Legiil aspects of labor provision stays. 

8.29_ Evaluation of ezqperie.ices. 

i.3 Trade practice provisions. 

8.31 General analysis aid discussion Of trade practice 

provisions with respect to stays thereof, the provisions 
being grouped as follo'.vs: 

8.311 Generally accepted in law. 

8.312 Desirable but not fully accepted in law, 

6.313 Desirable but no basis in law. 

6.314 Undesirable. 

8.315 Unenforceable. 



Part Two 
Appendix Ho. 2. 

8.32 Code Authority rtiles and regulations having force and 
eiiect of trade practice . rules. 

8.33 Price policy. 

f .-■. 8.331 Price fixing. 

8.3311 Pixed prices. 

8.3312 Lowest reasonable price. 

8.3313 Llodal mark-up. 

8.332 Price control. 

8.3321 Loss leaders. 

8.3322 Loss limitations. 

8.333 Open price systems. 

8.3331 Institution of system. 

3.3332 Particular cantracts. 

8.3333 Method of operation. 

Note; For purposes of discussion bid depository systems are included 
under tnis sub-division. 

8.334 Cost provisions: - 

8.3341 Sales below cost. 

8.3342 Obsolete goods. 

8.3343 Emergency disposals. 

8.3344 Competition. 

8.335 Accounting systems. 

8.3351 necessity of approval of Administrator. 

8.3352 Complexity of system. 

8.3353 Difficulties of installation. 

8.336 Sales reporting systems. 



Part 'Two 
appendix i\Io. 2. 

9. 3ode Authority provisions. 

9.1 Rifrhts of God.? Authority. 

9.2 Obligations and duties of Code Authority. 

9.21 Optional. 

9.22 Mandatory. : . . 

9.3 Use of stay to enforce. ' ' 

9.31 Representative elections. 

9.32 Prevention of undue association participation. 

9.33 Legality. • 

9.34 Policy. 

10. Code Authority finances. 

11. Latels •■ 

11.1 Bases of applications. 

11.2 Use of stay 'for 

11.21 Control. 

11.22 Yifithdrawal. 

11.23 Policy. 

11.3 Effect of stays granted. 

12. Statistical reports. 

12.1 Executive orders of gencr,?.l application. 

12.2 Bases of ap Jlications. 

13. Conditional orders of arjproval. 

13.1 Nature of sta^r graxited. 

13.2 Effect upon conditional orders. 

13.3 Effect upon policy sTid general code structure. 

14. Miscellaneous code provisions subjected to stays, 

15. Government contracts. 

Part r.vo 
Appendix No. 2. 

15.1 Executive Orders 53.i7 and 6645. 

15.2 Stays of codes provisions caused "by Government contracts. 

15.3 Nature and effect of stays for government contract purposes. 

16. Period of stay, 

16.1 Duration of Act. 

16.2 Duration of code, 

16.3 Temporary. 

16.4 Emergency. 

17. Types of orders, etc., other than code provisions vmich were 
subjected to stays. 

17.1 Executive orders, 

17.2 Administrative orders. 

17.3 G-eneral rules and regulations. 

18. Procedure. 

18.1 Source of application. 

18.11 Industry. 

18.12 Labor. 

18.13 Governmental ageacies otiier than N.R.A. 

18.14 Consujners. 

18.15 Otners. 

18.2 Application directed to 

18.21 Washington. 

16.22 Field offices. 

18.23 Code Authority. 

18.24 Other governmental agencies. 


Part Tv7o 
Appendix No. 3. 

18.3 Consideration by N.H.A« of application. 

18.31 Interoffice. 

18.32 Extra-office. 

18.33 Due process. 

18.4 Final action on application. 

18.41 Form. 

18.42 notice. 

19. Stays instituted ty IT.R.A. 

19.1 Bases of action. 

19.11 Policy. 

19.12 Legality. 

19.13 pi'otests. 

19.131 Industry. 

19.132 Labor. 

19.133 Consujiier. 

19.14 IlecOfl;nition of recomiuendations of advisory boards. 

19.2 Analysis of industries and provisions stayed by N.R.A. on, 
its o\m motion. 

19.3 Effect of stays instituted by A. 

19.31 Iidustry. 

19.32 Labor. 

19.33 Consuiers. 

20. Power of subsequent modification or termination. 

20.1 N.K.A. initiation. 

20.2 Application by industry. 



Part Two 

Ap Jendix ilo. 2. 

20.3 Application ^by labor. 

20.4 Application by consiojuers. 

20.5 Application by Code Authorities. 

20.6 3ases of application. 

20.7 Effects. of modification or termination. 

21. Evaluations. 

22. Conclusions. 

23. Bibliography. 


Part Two 
Appendix No. 3 


CODE, ao . '.U u.iE GE CODS 

96 - Buff and polisuing Uneel 

124 - ,iOtioa picture . 

182 - P.etail Pood Jc Grocery 

196 - UholesaLe Pood li Grocery ■ ■ ■• 

202 - Carpet & K"ug Manufacturing 

204 - plumbing Fixtures 

234 - l.'iacaroni 

236 - Cooking & Renting 

237 - Alloy Casting 

239 - porcelain Eruakfast Furniture AsseraTDling 

240 - Advertising Display Installation Trade 

241 - Ciicwing Gum Manufacturing 
243 - Slide Fastener 

84-2 - Hand Chain Hoist 

84-3 - Chain i.Ianufacturing 

64-4 - Electrical Industrial Truck Maiufactioring 

245 - CTnx^nted & Solid Fibre Shipping Container 

246 - Paper Disc ;.iilk Bottle Cap. 

247 - Food Dish & Pulp & Paper Plate 

248 - Glazed and Fancy Paper 

249 - Tag Industry 

250 - Wire, Hod & 'Tube Die 

252 - Cylindrical Liquid Light Paper Container 

257 * Printing Eqaipraent 

259 - Hat Manufacturing 

260 - Ornamental Moulding, Carving & Tiirning 

261 - Foundry Supply 

263 - Machine Knife & Allied Steel Products 

268 - Secondary Aluninum 

269 - Carbon Black 

270 - Wood Heel 

272 - Unit Heater and/or Unit Ventilator 

274 - Saw ci Steel products 

282 - Restaurant 

286 - Beauty and Barber Shop 

287 - Graphic Arts 

289 - Cloth Heel 

290 - Photographic Mount 

291 - ITood Cased Lead Pencil 

293 - Gunuaing Industry 

294 - Guniraed Label « Embossed Seal 

295 - Taterproof paper 





Part T'-'O 
Appendix 3, 

296 - Fluted Cup, Pan Liner & Lace Paper 

300 - Lye ' . 

301 - Sar.ple Card 

304 - Outdoor Advertising 

305 - Fitre Can & Tute 

306 - t.'ica 

307 - Stay Manufacturing 
311 - Ready Mixed Concrete 
313 - Steel Wool Industry 

315 - Industrial Safety Eauipment 

325 - Horseshoe & Allied Products 

327 - Machine Applied Staples & Stapling Machine 

329 - Upnolstery Spring & Concessions Mfg, 

331 - Bulk Drinking Straw, Etc. 

333 - Canvas Goods 

334 ►• Beverage Dispensing Equip. 

341 - Fibre & Metal V?ork Clothing Button 

349 - Mayonnaise 

356 - Fullers Earth Producing 

359 - Preformed Plastic Products 

"752 - Photograiohic & Photo Finishing 

364 - Clay Drain Tile Manufacturing 

365 - Sand Lime Brick 

366 - Retail Monument 

367 - Metal Treating 

369 - ExTDanding & Specialty Paper Products 

370 - Open Paper Drink, Cup & Round Nesting Paper Food Container 

371 - Sanitary Milk Bottle Closure 
84-7 - Tool & Implement 

84-8 - Hack Saw Blade Manaf acturing 

84-9 - Forged Tool Manufacturing 

84-10 - Cutlery, Manicure Iraolement & Papers & Paper Hangers, 

Tool Mfg, , etc. 

84r-12 - Power & Gang Lav^n Mower 

84-11 - Tackle Block Mfg, 

377 - Reclaimed Ruhher Manufacturing 

378 - Peanut Butter 

382 - Transparent Materials Converters 

385 - Railroad Special Track Equipment 

386 - Umbrella Frame, etc, 
388 - Sandstone 

391 - Insecticide & Disenfectant 

394 - Lightning Rod Mfg. 

397 - Spray Painting & Finishing ' . 

399 - Household Goods Storage & Moving 

403 - Bleached -Shellac Hanof acta.ring 

406 - Boatbailding. & Boat Repairing 

409 - Flexible Insulation 

-•410 - Retail Rubber Tire & Battery Trade 

412 - Loose Leaf & Blank Book 



CODE m , 

414 - Bot"bin & Sno^l 

^16 - L°?.ther Cloth & Lacouprpid i??'brir>,s 

84-13 - Porcplain Snpmeling Mfg. 

84-14 - Non-?prrou3. Hot, 'Tnt^r Tank 

84-15 - Wrp.nch Unnufacturing 

201- 4 - Beauty &. Bpr'berrEqvii-onpnt ... ' . 

84-16 - Sna-D Past<=nftr I'fg, 

308- 2 ~ Wholesale Lotster 

419 - Soft Lime Rock 

420 - OeyX) S'Oin 

421 - Marti p Quarrying <?' l^urnisliing 
423 - Dro-1 Forging 

426 - Pa-oer Makers Felt 

432 - STjecialty Acct. Siirroly 

436 - Fur Manufacturing 

444 - Shoe Pattern LIfg, 
84-18 - Scre'-T Machine Products 

275- 1 - Agricultural Insecticide & Fungicide 

84-19 - Cap ScreiT Mfg. 

275- 2 - Carton Dioxide 

84-2C - Machine Screw Nut 

308- 5 - Blue Crat 

84-21 - Bright Wire Goods Mfg. 

84-22 - Dra-D^ry & Carpet Hard'-are 

84-23 - Machine Screw Mfg. 

84-24 - Wood Serein Mfg. 

347- 6 - Woodworking Mrichinery 

347- 7 - Beates & Jordan & A"' lied Products 

201- 8 - Wholesale Dry Goods 

84-25 " Steel Package Mfg. 

84-26 - Standard Steel Barrel & Drum 

347- 8 _ Water I'^eter Mfg. 

445 ~ Baking 

448 - Optical Wholesale 

450 - Dog Pood 

455 - Metal Etching 

456 — Ice Cream Cone 

458 - Wholesale Confectioners 

460 - Preserve, Maraschino Cherr?'- & Glace Fruit 

462 - Wholesale Tohacco Trade 

463 - Candy Man-'jf acturing 
84-27 - Galvanized Ware Mfg. 

84-28 - Joh Galvanizing Metal Coating 

84-29 - Wpshing Machine Parts 

84-30 - Milk & Ice Cream Can Mfg. 

84-31 - Warm Air Furnace Mfg. 

84-32 - Hog Ring & Ringer Mfg, 

84-33 - Plexihle Metal Hose & Tuhing 

84-34 - Wire Ro-oe & Strand 




CODE lyTQ . IV. ■ NA1.CE: 0? CODE 

347_ 9 - Di-'iiif^nd Core Drill 

347-10 - liech'^nicpO, Lubric-tor 

347-11 - ContiTctnrs p-'onp 

347-13 - 'Taterpov'or Equi-rment In.l-astry 

347-14 - Rolling; Hill Unchinory 

84-35 - Cutting Die Mfg. 

4- 1 - Refrigeration 

347-15 - Pulverizing lla chine ry 

201-11 - Eur Whclesalinf &. Distributing 

347-16 - Steam Engine Mfg. 

347-17 - Rock c^:: Ore Crushing 

347-13 - Reduction Machinery 

464 - Coca & Chocolate Mfg. 

465 - Retail Tobacco 

467 - Cigar Manufacturing 

469 - Sulphnnated Oil Mfg. 

471 - Tmilor Mfg. 

472 - Warm Air Register 
347-20 - Hoist Builders 
347-19 - Hoisting Engine Mfg. 
347-21 - Kiln Cooler & Dryer Mfg. 

347-22 - Ccnve^'-or & Material Prepf^ration Material 

34-35 - Lift Truck c^: Portable Elevator 

105- 1 - Automobile Hot "Jater Heater 

34-37 - Artistic Lighting Equroraent 

105- 2 - ReL-ilacement Axle Shaft 

o4-33 - Complete VJire & Iron Pence 

347-24 - Roller & Silent Chain 

201-12 - School Supplies & Equipment 

477 - Public Se fating 

479 - Cold Stor-ge Doer Mfg. 

4:5 - Cotton Ginning Machinery 

4_.9 - Safety Razor & Safety Racor Blade ivifg. 

490 - Im-oorted Date Packing 

34_40 - Cut Tack, '.Tire Taclc & Small Staple Mfg. 

347-25 - Poorer Transmission 

347-26 - Caster & Truck Floor Mfg. 

347-23 - Water Softener & Elite r 

1:4-41 - Open Steel Elooring 

347-30 - Multi-lie V-Belt Drive 

201-13 - Athletic Goods Mfg. 

105- 3 - Leaf Spiring Mfg. 

347-31 - Envelope Machine Mfg. 

347-32 - Air Filter 

347-33 - Gas Poi'ered Industrial Truck 

347-34 - Sprocket Chain 

34-43 - Vitreous Enameled "Jare 

492 - Stereotype Dry Mat 


. -62- 

201-14 - ■Joolons & Triiai.iin-s DiGtrituting 

347-35 - Oil Field Pu:Tping -Engint- Mfg. 

38- 2 - Filing Supnly 

88- 1 - Fire Resistive S-^fe 

347-36 - Refrigerating Machinery 

347-37 - Concrete klixer 

347-40 - Diesel Engine Mfg. 

347-38 - Jac': Mfg. .. , 

347-39 - Railway Appli-ince Mfg. 

347-41 - Hydraulic Machinery 

507 - Sirrgical Distributors 

508 - wliolosale plixntin.:"' Products, Heating Products, etc. 
275- 3 - Industrial Alcohol 

509 - Marine Equroment Mfg. 

511 - Corrugated Rolled Metal Culvert Pipe 
84-A:3r>.- 1 Fly Sr.-atter Mfg. 

84-48 - Perforating Mfg. 

84-52 - Tu"bular Split & Outside Pronged Rivet Mfg. 

84-53 - Liouid Fuel Appliance 

34-54 - Pile Mfg. " ■ 









- I - 


RZiiSGi's t-ii::{Ej'gr 





Cottrn Textile 


Cotton Textile 


Shiobtdlding a: 


Shiiotuildinfi; .'^nd 

CGDIi: KlOYlolOl^ 

M?^ chine Hours 

Hours (Spt. closing) 

Hours (for certain 

Nor rani hours and over- 
time tolernncG 

Shipbuilding and Normal hours and over- 

Shiprer)pirin5 time tolerance 

Lace Manufacturing Machine hours (Barmens 

Men's Clothim 
Ho s ie ry 

Norm^il hours 
Leprnin.? period 

Cast Iron Soil Pipe Normal hours 
Ma chine ho ur s 

■Jail Papei: 

Women' s Belt 

Lug.^age & Fancy 

Normal week period 

Normal wee^-. neriod 

Normal "Joek Period 


Limited equi-oraent 

Impending strike. 

To start produc- 

Additional men 
for testing in- 

Emergencj'- nork. 

against small 

Peak demands. 

To enable em- 
ployees to learn 
other skilled op- 
erations and 
assiire steady;" em- 

against small 

Scarcity of skilled 
help and peak de- 

Sc^ircitjrof skilled 
help and peak de- 

Scarcity of skilled 
help and poak de- 


Retail Drug 

Minimum wage outside 
salesmen and drug store 
delivery boys. 

Until Hearing. 


"I - (Continued) 















Retail Drug 

■Retail Drug 
Retail Drug 

Coot nnd Suit 
Wool Textile 

Wool Textile 

normal D^y period. 

All provisions 


;'ore th?5n one hour 
lunch period. 

Relief for smnll 
enterprises in 
tOTOis of 2500 or 

Consecutive hcurs for Inventory, 
specially skilled em- 

- II - 

1 member of Code Autho-Pending araend- 
rity selected from nent. 

Infants nnd Goats Assn. 

Rules of Practice 
(Moisture Basis) 

Rules of Practice 
(for piece goods) 

Autom^ic Sprinkler Unfair methods of 

Disclose inforna- 
ticn to competitors 
and no useful ^ixr- 

Ex^jort sales. 

Pending amendment. 
Difficulty of 

Coat and Suit 


Paint, Varnish, 
and Lacquer 

Faint, Varnish, 
and Lacquer 

Q,uotations or sales on Demor?'lized con- 
invitation to hid. dition of industry. 

Method of Assessment Non-represent'^tive 
character of Code 

tianufacture and sale Code conflict, 
of shellac and vrnish 
belov; cost. 

Sgles helov^ cost. 

Processing sche- 
dules not extended. 

Business Pumiture, Prohioitin.-- price guar-Relief to U. S, 
Storage Equipment , etc. antee anc" sale belo'; Government 
published -or ice. 




m. COSE 

SS-7 Business Ii\Lrr-iture, 

Storage Zq.a'ii);'ie;_A , 

gS-lo Business Furniture, 

S2-25 Business i\irniture, 
Storage Eqt!S.p.ijT3-nt;, 

I5I-5 Millinery 

I5I-7 Millinery 

151-16 Millinery 

151-12 Millinery 

151-25 M illiner;/ 

151-30 Millinery 

151-71 Millinerjr 

363-11 Men's Kechtrepj: 




Quantity discountn Relief to U.S. G-overn- 


U67-2 Cigar Mfg. 

467-7 Cigar Mfg. 

U67-27 Cig-^r Mfg. 

U67-33 Cigar Mfg. 

Marketing Provisionc 

Snles below putlisl' 
ad prices to U. S. 

Area Rates 

Area Rates 

Days per week as ap- 
plied to shipping 
crews . 

Days per week as ap- 
plied to shipping 

Time and one-half 

Daily hours and 
overtime pay 


F.O.3. deliveries 

Hours, Merchandising 
Plan, Wages. 

Wage exemption for 
slow v/orkers 

Overtine payment 


Impractical to deter—' 
uinc v;hether prices 
conform to code. 

Relief to U.S. Govern- 

?ile Incomplete. 

Unfair Competitive 

pending amendment 

Jile incomplete 

Unfair ajid disar- 

ll^lze up time lost 
Christmas 3ay. 

None given. 

Pr^ virion creates 
conftision and in- 

Continuation of stay 
in Executive Order of 

Operating at a loss 

Work on Armistice Day. 

Unr-lDle to pay code wages 
a,nd remain in business 





I1.67-U5 -Cigar Mfg. 
6C^5 Retail Drag 

60-105 Retail Drag 



Over time 

Minim-ora vtages for 
drag store delivei 

Loss limitations 


Lincoln' s Birthday 

None given 

Confusion in ap- 
plication of prov- 





D. L. Boland 




The purposes of this study are to disclose the question, problems, 
limitations and deficiencies relating to exemption and exceptions which 
were presented to or imposed upon the National Recovery Administration 
in its capacity as a governmental agency cnarged with the formulation, 
promulgation and administration of codes of fair competition under the 
terms of the National Industrial Recovery Act. (*) The report endeavors 
to treat certain phases of the above matters, v/hich, in the opinion of 
the author of the report, are of primary importance. These phases are 
concerned with the National Industrial Recovery Act and the bases of 
power therein contained with respect to the subject of exemptions and 
exceptions; the delegation of such power; the necessity of such delegation 
and a recapitulation of the exercise of such pov/ers, both administrative 
and delegative. 

The report attempts to present an explanation and analysis of the 
various kinds of exemptions and exceptions. The extent of the analysis 
covers the causes of the application or applications or initiations 
thereof, the considerations had thereon by the National Recovery Adminis- 
tration and the nature of its decision. 

The bases ox the findings set forth in this report result from an 
investigation of the files and records of the Ilational Recovery Adminis- 
tration and its official orders which relate to exemptions and exceptions. 
Lack of time and personnel prevented an investigation of all the records 
of the administration relating to this subject, so for purposes of this 
preliminary report a selected list of codes was drawn up, such list 
being made upon the basis that an exrjnination thereof would disclose in 
the msan a cross-section of American industry and also a fairly represents 
tive and reasonable picture of the problems and questions presented to 
the Administration in connection with the subject of exemptions and ex- 
ceptions. The list of codes is as follows: 


Cotton Textile 

Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 

Wool Textile 

Electrical Manufacturing 

Coat and Suit 

Lace Manufacturing 

Corset and Brassiere 

Legitimate Full Length Dramatic and Musical Theatrical 

Ltimber and Timber Products 

Iron and Steel 

Photographic Manufacturing 

Pishing Tackle 

Rayon and Synthetic Yarn Producing: __^ 

(*) 48 Stats. 195 

LIS' J OF-CLDi:S HS-MIUZD ( Cont inued) 

Men's Clothing 


AutomolDile Mjinufact-uriri:^ 

Cast Iron Soil Pipe 

YiFall Paper I'anufacturing 

Salt Producing 


Motion Picttire Laboratory 

Underwear and Allied Products Manufacturing 

Bituminous Coal 

Oil Burner 

Gasoline Pump Mpnufacturing 

Textile Bag 


Artificial Flower and Poather 

Linoleum and Pelt Base Iwsnuf actuxing 


Blnitting, Braiding and \7ire Covering Machine, 

3etail Lumber, Lumber Frod.ucts, Building Materials and Building 

Laimdrj'- and Dry Cle;ining Macninery Manufacturing 
Textile Machinery Manufacturing 
Glass Container 
Builders Supplies Trade . 
Boiler Manufacturing 
Farm Equipment 

Electric Storage and Wet Primaxy Battery 
Women' s Belt 

Luggage and Fancy Leather Goods 

Boot and Shoe Mfinuf acturing 
Saddlery Manufacturing 
Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade 
Silk Textile 
Optical Manufacturing 
Automatic Sprinkler 
Umbrella Manufacturing 
Mutual Savings Banks 
Compressed Air 
Heat Exchange 

Pump Manufacturing . 

Cap and Closure 
Marking Devices 
Retail Trade 

Faint, Varnish and Lacquer Manufacturing 
Business Furniture, Storage Equipment and •'^iling Supply 
Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Manufactiu'ing 



Dress Man-afacturing 

Paper and Pulp 


Can Manufacturers 

Wholesaling or Distributing Trade 

Schiffli, the Hand Machine Embroidery, and the Embroidery xhjread 

and Scallop Cutting 
Men's ITeckwear 
Cigar Manufacturing 

The objectives of this study have been mainly concerned with the 
problem of legislation, keeping in mind at all times the content of the 
President's letters to the chairmen of certain committees of the Congress 
with respect to suggestions for future legislation embodying the prin- 
ciples of the NRA. As a result, the a^lthor of the study has concerned 
himself with the experiences of the National Rgcovery Administration vdth 
exemptions and exceptions as a legislative question, the extent of the 
power to grant exemptions and exceptions, the limitations upon such power, 
the methods of use and exercise of that power, the methods of the dele- 
gation of such power, and constructive suggestions as to the subject in 
general. The outline of the study which is attached hereto is much more 
comprehensive and includes phases of the study which are not made part 
of this preliminary report, some of which are problems of procedure, ad- 
ministrative detail, relationships with other governmental agencies, 
more critical analyses of the subjects of this report and evaluations of 
experiences relative thereto. This preliminary report is rather con- 
cerned with the more important and substantive subjects hereinabove 

Wo attempt has been made to extend the scope of the study or the 
sources of material thereof beyond the actual files ajid records of the 
National Recovery Administration. These records do not include those 
of code authorities, other governmental agencies, or private individuals. 
No conferences have been had with any such agencies or individuals. In 
short, it is the intention of this report to present in preliminary form 
some answer to the question - What did the National Recovery Administra- 
tion do in the exercise of its power to grant or deny exemptions from 
and exceptions to code provisions? Again, it is the intention of this 
study to present in likewise preliminary form some answer to the question- 
What should any future governmental agency embodying the principles of 
NEA be empowered to do with respect to exemptions from and exceptions 
to code provisions? 



„3 or POV'EH 

T]ie National Ind-astrial Recovery Act (*) became la'v on June 16, 
1933, Title I of such Act related to industrial recovery, and provided 
in general for the set-up of various codes of fair competition. 
Section 3(a) of the Act states as follows: 

"Upon the application to the Presidsnt by one or more trade 
or industrial associations or groups, the President may approve 
a fcode or codes of fair coupe tition for the trade or industry 
or subdivision thereof, represented by the applicant or 
applicants, if the President finds (l) that such associations 
or groups impose no inequitp'ble restrictions on admission to 
members?iip therein and are truly representative of such trades 
or industries or subdivisions thereof, and (2) that such code 
or codes are not designed to promote monopolies or to elimi- 
nate or oppress small enterprises and will not operate to 
discriminate a;=.':ainst them, and will tend to effectuate the 
policy of this title: Provided, That such code or codes 
shall not permit monopolies or monopolistic practices: 
Provided further. That where sucn code or codes affect the 
services and v/elfare of persons engaged in other steps of 
the economic process, nothing in this section shall deprive 
such persons of the right to be heard prior to approval by 
. the President' of such code or codes. The President may, as 
a condition of his approval of any such code, impose such 
conditions (including requirements for the malcing of re- 
ports and the keeping of accounts) for the protection of 
consumers, competitors, employees, and others, and in 
furtherance of the public interest, and may provide such 
exceptions to and exemptions from the provisions of such 
code, as the President in his discretion deems necessary 
to effectuate the policy herein declared." 

It is to be noted that under the terms of this particular 
section the President was delegated certain power to 

"* * * impose such coiiditions (including requirements 
for the making of reports and the keeping of accounts) 
for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees, 
and others, and in the furtherance of the public 
interest, and may provide such exceptions to and ex- 
emptions from the provisions of such code, as the 
President in his discretion deems necessary to effec- 
tuate the policy herein declared." 

(*) Public Resolution "nio . 67, House Resolution Wo. 5755, 73d Congress, 
48 Stats. 195 



It is apparent from this particular section that Congressional dele- 
gation of power had heen made up to the President to grant exemptions 
and exceptions from the provisions of codes approved under the pro- 
visions of the said Section 3(a). This sentence gives the President 
power to do two things: 

(1) To impose certain conditions: and 

(2) To provide exceptions and exemptions. 

As to the first, it says he "may, as a condition of his approval 
of any such code, impose such conditions" . 

As to the second, it is said he "may provide such exceptions to 
and exemptions from the provisions of such code, etc." 

A careful reading of the grant of pov/er reveals that the clause 
"as a condition of his approval of any such code" surrounded hy commas, 
is interposed "between ''mn7/'''^and "impose", whereas later "may" is again 
repeated and placed just hefore "provide" without any such interposition. 
It must follow, therefore, that the very language of the act is such 
that no time condition is expressed, limiting the power to grant ex- 
ceptions and exemptions. 

Section 4(a) of the National Industrial Recovery Act provides as 

"The President is authorized to enter into 
agreements with, and to approve voluntary agreements 
hetween and among, persons engaged in a trade or 
industry, labor organization, and trade or industrial 
organizations, associations, or groups, relating to 
any trade or industry, if in his judgment such agree- 
ments will aid in effectuating the policy of this title 
with respect to transactions in or affecting interstate 
'or foreign commerce, and will be consistent with the 
requirements of clause (2) of subsection (a) of section 3 
for a code of fair competition." 

This section contemplates the creation of voluntary agreements 
between the President and various groups, but exercise of the autho- 
rity is subsequently conditioned upon the requirement that the agree- 
ment is consistent with the provisions of the second clause of 
Section 3(a) herein-above set forth. This clause refers to monopolies 
and it may be arg-aed that the authority conferred upon the President" 
by Section 3(a) to grant exemptions and exceptions from the provisions 
of codes applies to Section 4(a) agreem.ents insofar as monopolies and 
oppression of small enterprises are concerned. 

Section 7(b) of the Act is as follows: 

"The President shall, so far as practicable, afford every 
opportunity to employers and employees, in any trade or industry 
or subdivision thereof with respect to v/hich the conditions 
referred to in clauses (l) and (2) of subsection (a) prevail » 



to establish by mutual ngrc^raent, the st;jir4fjLr(is ^3 to the 
maximum hours of labor, •lini'rurr. rat'-o 01 .pay, at.A such other 
conditions o.f emplQ.vrnont as m.-\,7 be necqssary in sucii. trade 
or industry or su'Bdivision thereof to effectuate the policy 
of this title, and the stand ardrj est.sblished in such agree-- 
ments, when approved by the Prsoidont, shall have the same 
effect as a code of fair competition, ."■pprov^'d by the 
President imder subsection (a) of section 3," 

Section 7(c) of the Act provides: 

"Where , no such mutual agreement has been approved by the 
President he may investigate the labor practices, policies, 
■• . wages, hours of labor, and conditions of employment 'in such 
trade or industry or subdivision thereof; and upon the basis 
of such investigations, and after such hearings as the 
President finds advisable, he is authorized to prescribe a 
limited code of fair competition fixing such maximum hours 
of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of 
employment in the trade or industry or subdivision thiireof 
investigated as he finds to be necessary to effectuate the 
policy of this title, which shall have the same effect as 
a code of fair competition approved by the President under 
subsection (a) of section 3. The President- may differentiate 
•according to e:cperience and skill of the employees affected 
and according to. .the locality of emplo;j'ment ; but no attempt 
shall be made to introduce any classification according' to 
the nature of the work involved which might tend to set a 
maximum as well as a minimum '-age." 

The above two sections contemplate circumstances under which 
maximum hours of. labo.r and minimum rates of pay and other conditions 
of employment might be made the subject of an agreement between the 
President, employers spid employees of any trade or industry or sub- 
division thereof or the occasion of the exercise of the povi;er by the 
President to prescribe a limited code of fair competition as to 
maximum hours of labor, minimum rates of pay and other conditions of 
employment. The agreements so • contemplated under the terms of 
Sections 7(b) and 7(c) necessarily were to be considered as having 
the same effect as a code of fair competition approved under the pro- 
visions of Section 3(a). Tlie effect of this declaration carried the 
full authority conferred in Section 3(a), which, as hereinabove 
mentioned, conferred upon the President the power to grant 
"* * * exceptions to * * and exemptions from * * * the provisions 
of such codes * *" . 

The administration of the Act necessarily required some latitude 
of administrative discretion. The provision made therefor was Section 
10(a) of the Act, which is:- 



"The President is autiTorized' to prescribe such rules 
and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the pur- 
poses of this title, and fees for licenses and for filing 
codes of fair competition and agreements, and any violation 
of any such rule or reflation shall he punishable by fine 
of not to exceed $500, or imprisonment for not to exceed 
six months, or both." 

Section 10(b) provides:- 

"The President may from time to time cancel or modify 
any order, approval, license, rule or regulation issued 
under this title; mid each agreement, code of fair compe- 
tition, or license approved, prescribed, or issued under 
this title shall contain an express provision to that effect." 

The power conferred upon the President by these two sections 
permitted discretion in the grant or denial of exemptions or exceptions, 
authorized the creation of rules and regulations relating thereto and 
the cancellation and modification of any order, rule or regulation. 
These sections enlarge upon the power conferred to grant exemptions 
and exceptions with the further additional requirement that eacJi code 
contain the express provisions of Section 10(b) , which seems to be the 
safest to rest the power to grant exemptions and exceptions. 

The power conferred upon the President as set forth above is 
broad and subject to few limitations. These limitations are expressly 
set forth as follows: 

In Section 3(a) - 

"for the protection of consumers, competitors, employees 
and others and in the furtherance of the public interest 
* * * as the President in his discretion deems necessary 
to effectuate the policy herein declared." 

Section 7(b) provides - • 

"as may be necessary * * * to effectuate the policy of 
this title; * *," 

Section 7(c) provides - 

"* * as he finds to be necessary to effectuate the policy 
of this title." 

Likewise Section 10(a) contains a limitation upon the exercise of 
administrative discretion - 

"as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title". 



An ex.aminatiijii of S(.ctionl, Title I, oi the National Industrial 
Recovery Act discloGes a ler;lslctivc d-icl.-iVntion of the existence of 
a great national eraergency and olno various widespread protliims and 
conditions in American industry and labor which, through the extent 
of their seriousness and effect necesssirily required the exercise of 
great administrative discretion on the part of the person charged v/ith 
the admini titration of the law. These legislative declarations set 
forth the policj'' and purposes of the Act and ns such constitute the 
standards to which the President was required to adhere and act as 
limitations upon the grant of power hertiin'oefore mentioned. 

The legislative history of the NIHA is particularly meager upon 
the question of exemptions and exceptions to codes. An examination 
of the committee reports in both Houses, the hearings before. those 
committees, and the debates in Congress upon the submission of the 
Recovfiry Bill itself furnishes only slight support to siny policy of 
malcing exemptions to the operation .of codes. Hovrever, such material 
as may possibly bo regarded as bearing upon the point is herewith set 

Regarding Section 7(c) of thu Act, Mr. Richberg had this to say 
before the Comi'nittee on Wriys and Lieans of the House: 

". . .1 ¥/ill just refer you .to the next section on page 
8, where the President is authorized, where no mutual 
agreement has been approved, to investigate the conditions 
piid to 'est, ' lb 11 sh a 'limit'.Kl 'codo 'of . fsiir oainpotition v/hich 
fixes maximum hours of- labor, minimum rated ef pay, -and' 
other working .conditions; and on page 9 the specific 
provision is made that 'the President may differentiate 
according to experience and skill of the employees affected 
and according to the locality of employment' • And that is 
the thought which runs throughout the, billy ..a;S I understand 
it." (Page 71, May 18, 1953). 

Concerning the spse section of the Act, Senator Wagner had this 
to say before a hearing of the same committee:' 

"... Where no agreement can be reached or has been 
approved, the President is authorized to investigate and 
to prescribe by way of a limited code or as a part of a 
general code the standards of hours, v-'ages and conditions. 

"Of course, in those cases, in his investigation he raust 
take into consideration the locality, difference in .the 
cost of living in certain localities, and other matters 
which enter into a determination of hours and wagQS and 
conditions, with which we are all familiar." (-May 19, 1933). 



As finally passed, Section 7(c) of tne Act .--jives definite sanction 
to a differentiation - 

"accordin,j to experience and skill of the ernploj'-ees affected 
and accordine; to the locality of the emplo^^.Tiient ." 

Therefore, the raeaninf; of the Act upon this point seyms to have "been 
?/ell presented at the foregoing committee hearinf^-. 

Concernin/;; Section 4(a) of the Act, SenT.tor War";ner said at the 
hearing hefore the Committee on Finance of the United States Senate: 

".... In addition to the voluntary code, and the compulsory 
code, there is also provision that a portion of an industry 
may enter into some agreement that is different from the 
codes, bocause the government talces it out of the code for 
some specific purpose. For instance, in some locality 
conditions exist that do not exist within the trade gene- 
rally, and that may require, rather than an exception in 
the code, a definite agreement tiotvoen. the Governr.ient and 
the individual industry." (Page 3, May' 22, 1935). 

This recognition of differentiation hy locality applies only to 
the agreement features, and does not hy its terms apply to volxintary 
codes and compulsory codes. 

The following hrief colloqu;^ hetwoen Senators La Follette and 
Wagner at another hearing hefore the s.?jne committee relates to Section 
10(Td) of the Act: 

Senator La Follette. "Senator Wagner, did you and your associates 
consider the advisability of conferring power upon the President 
to amend or revoke these codes of fair competition in cases where 
it was demonstrable that the public interest was being injured 
by their continuance?" 

Senator Wagner. "That -is right in the act. He may modify, 
cancel, or do anything to the order. 

Section 10(b) of the Act seems to be the safest reliance in 
justifying exemptions and exceptions to codes. The wording of the 
Section is so broad that the President seems clearly to have the 
povfer of granting exemptions and exceptions. (*) 

Thti report of the House Committee on Ways and Means upon the Re- 
covery Bill has little to say which bears upon the subject of exemptions 
and exceptions. The follov;ing are the only excei--pts from the report 
which are. in point: 

(*) It is interesting to note that the Administrator assumed he had 
power to grant exemptions - See Office Order, December 7, 1933 - 
although the powers conferred by Section 10 had been reversed by 
the President (See Executive Order 6205-A) NRA. files. 


„ 77 - 

". . .If coder,, ar-TGcrnonts, or licenc'.-;: orov..; f;mlty, the power 
is reserved to the Presid-.Mt, \:,\d:T iKction 9.(b) , to cancel or 
modify any order, a-.Tn-ovrl, license ,. r.ilc or re^julation issued 
under this title." 

Section 9(b) later liecaine Section 10(b) as finally ennct'id: 

"... TOiereas a code of fair coninetition will "bo made for an entire 
trade or industry and must be made by those truly representative of 
the trade or industry, these voluntary agreements can be entered 
into by }iarties in an industry or in more than one industry. The 
code binds all persons engaged in a trade or industry, but an a,;;ree~ 
ment binds only those entering into it. Thus the -orovisions for 
codes and agroemant sUpT)lement each other and provide a thoroughly 
flexible liiachinery of industrial operation." (pages 3 and 4 of 
House Report i^o. 159, supra). 

Of course, the last 'of '-'the foregoing excerpts merely explains the 
difference betv/een a code and a voluntary a-reernent. If anything is to 
be gained from this portion of the report it would seem to be that codes 
are presumed to be binding upon all m>^mbers of an industry alike. 

In the report of the Senate Coiamittee on ITinance uoon the National 
Industrial Hecovery Bill there is nothing which relates to the subject 
of exceptions and exemptions. (*) 

From the debates in Congress we likewise find little inaterial. The 
follov/ing excerpts from the Con,^ressional Record are sub stc-mti ally all 
of the material which in relevant: 

The Presiding Officer. (l.:,r. lleely in the chair.) "... The next 
amendment was., on page 7, line 21i -after the name 'President," to 
insert 'shall find that destructive wage or price cutting or other 
activities contrary to the policy of this .'title are being practiced 
in any geographical area or in any subdivision of any trade or in- 
dustry, and . .. .'" (Pag-:; 5355,' Senate, Jixie 3, 1933) 

Mr, Black, "iv'r. Pr.osidc-nt, there was aji amendment pending to that 
particular amendment. Hint y/as the pending question, as I under- 
stood. The amendment was to strike from the amendment the v/ords 
'in any geographical area'," (Page 5355, Senate, June 3, 1933) 

Mr. George. ". . • If the Senator from I.lississippi is going to 
insist uiDon it, I shall move to strike out 'in any geographical 
area or' on page 7,' and the same language on page 8 of the bill," 

See footnote on next page. 


Mr. Ilcrrisori. "iJin.7 I aay to the Sen.- .tor fi'om Georgia that 
I aia not inaistinj p.' rticulcrly oa. ;:iy proposition- in that 
regard, 'because this ?:uenduent v. .3 offered in the- comit- 
tee, and, of course, I fuel th.-.t I to ctand "by the 
action of the coLiinittee; "bat Geriei';„l Jolmson, -when he ap- 
peared hefore the coramittee, naid he did not think it was 
necessary as to this matter. I o,skecl unanimous consent 
for the reconsideration of the vote "by which it was adopts 
ed in order to get the matter before the Senate, so that we 
could dispose of it." 

Mr. G-eorge. "I make that motion, Mr, President, and sug- 
gest the absence of a quorum unless it is accepted." 

Ivlr. Presiding Officer. "The ahsence of a quorum is sug- 
gested. The clerk will call the roll." (Page 5259, 
June 8th, 1933.) 

After a roll call with 92 members ^uiswering, the foregoing dis- 
cussion of licenses under Section 4('b) of the Act was continued. Sec- 
tion 4(h) was finally passed without the provision as to geographical 

The following remarks of Mr. Black illustrate the opposition to 
the unsuccessful attempt to mal-re the license features have a geograph- 
ical aspect: 

"... I strenuously ooject to iia.ving any one state marked 
off with lines around it, and the statement made to the 
public that ttere is an infection in that State in a par- 
ticular industry. It seems to me that we should either 
have the rules applied to on entire industry or that they 
should not apply to it a.t all. I can see nothing fair, when 
there might be an investigation of some couplaint made about 
one State, saying that v^e will require every person engaged 
in the business in that St.-\te, drawing a line arouad it, to 
be licensed, but that we will m.-ilve no such requirement of 
those engaged in the same industry in jiny other State. . ." 
(Page 526', June 8, 1933) 

This portion of the legislative history seems of doubtful value to. 
us because the license features of the Act were not exercised by the 
president, and his power to license expired by the terms of .the Act a 
year earlier than the other provisions of the Act. 

(*) See Report EFo . 114 of the Senate, 73d Congress, 1st Session. 



An "exenption" in t.e crdinory rneeTiin^; of t'.e wcr'l is "t".-e act 
of exem_Dtin,;; or stc.te oi' 'oein^i oxer.ipted; ireedcni frr.m any charge, 
burden, evil, etc., te v/l.icl- others subject; inx.iunity; privilege; 
* * *M _ (* ^ 

According to Ulie strict lesgal definition the term "exemotion" 
relates "to t'le' right g^ven by lavrt: a debtor tc retain a portion 
of -h.s property without its being lirble tc execution at the suit of 
a creditor, or t:, a distress for rent." (**) 

I^ie ordinary me-^ning of t.e terrn "e::Gepti:n'' is "the act of 
excepting or executing; exclusion; restriction by tailing out some- 
thing \7.ich ot-ien/ise v/uulu. be included; as in a clo,ss, state.r.ent, 
cr rale. - 

"T-iat v/hicl. is excepted or trJcen out frou others; 
person-, thing, or ca-"e specified as distinct, cr 
not included; as, aL.icst every general rule has 
its excepti..n." (***) 

The legal nerjimg oi t!-e ten.; "excepti-on" 'i-;.s severs.1 applica- 
tions, but for tne purp-'ses of t'^is study refers to m exclusion 
from the general rulss fnd operations of t-.e la':/. (****) 

Tno ITational Recovery Achn:.n '.:-:trati'n from tie "utset recognized 
its pov;er to grant exemptions end fexceptions. Paragraph 14 of tie 
originaJ Prosiderit's P.eeuployment Agreement (Ij) hulletin iJo. 3, 
National Recovery Administration, of tie Presidont' s Reemployment 
Program, July 20, 1S33, specifically provided f r petitions for sts,ys 
of the particulrr provisions pending a sum;,iF,ry inve^'tiga.ticn by T.BA. 
Tlie order of approval of tie first IIRA Code (Cotton Textile) which 

(*) Ifebster's 1"g\7 Internc.tional Dictiona.ry :f the English Language, 

G. cz C. herrian Co., 195d, at p. 767. 

(**) Bouvier' s Lav^ Dictiona;:y, Rarde' s Tliird Revision, Vol. 1, 

p. 1153. 

(***) ".Vebster's Hev/ International Dictionary of tne English 
Language, G. d C. herria.-n Co., lCo4, at 5. 763. 

(****) Bcuvier's Law Dictionary, Rav/le' s Tliird Revision, Vol. 1, 
■2. 1108. 



contained an exce-pticn as to certain member'^ of t:.s industry frora 
tliG "orovisi ^ns re:'uirinjj mach .ne licur lirr.itationG. Tlie use of t'.iir, 
ncyVier coiitijiued, Lut no s,d.iiinistrative attenot to define tlie terras "stay" 
"exei-iption" rnd "e::ce;^tion" were used .sync r^TTCously and witlicut re- 
gard 'to any crderly definition snd statement oi t-'e scope of the 
meanings of tlie various terms. Tnis intercl:.ange of t'.e use of tlie 
terms neces'-.arily required clarification and on i.fcy 5, 1934, 
Hughs. Jo^.mson, Adiiiinistrator for Industrial Keccvery, by Adininis- 
ti'ative Order IJo, X-37 , jxefiCribed rules and regulaticns concerning 
exceptions tc sjid exemptions from approved codes of fair co:apeti- 
tion. Tlie order defined tne term "exemption" r.s follows: 

"The term 'exemption' sliral include 'exceptions' 
a:id 'stays' and all rulings v/aereby an ir.divi'Iual, 
group or class .Is relopsed frjra tne full o";5eration 
of a provision of ,". code." 

It will be seen from tliis au'ninistrr.tive definition tiat tie term 
"exemption" and "exception" rolated t: ;-: releaee from an approved 
code and t/i,-.t tlie intention of t"ie Icjnini stration w.",;.; to consider 
tjiem in the ss^.ie meaning and sense. This admiiii strati ve definition 
continued to be operative until approximately Septef.jer 1, 195<1, when 
the Administre,tion issued an Office Manual. Pert III, -)ar. 3510, 
of the Office i.ianual , descr_bed tl.e term "exemption" c.s follows: 

"Tlie term ' Exemption ' includes any ruling whereby 
an individual, group, or class v/ithin an indus- 
try is released frora the full operation of a code 
prevision. " 

Paragra,;3h 3210 further states - 

"To preserve -ojiifornity of u~age t.e ter.i 'Sxce.ticns' 
will not be used as a synon.y-m for 'Exem ;tions' . 

Such Office Manual contains the followin.;; statement: 

"Superseding all previous Office Orders and hemoranda, 
includin^^ all Administrative Orders ;ind all Executive 
Orders v/iti general application of rlPA.. " 

and further declares:- ■ 

"It is the purpose of the Ofr'hce Llanual to:- 

"To eliminate r.11 conflicts and 
obscurities in existing Office 
Orders, Office Lleraorania, and 
Administrative Orders." 

"Upon completion of the first 
edition all previous Office Irders 
and iiemcranda will be revoked." 



This Office li,?jauc'l v;.'\s jrdvrc.l by" t'le directicn of the Administra- 
tor 31V. t;..e crdoi of \ss\wnco t';\9.ecf v/r.s sijmed by (}. A. Lync, tie 
Adraini strt.tive ' f f icsr. 

It './ill ba noted from t.-^ cbove t"_i?vt t e Cffice Lianual varies 
from t]i.e definition set fortl. in Ac-ininistrative Order X-27. According 
to the strtenent of V. e exjlfuirti.-n r,f the Office l;ianual the tenns of 
Adrainistrc:,tiv3 Order X-'37 were suv-erseded and a.cccrdingly would "be 
affected, but the author of tlio report, durinj the course of his in- 
vestijc-.tion , conferred wit;i llr. I.ielvin Sirns, Assxsta.nt Counsel of the 
Legal Division of tiie I'PlA,. rej;s.rdin.i; tie definitions of the terms 
"exem_jtions" and "explanations" contained in the Office Lianual. 
l.;r. Si::is v/as a ue.aber o'l tlie convnittee appointed by the Administrator 
to prep;.u-c the Cffice Lipjiual and v/as well acquainted witii the circuin- 
str?jLces surroimd the inclusion of Part III, F-.r. 3210. lir. Si.ns ex- 
plains the variance in t-at th.o reference to the term "exception" 
related onl / tc tie situation cre-.ted by the Presidential use of the 
term "exception" in hxecutive Carder 66<l-6 relating to Goverrjiaent con- 
tracts sjid that it v/as the mtenticn.of drcvftcrs of the Office 
lianual tc treat t.--.e botn terias as synonomous v;ith t"ae one different 
instance mentioned, ho ct.ier official administrative definitions 
of the terms have been mads and for tl.'.e purposes of this report the 
originrJ intention of the Administration s^irll be follo\.'ed and th.e 
terms "exemptions" ?aid "exceptions" shell be used synonomously. 





Under the terms of Section 2{p.) r.nd 2(13) of the 1' 124-, the President 
was authorized to establish such ag^encics, accept the services of and to 
utilize Federal officers and enrployeec, prescrihe their authorities, and 
to delegate any of his functions and powers u:ider the title of the Act to 
such officers, agents, and employees. The particular sections in quest- 
ion are as fellows: 

" To effectuate the policy of this title, the President is hereby 
authorized to establish such agencies, to accept and utilize such 
voluntary and tmcorrrpensatod services, to appoint, v/ithout regard 
to the provisions of the civil service laws, such officers and 
employees, and to utilize such Federal officers and employees, 
and, with the consent of the State, such State and local officers 
and employees, as he ma.y find necessary, to prescribe their auth- 
orities, duties, responsibilities, and tenure, and, without regard 
to the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, to fix the compen- 
sation of any officers and employees so appointed. 

"The President may delegate any of his functions and powers under 
this title to such officers, agents, and employees as he may des- 
ignate or appoint, and m3.y establish an industrial planning and 
research agency to aid in carrying out his functions under this 

Pursu3.nt to this authority, the President on June 16, 1933, by 
Executive Oi-der No. 6173, appointed Hugh S. Jolmson, as Administrator 
for Industrial Recovery under Title I of the Act. Under the terms of 
the said order the President further appointed a' special Industrial 
Recovery Board to be composed of the Secretary of Commerce as Chair- 
man, the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secret- 
ary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Labor, the Director of the Sudget, 
the Administrator for Industrial Hecoverj^, and the Chairman of the Fed- 
eral Trade Conmission. General Jolinson, Administrator for Industrial 
Recovery, was granted authority for thirty days subject to the approval 
of the special Inc-ustrial Recovery Board, to appoint the necessary 
personnel on a temporary basis and to conduct the v/ork authorized 
under Title I of the Act. On July 15, 1933, the President, be Execut- 
ive Order llo. 6205-A, continued the appointment of Hugh S. Jolmson as 
Administrator for Industrial Recovci-y and authorized him, subject to 
the general approval of the aforementioned Specia.1 Industrial Recov- . 
ery Board, to appoint the necessary personnel on a permanent basis, 
and among other things to exercise functions invested in the President 
by Title I of the Act, except the apnroval of codes, mr.I:ing of agree- 
ments, issuance of licenses, or exercise of power confori-ed in Sect- 
/ ions 3(e), 6(c) 8(b\ 9 andlO. The first specific reference to exempt- 
ions in the various delegations of power by the President to the Admin- 
istrator is found in Executive Order iJo. 6205-B of July 15, 1935, in 
which the President granted the Administrator power to stay the prov- ^ 
isions of a code upon the receipt of an application for an exception 
to or an exemption from a code from persons who allege d that the op- 
eration of a code would result in undue hardship. 


Early i:.i the ac-ministr-tion of Titlu I of tho llo.tional Iriciuo+.i-ial 
Rocoveiy Act tho President invokod the -jotqts contr.incd in Section 4(a) 
of the Act to institute tho procrain of agi-o racnts Imows as the President's 
Reemployment Agreement. This pi-ogram T^as-anno-jncod by Bulletin llo. '6, 
issued July 20, 1935, and on September 13, 1933, Bulletin "Jo. 5 of the 
National Hccovcry Admini strati on, as approved by the Administrator and 
the Chairman of the National Industrial Hccoverj' Board, (apparently a 
misnomer for the Special Industrial Recover;/ Board), set forth re£,ulat- 
ions and procedure for local NRA Compliance Boards. Those boards were 
set up for the iiandling of complaints of non-compliance and petitions 
for exceptions from the terms of the PEA and wore coi.posed of members 
who volunteered their services in tho particular districts in which they 
lived. The boards were empowered under Section 2 of the Bulletin to 
receive all petitions for exceptions from the provisions of the PRA 
and to grant exceptions in cases of peculiar circ-umstances or groat 
and unavoidable Ijardship. Certain exceptions from the delegation of 
this power were set forth in Section 2 of the bulletin. It was con- 
fined to consideration of individxxal coses of individual Imrdship and 
in general these boards were pei-mittcd to .grant exceptions from the 
wage and hour provisions of tho PRA. llo specific delej^.tion of power 
to grant cxc.jptions to and cxo!TK)tions from the PRA wa.s made by the 
President at tho time of the issuance of Bulletin Uo. J, but on IIov- 
ember 23, 1933, the President, by IJxecutivc Order Ko. 6443, authorized 
the Administrator to grant exceptions to and exein^itions from agreements. 
(Referring to the President's Recrdployment Agreement). 

Tho loc-3,1 KRA Compliance Boards operated on a voluntary basis and 
consisted ms.inly of members of local committees which had been set up 
by civic gro"up3 at the time of the institution of the Pl^ campaign. 
These boards were created in pra.ctically every city and town in the 
United Sta.tes and e xcrcisod the power from the time of the 
issua.nco of Bulletin lie. 5. ■ . . - 

In the meantime, tho Administrator ret-ained the final power to 
grant PRA exeirptions. Office Order ITo.. 40., issued by the Administrat- 
ion over tho signature of ' AlvinBi-ovm,' Assistant Administrator and 
3::ecutive Officer, created a National Conrpliance Board, which Board 
was empowered to rocomitiGnd oxcoptions and the Eagle Bra,ncn of the 
Compliance Division of the Administration was designated as the bodj" 
to grant cxcmi^tidns from the PRA . !Io other specific administrative 
delegations of the ^ovTor to gi'ant PRA exemptions and exceptions has 
been found in tho records of i'PA. 


Immediately after June IG, 193'-, tho IIRA began the. codification' 
of industry and trade and the approval of various codes stibmitted nec- 
essarily required exercise of power to grant exemptions therefrom. The 
iriginal delegation by the President was of general description, but tho 
Administrator acted thereunder until December 30, 1933 , v;hen tho Pres- 
ident, by Executive Order Ho. Go43-A delegated to the AcLainistrator the 
following functions and pov:ers; 



"(2) The ap-proval of any *** exception or exemption from *** 
any one or more provisions of any code of fair competition." 

This delegation specifically related to codes and incorporated pow- 
er theretofore generally granted. It specifically shows that no limita- 
tions were placed upon the Administrator other than those contained in 
the Act in the exercise of the power conferred. 

A further Presidential delegation of pcier to grant exemptions oc- 
curred on March 14, 1934, when the President, in the exercise of the ex- 
ecutive and governmental discretion to impose such conditions as may te 
necessary in the governmental purchasing activities, set forth in Execu- 
tive Order No, 6646 certain requirements with regard to bids submitted to 
governmental agencies and at .the same time in paragraph 5 of the order 
empowered the Administrator for Industrial Recovery to mal-:e exceptions 
in specific cases and otherwise under the order when in the judgment of 
the Administrator justice to the public interest would be best served 


The National Recovery Administration v/as primarily concerned with 
the codification of industry for the purposes of industrial recovery. 
The Presidential program also included the rehabilitation of agriculture 
through the vehicle of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and in 
the terms of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (*), the Secretary of Agri- 
culture was appointed as Administrator of the Act, 

On June 26, 1933, the President, by Executive Order No. 6182, dele- 
gated to the Secretary of Agriculture all of the functions and powere 
(other than the determination and administration of provisions relating 
to hours of labor, rates of ;oay, and other conditions of employment) as 
referred to in Title I of the Act with respect to the industries and trades 
engaged partly in the handling of milk and its products, tobacco and its 
products, and all foods and foodstuffs. This delegation was subject to 'O 
the reservation of power in the President to approve or disapprove pro- 
visions of any code. This delegation was re-affirmed in Executive Order 
No. 5207 dated July 21, 1933, and on January 8, 1934, the President, by 
Executive Order No. 6551, transferred all of the functions and pov^ers 
theretofore delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture to the Administra- 
tor for National Recovery insofar as these functions and powers related 
to certain industries which were set forth in the order and which were 
also the subject of subsequent agreement between the Secretary of Agri- 
culture and the Administrator for Industrial Recovery. The result of 
this Executive Order placed codes co-vering industries and trades which 
were closely allied to the regulations of the Agricultural Adjustment 
Administration under the power of the Administrator for Industrial Re- 
covery who had theretofore been delegated pc'er to grant or deny exemp- 
tions and exceptions. 

(*) Public Resolution No. 10, 73d Congress. 




In Septemoer 1934, the Jrosident decided uyion. p, chanf^e in the form 
of the administerinri' nody of the llrtionr.1 Industrial E.<=cover7 Act. 
General Jolinson had resigned ar, Adrainistrntor for Indurstrial Recovery 
and on September 27, 1934, tho President, "oy IJxecutive Orden' Up, 6G59, 
created the National Industrial Recovery Borrd, consisting of severe 
menhers. The order appointed Cl.^ Uillinns, A. D. Uliiteside, Sidney 
Hillraan, Leon C. Llrrshall, a.nd ITalton Hamilton as menbers of the Booxd, 
and apoointed Blaclavell Snith LegaL Adviser aid Leon Henderson, Economic 
Adviser to the Boa.rd. These ti70 advisers served as ex-officio raenhers 
of the Board, The five menhers aooointed (other than ex-officio mem- 
hers) rrere om^oi.Tered to aduinister, -under the direction of the President, 
Title I of the Act, and the Boa.rd i.t-^s authorized to exercise all powers 
theretofore conferred hy executive orders uoon the Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery. This creation of the Board and transfer of ■oo-'er 
from the Administrator to the Board necessarily carried the poner to 
grant or deny exen-otions or execDtior.s, theretofore s^ranted to the Ad- 


Applications for excGptions and Gxcm-Ttioi.s frou the -orovisions of 
the codes increased as the number of r:r)TOve-l codes increased. At the 
outset of the Administration, individurl r, .'plications for exemptions 
were granted or denied jy presidciitiaJ. orders (*). Later such others v.'ere 
signed by General Johnson, but the volume of a r-)licntions so increased 
that the delegation of ]jO"7er to lesser officials of tho ITPA became neces- 

On liarch 36, 1934, General JoixnQon, through the vehicle of Office. 
Order Ho, 75, set u-j a procedure to be follo-./ed in r-'olings on code a,dmin- 
istration problems, P?.rt of this procedure relr.ted to exceiotions and 
exemptions and provided that each Division Administrator rras em'sonered to 
malre rulings on a^'")plic,ations far exemptions and exce-otions and that the 
Division Adininistrator' s decision r,'ould bo final, subject onl"" to the 
ultimate disa-xoroval of the Adrainistratpr himself. This -oo-fer of the 
Division Adr/iinistrator v/as continued throughout the code administration 
period of NRA, (**) IJo further delegations "cre to officials under 
the supervision of Division AdminiGtra-tiors, although Deputy Administrators 
were given pov.'er cf recorainendation, 


During the course of code administration, territorial iDroblems arose 
and many applications wer.j received for exenrotions from territorial codes 

(*) See Executive Orders llos. 6274-S296 IIRA files. 

(**) See Office Orders IIos. 87 and 89, Office MeraDrandvun llo , 248, and 
Part III, Section 3225 IffiA Office llrnual - 3235. 1. 



or the application of national codes to the territor-^. These -jroblens 'ej 
recognized hj the AdminiGtr-tion (*). Shortly after the issuance of 
these orders, the IJEA. established a Territorial Division, '.vhich -t'.s 
charged --ith matters rel.-tin;; to the territorial adiainistration of 
codes, -particularly in Hn,v?aii and Puerto Rico (**), After considera- 
tion as to the problems presented and the most effective method of hpjidl- 
ing territorial eicem'itions, the national Industrial Recovery Board dele- 
gated to the Deputy Administrator for the Territory of Tiavraii the auth- 
ority tn grant exemptions from codes of fair com^^etition a-j'provei excul- 
sively for the Territory of Hawaii. (***) This ,delei;,Ttion vas subject 
to the conditions of ' the action tloxne bein.;' in accordance •'jith the rules 
and re,2:ulati(>ns rnd toIIg;'' of 'the L'rti -lal Industrial Recovery Board 
and thrt all action taken by the Deputy Administrr tor for the Territory 
of Hawaii be reported to rnd bo subject to revie'- ond disa-ior oval bjr 
such Board. 

Shortly after the a";ove delej-jation regarding Har/aiian codes the 
Deputy Adrainistrator for the Territory of Alaska '-'as ruthorized "to exempt 
or refuse to ezeiirat from any provision of any code of fair competition 
to the extent that such code p;rnlieG to mj transaction ^uthin the Terri- 
tory of Alaska". This authority did not aopl^'' to ezemotions from the 
following soecified codes: 

Cr.;ming Indus trj'- 

Canned Salmon Indus trj'' 

LtTJiioer and Timber Products Industries 

Fisheries Industry/ 

This authority r.-a.s /-;rp.nted by the national Industrial Recovery Board on 
May 3, 1935 {****),' ' ' 

No official dolegr tion ^-^s made to the Deput"/ Administrr-tor for 
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, although the IJa.tional Industrial Re- 
covery Board had planned r similar grant of authority a.s had been made 
to the De-Quty Administrator for Hawaii. 


A further delegation of porter was made with res-oect to the issuance 
of exemptions on Aoril 9, 1934, when Genera.l Johnson created the office 
of Adininistr.-tive Officer and designated such Officer "to act on all 
matters not other-rise assigned \7hich do not require the Administrator's 
personal attention, including final approval in the name of the Admin- 
istrator of codes arid other documents requiring the AJjninistra.tor's^- action 
****". The national Industrial Recovery Board continued this office and 

(*) See AdjQinistra,tive Ordor X-GO - Office Order llo. 104 - Kl£ file. 

(**) ■ See iCln. Office ileinorajidum of December C9, 1933. 

(***) Office Lleraorandum No, 348 - March 19, 1935. 

(****) Office Liemorandur.1 No. 356 - NliA files. 



its order conferrin'c th^ authority st^-tcs "to c.-cecutc s.rrj or rll papers, 
documents, or other instru'.ients in ■■•ritin;-; required in the performance . 
of the functions F',nd pb-u'cra dole;;at!j'. to !3o-Td oy said Executive 
Order and othenrise, includin;', Dut vithout linitr.tion, the -lovrer to 
issue order's, r.iD")r ovals, rules or rofjulations". (*) 

A fei^ laiscelianeouT dele^r.tionr, o:' a.uthority to -^rrnt or deny exemp- 
tions were nrde in connoction v.'ith various -ohasos of code a.djninistration. 
Executive OrCer No. 664G related to oonr^lir'ncG with codes for piuTDOses of 
bidding on &ove:rnment contracts. This ^-jr.s primarily a matter of coravoli- 
ance and on Decciher 15, 1934, the Director of Com^Dliance and Enforcenent 
was authorized 'by the Administrator to grmit exceptions from the provi- 
sions of this Executive Order (**). 

The neccBsity of efficient hendlir.f: of o.pplicp.tions for exemptions 
motive.ted the authorization of the Chief of the Com-^li,?jice Division to 
grant or deny an ap-)licrtion for an exemption which had been referred "by 
any of the St.- te Cou-|oliance Directors (***)j when the ordinary procedure 
resulting in a decision ty a. Division Administrator ha^d caused undue 


No evidence other than the territorial dele^^-ation ha.s "been found 
showing BXTf decentralization of the authority to grant or deny exemptions. 
The 1-IKA maintained offices in each strte under the direction of a state 
director aaid on January 1, 1935, created a regional organization which 
divided continentpl United States into eight regions, under the dir- 
ection of a regional director. It was contenolated thr.t the authority to 
grant or deny exeiTDtions vrould oe delegatr-d to theTo itJgional directors, 
hut the -olans for this deaentralization of the authority never materializ- 
ed (****), In addition, the Code Administrati n Division of HEA was 
decentrrli::ed "by the a y ..ointment of regional directors of code adminis- 
tration. Offices '--ore authorized in Hew Yorl', Chicr 'O and Saoi ITrancisco, 
"but there wrs no delegati n of azxthority rela.ting to exe iptions to these 

cod:: althqritiss 

CertPoin codes ay their terms authorized code authorities to grant 
exemptions from the jrovisions of the -oa.rticular codes v'hich they ■■-ere 
administering. The aiTjroval of these provisions necessfril;'' constituted 
a further delegation of the governmental authority, hut this rc'oort does 
not consider this ohase of the nuestion, as it will "be treated hy the 
Revie- Studies Group rejortiii^-; upon the ractivities of code authorities, 
as sucli. 

(*) Admi:"iistrrtive OrJ-cr :C-107, Ilovenler 1, 1934- Administr-^ tive 

Order X-93, Septembor 28, 1934 - iJlA. files. 

(**) See Executive Order ::o.564G - Ad:aini3trrtiVe Order :'C-123 - IfflA files. 

(***) Office Order No. 108 - Au^ast IS, 1:)34, in IW. file 

(****) See USA Compliance Division Field Letter IIo, 190. 



The Aaturo of the terns "c::cnption" and "c;ccc-ption" and tho 
"basis of the administrative grant thereof is to bring relief to a 
particiilar individual or groiro of individiir-ls fron hardship, -onfair 
situations and other conditions which arc caused "by -uniform applica- 
tion of code provisions. The stud;;'- of the subjoct of e-comptions and 
exceptions has been based upon an analysis of tho reasons vhy aopli- 
cations for cxenptions ^,'ere nade , the considerations Imd by the llationall 
Recovery Administration on such applications and the for the grant, 
denial, or modification of the relief requested. The puthor of the re- 
port was aided by a former re'oresentative of the Labor Advisory Board, 
who had, during the course, of the code administration, maintained a 
record of exemptions from labor provisions. The files of this indivi- 
dual v;ere nade available and the index v/hich she kad prepared was used 
as a guide in the examination of the actual records and portfolios of 
the official orders of grants and denials of exeirations. The investi- 
gation caused the ex-iriination of the entire records of the official 
orders of exemptions or denials thereof as to the codes. which are listed 
in the Introduction to oart Three, supra . 

Five hundred and fifty-foux (554) orders of exemption or denial 
thereof were examined, of v/hich fo-ur hundred and ei/jht (408) orders 
granted exemptions from codes and one hxmdred and forty-si:: (14S) 
orders denied the relief requested in the apolication. All of such 
orders related to the above memtioned codes, and ap-olied to both labor 
and trade practice provisions. 


The orders of e::emptions or denials thereof and the supporting data 
fovmd in portfolios which were studied disclose that most of the exem'o- 
tions granted related to labor provisions and that, in very few cases 
were exemptions granted to members of industry from trade practice pro- 
visions. A tabulation of the tjrpe of labor provisions to which the apT)- 
lications for exemptions were directed and which the WJA officially 
either granted or denied discloses the following:- 

T;'T>e of Labor Provision Ilunber of Orders 

Normal minimum wage provisions 170 " 

Skilled minimum wage provisions 8 

Overtime wage provisions 12 

Apprentice minimum wages 5 

Squitp.blc readjustment of wages above the minim-um- 4 

Korraal iaa:-:inam hoiirs 295 

Peak period hours 2 

Hatchmen - ma:-cimujn hours— 8 

Overtime tolerance - maximiun hours 29 

Child labor provisions 3 

Limitation of number of apprentices 

or learnei's . • 14 



TyiJe of Labor Pro-v ision - - IT-um"ber of Orders 

Slov; vrorker toleraiace.s 21 

ProhilDition of home work 2 

Specified piece rates 1 

liachine hour linitations 65 

Production control 7 

All labor provisions 2*^ 

The total of the above tabulation does not coincirie with the num- 
ber of orders issued because in manj'' cases an order of exemption was 
issued uhich referred to sev.eral provisions of a code, ho-jever, the 
tabulation has listed each provision affected. 

The records of the orders of the grpaits or denials of exemptions 
in most cases contained the application for the exemption, which appli- 
cation usually contained the reasons for the application. Examination 
of these applications found that most of the exemptions sought were 
based upon scarcity of skilled help, seasonal pealc demands, or rush of 
orders, as distinguished from rash of orders in a pea!: season. It was 
likewise found that financial difficulties of members of industry or 
trpxle and iinfair advantages because of geographical differentials 
prompted the filing of applications v/ith ilPJl. In addition, most of the 
applications relating to machine hour limitations acted upon set forth 
necessities of production adjustment or seasonal peal: demands as the 
causes therefor. A complete tabulation of the reasons set forth in the 
applications for labor exemptions, v/hich supplications were acted upon 
either in the form of a grajit or denial thereof shov;s the following: 

Reason . IJo. of Aprilications 

Departmental diff iculties--r^ 65 

Pe?lc demands 63 

P.ush of orders 56 

Hardship 44 

Foreign competition 2 

o. j^.."' Cp"orrs3ioia of .sma^-.i/entexprises-' 11 

Strikes 6 

Emergency (bre,?Jcdovjn) 10 

Inventory 11 

Scarcity of skilled help ing 

Production adjustment 29 

Introduction ne'.v articles or process 5 ' 

Poor Equipment 3 

Lack of equipment 14 

Lack, of spacc^, 7 

Pire— • 4 

To start production ' 2 

To mal:e career (child labor) 2 

Pinancial difficulties 40 

Geographical differentials : ' 30 

Haaidic.apped or inefficient wor]:ers ' 19 

Hulti'ijle codes '■ "10 


Eeason No. of Applications 

Competition with exempt firms 2 

Inconvenient location 4 

Pending investigation 4 

Tine lost due to holidays 7 

Change of plant operation 13 

Charitable institution 1 

Shipment delaj'^s 2 

Non-compliance of competitors 8 

The ahove tabulation, as in the case of the tabulation of code pro- 
visions, does not represent each individual applica.tion. Most of the 
applications set forth only one ground for relief, but in some cases 
various reasons were specified in seeking one exception. It was found, 
as a result of the investigation that the reasons, scarcity of skilled 
help aiid peak demands vrere linl^ed together, and that the relief request- 
ed related to maximiira hour provisions and ovartime minimum wage rates, 


ilo cases were found which involved am application for an exemption 
from wage diff as to sex, but as stated above, a number of 
applications from the minimum \7age provisions v/ere submitted, giving as 
reason for relief requested the fact that geographical differentials of 
wages vrould impose hardships. A number of these applications originated 
with southern manufacturers or in. states bordering those sections in 
which a lower geographical differential had been set up. (*) Likewise 
various codes set up rates of pa;'' for specified areas, the application 
of which resulted in some cases of hardship. The' application for 
exemptions from these area rates alleged competitive disadvantages- that 
made it impossible to continue the operation of these wages. This sit- 
uation araong the codes examined was particularly evident in the adminis- 
tration of the Millinery Code (**). 


The records disclose that only three applications for exemptions 
from the child labor provisions of the codes examined were made. These 
cases involved boys of 14 and 15 5'"ears of age, ajid in two cases, the 
reason given wa,s to embark the boy upon a career. The reason given in 
the third case was tliat the father vrished his son to work for him in his 
plant. Some applications for permission to employ more learners than 
specified in the code occurred in the Handlierchief Code (***)^ the 
Milliner;- Code (****^, jj^e reason for such applications was the opening 

(*) See Order No. 49-6 axid. Order No. 57-19 in NRA files. 

(**) See Order No. 151-9, Order No. 151-24 a:id Order No. 151-5^^, 
in NRA files. 

(***) See Order No. 53-5; 

(****) See Order No. 151-69 in ilRA files. 



of ne\7 o.epartiiients. Relief from the application of tercentages as to 
emplojTi.ient of apprentices was also sought; also a number of applica- 
tions for exenptipjis from a wage tolerance as to sIo'.t workers which was 
set forth in the CJicar lua-niifr.cturing Code. The usual reason given for 
the e;:en;ptions from the percentage of apprentice? eriiployed Tvas that 
there w.s a scarcity of skilled help and it was necessary to employ ad- 
ditional apprentices to carr3'' on production. In some cases, relief 
frora the pa,j,Tnent of ppprentice vrage was requested, hut in all these 
cases the relief asked related to overtine ratfesri'ather than relief, 
frora the pa,yment of minim^un \7ages. Onl>/ ' ca,se v;as found in which 
the applicant asked for permission to pa^"- learners below the minimun 
wagps, which application v7aG 'denied (*). 

A number of applications requested exemption from the overtime 
tolerance provisions of codes. These applications were verj"" numerous 
in the administration of the ;)Paper and Pulp Code, Code jlo. 12^^, r<nd 
the reasons given .therefor were necessities of bolstering inventory and 
inabilit:' to meot orders on time (**). A particular industrial reason 
was also given in these particular applications, which was lack of suf- 
ficient \7ater power. 

TPAiiE peactigj: p::;gv:sioes 

As stated above, the orders of exe:.TOtion ex.ariined, disclosed few 
which affected trade pra.ctice provisions of codes. A tabulation of the 
types of trade practice provisions is a-s folloT^s: 


All trade practice provisions 2 

Productions control 7 

Consignment sa,les 1 

Price Filing- ■■ • 1 

Loss limitation 1 

Sales below cost — 2 

hislabeling 1 

Uniform ter^s nf sale . 1 

Container specifications 1 

Merchandising plaiis 2 

The main reason set fortn in tne applications relating to trade 
practice provisions was that the particular applicant was losing busi- 
ness and tha.t his continuance therein was dependent upon the relief 
requested. Anotner main reason which was set forth with res"nect to 
applications for exemptions from production control provisions, sales 
below cost and loss limitation, was that the competitors of the appli- 
cnjat were not compl-'-ing with the particular orovision. Relief from the 

(*) See Order lie . 120-1^5 in ITRA files. 

(**) See Orders hos. 12i^-ll, 12'"i-12, 12^-29 and 12r>-37 - l^IRA files. 



code provisions relating to containpr specifications and mislabeling 
provisions was requested upon the basis that thp aprilicant had a stock 
of cans and containers on hand -^M that the non-use of tt»se containers 
would result in great loss to hin. It is interesting t'^vcte the 
Administration denied all of tae qoclicitions for exerouya^ns from trade 
practice provisions, with the exception of t'f'o. 

No orders of exemption were found among the code^ ^"jcamined, sif- 
fccting code authority provisions or tne rights -md ooiigations of the 
code authorities created under the orovisions of any such code. 


The origin of aDulications for exemption as to geographical con- 
siderations was widespread. Of course, it is realized that the codes 
selected fqr examination for the purposes of this preliminary report 
would have a very marked effect upon the geographical locations of 
the applicants. In many cases the members of the industry or trade 
were concentrated in a particular section of the country which would 
neccesarily affect the geographical picture, however, the tabulation 
set forth below will give some idea as to the origin of applications 
for exemption which were officially acted uraon. 

districts No. of Applicants 

New England (t'aine, New Hampshire, Vermont, 

li'assachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut) 8? 

Middle Atlantic States (New York, New Jersey, 

Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, District 

of Columbia) — — 157 

Southeastern States (Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina 

South Carolina, Georgia, V/est Virginia, Virginia) 63 

G\ilf States (Florida, Alabama, Mississippi , Louisiana — 16 

Middle West (Ohio , I ichigan, Indiana, Illinois, 

Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa) 121 

Southwestern States (Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, 

Arizona, Arkansas,, Kansas) 19 

Northwestern States (Wisconsin, Minnesota, North 

Dakota, Souta Dakota"^ 20 

Rocky Moijjitain States (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, 

Nevqda) 11 

Pacific Coast States (California, Oregon) 11 

Pacific Northwest Statrs (V/ashington, Idaho, I'ontana)- 6 



Distric ta Yi r . q-^ An-oli cat ions 

Puerto Rico -- . . __ 2 

Hawaii n 

Alaska a 

As stated above, an examination of tne records of the orders of 
exemotion incladed location of particular apolicant or aT>i--ll 
cants therefor. For th<= ournoses of information as to the origin of 
aoolications wit-i respect to potialaten districts of the country, the 
author has caused a tabulation to be made, shoT-in-.- the distribution of 
the origin of applications for exemotions uuon which some official ac- 
tion '^as taken with resoect to the si?e of the towns or cities in which 
tac oarticular anolicant was located. 

Ho. of Crdcrs 

Citips of a r.'iillion lorioulation or over 125 

Cities with population of 5''0, nnn to l,nnn.^nnn 43 

Cities witn loopulation of ir>r>,riro to ^nn^nnn 114 (*) 

Cities with pooulation of 50,"ino to inn.oon 53 

Cities and towns with TDOioulntion under 5C-,>y-C) I55 

In some cases the "ror": sheets on '^iiicn t;ie ab^ve tabulation was made did 
not give exact in:f oriiation as to t .le location of the aoolicants - some 
cases such as, ''Seventeen rapr.bers of trie industry on the Pacific Coast", 
"Members of th^ incastr,/ operating in cor.oetition witti tne Dress I'anu- 
facturers" and otaer like designations were unable to be charted as 
to location. It is submitted t;ia+ t'i<-^ aoove tabulation reoresents prac- 
tically 95;c of all of tae order:-, studied and accordin,Tly oresents a 
picture of tae oooalation situ.ation to t.nat extent. 

peeils lf e:;el; lPtic:t 

The power conferred upon tne President in tne Act oerraitted the 
granting of exemptions -^nd exceotions "-itiiin tiie discretion of tne 
President, provided oolici-'S oi tae Act '^"ere effectuated. Th^ exer- 
cise of tnis discretion was evidenced in tnp Deri'^d for whicn exemntions 
were granted. Scrne aoi-.lications were ref-eived in wnich relief was re- 
quested for a liruted oeriod; e.g., one day, one wee":, one month. Other 
applica,tirns made nc mention of tne oeriod of time of relief reqaested. 
Considerations apon the aDolications had by IfRA often resulted in a 
limitation or aa extension of tne time of tne exemrition granted. In 
addition, some aoplications requested exemotions for a limited oeriod 
and subsequently asked for an extension nf tne exemiDtion for either a 
furtner limited oeriod or an unlimited oeriod. All ohases of the period 
of exemotions aooearinr in tne orders rf exemotions were studied for this 
preliminary reoort. Tne tabulation is as follo'^s: 

(*) Note: Records '"f oooulaticn c'larts set forth in the World Almanac, 
1935 Edition, were consulted for ourooses of this tabulation. 




Unlimited .-.-." ——. "^^^ 

To June 15 or 16, 1935 — '■ "6 

Pendina: Hearing 'ir Stady 6 

To the EXTDir^ition c" C''de 1 

Until Terminated , 3 

PendinF Amendment 2 

Sixty Days cr Over 62 

Thirty to Sixty Bays 44 

Fifteen to Thirt"' Days 53 

Cne week to tio \7eeks 5^ 

Two days to one week 20 

Cne day 15 

No general analysis of the reasons for these various periods of 
exemptions can Ise m^de, V7ith tae exceution of a few. It w^s found that 
the exemptions for various Deriods of -time ™ere asked because of various 
conditions. An examination finds that the exemiotions granted for one 
day or for tne iDericd of from t'^o days to one '-eek ^&Te requested for 
the purpose of taking inventory, to repair troken-dovm machinery or to 
meet some emergency situation. The unlimited exemotions "^ere granted 
d-urin^ tnp early oart of MA administration of codes -^nd being coexten- 
sive Tfith the Act, terminated on June 16, 1935. On .or about 
February 1, 1955, the Administration becqjne increasineily mindf-ol of the 
date of tae termination of the Act, and, as a matter of nolicy, the 
source of "hich the author has not explored at this time, orders of 
exemption were soecifically not permitted to continue beyond June 16, 
1935, Some ^oFd3 lis. stated June 15, 1935 - others - June 16, 1935. 
This difference most orobably arose from a misapr)rehension as to the 
actual date of termination of tie Act. 

The exemotions granted for tne oeriod pending a hearing, study or 
amendment are self-explanatory. 


Not all applications for exem-)tion were result of foresight. 
Some members of industry or trade being presented vith an emergency 
situation, violated tie code provisions and later made aoplica,tion to 
tae Administration for exemption from the code to cover the violation 
theretofore committed. In addition, applications for exemiotions were 
directed to the Administration before tne date upon which the requested 
relief v-oulc" take effect, but due to difficulties in routinf', reference to 
to Advisory Boards and otner orocedural require-^ents, tap actual deci- 
sions as to tae exemotion vas not made and the order of exemption is- 
sued until after tae tx'^.p noted in the aoolic^tion had TDartially or 
totally elaosed. For example - Crder >Io.3-51 (T7ool Textile Code) 
gr'^nted an exemption from tne normal hour orovisions of that code :frora 
March 4, 1335 to J'ay 1, 1935 - the order was signed on "arch 8, 1935; 
in order Ko. 59-19 (larking Devices Code) the order of exemption was 
signed on January 10, 1935 exempting the applicp.nt from the normal hour 
provisions of the cod/- from December 31, 1934 to January 10, 1935, the 
date upon rhich the order was signed. These cases are kno-tTi as retro- 
active exemptions. 


The iDOwer of the President to t_,rant axeijptions was of wide latitude, 
Guhject only to the liuiitTtirius thit the action should effectuate the 
policies of the Act, but the Act does nob contain any specific legisla^- 
tive declaration exonio t in^^ certain cliisses or groans of individuals from 
the provisions of codes which related to MCiribers of industry or trade. 
The absence of this stntatory assurni^tion required administrative exer- 
cise of dispensing, powers which necessarily operate upon a foresight 
basis. The power to exeinpt v.dth respect to future acts is admitted and 
in cases vrtiere applications for exomptio:is v/ere received by tlm adminis- 
trative 3t3ency prior to the time to which the exeroption related can 
equilly be justified because adnuniEtr''.tive remedies had been sought. 
It is true that some penalties accrued as a result of the tardy order of 
cxeiiTption, but these considerations are offset by the activities of the 
seeker of the remedy. Tnc Constitution does not deter an interested 
party from seekint^ administrative remedies and for so doin^;, viola-tions 
prior to the adjudication upon the application will not be imposed. (*) 
However, in cases where the applicant chooses to av/ait proceedings and 
violates the code, the penalties may be imposed. The grant of an exentp- ■ 
tion in the last mentioned case or on a retroactive basis, is not a 
grant of relief from code provisions which have already been violated 
but is more in the nature of a nolle prosequi exercised by prosecutors 
in the administration of criminal JusTiice. The failure to prosecute 
cases is in reality largely an administrative matter controlling a de- 
sired effort to accomi-jlish the general piirposes of' a criminal law, even 
though in many cases some wrong-doers are allowed exemptions from the 
strict torm.s of the statute. It is true that in certain statutory enact- 
ments, the effects of which are retroactive, certain exemptions are set 
forth. These t^q^es of statutes do not apply here in these cases because 
of the absence of mj statutory declaration in the Act. It is the author's 
opinion that retroactive ex'omotions, as such, were not in fact exemptions 
from -orovisions of codes but condonations of violations already committed 
and administrative declarations of intentions not to prosecute, v;hich 
declarations are similar to the practice in the criminal law imovTO as 
nolle prosequi, 

c oiroiT I o:'AL EjSi.pTi o:i_s 

A number of orders of exemptions issued by the Administration ex- 
empted the j:xsrticular applicant or groups of applicants from the provi- 
sions of the code on condition that certain things be done or that cer- 
tain requirements be satisfied. (**) The conditional form of exen^tion 
did not occur in each case. 

(*) ffadJex^S-Outliern R. Go. v. Gcorria . 235 U.S. 651, 652, 569. See alsc 
New York Public Service Commission Law, Section 24. 

(**) See Order 54-55, Order llo. 120-10- I>iEA Files. 


-96- - 

Payment of '(Vage rates soeci.'ied in tiie oj-der of exemption 9 

P.equirement of abiding; "by txif minimum wnge rates in the code — 1 

Adherence to rules and ri=,"ulations of tnc Administration 1 

Requirement tnat new emoloyees be hired at code rate 1 

Requirement that no work be done on a holiday 1 

Requirement thit Administrative oermis&ion to incr°qre TDercenta.5e 

of estimated volume be obtained 1 

Comnliance with code 4 

Requirement that overtime be oaid during certain specified m.onthsl 

Requirement that no excessive maximum hours be worked 1 

Limitation of period of apnrenticeship 1 

Lirait'ation of number of apprentices and payment of time and 

one-half for overtime 12 

Requirement of no pay-cut 1 

Limitation on reduction of personnel 2 

Limitation on working 95 hours in two weeks 1 

Limitation of maximum daily hours and maximum weekly hours with 

requirement of deduction from "oeak season tolerance- 2 

Requirement that overtime be averaged over 13-week period 1 

Limitation of 4S hours a week 1 

Requirement of payment of time and one-half for overtime 12 

Requirement of payraent of time and one-third for overtime 11 

Limitation upon n^uraber of hours of overtime 11 

Requirement of reoort of additional hours worked 1 

The majority of these imposed conditions related to the payment of 
minimum wages or adherence to certain maximum hour requirements. There 
is no doubt of the power of the Administration to exempt the particular 
applicant or apolicants from the provisions of tne code either upon a 
partial or complete basis as to both extent and time, however, the im- 
position of a condition must bear a relationship to the general purposes 
of the statute in order to have a valid condition. (*) 

The declared- policy of the Act, among other things, relates to the 
promoting of the organization of industry, the reduction and relief of 
unemoloyment and the improvement of the standards of labor. An exami- 
nation of some of the types of condii"ions tabulated above might show 
a relation to the declared purposes of the Act, however, some of them 
may be oven to question. In addition, it is subject to question 
whether or not tne Administration should affix a condition to an exemp- 
tion order '"nicn is not a part of the code and which a member is not 
already bound to comply with. These various phases of the question^. 
resulted, in tne ooinion of the author, in man^' invalid conditions 
which '"'ere attached to orders of exemption. 

The invalidity of these conditions raises two points, one, the 
effect upon the minimum wage provision, two, the effect uoon the appli- 
cant. It would apoear tnat the grant of an exemption to i^hich an 

(*) See Smith v. CaJioon, 283 U. S. 553 (193^) 

invalid condition ir>s n.ttachecl '"oula be r\ vilid evenotion but that the 

condition woald he inopentive. In U; S. v. Ciiicaf^o, etc., Railway Co ., 

282 U. S. 511 (1031) t:ie Interstate- Cor'r,erce Comniission attached in- 
valid conditions to its e^rr\nt of a per?iit to issue securities and after 
the securities were issued t.'..e' court neld tnat even thou^^h the coiidition 
was not severable from the b=icis of the, the condition could be 
ignored. (*) 

It would seem that an investi, coition of the conditions attached to 
orders of exeinctions would be no* cess ax";'' in order to determine, with the 
background o^ tne legal principles hereinabove stated, whether or not 
the conditions imposed were valid in f'-'.ct =ind in law. 

There is also tap larger field o:^ investi "fition that, assuming the 
conditions attached to orders of exemptions 'fere valid, '"ou^d they in 
fact modify the provisions of tae code or cause ambiguity to arise there- 

HEASC'TS - ng-II AL C^^ EXE?.'? tIUMS 

An investigation discloses that of the oroprs ex-^mined one hundred 
and forty-six (146") thereof denied t;ie aoplication for exemption and in 
some cases the Administration took occasicn to exoresi; its reasons there- 
for. A tabulation shows the following: 


Grant of Exemotion would be unfair to corapetitoi"s 14 

Grant of exemption would' result in code collapse — 1 

Applicants are code violators 3 

Absence of Proof of hardshlo ■ • , 9 

Code authority and the Adr-.irii strntion con&idered 

grant a particular precedent : • 3 

Market over- supplied ■ 

(Machine hoTir limitation exemption) — • 1 

Skilled help available 4 

Conditions of aioplicant not dissimilar from tiiose of 

othpr m.embera of trie industry 3 wages too low to justify exemption 1 

The few reasons above tabulated are not of much help in determining 
the factors in the actual decision of denial. The orders of exemiDtion 
are rather general in their statements of reasons and nc findings of fact 
were contained therein. The power of exemotion, as granted by the Ife- 
tional Industrial Pecovery Act, is United, to tn^ finding that tne action 
is "necessary to effectuate tne oolicy of Act". 

(*) See NRA Legal research memorandum 883, May 16, 1925, memorandum on 
tae effect of tae conditional exemotion order. 



The power to grant exemotions is executive in character and it is 
presamed that the exercise of po";er was in accordance witn the limita- 
tions laid down by Congress, (*) All of the orders of exemotion 
examined contained a statrment that the particular administrative ac- 
tion set forth in the order was "necessary to effectuate the oolicy 
of the Act." This finding, coupled with the authority of a line of 
decisions holding that an order of exemption is valid even though ma,de 
without any formal findings (**), rendered the action of the Adminis- 
tration valid within the terms and limitations of t^ie National Indus- 
trial Recovery Act. 


The activity of tne particular codes studied for Dumoses of this 
report in the realm of exemptions may be of interest and the following 
tabulation has been made, which snows the name of the code studied and 
the number of orders of exemotion found therein. The tabulation also 
shows the particular code orovision to which most ao-olications for 
exemption referred: 

NA'ii C? CODE 


Cotton Textile 

Shipbuilding & Shiprepairing 

Wool Textile 

Electrical i. anufac taring 

Coat & 2 Suit 

Lace Manufacturing 

Corset & Brassier 

Legitimate Full Lcngta Dramatic 

& Musical Theatrical 
Lumber & Timber Products (incomplete) 
Photographic Manufacturing 
Fishing Tackle 

Rayon Synthetic Yarn Producing 
I en' s Clothing 

Automobile Manufacturing 
Cast Iron Soil Pipe 
Wall Paper Manufacturing 
Salt Producing 

Motion Picture Laboratory 
Underwear & Allied Products 
Oil Burner 

30 Machine hour -orovisions 

9 Overtime wages 

38 Machine hours & normal 

maximum hours 

67 Normal hours and wages 

7 iVagp area rates 

20 Maximwn hours 


Normal wages 


Normal maximum hours 


Normal maximum hours 


Normal maximum hours 


Machine hours 


Overtime tolerance 


Normal maximum hours 


Lvertime tolerance < 


Normal hours 


Machine hours 


All -orovisions 

(*) See Panama Refining Co. v. P^yan, 55 Sup. Ct. 242 (lySS), 
page 283 

(**) See NRA Legal research memorandum 680, March 2, 1935, memorandum 
of law on the administrative law governing exemptions. 





Gasoline Pumo 

Textile Bag 


Artificial Flower 'x Feather 

Linoleum & Felt Base 


Knittinf^, '^raidine: & Wire Cover- 
ing Machine 

Retail Eilmbe'r 

Laundrv & Dry Cleaning 

Textile Machinery 

Glass Container 

Builders' Suoolirs 

Boiler Manufacturing 

Farm Equipment 

Electrical Storage & Wet Primary 

v7omen' s Belt 

Luggage & Fancy Leatner Goods 


Boot & Shoe Manufacturing, •■■ 

Saddlery Manufacturing 

Iiiotor Vehicle RetaiiL Trade 


Silk Textile 

Optical M-anuf acturing 

Automatic Sprinkler 

Umbrella Manufacturing 

Mutual Savings '.Banks.. 



Compressed Air ' 

Heat Exchange 

Pump Manufacturing 

Cap & Closiire 

Ma.rking Devices 

Retaiih Trade 

Drest Manirf acturing 

Paint, Varnish & Lacquer 

Paper & Pulp 


Can Manufacturers 

Wholesale a Distributing Trade 

Schif f li , Hand Embroidery, etc. 

Men' s Neckwear 


Cigar Manufacturing 


Normal hours 
Normal minimum wagps 
Wages, r^Xid hours 
Normal hours 

Normal ma>:imum hours 

Normal maximum hour;: 
Overtime tolerance 

Wages and hours 

f.inimum wages 
Overtijne tolerance 
Maximun hours 
Child labor 
Machine hours 





Minim.ura wages 


Minimum wages 


Wages and hours 


Minimum wages 


Overtime tolerance 


Maximum hours 


Maximum hours 


Skilled wages 


Wages and hours 


Overtime tolerance 


Area wage rates and per- 

centage of anorentices 




I'axinum hours 


Normal maximum hours 


I'unimum wages 


Hours and wages 


Slow-worker wage toler- 






This chapter has so far concernf-u itself 'vith tap treatment of 
Administrative orders of grant or denial of exeTotions which were issued 
after the approval of a code, tiiat is, during tne coarse of code admin- 
istration. The content of the study has been baaod "i:^on orders 'affecting ( 
or a few particular codes. As the qd-nini strati on of codes progressed, 
various problpras arose wnicta required drastic and widespread action, 
either Executive or Administrative, which would find some exoression in 
the issuance of general exemotions. 

An order of general exemotion was one issued feitte.r by. the Ei^esr- 
dent or tne Administrator and applied to all codes, or to all codes 
which were affected by tne particular situation covered. A few samples 
suffice. (*) Experience taught the Administration that the operation 
of tne PPiA in small towns and hamlets resulted in many cases of hardship 
in local retail trade and service trade establishments. The solution 
of the problem lay in exemiDtions of those affected, so on October 23, 
1933 the President, by Executive Order Ko. 6354 issued a general exemp- 
tion from certain provisions of the PSA to employers engaged locally in 
retail trade and local service trades, whose place or places of busi- 
ness were located in towns 6f less than 2500 iDopulation. This form of 
general exemotion was not exercised by the President on many occasions, 
but was utilized by tae Administrator to meet nrobleras relating to 
policy, hardshio and other situations. Charitable and publicly endowed 
hospitals found undue hardship with resDect to purchase of materials 
from members of industries subject to codes. This condition resulted 
in the issuance of Administrative Order No. X-4 (January 23, 1934) where- 
by those members of codified industries who sold materials to charitable 
and publicly endowed hospitals were exempted from the provisions of the 
codes relating to sales. Difficulties of assessment of members of in- 
dustry for code administration necessitated tne- use of this -oower of 
exemption, as evidenced by Administrative Order X-3b (**"> MA j^olicy 
required some consideration insofar as codes applied to sheltered work- 
shops, and in tne execution of this policy a general exeraution was 
granted whereby sheltered workshoos '-^ere exeinpted from the operations 
of codes on certain conditions. (***) This power of general exemotion 
was used on very few occasions by tie Administration and it is mentioned 
here for the q.iroose of sho'-'ing one particular tyoe o:f exem-otion and 

(*) See also Administrative Order No. X-14n _ MA files 

(**> For more detailed treatment of general exemptions created 

by Executive and Administrative Orders se^ ""istory of General 
Exemptions", vTork Materials No. 75. 

(***) Administrative Order X-9, Jarch 3-, 1954, in IIRA files. 



the metnod of execution thereof. On some occT.sions a eener-'il PTeTotion 
was issued, upon th'= at)iolication of tie interested parties, as in the 
case of Administrative Order No. X-&. .,■*•:"•'■ 


Various codes ^s subniitted for aoDroval, and some as agreed uoon 
between the sponsors thereof and tne Administration, contained pro- 
visions settini^ up exemrjtions from tne provisions of the code. A 
usiial pxemijtion found in codes related to sales for exnort whereby the 
provisions of the code did not apoly to export sales (*). Other types 
of exemptions were written into codes and operated to relieve members 
of the industry from the operation of some or all of the provisions of 
a code. Various questions arise in connection with these tyo^s of 
exemptions, but the author aas not had an opportunity to fully consider 
them. One of these problems relates to the above mentioned type of 
exemption by which code definitions of export trade varied from the 
definition of interstate and foreign comraerce found in 7 (d) of the 

(*) For example, Article X, Oil Field Pumping Engine f/ianuf acturing 
Code, T^Io. 547, Supo. 35, Codes of Fair Competition, Vol. XIV, 
p. 357. 



The oor/er to grant exemptions is one easily susceotiole of atuse and one, 
the exercise of \7hich, can result in complete defeat of the purposes of legis- 
lation from I'hich the exemption is granted. The reasons for the po\7er of 
exemptions or dispensing peers, as they are sometimes called, can be broken 
dovm as follo\7s: 

1. Tefinite ascertainuent of general 
legislative language without the 
necessity of specific penalties or 
law suits. 

2. Recognition of special cases which 
cannot fit into a general rule, 

3. Relaxation in cases of an emergency 
nature where humanitarian considerations 
are concerned. 

4. Relaxation of questionable policies, 
especially those of an economic 
nature (*). 

The above classifications show reasons for the allowance of e xeraptions and 
each one of them enables a just enforcement of the Act and as such are necessa:i 
to effectuate the policy of the Act, 

Chapter I refers to various sections of the Act upon which the power to 
grant exemptions can be predicated. Specific mention of the phrase "ex- 
ceptions to and exemptions from" in 'Section 3(a) leads to the conclusion that 
this section was intended to grant this power. This section however, in the 
main specifies procedure for the submission of codes and for the conditions of 
a-o-orovsl thereof. Some doubt might arise that the power, to exempt or except 
relateed to the time of the order of approval, but a careful reading of this 
grant of power reveals that it is not liaked up with the order of approval but 
rather is repeated so that there is no such limitation upon the power to grant. 
This conclusion is based on the construction of the Act. Chapter I also stated 
that a grant of power to exempt vras conferred by Section 10(b), Some doubt 
may arise as to whether exemptions and exceptions axe included within the 
phrase "cancel or modify", however, it is suggested that the specific s^tatement 
be set forth in new legislation, if any, as to power of exemption. Such state- 
ments should make it clear that the power to grant exemptions may be made at 
the time of the order of approval of the code or afterwards; that the exemption 
may be modified or terminated; and that power to exempt may apply to an in- 
dividual, group of individuals, industrial subdivision, an entire industry, or 
American industry in general, J 

Chapter I mentions the administrative discretion conferred upon the Presi- 
dent in the exercise of the power of exemption. An arbitrary action with res- 
pect to exemptions is not proper and substantive guides as to the subject of 
e xemptions denote general principles of fair cl assification. These principles 

(*^) Preund, Administrative Powers Over Persons and Property (1928), Pages 128" 
9S44 ' to 139, inclusive. 


fa]l into one ox t^-o categories - (l) classifications must be fnir and 
reasonable and not arbitrary, (2)' all persons nithin the class must be treated 
alike so tliat others not at the moment si:-'lyina; for exemi-jtion may make a loli- 
cation at a later time uoon a sho\;in£; that they are within the class so 
fefined (*). It is true there is n^' guarantee' in the Fifth Araendment of the 
Federal Constitution of eq-oal nrotection of the la.'S, but in cases arising 
under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution it does prescribe 
eq.ual protection of laws, which ■.vill serve as a. precedent for determining 
valid classifications in the exercise of the power of exemptions. (**) 

The necessity of exem-ntions being fair and reasonable and that the 
application thereof be equally unifoi'ra would indicate that the power to exempt 
should be granted legislatively in accordance with a declaration of standards 
upon which the exercise of administrative discretion could be predicated 
and limited. This form of ^rant of power could specifically set fort', the 
various requirements for the grant of an exem-'jtion and require th^t uoon 
sufficient showing and a finding thereof by the administrative agency that the 
applicant came within the limitation of such standards, the exemption could 
be issued. 

The issuance of such an exerar)tion could, under the terms of the statute 
be declared a precedent for all other -oersons equally situated, thereby meet- 
ing the requirements of a fair and reasonable excraotion aptjlying to all persons 
in the same category. For the -numoses of information, it coxold be required 
that notice a,nd -oroof of condition similar to that of the precedent should be 
submitted to the administrative a^rency by the particular person or group of 
persons so similarly situated. This requirement of report and ijroof would 
enable the administrative agency to take a^ction with respect to any particular 
problem which would arise by virtue of the -orecedent crea.ted. 

The above mentioned standards for rules and classif icatiois find a basis 
for a statement thereon in Section 1 of the present Act. Elaborations upon 
these standards can be obtained in some degree from the information set forth 
in the Chapter entitled "Causes of Exern'oti^ns". The reasons set forth in the 
ap"olicaticns will serve as some criteria for the standards sug.zested. It is 

(*) oee l\\3A Legal research meraorand-'am No, 4C6 , November 16, 1934, memo- 
randttm of law concerning substantive giiides in granting exemptions, 

(**) See Connoly v. Union Sewer Tipe Co . , 134 U.S. 540, 22 S. Ct. 431, 

46 L. ed. 679 (1902) 
Central Ltunber Co , v. South Dakota , 226 U.S. 157, 33 S.Ct. 66, 57 L. ed. 

164 (1912) 
GuLf. Colorado & Santa Fe Hr.y.Co . v. Ellis , 165 U.S. 150, 17 S.Ct. 260 

61 L. ed. 685 (1897) 
Jone s V. Brira, 165 U.S. 180, 17 S. Ct. 282, 41 L, ed. 677 (1897 

Se.-^board Air Line Iiwy . v.. Seegers, et 'al , 2C7 U.S. 73, 28 S. Ct. 28 

52 L. ed. 108 (19C7) 
German Alliance Insurance Co . v. Hale , 219 U.S. 3C7, 31 S. Ct. 246, 

55 L. ed. 2S9 (1911) 
P.adice v. New York , 264 U.S. 292, 44 S. Ct. 325, 68 L, ed. 690 (1924) 



reglized that ver-- little information is containsd in this reocrt as to the 
reasons for exem.tipns from .trade -oractice -.rovisions and also code authority 
provisions, "but sone inforraation must be avail^^TDle in scrae of the studiics 
being conducted 'oj the Trade Practice . Studies Section of. the Division of '' 
Hevie-' and a further study of this subject \7ill discover them. 

Exaiainstioia of records of WTU in respect to the use of the terms 
"exemption", "e::cev)tion" and "stay"' shows' attempts on the -nart of^ the Adminis 
tration to differentiate the meanirss thereof, folio-Tad by' attempts to treat 
the terms srynon-mously, resulting in interchangeable iise of the terms. Utter 
confusion resultea as to the exact meaning of the administrative use of the 
various terms. Adjuinistrative orders covering identical situations in one 
case TOuld e:vempt the particular applicant from the provisions of the code 
and in the other, stay the provisions of the code as to the particular ap-oli- 
cant. It is true that the effect of the a diainistrative action does not depen 
upon mere terminology, but for -jurrjoses of a dministrative cl-rity, the pro- 
cedure and the lihe, it is recomniended that legislative definitions of the 
terms "exemption" a.nd "exce-otion" be made to act as guides to administrators 
of any new Act. It is suggested that the term "exerrotion" refer to adminis- 
trative action by which the particular member of sn industry or trade or 
several members thereof, including geogrjmhical or indaxstrial subdivisions, 
or the entire moustry, are relieved from full or iDartial ooeration of a code 
and that an exerarition cannot operate unless there has been a r^rior obligation 
to abide by the code. 

^ The terra "exception" should refer to administrative action whereby an \ 
individual, group of individuals, either in geogrn-nhical or industrial sub- 
divisions, or an entire industry or trade is relieved from the operations of 
a code, or portion thereof, by the terms of the code itself . 

The terra "stay" should refer to administrative action whereby an in- ' 
dividual, grouo of individuals, either geogra-ohical or industrial, or an 
entire industry would be relieved from the operation of the r,rovisions of 
a code, in whole oria part, by the order of apiDroval of the code. The stay 
operates from the time of the promulgation of the code and recognizes the 
existence of the particular provision but relieves persons x..m the ODeration 
thereof fron the time of the order of apv,roval. The effect of an orderof 
stay -issued after the approval of the code would, under the suggested defi- 
nition, be an oxeraption and not a stay. The suggested definitions raay serve ; 
sorae guide and it is ,:ost strongly urged that some clarification of the terras 
be made. 

This report lists the actual official record of the delegation of iDOwer 
to grant exemptions. ^ The record of itself is in the main sufficient. An 
examination of the files discloses various deviations in the authority grantee 
It is true, consideration of speed and emergency , confronted the Adminis t rat ioj 
in 1933 and the early part of 1934. Such matters as delegation and the uropei 
expression thereof seemed of secondary irar)ortance. . In addition, the excesses 
of authority found in the records were not attributed to the Administrator or 
the National Industrial Recovery Board, but .rather to the lesser officials of 
KRA. Lack of ocordination of activities and Tjrecedents upon which their 
actions could be based Were very strong contributing causes of these excesses 
of authority. If the sugg.;stion relating- to standards and classifications as 
to exemrjtions iS followed, the necessity of gross delegation would not be so 
real. The variances may in some cases have been due to problems of procedure 

and intercfrice c^eration. The situation is not cf such ini-nortanco as to re- 
quire legislative action, lio- over, it is suf-fTcsted that the -oower to grant ex- 
eiimtions should remain in the administrative a 5,ency v/ith the possibility of 
some dele:^:ation to an oxenmtion off icef , ':T'ho ' should "be the only one permitted, 
other than the head of the administrative agency, to exercise this power. 
Since this report has not considered auestirns of d^lay and inefficiency r/ith 
resT^ect to geographical considerations, the question of the re~ional docentrali*- 
zation of authorit"'- is left o oon as to su3;,-;5Estion, hoirever, the plan initiated 
1)7 the National Industrial Hecovory Board nith resr)ect to exemptions in terri- 
torial codes as evidenced 'hj Office Memorandum No, 348, March 19, 1935, should 
tie cont'inued. It is the or)inion Of the author that the v.holesale delegation 
of the -oovcr to exera-ot resulted in lac': cf coordination and little knoi-'ledge 
of the' extent and nuiriter of the aVolicatirns being stibmitted, thereby re- 
sulting in inequities, code brea:'-do\7ns and arbitrary rulin-^s. A tighter, 
closer and mor^ carefully guarded c-ntrol of this poi,7er would restilt in better 
ad'iinistrativo use thereof. 

The elimination of th.^ causes of exera'otions depends upon the tj'pes of code 
provisions to which exemptions would be addressed. The analysis of e xem^itions 
and codes in Chapter IV, is more a matter of historj?- than a basis for concrete 
suggestion ps to loarticular codet. The experience had with certain industries 
as to certain provisions, of course, is helpful, provided the same type of 
provisions would be submitted by the same 'industrTr, AJ'rnowledge of the 
conditions in the industry 'of ten ,j,s the controlling factor as econCinic and 
industrial conditions raaj''' change , but it is suggested that, in consider-^tion 
of any new codes, particular attention be paid to the following: Multiple 
codes, overlapping definitions, peak seasons in the 'industry, adequate pro- 
visions for rush of orders,, availability of skilled help, financial condition 
of the members of the industry, the departmentalization of the industry, labor 
unrest in the industry, r^eograohical differentials, all of which result in 
applications for excmptidns. 

The a-athor does not feci 'q-aalified, upon the basis of this report, to 
submit any recovanendations regardin-; trade practice provisions. 

It is suggestcid that with respect to the neriod of an exemption, great 
latitude and discretion be reposed in. the administrative agency. 

It is *sug,.?«sted tliat retroactive exemptions, as such, be eliminated 
and that if situations arise whereby -oower of condonation shoiold be utilized, 
that it be used in that manner rather than in the forn of a retroactive ex- 

It is the opinion of the author that a number of administrative orders 
of exemptions contained conditions which, under the ordinary niles of law 
of ccndlticnal exemptions, were invalid. The necessity of conditions in 
exemptions is recognized, but the administrative exercise of the imposition 
of these conditions should be liraited ''oj st'^tutory declarations as to the 
types cf conditions which could "ce inncsed, bearing in mind the legal re- 
quirement that the condition must bear relaticnship to the matter upon which 
the order of exen'-iticn is issued. 



realized that ver-',- little information is containad in this roocrt as to the 
reasons for exem 'tif^ns from ,t>rPde practice irovisions and also code authority? 
provisions, 'out sone info r-nat ion must be avail^ible in scrne of, the studiics 
teing conducted oy the Trade Practice . Studies Section of the Division of 
Sevie',' and a further study of this subject trill discover them. 

Exaiainatio^ of recoi'ds of l<[3ji. in respoct to the use of the ternjs 
"exemption", "ercception" ano. "stay"' shows attempts on the part of the Adminil 
tration to differentiate the meanirgs thereof, follCTad by attempts to treat 
the terms synon^-moxisly, resulting in interchangeable use of the terms. Uttei 
confusion resulted as to the exact raeanin.? of the administrative use of .the 
various terms, Adjainistrative orders covering identical situations in one 
case would e:-:erapt the particular ap;olicant from the provisions of the code 
and in the other, stay the provisions of the code as to the particular appli- 
cant. It is true that the effect of the administrative action does not daper 
upon mere terminolC;,y, but for ^jurposes of a dministrative clrity, the pro- 
cedure and the lihe, it is re contended that legislative definitions of the 
terms "exemption" and "exception" be made to act as ;'5uides to administrators 
of any new Act, It is suggested that the terra "exemtion" refer to adninis- 
trative action by which the particular member of pn industry or trade or £ 
several members thereof, including geogrjinhical or industrial subdivisions- " 
or the entire inoustr;/', are relieved from ful'i. or partial o-oeration of a cod< 
and that an exera-ntion cannot operate unless there has been a -nrior obligatioi 
to abide by the code, JL 

The term "exception" should refer to administrative action whereby an 
individual, group of individuals, either in .geogrni-hical or industrial sub- 
divisions, or an entire industry or trsde is reli(iv.?d from the operations of 
a code, or portion thereof, by the terms of the code itself . 

The terra "stay" should refer to administrative action whereby, an in- 
dividual, grou'o of individuals, either geogra-ohical or industrial, or an 1 
entire industry would be relieved from the operation of the provisions of ^ 
a code, in whole or in part, by the order of approval of the code. The stay 
operates from the time of the iDromuljation of the code and recognizes the 
existence of the particular provision but relieves persons ^-,m the operatioi 
thereof fron the time of the order of aporoval. The effect of an order of 
stay 'issued after the approval of the code would, under the suggested defi- 
nition, be on exeraption and not a stay. The suggested definitions may serve 
some guide and it is ,;ost strongly urged that some clarification of the termi 
be made. 

This report lists the actual official record of the delegation ©f povrer 
to grant exemptions. The record of itself is in the main sufficient. An 
examination of the files discloses various deviations in the authority grants 
It is true, consideration of speed and emergencj'- .confronted the Administratic 
in 1933 and the early part of 1934, Such matters as de-legation and the prop( 
expression thereof seemed of secondary ira-oortance, _ In addition, the excessei 
of authority found in the records were not attributed to the Administrator oi 
the National Industrial Recovery Board, but .rather to the lesser officials o] 
WEA, Lack of ocordination of activities and i^recedents upon which their 
actions could be based were very strong contributing causes of these excesses 
of authority. If the suggestion relating to standards and classifications as 
to exemptions iS followed, the necessity of gross delegation would not be so 
real. The variances may in some cases have been due to problems of procedure 

and intercfTice o^:ieration. The sitviation is not cf such iimortance as to re- 
quiro legislative scticn, ho- over, it is suf-r Tested that the nc-nor to grant ex-. 
emntions should remain in the administrative p ^.^ncy v/ith the possibility of 
some delegation to an oxemntion officer, r^ho ' should he the only one permitted, 
other than the head of the administrative agency, to exercise this power. 
Since this re-pcrt has not considered questir^ns of d.^laj'' and inefficiency r/ith 
res-oect to geographical considerations, the question of the regional decentrali* 
zation of authorit-'- is left o ocn as to su:;gostion, however, the plan initiated 
by the National Industrial Hecovery Board rith rcsncct to exemptions in terri- 
torial codes as evidenced b"/ Office Memorandum No, 348, March IS, 1935, should 
be cont'inued. It is the o-oinion Df the author that the v-holesale delegation 
of the ;oc"er to exera-nt resulted in lac': of coordination and little knoi-'ledge 
of the extent and nmnber of the aVolicatirns bcin^, s^ibmitted, thereby re- 
sulting in inequities, code brea::-do\7ns and arbitrary rulings. A tighter, 
closer and raor- carefull^'/ guardec". c-~ntrcl of this porrer wovild result in better 
ad'iinistrativo use thereof. 

The elimination of th- causes of cxera-otions dspends uoon the tj-pes of code 
provisions to v/hich exemptions would be addressed. The analysis of exem-ntions 
and codes in Chapter IV, is more a matter cf histcr;'' than a basis for concrete 
suggestion as to laarticular codet. The experience had vdth certain industries 
as to certain provisions, of course, is helpful, provided the same t3rpe of 
provisions wo-old be submitted bj^ the same 'industr^r. A.i'inowledge of the 
conditions in the industry 'of ten ,is the ^controlling- factor as econcnic and 
industrial conditions may' change, but it is .suggested that, in consider-^tion 
of any new codes, particular attention be paid to the following; Multiple 
codes, overlapping definitions, peak seasons in the 'industry, adequate pro- 
visions for rush of orders, availability of skilled help, financial condition 
of the members of the industrjr, the departmentalization of the industry, labor 
unrest in the industry, r'-oograohical differentials, all of which result in 
applications for exemptidns. 

The author does not feel 'qualified, upon the basis of this report, to 
submit any recoia^iendations regardin.r trade practice provisions. 

It is suggestc'.d that vrith respect to the -rieriod of an exemption, great 
latitude and discretion be reposed in. the administrative e^^^ency. 

It is 'suggested tliat retroactive exemptions, as such, be eliminated 
and that if situations arise whereby oower of condonation shovild be utilized, 
that it be used in that manner rather than in the forn of a retroactive ex- 

It is the opinion of the author that a number cf administrative orders 
of exeraT)tions contained conditions which, under the ordinary niles of law 
of conditional c:;empticns, were invalid. The necessity of conditions in 
exemptions is recrgiized, but the administrative exercise of the imposition 
of these conditions shoiild be limited by st-^tutcry declarations as to the 
types cf conditions which could "oe im"ocsed, bearing in mind the legal re- 
quirement that the condition must bear relationship to the ma.tter upon which 
the order of exenoticn is issued. 



Appendix No. 2 

4. .524 Regional nnd Strte Direc-tors 
4.5241 E:ctent of delegation. 

4.52411 Service Cedes. 

4.52412 Codes in aenaral. 

4.525 Territorial adininistrfltors. 

4.5251 Limitations and requ.irements. 

4.526 Delegation to Cede Authorities ty 
4,5,";61 Code prevision. 

4.5262 • Administrative order. 

4.5263 Bj-lavfs of Code Authorities. 

4.5264 General sd'ainistration ;:)elicv. 

4.5265 Legal aspects of delegation to Code 

4.6 Dele;j;ation of ;oower for purposes of ap'oeal, 

4.61 Industrial Appeals Board. 

4.62 Advisory Coiincil. 

4.63 Adiiinistrator end Hatienal Indu.stri3l Recover'/ Board. 
5. •• Kinds of exera-jticns and exceptions. 

5.1 Exeni-oti':^n from provisions of all codes. 

5,11 C-oneral - exempts certain -oersons fron all codes. 

5.111 Exclusion of individual rianual laoor - selling - 
marketin-? of iroduce of farm in Act, 

5.112 Causes of ;enornl exem-Dtions. 
5.1121 Prisons. 

5,112.? Eeder-'^l er State com-'-iotition. 
5.1125 Sheltered TToricshops. 
■3 „ 1124 Territorial ;orobl3ras, 

5.1125 Form cocperatives. • 

5.1126 Trade, or industry in toxins of 2500 or less, 

5.1127 Geographical problems, 

5.1128 Llulti 'le codes. ' 

5.1129 Other causes. 
5.112]^ T"'pic-nl cases. 

5.113 Method of exe ntio-i, . • 

5.2 Complete individual exempti'-n. 

5.21 Exem'Tts one or more industry or trade aemhers from 
''^11 provisions of p code, 
5.211 Causes, 

5.2111 Sm.Tll riraotint of business under code, 

"1,2112 Multiple codes. 

5.2113 Geogra-ihical proble;ns. 

5.2114 Banlcruptcies and business failares. 

5.2115 Receiver shins. 

5.2116 Foreign comnetition. 

5.2117 Subject tr other governnent agencies. 

5.3 Partial individual exemption, 

5,31 Exempts one or more industry or trade nembers from 
Tj.?rt of the provisions of a code. 



Exein-oticns pnd exce-jtions fron crda 'orcvisions relating to labor; 

Gil Hyp&s c-f hour and wbges exeiTotions, 

5.11 Unlimited,, 

6.12 Ccnditional. 

5.13 T^roical cnses. 

6.2 i.iaxii.'iiun hoiors. 

6.21 Normal periods. 

6.22 Pep.'- iDeriods. 

5.23 Overtime tolerances. 

6.3 .Minimum vages. , 

6 . 31 No rm3 1 ra te . , 

6.32 Overtime rote. 

5.33 Apprentice rate. 

6.34 S'^-illed rate. 

5.35 , Union contract rate. 

5.4 Reasons for maximtmi hour and minira-uia \7age exemptions. 

5.41 Geogra'ohical dif iere:itipls. 

5.42 Inahility to operate under code -orovisicns. 

6.421 Scarcity of labor, 

5.4211 Ccmmon. 

5.4212 Ap-orentice. 

5.4213 Skilled, 

6.422 Peak demands, 

6.423 Rush of orders. 

5.424 Inventory bolstering. 

5.425 Emer.^ency T7ork. 

6.4251 Protection of property. 

6.4252 "i.Iaintena::.ce, 

6.4253 IJeath^r, fire, acts of God. 

6.426 Competitii^n' with uncodified industries. 

6.427 Pcdoral and state competition. 

6.428 Financial difficulties. 
6.42S DenartLiental diff icv-lties. 

6.5 Gener-'-il labor provisions. 

6.51 Child labor 

6.52 Apprentices. 

6.53 HandicaoToed workers. 

6.54 Standards of safety and health. 

5.55 Home work. 
5,55 Stretch out. 

6.57 Scri^o -'ia3n'aents, 

6.58 Equitable readjustvient of wages above the ninim-um. 

6.59 Posting. 

6.51_ Collective bargaining;. 
5.52 Miscellaneous. 
6.,6 Ty^Dical cases and discussion thereof as to 
6.61 Bases of exemptions. 

6.52 Developiuent of policj'-, ■ . 

6.53 EvaLiation of e:gperiences. 



7. Excraotions .?nd exceptions from trnde iDracticc -orovisicns, 

7oi p«n.A. 

7.2 Codes. 

7.0 Kinds of provisions. 

7.31 Gener.?! trpde practice rules. 
7„S11 Codes. 

7 = 3111 Generally ncceptod in la':.'. 

7c3112 desirable but not fully accepted in law. 

7o3113 Lesirsble but no basis in lou. 

7.3114 Undesirable. 

7 . 31J 5 Unenforce-^. ble . 

General annl3/sis and disear^sion of tx-JcJe ■iracticc rules from vievrncint of 
cxep.ptions and exrc-'ptions. ' 

7.32 Code Autii'irity rules and regulaticns havin-'^- force 
and effect cf trade p-.-.ctice rules. 

7.33 Price oriicyo 
7.331 priee fixing. 

7.3311 : ■■. 'xod ^.ricos. 
7o3312 LcT/est reoconaole orice. 
7 1,3313 Modal raark-uo; 
7.3--i2 J^rice control. 

7.3321 Less leadors. 

7.3322 Loss limitations. 

7.333 Open iirice systems. 

7.3331 Institution cf system. 
7,.3S32 Particular contracts. 
7,3333- Hethcd cf oeration. 
No bC ; Jor pui-pose of dj.scussians bid deMc'aitdry s-ystenis are inclr.ded 
under this '.nb-division, •■■''■ 

7.334 Cost prrvisicns;- 

7.3341 Galot; Dolon cost. 

7.3342 Obsolete goods, 

7 r 3343 Jil^.-iCrgency disposals. 
7.334-i Con. edition. " • 

7.335 Account in;? systems. 

7.33.51 Necessity of approval of Administrator. 
7.3352 Complexity of system. ■ 
7c3353 JDiff icvlties of installation, 
■7,335 rcporti:.'-: systems. 

8. Exem-otions and cxcej.'tiions from Code A.uthcrity, 

8.1 Duties required by code provisions, 

8.11 Organization cf 'jGde Autliori i.;^-. 

8.12 Kenorfs b"'" Code ijuthorities. 

8.13 Compliance activitiet,.. 

3^14 Gonei-al code administr-'tirn. 
B.2 IT,?.. A. rules and -'ot^ulations rc-gardin;; activities cf 
Code Atithoriticti. 

5.3 General executive and a di.uni strati ve order re--;;arding Code Authorities. 
o,31 Ora:finization, 

J, 32 Mandatory requirements, 
.?'.33 Code administration. 
C,34 Compliance. 


Code Authority finances. 

9.1 Necessity of ^.xeciption, 

9.11 Adiiiinistrative Order X-19 ^nd. siibscquent oi-aprg 
rclatiniS thereto. 

9.2 Development of terninaticn of oxenption. 

9.21 Necessity. 

9.22 Eases of applications thurefdr. 

9.23 Considerations by N.R.A. 

9.24 Determinations. 

9.241 Complete termination. 

9.242 Partial termination. 

9.25 Effects. 

9.251 N.R.A. policy. 

9.252 Code Authority finances. 

9.253 Com"oliance and enforcement. 

10.1 Bases of .exemptions from lahel iirovisions. 

10.2 Effect of exemptions granted 

10.21 Upon industry members, 

10.22 Com-'iliance 

Exemptions from requirements' of re-ocrting data, 

11.1 Where Code Authority is reporting; agency. 

11.2 Wiiere re-oorts are required fron individual members of 

11.3 Usual governmental reports 

11.4 General executive or administrative orders as exemptions 
from re-)ort-making. 

11.5 Hiiles and regi-Jations re exemptions fro-, rcijort-making. 
Government contracts, 

12.1 Discussion of Executive Orders 6337' and B646 as to 

12.2 Bases of a-y lic=ition for exemptions from executive orders, 

12.3 Nature ^nd extent of ex.-.nptions granted, 

12.4 Effect of exemptions upon purpose of executive orders. 
Conditional orders of approval. 

15.1 Natijre of exemptions requested. 

13.2 Considerations by N.H.A. 

13.3 Determinations. 

13.4 Effect upon conditions and j;eneral code structure, 
i.iiscellancous e::em;)tions, 

14.1 Code Provisions. 

14.2 Executive and administrative orders, 

14.3 Policy, 

14.4 N,R,A, rules and regulations. 
Time of e:-emption, 

15.1 Diiration of Act, 

15.2 Torai30rary period, 

15.3 Retroactive, 

15.4 Conditional 

15.5 Emer:;:ency. 


le,. Procedure a.s to exemptions. 

15.1 Application 'hj . 

16.11 Industry member. 

16.12 Industry grou'o. 
16.15 Code Authority. 

16.131 Rational. 

16.132 Local. 

16.14 Instituted by N.H.A. 

16.141 Industry Division. 

16.142 Le;a,-al Division. 

16.143 Advisory boards, 

16.144 Field offices. . 

16.145 Other departments of N.Fv.A. 

16.15 Government, agencies other than II.R.A. 

16.16 Labor. 

16.161 Individual. 

16.162 Group of em-oloyees. 

16.1621 Unorganised, .•■ 

16.1622 Union. 

16.2 To whom T/as application directed. 

16.21 Washington. 

16.22 Field offices. 

16.23 Code Authorities, 

15.24 Other governmental agencies, 

16.3 Consideration of application. 

16.31 3v deput:% 

16.32 Advisory Boards, 

16.33 Research and Planning Division 

16.34 Legal Division, 

16.35 Administration members snd. Code Atithcri.ty. 
.16.36 Review Division 

16.37 Extent of consideration by beards, etc., and 

limitations thereon. 
16.53 Division administrators.. 
16.59 Higher officials and President. 
16.3]- Extent of consideration of. briefs pro and con. 
16,32 Field offices - N,R.A. 

16.4 Due process rer[uirement. 

16.41 Arjplica.tions submittod to hearing. 

16.411 tj^e , form and e xtent of notice, 

16.412 Place of hearing. 

15.413 Record of hearing. 

16.42 Applications submitte.d to an opportunity to .Ov. heard. 
16.421 TjTpe, form and extent of notice. 

16.43 Application receiving no public consideration. 

16.44 Discussion of treatment of applications with 
regard to due iirocess requirements, 

16.5 Final action on apnlication. 

16.51 Form. 

16.52 Notice. 

16.6 Time of submiasionc of application. 

16.61 Before effective date of Code. 

16.62 Code administration. 

16.63 During ccmoliance com^olaint, 

15.64 During litigation. 



cf exeni'otion. 

Autiicrities to grant exemptions 
rrant excimDtions. 

16.7 Time of handling 3p;olications. 

16.71 A'oplicTtions received in field, 

15.711 Geogrophical cnsiderstions. 

16.712 Bala^^s caxi.sed oy i-cference to Washin--;ton, 
1C-.713 T]A)ical ceses. 

16.72 A"i:"olicatirns received "by or referred to Washington, 

16.721 Routing of applications. 

16.722 Necessity of reference to "bo-rds. 

16.723 Causes of delay. 

16.724 Effects of delay on 

16.7241 Code structure. 

15.7242 Compliance. 

16.7243 Enforccnr^nt. 
Power of subsequent modif icfition or tcrrainatioi 

17.1 N.R.A. initiation. 

17.2 Applicption Toy industry. 
1'^.3 ApTJlication by labor. 

17.4 Application by Code Authorities. 

17.5 Application by other parties. 

17.6 Bases of ap^ilication. 

17.7 Effects of modification or termination. 
Substantive problems. 

13.1 Should K.E.A. -o;rmit Code 
pnd exceptions. 

13.2 Should K.R.A. -nermit field offices to 

13.21 Torapornry. 

13.22 Emergency, 

13.23 Permanent, 

13.24 If revie?' should be had by Washington, 

13.3 What requirements of due process should be considered by N.H.A. 

13.31 Kotice. 

13.32 With or vrithcut hearing. 

18.4 Should applications for exemptions and exceptions be 
referred to: 

13.41 Code Authorities. 

13.42 Other governmental agencies. 

13.43 Administration members. 

13.5 General legcl effect of amendr^ients, stays and interpretations 
UTJon exemptions and exceptions. 

18.6 Should the exemption or exception ruling be a precedent for 
all parties similarly situated. 

13.7 Goneral legal aspects of 

13.71 Retroactive exemptions. 

13.72 Temporary exemptions, 
1^,73 Conditional exemptions. 

Effect of exemptions. 

19.1 Industry 

19.2 Labor. 

19.3 General code structure. 

19.4 Initiation of amendments - stays, 

19.5 O"opression of small enterorises. 

19.6 Monopoly. 

19.7 Development of pel icy. 


20. Discussion of procedure and constructive su,£.gsstions relating thereto, 

21. Evaluations, 

22. Conclusions. 

23. Bibliography. 



PAI-iT ?OUR: cod:: AiaiDMl^lITS 

D. L. B J la- Id 



Undor the --authority of Executive Order ITo. 7075, Jime 15, 
1935, the Organization Studies Secticn cf the Division of Review 
hr.s designated the subject - Araondriients - for study .^.nd report. 
The subject -X-^plies to those phases of the activities cf ITPJl 
as a governmental aj^jency in its treatment of amendiaents to codes. 
The probloms, questions, and attendant raa-tters relative to the 
subject are presented in this report. The content cf the r ncrt 
is primarily concerned T.'ith the bases of power, dele£;ati-ns of 
such power, the necessities of such power and :.'f the extent of the 
delegation thereof. The report also considers the tyi'ios of code 
provisions amended, the industries affected by such aiaendments, and 
the effects of such amendments. 

An analysis of the types of code provisions amended and new 
code provisions inserted in codes 'oy way of amendment is set forth. 
Some treatment of the benefits and detriments of amen(?Lments to the 
particular industries concerned is included in the report - such treat- 
ment beinL; limited to amendi"nents of labor provisions. 

As a basis for this reiort, toie author ha,s ccnpiled a list of 
all araendinents approved from J^vne 16, 1933 to I.iay 2, 1935, inclusive, 
(approximately eight hui:idred) . The list also sets forth the nature 
of the amendments as to the type of code provision affected. lie 
attempt hs.s been made to explore the causes for such amendments and 
the considerations had by 1-T3A prior to approval. Time, for the 

purposes of this reTjort, did not permit, althoti^li some r,mencljnents 
?7hich resulted from applications of -oolicy have been noted. 

The sources of this report and the findings set forth therein 
are the files and records of the national jlccovei^' Administration. 
lie outside sources of inforroE'.ticn been, investigated and no 
conferences or conversations ha,ve been had with any other governmental 
agencies or any private individuals^ The records of code authorities 
and trade associations have not beon examined, as the intention of 
this re-jort is to present in preliiuinary form from ITIiA sources some 
answer to the questions:- (l) YJas the 2:)ower to amend codes properly 
conferred uoon ITHA? (2) '.Vhat did IIHA do in the exercice of this power? 
(3) 'j'liat should any f"Lirti\re governjnental agency, embodj^ing '.ne principles 
of ij3A, be empowered to do va th res-oect to amendments of cooes? 



.AS::s or ?o :x 

On Juno Ih, 1Sj3j t'^'-Q Froricent signec. the ITationr.l Inc'-usti-ial PlS- 
covery Act. {■'■) Title I tliernof relstci". to innistri.r.l recovery r-nd aiong 
other thin ;k v^ovic.en for the io'^valr.tion g" _ji'0'ail^ irtion of coc.cs of fair 
CO 'petition. Section 3 (p) o:" the Act ntates: 

"U"jon the e;o;plicrtion to th.e Presicent o"' one or lore 
trc?,de or in-hAstri-.l aanociations or .';ro"Li"_":.s, the Fresi- 
clent AC'-- p-jprove a code or coSes of fair conpetition for the 
trac'e or inC:r.stry •"r r;-a"j'"ivision thei-eof, represented 
"by the a", licant or a;,. -lica- ts, i:' the President ^inds 
(l) cuch r.ssociatioj'iS or ,:rojp'S inpose no ineouitahle 
restrictions on arViission to le. "hership therein and are 
truly representative of trades or i:".c-i.iEtries or suo- 
divisions thereof, r.nd ('^) that such code or codes are 
not desip'ned to pio;:ote lonopolies or to e"'.i 'inate or op- 
press Enall cntororises rnd ■■.ill not o^pcrrate to discri- 
r.rinate a-^ainst the:, a^nd ■•-'i'J.l tend to e.-fectuate the 
policy 0"^ this title; ?:.o-'ic cd, Shat ?raeh code or codes 
shall -not ■pe^r:.iit laono'polies or n.ono poli-- tic' prc.ctices: 
Frovir.ed further, '^'hrt •diiere s^ich codt or codes ..affect 
the 5er"."iceG and -.'oi.fare. of perso.-.s cn,-;a;:ed in other 
steeps of the econo ic -process, nothin' this section 
shall de.-^rive s-ach persons q-j" tiie ri h_t to he heard 
prior to approval h;' the President of s^ach code or codes. 
The President r.r--, as c? condition of his av. roval of any 
s\ich code,. i-rooFS such, co^nditions ( i-icludi^n.;; require:"ients for 
the 'jai'-i^ji : o" reports and tl..o hee^pi'ny of rcco-o.nts) "or 
the -protection of co'iru-icrs, co:'ipc;titors, e-vplo^;ees, and 
others, and m furtheia-nce of "'die -puolic interest, and 
na- provide. s"a.3h er.ceptior.s to anc^ enenptions ■froM the 
provir.ions of such coc'e, £.s the Presicent in .^.is. f iscre- 
tion dpo:!S necessary' to cff>'ctur.te t'-te policy h^erein 
declared. " ■ 

Section 3 (<^''-) of the Act states: 

"Upon hie o-'^n notion, or if conplaint is .lac.e to .the President ■ 
that ahuses ininical to the puhlic interest and contrary to 
the policy herein declared are ■prevr.lent in a;iy trade or in- 
dastry or suhdivision thereo'f, ?.nc". if 'no coce o^f fair cojrpe— 
tition therefor has the .-etof ore "been s.pproved ''o'j the President, 
the President, after s^ach ■puhlic notice a-nd hearing e.s he 
shall s'^ecify, nay prescribe r,nC. approve a code of fair con- 
petition for such trarhe or ind^c.stry or siijr'.ivision thereof, 
'.Thich shall have the s-". ic effect .as a code of fair conpeti- 
tion approved by the President under suusection (a) of this 
section. " 

(*) Puhlic ..esolution llo. '>7, 11.-1. 5753i 1:''^"'^'- Con"ress, US Stats. 
1S5, hereinafter crllcd the "Act." 

- 118 - 
Section 4(a) of the Act states: 

"The President is authorized to enter into agreements with, and to 
approve voluntary agreements "between and among, persons engaged in 
a trade or industry, labor organizations, and trade or industrial 
organizations, associations, or groups, relating to any trade or 
industry, if in his judgment such agreements will aid in effectuat- 
ing the "Dolicy of this title with respect to transactions in or 
affecting interstate or foreign commerce, aiid v/ill he consistent 
with the requirements of clause (s) of subsection (a) of section 3 
for a code of fair competition." 

Section 7(b) of the Act states: 

"The President shall, so far as practicable, affoi'd every opportunity 
to employers and employees in any trade or industry or subdivision 
thereof with respect to v.'hich the conditions referred to in clauses 
(l) and (2) of subsection (a) prevail, to establijh "oj mutual agree- 
ment, the standards as to the maximum hours of labor, minimum rates 
of pay, and such other conditions of emoloyraent as may be necessary 
in such trade or industry or subdivision thereof to effectuate the 
policy of this title; and the standards established in such agree- 
ments, when approved by the President, shall have the same effect 
as a code of fair competition, aoproved, by the President under sub- 
section (a) of section 3." 

Section 7(c.) of the Act states: 

"Where no such mutual agreement has been approved by the President 
he may investigate the labor practices, policies, wages, hours of 
labor, and conditions of employment in such trade or industry or 
subdivision thereof; and upon the basis of such investigations, and 
after such hearings as the President finds advisable, he is authorized 
to prescribe a limited code of fair competition fixing such maximum 
hoTirs of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of eii>- 
ployment in the trade or industry or subdivision thereof investigated 
as he finds to be necessary to effectuate the policy of this title, 
which shall have the same effect as , a code of fair competition 
approved by the President under subsection (a) of section 3. The 
President may differentiate according to experience and skill of the 
employees affected and according to the locality of enployment; but -• 
no attempt shall be made to introduce any classification according 
to the nature of the work involved v/hich might tend to set a maximum 
as well as a minimum wage." 

The above quoted sections all refer to various t-foes of coded or agreements 
which would serve as bases for amendments thereof, but it is to be noted 
that in none of the quoted sections of the Act is fo-und any reference or 
specific mention of the terra "amendment" or the power to amend. 


U^caninp.tion of Sections 10 (a) anr. 10 (li), --iiich provicle as 
folic rs: 

"Section 10 (a) - The Frosicent is oratlioirizecL to pi-ecril)e 

such rules anc-. re^'ul.-^tionK as nprj be nocessa:;y to carr," out 

t-iie pxirposes o:" this title, a.n(' fees for licenses anc. :"or 

filin"- codes o: fair conpetition anc. a,:;ree-ients, anr". any 

violation o"? a.n" such rule or re-rcl^-'^'io-'"^ shall De '"unish- 

ahle "by fine of not to exceec". O^OC, or i:rpr isonraent for ^ 

not to e::ceeo. si:: lonths, or "both, 

"Section 10 ( b) - The Presic.ent 'lay fron ti::e to tine cancel 
or .lo^'ify any, nprovpl, license, rule, or regulation". unc^.er this title; anc^ each a',;reeMent, coc.o of fair 
conpetition, or licnnse approved, prescrioec., or isstied un- 
der this title shall contain an or.'oress provision to tliat 
cf r^ect." 

lihe-Tise sho'js no specific nention of such terv.i or po'-er. This lad: of 
le;:;islative declaration requires a construction of the Act upon -Thich 
to precicrte the po''er to enend coc'.cs, 

A usual ■.lethoc"'. of statiitory constr'action is:- 

"to have recourse to tlie leyislative "nistory 

of the.Act and Statenents 'by those in chaiY^e 

of it e.urinj; its consideration by the Con^-ress." 

U . S . V, Great Northern Ite il-'ay Co., t?o7 U.S. 

ikk, y^h; 15^. 

See also U. S « ^? h issouri Pacif ic r.ail-'ay Co. , 

071-' TT c '^C.O 0~l'" 

The legislative hie-tor;- of the KI2A revopls that the sponr;orshiD theieof 
intended to ;:ive the President broad povers. An c::a-iination of the 
record of the hearin.'-js before the House and Sena.te o:a the Act, of the 
reports of the Senate Con::ittee o:a finance and the House Cornnittee on 
T7a"s anc'. iieans and of the Conference f.eport discloses sone help.f\il 
i:iforr.iatio:a. The lan:_uai2;e used 'o'j Senator 7a,yner of Isev Yorl:, vhen 
acx.ressin£ the SenF.te on June 7> 1S33> lenf.s sone alo. to construction 
of the Act, '^''ixe SenP.tor saio.:- 

"But if any trp.c.e or inc^ustry crnnot or -'ill not cooperate in 

the fornulation 0:" a voTontary code, the Fresicbent is authorized, 

after pro^jer investi.^a.tions anc. hearinys, to prescribe a coc'.e in- 

cludiny all the salutary anc"'. protective features of the voluntary ^ 

codes. Or if any trade or inc,\\str;' volun.tdrily arrives 2X sone of 

the rectiirenents of a coc^.e anc"". ne "elects others, the President nay 

in a proner n.anner prescri"be thes-.' others ancb include all in 

p. yeneral code," (*) 

(*) 77 Cong, rec, l-Io, 70, p. I^S^S 
t 9844 


It -'ill oe o'')served that the Senator spohe o"" volun'-.r.-:;;- codes of the_ 
■orotec vive features of such codes. In these respects he also clearl;' 
spo]:e of codes forned under Section 3, (s-) on applica.tion of the industry. 
Section 3 (a) contains provisions ••hich are "aalutar-- anc'. protective," 
ho'-eve;;, the Senator's tise o" the "ord "preTcrihe" fine's no op.sis there- 
for in Eectio:! 3 i^) » ^i^e '?ord toes appear in Sections j (d) and 7 (c). 
It '-"ould therefore appear that vrhen Senator 'Ja ;ner used the ''ords 
nuoted above, he '-/as referring-; to Section 3 (^0 '"'h-sn spealrin^; of 
voluntar;^ codes and to Section 3 C^"-) ''hen socahin': of prescrihcd codes. 

The le,^;irlative co;v-ent rcardin." Section 10 (h) f'ivcs ■■:oro li'iit 
upon the 'pOTer of mend. :ent: 

(a) Ihe President had po'^er to .lodify or cancel 
any action trhen lij hin: 

"Section S (h) (") a-athori7.od the Prosidcnt 
to ::odif r or cc'o.cel n:"i.y action tr':en hy hin 
under the title." (Senator j'a-;ner, Ii.2. 
5:65, paje S^.) 

(h) The Presic'ent unfer Section 10 (h) had the 
po "er to -lodii'y fruit" p "reorients: 

"If codes, ajreenents, or licenses prove 

faulty, the pc-rer is rcservec" to t]:.e I-ro" 

si'-ent v:.\:.e:? Section 9 ("t)) to cancel 

or Mod.ii7y an;- order, ap":;roval, license, ' • • 

■j^U-le or reyalation issued under t'lis 

title." (H. E. 130* (hpport o'" -the House 

Co'i::ittee on 'Ja^s and ilcans.) {'op't 3«) ' 

"Section 9 {^) ";'rovideG as iie: etof ore 
strted, for the' cancellation or :.:odifica- 
tion of any orr^cr, a.:rovrl., lic:nsc, ixile, 
or rculahion issxied under this title. "(**) 

(c) The rresidentia!'. po^'ers conferred '-e^e laryely 
unrest:"icted in ori'er to iieot- eneryencics: 

"The o"aes':ion that ^as raisec. a fe-- linutos 

ago hy hr. Le "is — that is, ahout this de'^eyation 

of authorit"- and a'jout the aclninistrator ■ — 

is so inpoi-tant that I -ondered if you th.o"aght 

that the hill itself, in its present for::, 

covers ever;' thin' ; that -rould oe necessa:.y- 

or -hether any further restrictions should 

he offerer, as to the r.d^inistrator, or 

■'hether anythin,-' vould ho s'Lvy'ested 'o'j you 

r.lony that line." (ah-. Trear, Ihid.lll.) 

(*) Section S (0) Irter Section 10 (h) 

(**) Sections $ (a) and 9 (h) I'.ter oeca-.e Sections 10(r) rrj_ 10 (h). 

"Of cov.rsr I cc/.'i '-..ll;:tr:i('. -ov.r C5ncs:..-r;, CoPi.'^'reGs- 
\pn; "but I till it; tar.t M'u-'.t ■ rf s ;-)UJj:osn'l,-- to :i,"J;e 
the po-'er .".a unrestrictec r.s josci'dr '".uri'i,-- tiiese on- 
er.-jenc,"' (".r-s,. jecPr.Ka thiiYjs ciirnge f:-o-i L-..,/ to cV.y. " 
(Senator ■, I"jid. Ill) 

(cl) A reference to the, ""in^ncc Co ■•^ittee hGrrrr.'iii in th"' b>.ivo,te 
secriG to c'.isclose f. rather yointpc". que- ':ion or the ;; oner of 
the President to r lend codes i;nd inf"ics.tet. t...;,t it "as the 
intention to permit -^he Fresif.ent to anenf. codes -There the 
puhlic interest rics hein/;; injured "by the continuance oi the 
particular code, 

"Senator La ZPollete: S3na.tor '.Tafjner, r"id ^'ou 
rnd ;^'o\ir associates consider the advisaljilit^ of 
conferring; poorer upon the President to anend .jr' ' 
revohe these codes of fair co .>.etition in cases 
' i7here it ijas c'evionstrahle that the puhlic interest 
~as heinfj injured ''jy their continuance? 

"Sons.tor "Taf^hei-: 'That is ri;;lit in tlie rc't. He :.\p-/ 
:no6.ify, cancel, or ;"o anythi'.v to the order, " 
(Eea,rin-s;,'s before the Cc:r.r^ttee on Pinanco, 'Jnited' 
States Senate, 73rd Con,-:resr, 1 Ses' ion, G. 1712 and 
E. P. 5755; ^0, 21.) 

An analysis of the aoove; mentioned references' discloses that one of the 
authors of this Act, •i\ile not i;:i'-'in;: a positive rns-.'er, :'e plied' in ? 
vein to sui];.;'est that rjider Section 10 (h), the president do'e's have po"'er 
to mend codes.. '-hen the'- a-^e detrin.ental to the puhlic interest. There 
are other stat'enents in the le;'jislrtive' historj' -hich sho-r. that the 
President has po'Ter to correct fault" codes and, lihe'-.'ise, a sta-te^ent 
referrin; to Section 10 ('b) that anp ciction' could he trl'en. 

It r.ay he ar.p.ied thr t the po-'cr conferred upon the President h;" 
Section 3 (^'-) :~ 

"Tlie Presic ont nay, as 0. confltion of. his ap-.roval of any 
such code, i'.iposL conditions ( inclu-dinfj rccuirenents 
for the nrliin,-'; of reports and the hee^;i"A:; of account?) "or 
the protection 0..; ?,on^;"uj:3rs, co-.;petitor.s, enplpyees, and 
others, anc. in furtherance o" the ■juhlic interes.t, ano may 
'orovide such errce;. bions to and e:ce;:ptions f rq 1 thepprovi- 
sions of s\ich coc^e, as the President in his discretion deevis 
necessary to effcc.tua.te the olicy he:-ein declared,-" 

is sufficient to 'ivc r "/0'"'er of a.'.ent'' lent. The. repetition of the -'ord 
"ucy" ■'oeforc the -ord "provide" .-j'i.oo-s an iiitention that no ti;.:e coni-l,tion 
s'.ioliIl- attach to or li'-'.it 'the po" 'or to, pjiend codes. Lir.:e"ise, there is 
no state::ent thrt the iv os'ed provisions he 'ratified !)-■ the industry, 
a-l-'".hou"h tho ori ;inal application for r code he voluntarily suh- 
nitted. It -'or.ld scon that the use of the -ore- "iposc" indicates thrt 
the 00 'er to a. ^enc, a-s conferred cy Section 3 i^-) , '"?-s not tied to the 
volj.intary fea.tures of the first oart of th-at Sect;.on, 



Section 10(b) is the safest part of the Act upon which to base 
the power of amendment (*). 

It may be reasoned that the po^'-ers contained in Section 10(a) 
with respect to the prescrir,tion of rules o.nd re;5ulntions may be 
invoked for use as a po'^cr of rmendraent. The reliance upon this 
section should be predicated upon the contention that code pro- 
visions are roles and reg-jilations (**). If this argument is proper, 
then strength rould be given to the p-Dnlica.bility of Section 10(b) 
in that this section expressly refers to the terras "rule and regu- 

The voluntary nature of codes submitted under Section 3 (a) 
caused discussion by some NRA. officials as to the power to amend 
codes without adherence to this theory and -Dolicy of industrial or 
trade volition. Some believed that no power existed whereby such 
codes could be modified v-ithout the assent of the industry affected. (***) 
Section 10(b) in part requires - 

"Each a;-;reement, code of fair competition . • 
shall contain an expressed provision to that 

In other words, a mandatory expression of the power set forth in 
Section 10(b) was required in each code of fair competition. All 
codes contained such a provision, a typical one being: 

"1. This Code and all the provisions thereof are ex- 
pressly made subject to the right of the President, in 
accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of 
Section 10 of the National Industrial Recorery Act, 
from time to-, time to caacel or modify any order < 

(*) One legal periodical takes it for grajited that the President 
may modify or amend code provisions at will, irrespective of 
whether or not the members of industry assent. "Except in 
the Iron and Steel Industry, the codes do not purport to be 
agreements between their members and in no case between mem- 
bers and government . . . the fact that the President can 
amend codes both before and after approval (citing Section 
10(b)) recnforces this conclusion." 47 Harvard Law Heview, 
100, Ivjov ember 1933. ) 

(**) , See NRA Legal Research Memorandum No. 68, June 29, 1934 - 

Power of President to Amend AAA Codes Without Assent of the 
Industry Affected. 

(***) See NRA Legal Research Iv'eraorandura No. 68, supra - Also NRA 
Legal Research I^emorandum No. X-297. 



o,_i3rovcl, license, rule, or reruletion issued under 
Title I of said Act and specii'icc^ll;^ 'out \;itliOut 
linitaticn, to tae rignt of President to cancel 
or Modifv xiis approval of this Code or any conditions 
inrcoscd "by I'iin upon his ap_.jroval thereof." (*) 

The volxmtary inclusion of such a provision 'oy the sponsors of a code 
under Section 3(a) v/ould infer ai assent to sv-hsequent e::ercj-se5. of the 
general pov/ers set forth in Section 10(o). 

Section C(a) peri.uts the President to 

"ii.ipose such conditions . . . for the protection 
of consuHers, competitors, employees and others 

This form of exercise of the power of amendment vas the imposition of 
a condition upon the order of approval of a code, either previously grant- 
ed or to he issued in the future. The theory of this exercise of pov/er 
seems to he in the nature of a "continuing condition", which attached to 
the order of approval and coiild he exercised "oj the president at any 
time (**). An example of this form of . aaendnent is found in Executive 
Order 6711-A (llay 15, 1934) "vrhich states in the last par;igraph thereof - 

"This order . . . shall operate c',s a condition upon any 
previous orders approvini^ any code of fair competition 
under Title I of the national Industrial Recovery Act". 

It is interesting to note tnat this Executive Order also sets up rules 
and regulations and a requirement that no provision of the code shall he 
construed or applied as to viols,te the rules and regulations prescrihed 
hy the order. 

The various theories of constru-ing the existence in the Act of the 
power of amenchmerit have h^en set forth ahove and it is the author's con- 
clusion that the pov/ers contained in Section 10(h) are sufficient to in- 
clude the power of amendi.ient of codes. 


The po\/er conferred hy the Act '.'as suhject to few limitations. The 
purposes of this legislation necessarily required an amhit of wide ad- 
ministrative discretion. This discretion with respect to the power of 
amendment was e:>rpressed in various wa.ys in the Act, hut all referred to 
the same limitation. Section 10(a) in part says - 

(*) Article YIII, Code of Pair Competition for the Pleating, Stitch- 
ing and Boni'.az and Hcnd Erahroiderj"- Industry. 

(**) See ;i{A Legal Research Liemorandura iTo. 63, supra. 


. nrccnsary to carry out the piorposes of this title 

Section 3(c.) in pra-t stt tes - 

1'. . lor tiie protection oi' co;?, jetitors, cons\i:.iers, em- 
ployees r,nd otacrs and in f-arthorance of the putlic in- 
terest ... as the President in his discretion deems 
necessary to effectuate the policy herein " 

These limitations show that the po'7er of the President to amend codes, 
v/ith two exceptions, v/r.s subject only to the requirement that the action 
effectuate the policies of the Act, which were stated in Section 1 of the 

It woxild seem that a limitation of a mandatory nat^ure upon this modi- 
fying power of the president results from the provisions of Section 7(a) 
of the Act, v/hich, among other thiMi'rcs, provides - 

"Every code of fair competition, ag'reement, aiid license 
approved, prescribed, or issued under this Title shall 
contain the following conditions ..." 

This language would appear to deny tjie rir;ht of tl^e President to substant- 
ially modify any code provisions required to be i:icorporated by Section 
7(a). A similar denial appears to have been imposed by Section 10(b) in- 
sofs,r as aanendinents of code provisions incorporate the substance of 
Section 10(b). 


ciiapti:h II 


An amendMent , in the ordinary application ni tlie tern is - 

I'Aij alteration or change for the tetter; correction of 
a fault or of faults; reformation of life by quitting 

"In public bodies; i.ny alteration raade or proposed to 
be made in a bill or motion by adding, changing, sub- 
stituting or oraitting. 

"Law: Correction of en error in a writ or process." (*) 

The legal d.efinition of the terra "ainondnent" is as follows:- 

"Axnendnent in Legislation - An alteration or change 
of something proposed in a bill or esta.blished as 
law. Thus the Senate of the United Statds may amend 
•raonejr-bills passed by tho House of Representatives, 
but cajanot orif;inate such bills. The Constitution 
of the United .States contains a provision for its 
ainend:nent. (U. S. Constitution, Article 5) 

"In practice - The correction, by allo\,'ance of the 
court of an error committed, in the progress of a causCk . 

"Amendments at common law, independently of anj-- statutory 
provision on the .subject, are in e.ll cases in the dis- 
cretion of the court, for the furtherance of justice. 
Under statutes in modern practice, they are vex-y liberally 
allowed in all formal and most substantial matters, either 
without cost to the party auending, or upon such terms as 
the court thiiUcs proper to order. (See Jeofaille) 

"An amendment, where there is something to amend b-;-, may 
be made in. a crininal as in a civil case. 12 Ad. & E. 
217; Con , v. Parker , 2 Pid:. (iJass. ) 550." (**) 

ITo mention of the term "ai'.iendmrnt" or "amend" is found in the Act, but 
Section 10(b) uses the term "modify". The ordinary yaeaning of this term 
is to alter or qualify. The word is synonymous with the term "amend" 
(*** ) . 

(*)" TJebster's l.'ev/ International Dictionary of the English Languag , 
Quarto Edition of the Herriam Scrie-j, 197.4; p. 69. 

(**) Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Ha\'le!s Tliird Revision, Vol. 1, p. 187 

(***) Roget's Thesaurus of English Uords and Phrases - iiawson, Inter- 
national Edition. 



The Arlvainistration reco,2;ni:3Gc. itt'. po-,;ei- to aiuend code provisions, 
"but 'because of its ira:iedir.',to ccid .Ji'os'jiu-; concern over the codification 
of industr-;-, no c-.ttewnt va.v. i.iauo to dofi;ie tue term "ajaenunent" {*). 
The use of the teru I'liodification" finds its origin for liEA use in 
Section 10(1'), such use rcferrini; to the oo^.-cr of aucnd-.ient (**). The 
terms I'raodification" and "aincndnent" ■,7ere used interchs-ngealDly "by liEA 
until Ivir^ 5, 19S4, at uhich tiue C-cn'ral Johnson, Administrator for In- 
dustrial Recovery, hy Administr^itive Order :;-;:7, prescribed - 

".. rules and renulations concerninf: sj:ienG:-!euts to, 
modifications .. of, .. ap'^roved codes .." 

The order defined the term "..lodif ication" as follous:- 

"The term 'modification' shall include 'amendments' 
and all rulings whereby a code is amended by adding 
a provision thereto or chuu^iiK; or omitting any pro- 
vision thereof". 

The effect of this Administrative definition placed both the terra "modi- 
fication" and "ainendr.ient" on the same, basis and incorporated the unof- 
ficial accepted meaning,, at that time, of both terms; viz., changing" of 
addition to, or omission of code provisions (***), This administrative 
definition continued, but after the period of codification of industrjr 
drev; to a close and the requirevients of code administrr^ticn became more 
apparent, the popiilar use of the term "modification" gradually gave Wfy 
to the use of the term "amendmOxit" rnd, on or about September 1, 1934, 
(the date of the issuance of the Office Manual) administrative recogni- 
tion of this change in the reference to the pov.'er. of ainendi-ient was nexle. 
Part II, Paragraph 5000 of such Office i,iejiua.l defines the term "amend- 
ment" as follows :- 

"'Amendment', as applied to iTBA codes, means any 
addition, deletion, or other change in 3.ny language 

Paragraph 5010 of such Part of the Of- ice Ilanual sts.tes:- 

"To preserve uniformitj'- of usage, the terms 'modi- 
fico.tion', 'siipilemcnt ' , 'revision', 'addition' 
pn.d 'adjustment' ■..■ill not be used to describe 
'amendments'". . "" 

(*) It is to be noted that tne term "pnended" is used in the order 
of ap "Toval of the code for the Shipbuilding a:id Shiprepairing 
Industr;^-, Code Ho. 2, July 26, 1935; Paragrcph 12 of the order of 
approval of the Cotton Textile Industry Code. Ho. 1, July 9, 1933 
states "this approval is limited to the f oiir months period '>."ith 
the 'right to asl: for modification at any time . . .". 

(**) See Office Order Ho. 44 - ITovember 21, 1933, HBA files. 

(***) Sec also l^A Office Order Ho. 75 - Liarch 26, 1934. 


'This annoiince ic T.t effected a uni:.'ci':it" of eizpression v;ith respect to the 
tern "aiaendue-.t" i:nC. superseded - "c'.ll previous Off ice .Orders -".iid 
randa, includinj-; -J-i.iir.iitrative Orders ano. i;::ecutive Orders of ge'ieral 
application to i7-1A". (*) 

Exar^iiiation of the 6.efinitio:i set. fortn in Acxiinistrative Order 
X-27 sjid the Of- ice Majiub-l sho"./s a sinilarity in the scope of the tei'm 
"amcnd'-ient" in tjic'u it refers to additions, deletions and chanf^es of a 
code "provision" (as stated in Adr.iinistrative Order X-27) or code "loji^- 
uage" (as stated in the Office I.Ianual.) 

I'O other official aduinistrative definitions of the terra have "been 
found and for purposes of this report the definition of the term "aiiend" 
:ient" as set forth in the Office uanual, tof;ether uith the explanation 
Trith respect to the terns "modification", "suppleuent ", "revision", 
"addition" end "adjustment" T/ill o.pplj-. 

(*) This Office litausd "as ordered op the O.irection of the Adjnin- 
istrator and the order of issucu^ace thereof \7as signed ty G. A» 
Lynch, the Administrative Officer. 




The terns of the Act autnorized the president to estahlish such 
agencies, to accept the services of and to wtii.ize pedersd ofi'icers and 
employees, to prescrihe their authorities, to delegate an3'- of his func- 
tions and powers under the Title of the Act and to fix the compensation 
of such officers, agents a.m enployees. It also authorized the appoint-., 
ment of officers and employees (*). In accordance v;ith this authority, 
the president, on June 16, 1933, appointed Hugh S.'Johnson as Adminis- 
trator for Industrial Recovery \nmer Title I of the Act and further 
appointed a Special Industrial Recovery Board, the merahership of which 
T/as the Secretary of Cor.imerce, as Chairman, the Attorney General, the 
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary 
of Lahor, the Director of the Budget, the Administrator for Industrial 
Recovery and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Cor.imission. The order 
of appointment authorized General Johnson to appoint the necessary per- 
sonnel for the period of thirty (30) de^ys and to conduct the work aiith- 
orized under Title I of the Act (**). One month later, the President 
continued the appointment of Hugh S. Johnson as Administrator for In- 
dustrial Recover^r and authorized him, subject to the general approval 
of the Special Industrial Recover}- Boexd, to exercise the functions 
invested in the President under Title I of the Act, except the approval 
of codes, making of agreements, issuojice of licenses or exercise of the 
power conferred by Sections 3(e), 6(c), 8(h), .9 and.. 10. The., limitations of 
this order reserved the po\;er of amendiient to the-President. Subsequent 
delegations of po;;er of amendment were made relating to various phases 
of iJRA codes end for purposes of orderly treatment they '.Till be separ- 
ately set forth {***)'. 


The difficulties of im^^adiate codification of industry resulted 
in the initiation of the President's Reemployment Agreement, which was 
a general of f er -to employers to cooperate \7ith the President in the pur- 
poses of the Act (**=!=*). 

(*) Sections 2(a) end 2(b), ^~ 

{**) See Executive Order 5173 - June 16, 1S33, I'IRA files. 

(***) It should be noted ths.t the powers ejid the membership of the 

Special Industrial Recovery Board were transferred to the IJationaL 
Emergency Council, See Executive Order ITo. 6513, IIRA files. 

(****) See national Recovery Adj-.iinistration Bulletins ITo. 1, 3 and 4 - 



Tlie PHA ic":es no nCiition of anend:.ents or i.iodiiicftions thereof but Pai-?^ 
graph 14 peruits applicn.tions for stays pending investigation of individual 
cases restating in hardship. The administration of the PEA and the appli- 
cations received raider parci^raph 14 showed need for certain amendments of 
particular provisions of the PEA v;ith respect to certain employers or 
groups subject thereto. Accordingly, on ilovenher 22, 1533, the President 
authorized the Adiainistrator for Industrial Hccovery - 

I'to Malre nodifications of .. srid agreei.ients, or an3'- 
similar agreements here.:>i'ter entered into or aporoved 
"by me hy E::ecutive Order, as he msy, after investiga^ 
tion, .find necess^arj'- in p;a-ticulf.r insts^-nces in order 
to avoid undue hardship". (*) 

This grant of authority to aiacnd eigreements related only to the PEA and 
the S;:ecutive Order expresoly excepted the pov/er of amendment of codes of 
fair competition. 

One phase of PEA '.'hich in some Trays constituted amenczjchts thereof, 
should "be mentioned at this point. Paragraph 13 provides: - 

"This agreement shall cease upon approval by the Presi- 
dent of a code to nhicli the rmdersigned is subject; or, 
if the ilEA so elects, upon submission of a code to 
v.h.ich the undersigned is subject, pjid substitution of any 
of its provisions for any of the terms of this agree;.ient. " 

This section caused a nu.iber of substituted T/a^ge and hour provisions of the 
PEA,i7hich vere issued by permission of the VHk, the effect of r/hich was to 
substitute certain provisions of proposed codes of a nuiber of trades and 
industries for certain provisions of the PEA. The actual result of these 
substitutions was amend],:ents of the PEA insofar as it affected and applied 
to various members of industries cjid trades •./ho had submitted proposed codes 
ojid also obtained substituted provisions. The Administrative detail re- 
la-tive to the issuance of these substituted provisions was delegated to 
the PEA Policy Board, although prior to that time petitions for substitu- 
tions had been handled b^^ the "^articula^r depaVt^-Q-.-^inistrator (*=^). ilo 
specific delegation of this power was made "oj the president, although the 
terms of Paragraph 13 of the PEA indicate the delegation of power to the 
lIEiA to determine whether or not a substitution should be made. These sub- 
stituted provisions were issued on October 14, 1S33 b^^ the AdiJinistrator 
with the approval of the chairman of the Special Industrial Eecover^'- Board. 
(***) These acts of ai-iendment of the PPJl, even if not specifically aAith- 
orized by the President, were subseo^uently ratified oy him (****). 

(*) Ercecxitive Order "Jo. 6443, llovember 22, 1C33, ITEA liles. - 
(**) See Office Order I'o. 18, Axi^ust 7, 1^:53, ITEA files. 
(***) See i;ational Eecovery Adrainistration 3-jJ.letin To. 3. 
(****) See Ei:ecutive Order ilo. 6515, Dece-.foer IS, li:33, IIRA files. 



The Aduinisti-'etor retained the -povrrr to' cnerA the PRA and the in~ 
vestigatio:-! has disclosed no other specific ad;.iinistrativo delegations 
of such po^,■•er or imj other enlarjC^emerts thereon uy Preciidential order, 


As stated ahove, the President retained the pov:er of amendrient of 
codes at the tirae of his original delegaticns of po':er to the Adrainistrator, 
hov/ever, specific delegation of the pov/er of sjaendnent V7as nade to the Ad- 
ministrator for Industrial Recovery onDecemlDer 30, 1933 (*), This auth- 
ority uas enlarged upon hy the terms of Executive Order 2To. 6500-A, 
PelDruary 8, 1934, in v/hich the President authorized the Administro-tor for 
Industrial Recovery to prescri'be rules end reg-alations governing aj.iend:.ients 
to or modifications of codes of fair competition. 

A specific delegation of pov/er relating to codes is fov.nd in Executive 
Order ijo, 675G-A, Jiine 28, 1934, in v'hich tne president offered to enter 
into an agreei/ient v/ith members of certain service trades to "be specified 
"by the Adi-iinistrator upon certain conditions. The order authorized the 
Administrator to supplement the provisions of the Executive Order "by such 
rules and regulations cJid anendiuents, as the Administrator in his opinion 
determined '.vould efiectxiate the pui'poses of the Order and the Act. 


The purposes of the iTIRA were industrial recovery and reemployment 
of lahor engaged therein. The Agricult-aral Adjustment Administration was 
concerned ^vith the rehabilitation of agriculture and under the terms of the 
Agricultural Adjustment Act '(**). ^lie Secretary of AfTiculture nas appoint- 
ed as Adininistrcitor of that Act, 

Some inaustries and trades are closel;'- allied T;ith agricultiire aiid on 
June 26, 193o, the President delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture all 
Of the functions and voxiers, v/ith certain limitations, conferred by Title I 
of the Act with respect to ind^istries end trades engaged particularly in 
the handling of milk end its -oroducts and all foods and foodstuffs. The 
delegation vias subject to the reservation of the pov/er in the President to 
approve or disapprove provisions of any such code (***), Difficulties of 
this joint administration required some segregation of the xiov/er and on 
January 8, 1934, the President trEiisf erred the po\7ers theretofore delegated 
to the Secretary of Agriculture to the Administrator for Industrial Re-i 
covery insofar as the exercise of these porers affected certain indxistries 
v/hich were stated in the order and which were to be the subject of sub- 
seqiient agreement between the Secretary of Aigricu.lture and the Administra.tor 
for IndListria.1 Recovery, Enlargement of these powers theretofore delegated 
to the Secretaa-y of Agricultai-e and the Administrator for Industrial Re- 

(*) Scie Executive Order ilo. G545-A, Decn:.iber 30, 1933, iiRA files. 

(**) Public Resolution llo, 10, 73d Congress. 

(***) See Executive Order IJo. 6182, J-me 26, 1933; Sxecxitive Order 
No. 6207, July 21, 1933 reaffirmed this delegation, llRA files. 


cover7 r/r,s 'by the President in Executive Order ITo. 5764, J-uiae 2S , 
1934, Td7 'Jhich the approval of any anendjient or -.nodif ication of any pro- 
vision or provisions of any code of fair competition v/as to "be exercised 
"by the particular officer v/ith respect to those code provisions which 
such particular officer was authorized to oAninister. No record of any 
further Presidentic-l delegations of autliority with respect to JLAA-IKA 
codes has oeen found. 


A chsjige in the form of the Aduinistrc.tive Agency was nade 'by the 
President v;hen he created the I'ational Industria,l Recovery Board, sub- 
sequent to the resignation of General Johnson as Administrator for In- 
dustrial Recovery (*). The provisions of this Executive Order axithorized 
the Board to exercise all of the po'.vers theretofore conferred hy Exec^ative 
Orders upon the Adi-iinistrator for Industrial Recovery. This transfer of 
power necessarily'- carried the power of aaenduent, the record of delega^ 
tion of which is set forth aoove. 


The po'./er of approval of ej.iendnients of codes wt\s exercised "by the 
President until the time of delegation set forth in E^rcecutive Order IIo. 
6543-A. This power was then exercised "03;- the A(5-iainistrator as affirmed 
by Paragraph III, Section 3 of Aduinistrative Order ITo. X-27, May 5, 1S34. 
Diiring the early pert of 1S34 the nunher of ainendnents submitted to ERA 
began to increase and further delegation of the po^7er to ajaejid seened nec- 
essarj!-, but the power of final ruling on these natters was retained by 
the Ac'i.iinistrator (**). On April 9, 1954, the Administrator created the 
office of Ad;ninistrative Officer end designated hira to exercise the duties 
which woTild not reo^uire the Adiainistrator' s personal attention, including 
final approval in the name of the Acaninistrator of - 

".. codes and other dociLients requiring the Ad:ninistra,tor' s 
8.ction .." (***) 

The ifetional Industrial F;.ecovery Eoard, after its organization, 
authorized the Adiainistrative Officer, siib.ject to its general direction, 
to execute papers and documents and to exercise the power of isouance of 
orders of approval, or rules and reg-ulations (****). 


The formulation, pro:.Tulgation and ac'Lministre.tion of codes in the 
territories of the United States presented specific problems as to the 
method of exercise of the po'.rer of aiaencjaent. ITo delegation of this 

(=*=) ExecL.tive Order Eo. 535G, 27, 1954, I'liA files. 

(**) See Of.; ice Order xlo. 75, ERA files. 

(***) Office Order ITo. 85, iIRA files. 

(****) See Administrative Order X-93, September 28, 1934 and Aojninistrative 
Order ilo. X-107, "Jo v ember 1, 1934, .. EA files. 



loouer '.vas .lade to' Territorial Aclninistrators, ?,ltho-u£;h. certain ri3.1es 
and regulations "./ere set up wliereby tnese territorial at'jnin istratoru were 
required to do certain acts, nostly procedura.1, prior to the actual 
approval of an amencL.ient of a territorirl code (*). 


Durir^ the latter part of the year 1C54, the Administration in- 
stituted a decentralization of the adi-iinistrative './ith cjn. at- 
tendant delegation of various phases of the au-tiiority conferred "by 
the Act. Regional offices were established under the direction of a 
Regional Director and some delegation to these Regional Directors of 
the pover to auend codes v/as contemplated, out never acttially v/as 
inade (**). 


Through the vehicle of codes, the Aduinistration frou tiiae to tiue 
delegated various powers to code authorities; e.g., collection of re- 
ports, investigation of complaints, etc. ITo exrjxole of unqup,lified de- 
legation to code authorities of the povrer to amend has been found, but 
various t^^pes of limitations ur)on the exercise of the poTrer by ilEA "'ere 
set forth in certain codes. Soue code provisions required the prior ap- 
proval of an f-jnendaent by a majority' or fixed percentrge of aji industry 
or trade; other cbdes req.uired the approval of the proposed amendment by 
the code authority (***). other t;'-pes of linitations were included in 
the codes; e.g., the presentation of the codes was not an assent to any 
future a.mendj:ient s . The e::tent of the investigation in connection with 
these tj'-pes of code provisions has been very United, altho^igh questions 
do arise as to the propriet;r of such delegation or lir.ita„tion upon, the 
exercise of governmental poiTer and also the legal question of the effect 
of such a limitation upon the broad pov.'ar set forth in the Act. 

(*) See Administrative Order ITq. X-60, July 2, 1534; Office Order 
ro. 104, Ji.ay 14, 1934, ITU. files. 

(**) See IvRA Coirolio,nce Division Field Letter IJo. ISO, iIRA files. 

(***) See the Iron ohd Steel Code ITo. 11, Article XII, Section 1, Codes 
of Fair Competition. 




The pov/er of anend;.ient is evidencec. in scvei'al '.Tays - (l) general 
E::ectitive or Administrative Order, (2) order of approval of specific 
amendment, (3) conditional order of ap'iroval. (Strictly speaking this 
T/as not "ai.iendiaent" since the code r/as onlj'- p.pprovca in consideration 
of the uodification. ) 

ProH time to time, legal and policy requirements necessitated the 
issuance of an Errec.itive or Administrative Order wheretiy all codes a-o- 
proved or to he approved were amended to conform to the provisions end 
requirements of the psrticf-lnr E:-:ecutive Order (*). Likeirise, Executive 
and Administrative Ordersv.'ere is-ued; \/hich, although in the form of an 
administrative interpretation, may in sono cases have had the effect of 
a general amendment (**). The usual form of these orders, which were in 
the nature of interpretstions, i s as follov;s: 

".. no provision of any Code of Fair Competition, egree- 
;:ient, or license, which he.s he?:etofore "been or may here- 
after he approved, prescrihed or ispued pursuant to said 
Title of" said Act shall he so construed or applied a,s to 
violate the following rules and regulations ..." (***) 

ITo further consideration of the ■.■ethod of general amendment has been made 
for the purposes of this report "oecause this method of administrative action 
is morei.of an exercise of po\7ers of interpretation, and as such, will he 
treated in the study on interpretation:;. 

(*) E:;ecutive Order Ko, 546-1-, llovemher 27, 1S33, prescrihed rules 
and reg-alations '.hich had the effect of ainendiients of any in- 
consistent provisions relating to conmercicil hrihery provisions. 
Executive Order ITo. 5479, Decemher 7, 1933, providing for the 
suhmission of sto,tistical information hy persons subject to codes 
cj::ended every code of fair competition theretofore approved and 
imposed a condition in the order of a.pproval of s. code thereafter 
approved. See Administrative Order ITo, X-51, Juiie 15, 1934 for 
an example of an Ad:.iinistrative Order of general amendjaent, IIRA 

(*=^) Executive Order llo. 6G06-A, February 17, 1S34; Executive Order 
llo. D606-F, February 17, 1S34; Executive Order ilo. 6711-A, May 
15, 1134, IIEA files. 

(***) Executive Order ITo. oGOG-F, su'ora. 



An order of approval o:? a specific ancnd-ient v.'as the nost coi.imon 
nethod of e::ercise of this adninistrative por/er, Usvially an pjaendraent 
T/as proposed 'b;'- an industry group and after hearing and consideration by ' 
imk, it xieis 8,pproved by an Ac-iinistrative Order r relating to the particular 
anendi.ient (*). A method of raouif icr..tion (erroneously called anendnent) 
of proposed codes used frequently by i,7vA was the conditional order of ap- 
proval. This forn of aduinistrative action is evidencea in the order of 
approval of c. code. Such order of approva,l sets forth the adoption and 
ap ^rov£.l of the code, but conditions approval upon the inclusion of a new 
section in the code not originally subaitted b;- the sponsors thereof, or 
a aodiiication of certain language of the provision contained in the code 
as subaitted or the eli-inination of a. particuJ-ar provision (**). 

(*) See Code ilo. 31S, Anendnent .IJo. 1; Code To. 84, Ai.iencunent I'^o. 1; 
Code ITo. 131, Aiaendraent ITo. 1. 

(**) See order of approval of the Boot a^id Shoe ilanufa-cturing Industry 
Code, ilo. 44, October 3, 1933 for a.n exa-mple of an elimination 
of a, portion of the Code; See order of approval of the Umbrella 
Llanufacturing Code ilo. 51, October 9, 1933, for an example of an 
addition of a provision; See order of a.pproval of the Artifical 
Linb Llanufacturing Industry Code V.o. 514, Aug-ast 23, 1954, for 
exarjole of a change in the provisions of e code. 



■ ■ ^ ■. CEAPTia V 

AlTAIiYSIs'oP AL Elli)i.S'TS Qg CODES - TxPg3 

07 CODE pi.QV'ioiGJS a:j^±egt ed 

Investigation df the records relative to auenu:nents has resulted 
in a compilation of all of the amenc^ients approved fron J'lne 16, 1C33 
to uay 2, 1S35.- The bulk of fcie' compilation refers to specific amend- 
ments of particular codes dtA an attempt has "been Made to determine v/hat 
amends.ients vere ap'oroved, rrhat tj^es of code provisions '.vere aiiiended, what 
types 01 code provisions ivere adf.ed to or deleted from codes. Some ef- 
fort has been made to stuc^- the .effects of such araendi.ients upon the code 
structure and vdiat purposes v/ere' sought or a.ccomplished by particular 
amenc"j.ients. The author wt-.s able to ezcer.ine only labor and code authority 
amendments in the last mentioned phase of the stud^^. The v/riter has 'lieA 
no opportunity to 3,nalyn;e, the purposes c::).d. effects of a:yjnd:ients of trade 
practice provisions. 


One of the f irst 'pro.blems confronting .TA in the codification of 
industry was the correct ^definition of i.idustrj?- and the elimination of 
the troublesome mattery' of LUiltiple coverage, overlapoiiis industry de- 
finition, classification. and other, questions. relative to the jurisdiction 
of the code insofar a-s .the industry prodacts or activities thereto v/ere 
concerned. One method of solution waa avaendment of the definition of the 
particular industry.'; .or . trade, oi' /.leiiber thereof. In soiio cases, the scope 
of the code vas enlarged and in others it was limited. The investigation 
disclosed tnat s i'xty- seven (67 )■ codes had been amended, either as to the 
definition of the industry'- or trado,,,- or definition of the member of the 
industry or trade',' or 'products of the indxistry or trade-. The following 
tabulation lists the names of th.e various codes so amended end the tj^e 
of pxiend lent: 

i:Ai.IE or IPDUSTR; 





Advertising Specialty 
Air Transport 

Ban].: Instrument llfg. 
Beauty & Bc.rbcr Shop . 
Mechanical Eo^uipi.ient 
Bedding llfg. 

Beverage ' Dispensing Equip . 
Boiler i.Ifg. 
Builder's Supplies 
Candle mfg. 

Canning & Packing l.Iachinerj 
Canvas Stitched Belt 
Cast Iron Soil pipe 
Chinaware d Porcelain Ufg. 
CO;.i iercial Eef ri,',-err„tor 










Definition of Industry ■ 
Ha\.'ai'i included in definition 
Definition of chain store balcer 
Change in definition 

Definition of Indastr3'- 













16, Concrete Masonry 

17, Construction Machinery 

18. Cork 

19. Cotton Garment 

20. Cotton Textile 







Dress Mfg, 

Earthenware Mfg, 

Farm Equipment 

Fuller's Earth Producing & 

Funeral Supply 

Fur Dealing Trade 

Furniture & Floor Wax & 


Industrial Supplies ac Dis- 
tributors Trade 

Knitted Outerwear 

Knitting, Braiding 

Legitimate Theater 

Lime Industry 

Luggage <3c Fancy Leather Goods 

Lumber & Timber Products 

36. Metallic Wall Structure 

37, Millinery 

38. Millinery & Dress Trimming 

Braid & Textile 

39, Musical Merchandise 

40. Needlework Ind. Puerto Rico -174-2 

41, Nonferrous Hot feter Tank Mfg. C4-N-1 










Addition to definition 


Definition (cotton wash dresse 






















New definition 








Definitions (New Code) 


















Additions to definitions of 


Novelty Ciartain, Draperies, 

etc, 79-1 





Packaging Machinery 



Paint, Varnish & Lacquer 



Pl-umbing Fixtures 



Print Roller & Print Block 



Prison Equipment 



Railway Car Building 



Rayon & Synthetic Yarn 




Retail Trade 



River & Harbor Improvement 



Road Machinery 



Salt Producing 




2-2 . 

56, Shoe & Leather Finish 


Definition (e?cports) 
Change in definition of 


Definition . ■>■ 

New definition 

\. ■ 
Changing definition to exclude 



57. Shovel, Dragline & Crane-' '■'■■■•• 102-3 definition 

58. Soap & Glycerine Mfgk- • . . 83-1 Defiflitipn _ 

59. Steel Tubular & Firebox '• 62t-1.' '. '. Change in definition of 

..'.'.'.. . products ■ ' 

60. Tag Industry 249-1 Definition of member 

61. Tanning Extract 37-^1 Definition 

62. Textile Processing 235-4 Definition 

63. Upholstery & Drapery Textile .125-1' Definition of member of 

Industry deleted 

64. Warm Air Eegister 472-1 . Definition 

65. Wholesale Food & Grocery ■ . 

Trade •• :i9G-3 Definition 

66. Wood Plug 115-2 . . Definition 

67. Wool Textile 2-1. Definitions 

Other types of the definitions. set forth in. the code were made subjects 
of amendments. Such matters -as definitions of subdivisions of industries 
or trades, products, types of employers and employees, geograiDhical sec- 
tions were submitted for Amf5.udraent. The fol,lo\tJng .tabulation. _ 
shows the tj'pes of definitions amended and the number thereof: 


Industry ; '. . 

Member of industry. ......_ '..".. .'. 

Subdivisions of industry.......'....,.'. 

Products ■ '..'.'.'.'. 

Employer '.'.'.'.'.'. 

Employee '....'.'.. 

Skilled employee. .... • . . 

Territorial subdivisions of industry 

Customer. . . ^ ., 

Geographical area. » 

NO. OF .'AI-.ffiM)M-BNT5 


, 30 


, • • 10 



, ■ 5 




All types of labor provisions were submitted to amendment. In* ad- 
dition, the attempts of N.R.A, to revise codes so as to bring them under 
the then existent policy resulted in additions of a number of labor pro- 
visions which incorporated such labor policy. The codes ap"oroved in the 
early days of N.R.A. were, in many cases, sketchy. Administrative exper- 
ience with the enforcement of such labor provisions prompted revisions 
and additions of various types of labor provisionso- In some cases con- 
ditions in the parti,cylar industry resulted in inequitable situations, 
causing either an increase or decrease of the maximum hour provisions 
with an occasional attendant change in the minimum wage provisions. The 
following tabulations disclose the labor provisions amended and the num- 
.ber of amendments relating to such provisions: 



Normal maximum hours .... I 54 

Overtime hours 13 

Normal day period 5 

Normal week period 8 

Maximum hours for watchmen & .firemen . 14 

Maximum hour exception for emergencies,.,, 2 


Maximum hours - Skilled help, 11 

Exemptions. 1 

Salesmen and Executives,..-.... 1 

Female 1 


Normal minimum wages 35 

Overtime wages 5 

Skilled wages 11 

Apprentice wages 5 

Learners wages 6 

Handicapped persons 4 

Piece rate 9 

Wage adjustment above minimum. 12 

Sex wage differentials 8 

Geographical wage differentials ; . 20 


Child labor '. 9 

Home work 7 

Safety & health standards 26 

Posting labor provisions............ 19 

Handicapped workers ■.'.'.'..... 18 

Method of payment of wages. ..'.,'... 4 

Dismissal clause .....'....'. 1 

Hazardous occupations .■.'.. 7 _ . 

All of the various types of labor ameridments set. forth in the 
above tabulation were not changes in 'the' wording of existing p.rpyi- .... 
sions. All codes contained normal minimum' wage and maximum .h.o.ur provi- 
sions, and an amendment of these provisions represented a change in the 
wording thereof. In a few cases deletions of- existing provisions were 
made while a number of amendments were additions to the existing pro- 
visions. Most such additions were general labor provisions relating 
to safety and health standards, requirement of posting of labor provi- 
sions and provisions for handicapped workers. In. some cases, maximum 
hour and minimum wage provisions were added for apprentice or skilled 


The investigation of labor provisions has resulted in a compilation' 
of the codes, the minifnum wage provisions of #iich were amended up to 
May 2, 1935, An analysis of the original code provision and the amended 
provision- was made to determine the effect of the amendment upon the 
original provision of the code as fo all phases of minimum wage provisions. 
A similar analysis was made with respect to maximum hour provisions 
and the various compilations hereinbelow set forth are the result of 
such analysis and represent all changes, deletions and additions to 
minimum wage and maximum hour code' provision's as approved up to M=3.y 2, 
1935. ^ .... '". 

The following list shows the' Various codes which were amended as to 

minimum wage provisions and likewise,, sets forth the type of provision 
amended: - - • 



NAi.n: or jOds 

1. Artificial Flover & Tccther 

2, Artifici-1 Limb 
5, BalciniV 

4, Bitwninous Coal 

5. Blouse Sc Skirt kfg» 

6. Builders Supplies 

7. Can Mfg. 

8. Crzinin.g 

9. Cast Iron Soil Pipe 

10, ChinaT/are & Porcjlain Lifi:;, 

11. Coat & Suit 

12, Concrete Masonry 

13. Cotton G-anaent 

14. Cotton Textile 

15. Dresn Mf g, ' 

16. I?loor & Uall Clay Tile Mf:.;, 

17. Presli TJater Pearl Button 
13, Z?unGrcl Service 

19, jTur Dre rising & xur Dyeing 

20, Graphic Arts 

21, Knitting, Braiding, etc, 

22, Leather 

23, Le:_,itimate Theater 

24, Light Sevring, Except Garments 

25, Lime Industry 

26, Lumber cjid Timter 

27, liacaroni 

28, i.ien's Clothing 

29, Gf.rter, Suspender & Belt 

30, Millinery 

31, Paper & Pulp 

32, Peanut 3u.tter 

33, 2s,ilrra7 Car Building 

34, Hefractories 

35, rietail Toed & Grocery 


445-3 snd 













?.nd 3 







287-5 a.nd 8 





Wage s 

Wages for apprentices 

Wages, special ein^jloyces, 

Minimum v.'age scale 
Nev basic wage scaD.e 
Wage rpotes for District " G" 
Exemptions from minimum wage 
WaF':e s 
Territories & possessions 

wage district 
Exceptions to deductions of 
prages, minimum wage for 
Havaii District. 
G-eogra.TDhic wage differentials 
Wage adjustment above minimum 
Equal pay for ^^omen 
Wages (Geographical district) 
jjcw Geographical wage dis- , 
trict, vage provision for all 
cla.sses of employees, female 
wage differential 
Wages, minimum wage. 
Wages on certain tj^pes of . 

Minimum wage diff erenti.-ls; 
wages for employees. 
Wages; above minimum 
Wage district 
Wa,ge district 
Wage 3.djustments 
Wage (guneral provisions) 
Wage s 
Wage s 

Wage adjustment above -linimum 
Wage s 

Wages of learners * 

Wa^ges, adjustment 

Wage s 

Wage differentials 

Wages on certain types of 

Wages of apprentices 

Wage provisions 
Wage adjustments above minimum 
Wage 3.djustments 
Wage provisions; adjustment 

above minimum. 


nAuH cr co":g 

36. 2±:i^ Trcvolcr hf^. 

37. Se.CCle- iufg. 

38. Shi' 'liuildiiig 

39. Stracturcl Cl?y Procoictr 

40. iranr-^ M?.terialc Con- 


41. V:?.!! Paper h'lf^. 

4?. 71iOlGs-''.lc Food .': G-rocery 
4.1. '''holopplc Toljp.cco 
44. V'recl'i'.i-" .■. Salva^je 

A list relating, to hours, s 
ment'-- of ninim'om va=,e "orovisions, 

NAivi:: oz coDz 



12 "■'-1 




iviinim'uiii v-?.^g 

GeOt-,ra-.ihical va^e differ- 
enti?ls; vrages for v-orien. 
Wage adjustment 
Mod. of G'^0£,ra;oiiicai -::^.^e 

Kevv' wa^.e ;orovisions 
Equal pay for women 
Payment of w--;^es 
Wage rates 

imil?r to the for3^,oi: 
if as follo-'s: 

list as to a;:vrMd— 

1. AdYei-tic.-i-.i_^ S-ooci^lty 

2. Art !"eedle'-^or''.c 

3. Ai'tificial rioi:cr c; Feather 

4. Artificial Lirnb 

5. Autonojile Mfg. 

6. Automotive Farts C-. 3quroment 

iif ,1 . 

7. Ba]-i:i: Indurtry 

8. Bever-a-^e Dis'oensiag Hcuip, 

9. Bit\v.ii::Lou£ Coal 

10. BuilJcrr Su— olies 

11. Car.t Ii'o:: Soil Pipe 

12. Coat c, Stiit 

13. Concrete ..asonry 

14. Cotton &:^::ment 

15. Cotton Te::tile 

16. Jferthsnrare Lfg. 

17. Slectrot:--in£, ■ c- Stcreo- 


18. Faiv.i "Jf -ointment 


) ± 

■TY?-;s :: 



























Hours - orocessin^, c, 
l'.iaintenance e.uTlo5''ee£ , 
office h s^ilorie. receiv 
los<- than $'':3. ^ •■■e<=!:. 
Hour's for P9mi-ha'i''ica"-'"? 

Hour-exera-'itions for sale 

men c: executives; e;;ie 

gencjf cre^.-s 
Hours-7 hour-5 day '■ee'-; 

Hours V 

Hours for watchmen 
Hours - mfg. employees 
Hours of labor, machine '. 
Hours of outside eui loj'e 

£ cloaners 
Limitin: finiv-hint^ rarchi- 

to tvo 40 hr. shifts' 

i,.-' ri.;Ta . noi\rs not to 'oe 

Co: .r-:.f' ercd minimuj?. 
Hotir"^ "or vatchjiien ;., firemen; 

e.'tce^tion to maxi-nm. 


Mm~ or coi 


19. Fimci-t.l D'CToly 

20 . Fur D r e s c i n£, & Dy e i n^: 

21. GlaGG Container 

22. Gra-ohic ;,rts 

23. Hair c. Jvte Folt 

24. Hosiery 

2o. ?:cus Tiiolc Ice Eefritjorator 
26. Enitie'"'. Outerv:ear 

27. Knittin; , JBraidin^x,, etc. 

28. Lrce i.ifi;.. 

29. Leather 

30. Lc;;_,itim?,te Theater 

31. Lirno I:aduGtry 
3Ij. Lii-Mjcr c Timoer • 

33. l.i?."-\:?.ne&e Industry 

34. Millinery 

35. Motion Picture 

36. Lru-tvr.l Saving,? Ban'cs 

37. Oyster Shell Crushers 

38. Oxy-Acetylene 

39. Paint, Varnish & lacquer 

40. Photo_ra-3.hic & Photo 


41. P.eiractories 

4J. F.etail Food, d Grocery 

43. So tail Trade 

44. _-dni^ Traveler 

45. P.o'oc c; Allied Product; 

46. S^Adlery Lf; . 

47. Snr-'ouilJin, 

48. Sillr Tc::tilu , • 

49. Tn::tile ?.a , 

50. Textile Print Poller 

Ln^, raving 



Hours for on^ineerr,, fire- 
men, outside delivery r.ien, 
emergency renair crev/s 

Hours for working in fancy 
dressirt, and raljuit c.:.v- 

isions. Deleted i.i a.iaeiid- 

rnent no, 6. 


Hours, iDasic & for ■..•atc/men 

287-2 & 8 

Hours; aaximum hr. 3r:ce-.tions 

■ -73-1 


16-1 & 2 

Machine hours 


Hours ("oroductive) , "j?i.ic 

uouio and e-ce'otio-.s 




Hour' ; or sic, of en_:ins^rs. 

i"^.tch ;en; exenTntio'^.s; 

linit-^tions of 




Hoi'.,.r''; I.fe"imum & ma.c.:.i:ie 


Hourr for s-necial £,rou:;s 

of '^orl'ers 




Hours (general Cc exe:ntions) 


Allov.rable hours oi o"- sration 


Hourc, hoif.t men, pvjuj men 


Hours (^eneral) 




Old hotirs deleted for nep 









Basic hours 



51 7-1 




Hours, salesmen, vatcrjie:- 
service « maintenance 
oinployees; executives. 

Reduction of store .^lo'irs; 
hour exerrrptions 

Hour exeroi^tions for clafc 
of labor; houi's fc:: 
^-atciinien cc g.uardus 

Hours; exce-'Dtions for re- 
-.lair crews; executives; 
maximum hours for saler 


Hour:-, O'^'sic 

Ho-'vr". , o-'^sic 

Hour? for outside cro-s 

Hours, b^.sic 




NAivG or core A;'OTD;;"i"T YfP'ZS OF ?POVISIO''S 

51. Textile Procepsing 2^5-3 Hours, ODcning C: Closrag 

52. Uno-err'-'e' r c. Allied Products 

l.if;^. 23-2 & 3 Hours, machine 

53. U-Tholstery (i Dra-oory Textile l'.^5-l Hours, general >1 oxce'-;tion 
64. Usee". Textile Ba^ 267-1 Hours, for peek periods 
.55, Taiolssale Confectioners 458-1 Hour provision 

56. 'Tliolesrle Food ci Grocery Tr-Adel96-3 Hours 

57. "wool Textile 5-1 Hours, tasic 

3::rmi:>?.tion of the original hour and wa; ,e ■provisions and the ?:Tie::d- 
ments tHereof of the above listed codes discloses tiic follovving ini o nnr- - 


1« i.'i?.::i;'num hoxirs 

(a) Amendment resulting, in no change in 

the normal maxira'ujn hour ;Trovisions 20 

(1:) Araendjnent resulting, in increase in 

normal maximum nours — : 48 

(c) Amendment resultin,_^ in decrease of 

normal mavtimi'un nours : 3 

2. Hormal Minimui'n l/ 

(-: ) Amencljiient resultin.y in no chani^e in 

the normaJ minimum ^"age "provisions 5 

(h) Amendment resulting in increase of 

normal ainiitium viages 22 

(c) Amendment resulting in decrease of 

norrtial minimum \^ages 14 

3. Overtime Wages 

(a) Amendment resulting in addition of or ""^ 

revision of minimum overtime ra/,es 13 

(h) Amendment oroviding for maximum hoxirs 

for overtime v-ork • 28 

4. '.Tatclimen 

(a) Amendment rirovidin^ maximum hotu's for 
watclimen l-"" 

(b) Amendjnent ^irovidin . uiininuii ^-gcs foi' 



TY?::s 01' go:,:: prcvisioi' ai "itdid 'tq. oy ,;ir 

J. Ofirce and S:^1g<^, Iriiploycos 

{r-) Ajaendmont vjrovidi'nii miiaimwn wa4,os and 

:naxii;i-aTi hours .for tnis .tjrnc of employGO -• '^ 

(0) AmcncliriGnt oxceoting office anc salor;- 
oiT'oloyoos from minimiim vage "jrovisior's 16 

o. Sl:illcG. Erjployccs 

(p) Amendment as to rainimum 7.'ai,os 7 

(j) Aineiidment. as to rna.xim'um hours 6 

7. ;"o:i-skillcd ImoloyoGS 

{?) Amondm-^nt cs to minimum wa^^os — -> 

' (b) Arac'icij'iGnt as to maximyjn hoi'.rs 13 

8„ A"?; rori-tico.s ' 

{■■') Amoncjiiont definii:^., "ar>;jrentice" — 1 

(j) A-mcndmont ss to .i&xiiiri-ur. hoxirs .''- 

(c) Amenomont as to ..liiiim-'jm '.-'af -js 7 

(d) AjnGjidiTiont as tc cnnlojinont of V'-i"- 

cPntai^G of a'ToranticGS " 

S. liita.stry Suhdiviaions 

(-) Amondmont as to aiiviiiaVtia vaj-Gb 6 

("j) ijncvidmont ?s to ■'a:.i::-.vrn hours ■ 5 

li:. Area and C730t;raj:ihical Ratos of T^y 

(-) Arcp ratGs of v^.y ■ 1? 

(1) r-ofinition of aroas — • — 1 

(c) Gcos^ra-ohical ratos for no.rtnorn district — ; — 2 
('..) &G0i,raphical rates for soiithorn district — ; — 4 
(o) G-eogra-ohical rates for torritories 2 

11. Aiiicndmont providing ^.ox v.-age differentials " 

IS. iiours of opening and closin, 4 

1' . Amendment providing for oqus 1 rates of pay for 

ma.lo and female employees ? 

14. Prcvir.ion as to handicapped persons 

(iDurcentas, g) ' ' 6 

i;.'. Z::ccption of emoloyees earninj-, ^"<^ o:' inore froui 

Y.xv e ?nd ho v.r "Provisions — ■ 1? 

IE, 3.f.les for payment of va^cs 4 



The atove tabul-'^tion shovs the t^njes of amcndiaents of Inhor loro- 
visions and v/ith respect to the insxirauin horn' and minimvun wage provisions, 
discloses ','hether or not nn increase or decrease thereof was effected by 
the particular amendment. The author has had nc opportunity to investi- 
gate the causes for "these amendments of labor -Drovisions in order to 
determine 'Thether or not such amendments ^-rere initiated "by URA. or "^ere 
the result of apnlication therefor by the code authority or industry in- 
volved. The tabulations present some nicture of 'ihat occurred f^enerally 
in connection with amendments of Inbor -Drovisions. 


NRa codes provided for the creation and establishment of a body com- 
posed of industry members for the ouroose of administering the code. This 
organization was usually called a "code authority", altho-ogh other terras 
were used to designate it. The makers of the early codes uaid little 
attention to the rights and obligations of a code authority, but as code 
administration proceeded, experience taught I'lRA that various powers 
theretofore granted were too broad or too limited. Requirements of Section 
3 (a) and Section 6 ^.'ith respect to representation of industry attached 
to the establishment and maintenance of a code authority so that provi- 
sions relating to the election cf membership of these boards oftentimes, 
because of legal requirements, policy and for the purpose of prevention 
of oppression of small enterprises, necessarily had to be amended. The 
administration of a code bj^ a code authority and its efforts to effect 
compliance and enforcement required funds, the collection of which de- 
pended upon a statement of oov;er in the code. These requirements re- 
siilted in additions of provisions to codes permitting the collection of 
contributions for the maintenance cf the code authority and issuance cf 
WRA insignia and labels. Compliance activities with resnect to :. 
codes were handled jointly by code authorities and the Administration, 
Statements of power relating to the handling, adjudication and disposi- 
tion of labor and trade practice complaints necessitated amendments to 
codes conferring power upon the code authorities to conduct these 
activities. The administration of codes by code authorities often dis- 
closed the top-heaviness and inefficiencies of national code authorities. 
Decentralization of this i-ihase of code administration resulted in 
amendments of code authority provisions ^'hereby divisional and local code 
authorities were permitted to be established. In addition, other matters 
prompted other amendments of code authority nrovisions, as the following 
tabiilation shows;- 


Election, membership and constitution of 

code authority 126 

Code authority contributions and finances 331 

NBA insignia and label nrovisions 32 

Creation of labor complaints committees - 6 

Creation of trade practice complaints committees 19 

permission to collect statistics and reports 62 
Creation, membership and constitution of 

divisional or local code authorities - 37 

Additional general powers and obligations 18 



TliG fol'J.ovan.c^ lirt s.hov'G -'^.ic raij.ib ; ; oi' coaof; raid tno tics'-'oi 
which v.erc anondod with iL-Gsviec i; to tao oonstitution of tho coo.c 'iLtliOX'ity. 
The torrn "co" ctitution" r.s uso... iii tair. re-nort refsrs to the cocVj -pi'o- 
visions '"hicli '-/erG in the n.-^.tarc of -"'. I'.t-'^tor.'.op.t of the ri^^hts ^.m. ooli.^,'?.— 
tioiis 01 the ■ code authority and of the 'nenfoer^-. thor:of. These -jrovirions 
usually i-clatcd to the liability of the members of the code authority, 
AdministiT-tive pov/er of r^usi^oncinn of their activities, rights of e.rbitr-?.-*- 
tion, 'oov-cr to submit rccominenda tions to the -s.c'miristrp.tion, i:)ov".jr to set 
up rc,-,io]ial committees and the other usual code authority provision'o 
found in tiv:; tAodel Code. These industries are listed and set forth as 
an e:r:am;;'lo of the efforts of ".'IjIA to standardise code provisions relating 
to code ruthoritics and to describe the riivhts and oblij;:3.tions of code 
authority menders as saicli; ". 















Advcrti:i.i,^ Specialty 

Air Filter 

Alloy c Industry 

ArtM'icirl Flower & Feather 


3oil-r i.If^,-. 

Drattico Cloth Mfg. 

Grot lion ooil PiT"c 

Clr:'- ;>xU. Snele Hoofir:; 

Concrete I/asonrj'' 

G o " 1 s t rue t i e n Ivla chi ne i-y 

Corset C. Brs-ssiorc 

Cotton Textile 

Ulectric Iioi'-t ^i Monoi-pil 
Pibro Can and Tube 
Fur Ivianxifactxirin^, 
itirniture { . Floor Yf-:/: c; 

C-ro-_^hic Arts 

Industrial Furnace Mf^,. 
Investment Bankers 
Legitimate Theater • 
Lime Industry'- 

& Allied Products 
p.rryinJ3 "c Finishint 












■ 1' 

















Machine r 

l.I?.::blo Q 

ivlen • s G lo thing 

Metallic '.Yall Structure 


Hecdlev^ork Ind. in Puerto ?dco474 

ITovelty Cv.rtpin, Draperies, 

Bedspreads & ITovelty Pillow 79 
Oil Burner 35 

Ornamental Moulding 360 


January 1 , 1"''.; 
Hoverabor 2 :, l':34 
December IS, 1934 
xi.ugust 14, 19^:4 
April 27, 1^"4 
August ,rj8, If.' 4 
April 22, IS") 
Aiigust "l, 1" '1 
December 7, l"''-:- 
October 10, 1^'4 
Juno 23, ir3'': 
December ^1, l-':-34 
ITbvember 8, 1?3'T 
De cemb e r 2'" , 1*^ 33 
July 17, 1 3'-: 
October 1,;,1..'34 
July 6, 1 3-: 
FoDruary 1' , 1^735 

July 1^, -/-'. 
July 3,-'1934. . 
AiOi-jis-t, 11?; ■■■1934 
April 30, 10-3 
February 1, 1934 
October 22, 1934 
February 10, 1034 
A-oril 1, 193.1 
May 18, 1934 
October 24, 1934 ' 
December 13, 19:'3 
October 30, 1934 
ITove-mber '^, 19"4: 
July 20, liv-A 

August 24, 1934 
Soptember 17, 1934 
A->ril 28, 1934 






33. Paint, Varnish & Lacquer Vl-1 

33. PhotoBTfohic ci Photo Finisiiiii;: ;5'^2-2 

34. Pliuabiiit: Pixtures 204-,? 

35. ?ri:iter's Rollers 1C6-2 

36. ite.yon J; Silk Dyeing 172-4 

37. ?Lest?.ur&nt 282-2 

38. Hin-i Trc-.velor 517-1 

39. Rohe €: Allied Products 211-1 

40. Shi;?l3uilding 2-1 

41. Shoe (i Leather Finish 184-1 

42. Soft Fit re Mfg. 393-2 

43. Textile 3?.g 27-1 
44» Textile Processing 235-3 

45. Throwing 54-2 

46. Umhrella 51-2 

47. Undenverr ; Allied Products '^3-2 ' 

48. "J-^holstery £ Dra-^ery Textile 135-1 

49. VJall Paper L-ifg. 19-1 

50. Y/arra Air, Furnace Mf,-,. -2 

51. V.Tiolosale Lillinary 201-^;-! 

52. VJool Felt i-fg. 143-1 

March ']., Z.- "A 
March 4-, IZ"""-) 
April 2'^, 1^'"4 
1-Tovem'ber 37, 1£"A 
March 19, 19^L' 
Dccenfoer lb, 1934 
December IG, 1934 
April 26, 1934 
October 10, 1933 
August 2, 1934 
October 25, 1^34 
December ?"', 1933 
August 6, l-;34 
April 19, 1934 
July 27, 1^3'1- 
May 10, l-.:""4 
February 6, 1933 
December '^'J, 1C-" 
June 37, 19 74 
Augiist 30, l'^"4 
llovember 30, 19 "4 


The majority of amendments rtiferrcd either to code authority or 
trade practice -orovisions, but the number of actual .provisions affected, 
related to trac'e ■:)racticc rules. The types of trade practice roles set 
forth in varion.s codes covered a number of subjects and no attemot has 
been made, for the purposes of this preliminary report, to set out each 
particular trade practice rtile. Th- variety of such rules makes such a 
tabulation too much of a task at tnis time, noFever, the author naG atte:T:t- 
ed to compile certain information ret,ardin^ smencijnents of traae pr: ,;tj.ce 
rules. The following classification is used as a basis:- 

(a) Tr?de "oractice riiles having ba?is in la'-. 
.(b). Trade practice rules Ijaving some basis in l"'". 
(c) Desirable trade practice 'rules from an indus- 
trial vicppoint but h=^.vin'g no basis in lav. 

The author has set of-t in the Outline of thir. sxibjoct, which is attached 
hereto and ma.rked Appendix Wo. 1, t' o other classifications of these rules; . 
viz., -j^ulesirable trade practice rules and unenforceable trade practice 
rules. This report cannot concern itself with these tro last mentioned 
classifications at this time, because of the need of reference to the 
Trade Practice Studies and the Legal Enforcement Studies, which the av.thor 
has not been ?ble to fill for this report. The number of tr?de practice 
provisions , (-according to the above mentioned classifications) -hich v/ere 
subjected to amendment are ss follows: 

Trade practice rules liaving be sis in la^-. 119 

Trade practice rules having some basis in la^-- — 106 


Desirable to indvintry "l/Ut h'-^.'/irit, no b-j.sir: in lav — 20o (*) 

Tno follo'.Ting specif ic sifieno iier.ts rol^-^tirirA to certain rhasos oi tr? c.o 
practice rules and in ad.lition to tjr.osc listed abov3 r..r--':- 

Prico fi:;in,"_ rv? 

ProhiLition of sales 'bclo"- coct - ,"4 

Open price systems 4 5 

Unifoi^ra co>t accovintin^ 20 

Production control 7 

Machine hour limitationr 7 

Prohihition Ox ne\- instaliations 

of .nachinery — 4 

The FV.thor of this renort lias had no opportunity to examine the 
reasoui vl'iy these various trade 'oractice rules v^ere amended, whether or 
not the a.rnencaiicnts vrere sponsored by industry or ITRA. and vriiat effect 
those a.menc!j".ients lia.d upon the co3.e structure. It is hoped the t thi'^ 
prelininary report rill give some idea of the cuestions prosentod. 

iiisc:^LUi.'".ous 0C21. ?:ovi3ic\is 

The formation of codes resulted in some instances of impro^oor ^-ordin^i' 
m'nich, occai\se of tho tremcnduoris administrative Job presented Fcre not 
noted at tnat time. LOi^islative draft smanshro rccpaived e correction of 
these mistal;cs (**) 

The chanL/e of the form of administration from t^na.t of an individual 
administrator to a board ros'alted in a number of amer.dmcntc: s^^bstitutin:, 
the \7ordr. "llational Indu.strial Fecovcry Board" for the vord "Acmini&trc.tor" 

(*) A fev; examples of the classification noreinabove sot fortn may be 

helpfv.l. Tj'pes of code provisions vnich ^tsvo toon included in Class 
(a) are - commercial bribery, false advertising, liquidated dam.a^.c 
agreements, false invoicin:,, defamation of competitors, and secret 
rebates. Class (b) includes orovisions such as - design -^ii-acy, 
imitation of trade merles, style airacy, s'olittin^ of commissicrs, 
prohibitions against advertising allowances ant? optional stanc'arfs 
ciaiiscs. Clasci. (c) includes ^irovisions such as - "oniform discoi^'ait 
anc credit terns, Iocs limitation, prohibition of consignment sales, 
prohibition of future contracts, requirement of inclusion of tr-^.rspor— 
tation cost in piorchasing price, etc. 

(**) See Ame-\dmont iJo. .?0, Lumber and Timber Prodiicts Code - Jan-'Ja.ry ri, 
19o5 (the v;ord "industry" changed to "industries"). See Amendment 
No. 2, Metallic Jail Structure Code - March 7, 1S55 (the words "and/or 
offer for sale" were added after the -word "sell". The ori^ina.l 
■intent bcin^ tl^i3.t offers of sale rorc includec' in the word "sell"). 
See also Amendment !:lo. 4, Electrical Manufacturing Code - Aoril 25, 

(***) SL;e Arnendmiont Ho.. 1, The Ctirlod Hair Manufacturing Code - Fobrua.ry 6, 



On -?. nvinoer of occ?sions coOe y.-rovisions, l)ec?.u£e oi ■■'^oor draf ts,:!?.!!- 
snip, imjTO'per expression of the intent of the STjonsors, f?mbiguity or other 
reasons, resulted in sit^uations vhoi-e the "^ordinf; v.'?s not suhjact to in- 
terprctr.tion sufficient to cover the original intent or r'^move the ambi- 
guity. Some provisions vere susceptible to interpretation, but such 
intororetatioii might result in a distortion of the languaj^e (*). On some 
occasions actua.1 interoreta tions were in effect beyond the interpretative 
scope of the code provision and of necessity required amendment. The author 
of this re-?iort has had little opjortxmity to examine sucn situations, rhich 
actua.lly led to amendment of the code, but this cause rf amendment is 
mentioned and is sug^gested as a phase of the study fit for further in- 

Investigation discloses tiiat seven (7) amendments related to the 
effective date of the code, all of v;hich extended the ex;oiration do.te (**). 

(*) See Air.endjnent Ho. 1, Prison Equipment Manufacturin;-^ Code - I'ovcmber 6, 

(**) See Ai.iencinents Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 of txio Automobile irifnufacturini;; 



It \7?.s roqxiirc;! that tho i:-olicios - f tho Act bo ,i;ivcr. c::- 
prossicn in codes cf fair ccm-outitiov:. Tiio nov.'or o-" code-rrr'.lzine 
oi.i'br?.ccd the x\ill purpose of tlio Act ?.na -/r.s t'ho fuLid'^.mcntal reason 
for tho oxercisG of power, A pov;cr \:3.s tiir.t cf amend- 
merit of codes. Gv--?.rantoes of this power ?.nd its proper use meet 
the most fundament-?! rules of achninistrative law. Therefore, a 
coiqjlote evaluation of and nell considered suggestions re/,ard- 
ini:^ 1I?A amond:;ionts insofar as the ooA/er to am^^nd \'7a3 c:>:ercisod 
is a requisite of this report, 

Clir.ptor I discusses the various legislative sources of the 
po^vor to amend Codes, llo mention of the power is definitely stated 
orccept in Section 10(h). Gonsti'u.ction r.i' the provisions of some 
sections of the Act at least i;_,iveE some "basis unon which this ad- 
ministrative power irry- be predicated, Tho l-jgislative history 
refers to an' intention to coaf.-r such power but the bases found and 
inferred are not as perfectly set forth as was possible so to do. 
The ide'~'. of voluntary and innosed codes caxised doubt as t-; the 
existence of the po'.7or to amend voluntaiy code provisions. It is 
therefore s-ug^_,-ested tho.t now le;^islati-n, if any, contain adoqu?,te 
•'^nc' specific reference to the po-;'er of amendment of codes; that 
either a distinction as to exercise of the pov.-er be made between 
amendmionts of volrLntar;; codes and revisions of imposed cedes or 
that no Each distinct! rn be nkade; tiir.t full loowor be conferred with 
resooct to tho time of exercise thereof; viz., at time of code 
approval or any time t.ieroait ^r. 

Tho limitations of a "juinistrative discretion arc few, as dis- 
cus-od in Chapter I. Tho 'oower .'. f amendment, bein^^' such a lar- 
reachinf v/aapon, sh-uld bo s'abject to well defined standards of 
discretion. The policies of th^ Act arc a basis, bo.t it is sup- 
r'csted th-'^t standards, ^-enorally incori^oratiri; the reasons for 
amencmo-nts, particularly those offered by industry and trade and 
conceded beneficial i^olic;'" reqiiirem^nts of 1I7A, be legislatively 
establishod as a £,uide to and linitati.m. :r. the aclxdnistrativo 

A cooplote definition jf the term "o.mencinent" so far as the 
use of tho power and tjie scope of its rp ">licati^n are concerned, 
is suggested. The discussion of this -lart of tho subj^jct iii Chr.ptor 
II is sufficient to warrant the s-ap^es'tion. 

Chaptor III presents a record of tho delectation cf the power 
of '^menchaont. ilo Sc.rious deficiencies apoiear, although the refer- 
once to arid use- of tho power to "substitute" P?A provisions could 
be clarified and specifically brourht uaidcr tno power to "-mend". 



The retention of the -poY;er to amend by thu A'.'-ministrator and 
the lJatio:o,r.l Industrial P.ecover;,' Board in deemed jvood policy and 
ICoislrtive limitations iirjon dele.^ations to lesser officials are 

There appears to be no criticism oi s'OtiJ^esti-.n as to the use 
of an order of approval of a sviccific am^^nclment. Use of a general 
order of amendment and a condition-'.l order of approval is dependent 
upon the extent of tne legir.lative statement of the pov/er. (*) If 
broad discretionaiy powers are to be set forth, it is suggested 
that the power to generally amend 1 s included therein. In addition, 
the 'use of conditions should be limited so that this exercise of 
the power of amendment v/ill be d^no onl.y vhen the amendment bears a 
relation to the policy of the Act.(**) 

The analysis of labor amendments dir.clos.js the results of IPA'S 
leadership and policy of iniprovement cf labor provisions and the 
additions of provisions incorporating labor policy. It arjpears from 
the tabulations that most amendments cf Ir.bcr provisions related to 
special tj^pjs Of erajoloyees; e.g., watchmen, apprentices, etc. The 
number of cb-£'.nges of area and geographical rates of paj^ discloses 
the trouble enco-'ontered by this form of v-age and hcur-fixing but 
also shows the advants^ge of a flexible code prevision. It should 
be noted ti:i?.t the majority of revisions of maximum hours "permitted 
an increase thereof and that most of the changes of normal minimum 
wages resulted in increases. 

The amendments of cede ain.thority "orovisious covered all features 
of code adiviinistrati'-n. I/iany were bro-ag;ht about by the policy and 
regulations regarding code authorities. Amendments relating to 
contributions, assessments, labels, collection of statistics, labor 
and trade -practice c^ra-plaints corniTiittees conformed to the Adminis- 
tration's suggestions. (***) The conferri:!,;^ 'f additional general 
powers in most c-ases re;^rescnted industrial subscription to model 
code provisions relating tc code aiithorities. 

The amendments v;hereby the election and membership of code 
authorities were affected usually affected industry/ or trade repre- 
sentation; e.g., subdivisions of industry or trade, non-association 
groups, and trade associations, i.ijthods of notice, balloting and ^' 

(*) See comment in this Chapter, su-ira. 

(**) Sou Part three hereof. Chapter IV, f..r discussion re. 

{***) :::^ Bulletin ITo. 7: Bxorutive Order ■ o. • 6479; Executive 
Order. llo. 6678, :i?A fii>s. 



other mr^tters inci.ent to i.acjtin.s lil:ov/isc v/ere incorporated in 
such amendments. 

The c-ntent of t^iis re;;iart v/ith rot'/ai-d t .- araendrnonts of trade 
practice inilj^s does n;t justify ^ii evaluation and conclusion. The 
purpose of this repcrt is to present in ;orelirainary form, the problems 
of amendments of codes. Tiio trea.tment of such problems is not ado~ 
quate, hut serves as a oasis for further study, investigation and 



FURTH£H H£3EiVRCIi - . UlIii::gLuTl!£S EVL&^'lS oF : £H£ . . _. 

fart ?oim 
APFEEDi:: no. !.■ 

The outline of the study (Appendix No. 2) sets forth in detail the 
Various aspects of the subject of code amendments. This report does 
not attempt to cover all of the sections of the outline. 

The administrative details of procedure relative to the receipt of 
applications for amendments, the handling and routing thereof and all 
matters concerning efficient administration of the Act for speedy pro- 
cedural treatment of amendjnents to codes; the method of reference of 
amendments to code authorities, considerations thereon had by various 
Advisory Boards and other details precedent to the actual approval or 
denial of applications for amendment all mii^ht receive further con- 

As stated in Chapter III, various limitations upon the power of 
amendment were set forth in codes, such limitations conferring upon 
code authorities and industries the right of origin and/or approval 
of the amendment prior to administrative approval. This report has 
concerned itself with the bases of power of amendment. It is the 
author's opinion that the approval of codes with provisions limiting 
the administrative povrer of amendment may have been contrary to the 
provisions of the Act, so it is sugr-i'tisted that study be made to deter- 
mine whether or not any legislative limitation upon such code provis- 
ions would be desirable. 

Q,uestions of due process, alwnys a part of administrative consider- 
ation of amendments, have not been considered herein. Hearings, notices 
thereof, the record and the sufficiency of all such matters are of 
primary concern to an administrative ap^ency. It is suggested that this 
phase of the subject be considered to determine v;hether or not specific 
rules and regulations relating to this matter should be legislatively 
set forth (*) . 

Various problems were encountered in regard to the right of sponsor- 
ship of amendments. The Act said "truly representative" with respect 
to codes, but said nothing about sponsors of amendments. The author 
has conducted some investigation in regard^to this fundamental question, 
but suggests further study so that concrete evaluations and conclusions 
can be made. Some administrative rules and regulations were announced 
( **) which looked to a code authority as the proper sponsor. 

(*) See report on Administrative Law and Procedure under the NIRA 

A rejjort of the Division of Review NRA files. 
(**) See Administrative Order No. X-27, ILIA files. 



The status of applications by individuals or groups and the right and 
advisahility of administrative conside'ration thereof, with or without 
reference or approval "by a code authority or an industry, are matters 
of importance to the subject of amendments. These questions are linked 
with the problems caused by code limitation of the power of amendment 
hereinabove mentioned. 

Procedure was adopted whereby an application for an amendment sub- 
jected a code to reconsideration and general revision (*). Thi^ method 
of review resulted in ( l) issuance of better codes, (2) hesitancy by 
industry in the submission of necessary and beneficial amendments, (3) 
breakdowns of code structure and enforcement because of industrial or 
labor refusal to accept suggested amendments, (4) practical imposition 
of amendments. The advisability of such a policy and the causes and 
effects thereof are suggested for further study. 

Many amendments related to the jurisdiction of the code. Reasons 
for such amendments might be investigated in order (l) to determine 
means of presenting problems of jurisdiction, (2) to formulate methods 
and policies of codification, (3) to arrange a proper classification of 
industry, trade, products and services and (4) to prepare suitable 
definitions for future use. Further study should reveal important 
information bearing on these objectives. 

The causes underlying the amendment of labor provisions, particularly, 
their sponsors and the objections to them and the effects of thfe amend- 
ments are matters of interest and are suggested for further study. 

(*) Office Orders Nos. 73 and 86, NRA files. 



^0:i::IS?H^JIVS PaOELEiiS ?I1Y 1ITJ 


1. Introduction 

1.1 Objective cyiC. scope of the study 

2. Bases, in the Act 
. 2.1 Section 3(a) 

2.2 Sections 10 (o.) r.nd 10 (b) .. 

2.3 Application of Sees. 3(a), 10(a) and 10(17) to J,ecs. k, 7(b) 
and 7(c) 

2.^+ Legal aspect c of po'.7er conferred 
2.5 Limitp.tionsj if any, upon President 

3. Definitions 

3.1 Ordinary c.efinition ■ • , 

3.2 Adrainistr,'- tive definition - chanjjes thereof 

3.3 Discussion of relation to' term "modification" 
h. Delegation of po' e:.' to approve ajnendraents 

U,l To the AfciniGtrator 

k.2 To N.I.R.E. 

U. 3 Retentions of pov/er by the President 

h.h Delega.tion of joint power 

k.kl A.A.A. 

h.kZ P.A.C.A. 
U.5 Delegation of povfSr by Administr.^tor or/J.I.R.B. to . 

U.5I Division Aduinistrators 

4.52 Territoricl Acijninistrators 

U.53 Liraitation and requirenents 

5. llethods of ,?j:ienc"j':ent s of codes 

5.1 General enecutive or administrative order 

5.11 Araenoj.ient s of all codes 

5.12 Amencfcentrj of more than one code 

5.2 Approval of specific amendment 

5.21 Industry' application 

5.22 La.bor application 

5.23 G-overmentE-2 action 

5*3 Legal discussion of methods employed 

^.k Code limitations on exercise of method of c^xiendment 

5.^1 Necessity of assent of industry 

5.^2 Kon-v/aive;; of constitutional rights 

6. Types of codes subject to amendment 

6.1 P.R.A. 

6.11 General '- necessity of assent 

6.12 Substituted provisions 

6.2 Codes under Sec. 3i^) p-^^ Sec. 3(^^) 

6.3 Labor agrear.ents under Sec. 7(b) 

G,h Rales and regulations having effect 01 a. code 




7. C-eneral menu: iciitn orl" rj.l codes by exetnitive or r.cninistrp.tive 
7tl Purposes 

7.11 Policy 
7.1^ Lo :: lit;- 
7.13 Cla,vit7 

7.l'l- Ror.ovrl o:? coiiflictc. -^dth othoi' Ir.'s' or .yove-'-nmental 

7.15 Other 7>irjo;es 
7.2 'Effects 

7.21 On gonevT,! co'le stricture 

7.22 Indu^tr;- 

7.23 Labor 
7.2U Corsu-^.ers 

S. ■ i":"Ui. initiftion of r.;iend!nents 
S.l .'Causes 

g.ll AdjuctLier.t to policy 

5.1 2 Le.-.-Iity 

U.I3 Code ,'\c>.iinis"Lrnt ion difficulties 

6,1k Cor,pli?iice 

8.15 Enforcevient 

r .16, ?.ecO:";r-itio;i of protesting groups 

S.I7 Overlcvopirifj definitions 

3.1s Clp.rit" ;-.nd draftsmanship 

6.19 liicrerne of exemptions 

8.11 Ifon—susccptiljility of interpretrtion of code provision 

8.1_2 G-eC::;;ro,p'.iic",l reasons 

8.1^ Si}-iplific"tion of code stiiicture 

8.131 Consolidation of codes 

8,12.2 Co:.-solidp.tion of industry divisions 

S.IJ^ 1.0 del Code 

S,l_34 I:::l:,L'j;eiaent of scope of Incxistry Drsic Codes (as 
cUst i:\mi shed from 'MA Basic Code.) 
2.IU I'odificr;':i in of Code iiuthority set— iip 
S.l^ Li 'it: ti'" or er.larfjenent of oovrers of Code Authority 
S.l^ Oo'^er p .reposes 
8.2 G-eneral dicc-.cci n of I'T.Ji.A. require: 'ent that application for 
air.endment opened the entire Code for r.cninistrative study and 

8.21 Rirposes 

8.22 Z;f:7ects 

S. Annlvsis of applications for amendiiients r.'id a-:e:idr-ents of code 
provisions •■ith respect to 

9.1 Code .fefi:iitions 

9.11 I:adustL'- or ruodivisions thereof 

3.12 I-'erfoers of industry and classification thereof 

9.13 ^istriJAtio:! ?;=;encies 
g.lU Co: 1:10 Cities 

9.2 Lator provisio;?.s 
9.21 1 i?;::i- rcu ' '_ .o" i_ s 

9.211 I.'or::T.l week period 

5.212 l.or:ial d.a^r period 

9.213 Overtirae tolerance 
9.21U Pe.'l: -oeriod 



3.22 Miniriuin 'T.^^es 

9.221 ror]-.?.l tiTX.e 

S» 2^-11 Hourly rate 

5.2212 Piece rate 

5.2213 '..■eelrly rate 

9.222 Overtine rate 

9.223 Apprentice rate 
9.22U Gkillec. rr.te 
9.225 Union contrr'.ct rate 

9.23 Child lajor 

9.2U Apprentice li:dt.:tions 

9.25 Kandicrpped •■orhers 

9.26 StpndrJ.'ds of surety and health 

9.27 Horae Tork 
9.2s Stretch-out 
9.29 Scrip pa,yr.ents 

9.21^ Equitaole re-djustnent of wages above tlie .rlnijirujQ 
9.22 Postinc 

9.22. Collective or.iYJ^-ining 
9- 24 Miscellaneous 

9.2^ jevelopnent of lalsor policy '.7ith respect to rj.iehd'-ients 
9.26 Legal r.spects of la.bor provision '^jiendients 
9.2j[_ EvalUcition of eiqperiences 
9..3 Trade prp.ctice provisions 

9.31 C-eneral anc.l[ • si s and discussion of tr.C.e practice 
provisions being grouped a,s follows: 

9.311 r'-enercJ_ly accepted in law 

9.312 Desirable but not fully accepted in law 
9*313 Desirable but no ba.sis in la\7 

9.314 Undesirable 

9.315 Unenforcible 

9.32 Price policy 

9.321 Price fining 

9.3211 Pi"ed prices 

9.3212 Lo::est reasonable price 

9.3213 --odel mark-up 

9.322 Price control 

9.3221 Loss leaders 

9.3222 Loss limitations 

9.323 Open price systeras 

9.3231 Institution of system 

9.3232 Particulr;. contracts 

9.3233 -'ethod of operation 

Note: 7or purposes of discussion bid depository s"'stens are included 
under this sub-division 

9.324 Cost provisions:- 

9.3241 Seles below cost 

9.3242 Obsolete goods 

9.3243 Ilr.ergency disposals 

9.3244 Cor.ipetition 



'9«J!25 Ac CO.-.: it in^^ s.ysterns 

S^j'SI;')! Mecessity of ?;c2irov".l of Acuiinistrp.tor 
9.J'.?.f'.'' Co'.i:ple-cit7 of yy;;te:i 
3.:;;y>3 Diffxciilties of innt-JLlatlon 
9o2o Srleti reportinf?; sj'stoins 
9. U Amendment G of CoC.e Aiitluorit;,- orovisionG 
9t^l I'lGcessitiGG of a^nendracnts 

'9«^2 A.ien'lnentc rffecting rifiiits of Coc.e Aatliority 
9«'+3 AiciiOjientG r.fiecting o'bligations of Co'de Authority 
S.4h AMencu'.e::tG incorporating suc^i'-estions and regulations 

of IT.!:. A. 
:,'.U5 Le/;;rlity " 

9.46 Poiicy ■ ■ 

9.47 5'in?,nces 

9. Us Incorporation. 

9.U9 Tr "e csfjociation participation 

9.5 Labels 

9'51 Seceosity for use of labels 

9 '5'- Tiroes of r.'.iendment's submitted eig to ■• . 

9'.521 Control 
, 9. [322 Policy 

9.523 finances 
9*53 Tjn? e s of i ndu s t r 1 e s su"b mi 1 1 i n,°' 1 r'D e 1 a.:.ien drae nt s 

9.6 3t;vfcistical I'leports 

9.61 S:".ecutive order of December 7i.l;/53 

9.62 T'Aies of a.iendments submitted .ae, to 

9.621 C-overmnental reports 

9.622 Coc'-e Authority reports 

9.7 Conditional orders of approval 

9.71 A'.-iend^.ents subTnitted incorporating- conditions 

9.72 Amend-ients chan,^.;ing conditions 
9.2 Miscellarieoi^s code amendments 

10. Period of aj-iendnent 
10 ,'1 -Suration of Act 

10.2 Dura,tion of Clode 

10.3 Tenrporarj.' 
10. U Ei;ergenc3^ 

11. Amendments of orc'ers _ ' 

11.1 Executive and rdiinistrative orders of generr.l a.pplication 

11.2 Orders of approval 

11.21 Codes 

11.22 Aieiid.;ents 

12. Procedure as to ai'.end'.ents 
12.1 Application by 

12.11 Industr-y ■"-e. -ber 

12.12 Industr-' ;;roup 

12.13 Code -j.-'.tAority 
12.131 :iational 

'12.132 Local . 
12. lU Instituted' by H;H.'A. 

I2.IUI Industry Division 
12,l'!-2 Lc;i:a.l Division 
I2.1U3 Advisory' boards 



12.1^:-^ rield offices 

12.1'-r5 Other departnents of ■..!.?.. ^. 

12.15 Govei'nr.:cnt p.-^^encies other tiian "iI.r..A. 

12.16 Lc;oor 

12.161 Individual 

12.1o2 f'-roup of eniployees 

12.1621 Uinor-sanized 

12.1622 Union 

12.2 Considei'rtiori 01 apv'lic- tion 

12.21 3y C.eiTiti' 

12.22 -^dvicor7 I3or„rds _ ■ 

12.23 Research and Planning Division 
12. 2U LeQcl Division 

12.25 AcJi'.inistration laerabers and Code „-.thority 

12. 20 Reviev: Division 

12.27 Srztent of consideration "by boards, o-;c., and 

li: '.i tr t i :.ns thereon 
12.2s Dixrisic";! adiinistr.-'tors 
12.29 Either officials n.nd President 
12.21_ Z::tent of considera,tion of briefs pro aud con 
12.22_ Field offices - K.R.A. 

12.3 Dae process rcrairernent 

12.31 Applications submitted to hearij'i.£ 

12.311 1'3'pe, forn and extent of notice 

12.312 Place of hearing 

12.313 Record of hearing 

12.32 Applications subraitted to an op;~ortu;iity to be heard 
12.321 ^S-'pe, forn and extent of notice 

12.33 Application receiving no public consi^'-eration 
12.3^+ C-enerrd legal aspects 

13. J'inal action 

13.1 Porm 

13.2 Notice 

lU. Analysis of procedtire and tine cons\ined in the handling of appli 
cations for a- lencj-.ents 
lU.l Interoffice 
IU.2 Intraoffice 

14.3 Field offices 
lU.4- Dae process 

IU.5 Extra — li.R.A. reference 
IU.6 Effect of policy ralings 
IU.7 Protests 

lU.S Conpa,rison ■:ith procedure of other govennuent agencies ' 

IU.9 Causes of c.elay 
lU.l Effects of delay 
15» Analysis of rj.ienchients 

15.1 ^mendnents sv.bnitted ^oy private groups 

15.11 Effects upon code 

15.12 Effects upon industry 

15.13 Effects u_;'On labor 
15. lU Effects upon consumers 

15.2 Amend::ients i:istituted by w.R.A. 

15.21 Effects -apon industry 

15.22 Effects upon labor 

15.23 Effects upon N.R.A. 
15. 2U Effects "apon consumers 



16. Sabstnjitive TJi'oble .s 

16.1 t'hat I'igJ.ts 01 s;- onsors.iip of rvieiuients r.hov..lo. 1)0 granted? 

16.2 What conci ..e:,\-,tion of .-iacn.'.nents shoal'", 'ue ,:,f:!'orded industry 
and 1p.oo"_- 0:.' ".. ,-..A. 

16.3 Shoulr'. u-io .Q- g:.' of f"'enera.l ;viond,annt of c.ll cotles be utilized? 
l^.U What p, r-tici:;r':.ion should irtdastry r.r.'" '...■'■jov h-^.ve in the 

issuance of 0L'."-crs of .reneral aiieni.'. :e::ts? 

16.5 17hat roruiro' '.cntc 01 3.ue process Siic'-lv'. \:c ,:, to by IHIA,? 

16.6 Should li-'J^ ii.ctitute araendinentr. on its o-.rn :;.otion? 

16.7 Effect of • lord.ents on priorly crrnted e:::e--iptions 
(See Outline 0:1 Exemptions and FiXceptions) 

16. 5 Should fiol'. of:;'ices be .-'^ranted po^rrer to rJiend codes? 
16.9 Should r:".?.«A. o'len a code for general revision upon the 

r.ubnis:;ior. of r,:i a\iplication for a specific P.'nendment? 

17. r.ffects of ;. 'Oiid-ients on 

17.1 Code structure 

17.2 Declared pivjposos of the Act 
17 '3 Large bi-'.sinesL imits 

17.4 Small enterprises 
17«'5 Monopolies 

17.6 N.^.A. policy 

17.7 Le;~ality 

17 .5 Industry 
17.9 Labor 
17.1 Consujiiers 

18. Evaluation 
19 • Conclusions 
20 . 3ibl i ograpli;/ 



By • ■ 

W. U. Chubb 



The "Administrative Problems ?.-view" was set up to make a re- 
view of certain key problems wnich prrsented administrative difficultieo 
during the neiiods of code forimilntion and administration and to examine 
some of the methods develoTj'-d for nandlinj them. 

Such iiroblems hai, on one xiand, to do with Classification, Over- 
lapping Definitions and Multiole Code Gov- rage which v/ere fundamentally 
inherent in any attempt to codify industry and, on the other hand, to do 
witn oroblems of ffdjustment to developed policies, and of methods and 
machinery for reconciling and adapting the administration of codes under 
the various difficulties met due to practical conditions. This latter 
tyoe of -oroblems gave' rise to the use of such devices as Conditional 
Orders of A^proval, Amendments, Exemptions, Stays and Interpretations. 

All of Che above -oroblems and also a collateral study of the 
subject of Uncodified Industries are being reviewed and discussed in sep- 
arate reports. 

The accompanying d1;udy covers only conditional oroers of ap- 
proval and because of its nature, does not, to any great degree, tie in 
with the otnpr studies, but in common with the general objects of all rf 
these studies, emphasis has been -nut u-oon an analysis of the experiences 
during tne code period pointing toward substantial guides for the drafting 
of new legislation and plans for its successful administration. 

All oodes have been examined for conditions imposed in the order 
of approval and tne various types cf .conditions classified in- Appendix "3" 
herein. A representative number ' of ' typical cases have -been analyzed as 
to, tne function nerformed or attempted oy the use of this device, its 
successes and failures, and the legal problems .generated by its application. 

In Appendix "2" uereto will be found a detailed outline which 
was originally prepared witn great care for an exhaustive treatment of 
the subject. La.CK of time and the difficulty of locating -records under 
present conditions prevented this exhaustive analysis of all cases, but 
anyone desiring to make a more complete examination of the subject will 
find that outline-and the' references -iven to be very useful. 

The principal phases of tne subject that have important bearing 
as guides in th(- preppra,tion of new legislation and subsequent adminis- 
tration thereunder, hhve been prepared in the form of questions and this 
revip\'V has only attempted to collect data adequate to answer these ques- 

The present sub-title .embraces a review principally ^'f conditional 
orders of approval of codes, agreements' and amendments as issued by the 
President, the Administrator and the l^'IRB, but also to a limited extent, 
conditional orders of approval of minor administrative actions by the 
Administrator and by division administrators in such cases as code 
authority elections', by-laws, trade practice complaints committees, etc. 



CHAPT'i23 I . 



In order to olitain a proper orientation for this review, it is first 
necessary to examine just what specific powers of approval were con- 
ferred by the Act and if the language "be not clear, to go "back to such 
evidence of intent as may te shown by hearings before the Congressional 
Committees prior to the passage of the Act. (*) 


Section 3 ( a) of the Act conferred powers upon the President 
to approve codes voluntarily applied for, as follows: 

"Section 3 (a) . Upon application to the President by 
■■ * * * associations or groups, the President may approve a 
code or codes * * * if the President finds * * * (i) * * * 
no inequitable restrictions or admission to membership * * ♦truly 
.representative * * * * and (2) * * *code or codes * * * not * * * 
promote monopolies or eliminate or oppress small industries * * * 
Provided * * * shall not permit monopolies * * *; Provided 
further * * * nothing * * * shall deprive (certain) persons of 
right to be heard prior to approval * * *. The Presiden t may . 
as a condition of his approval of any such code , impose such - 
conditions * * * for the protection of consumers, competitors, 
employees and others in furth.^rance of the public interest, and 
may provide such exceptions to arid exemptions from the provisions 
of such code, as the President in his discretion deems necessary 
to effectuate the policy herein declared." 


Section 3 (d) of the Act conferred power upon the President 
to prescribe and approve a code uiider the following conditions: 

"Section 3 (d) Upon his own motion , or if complaint is 
made to the President that abuses * * * are prevalent in any 
trade or industry * * * and no code * * * has been approved 

*** the President after * * * public notice and hearing * * * 
may prescribe and approve a code * * * which shall have the 
same effect as a code * * =t= approved by the President iindor 
subsection (a) of this section." 

(*) In the quotations following the underscoring of certain parts 
has been added by the aiithor a2:Ld does not appear in the Act itself. 



( c) AG-HEEivZElJTS 

Section 4 (a) of the Acb confei-red pov/er upon the President 
to enter in af^reer.euts Y;ith, nml approve voluntarv agreements bety/een 
persons as follows: 

"Section 4 (a) The President is authorized to enter 
into agreemexits with, and to approve agreements between and 
araong, persons engaged in a trade or industry, labor or- 
gfini::ations, and trade or industrial organizations, asso- 
ciations or groups * * * if in his judgment such agreements 
will aid in effectuating the policy of this title with respect 
to transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, 
and will be consistent .with the requirements of clause (2) 
of subsection (a) of section 3 for the code of fair 

(d) LABOR A:-RESME1ITS . ■ . 

Section 7 (b) of tne Act required the Presidentto afford 
every opportunit,-' to employer r, and employees to establish by mutual 
agreement standards as to maximum hours, minimum rates of pay and other 
conditions of empjlo^inent and such agreements when approved "by the 
President "shall have the same effect as a code * * * approved by the 
President under subsection (a) of Section 3". This implied the power 
to approve. 

Section 7 (c) of the Act conferred pov/er upon the President 
to investigate labor conditions in a trade or industry where no mutual 
agreement concerning labor conditions had been approved under Section 
7 (b) , and to prescribe a limited code fixing certain labor conditions, 
which "shall have the same, effect as a code * * * approved by the Presi- 
dent under subsection (a) of section 3." 

( e) AliEliDMBlOTS 

Section 10 (b) of the Act conferred power upon the President 
to modify any order, or approval issued under the Act. This established 
the power to approve or prescribe amendments. 


. Section 4 (b) of the Act conferred power upon the President 
under certain conditions to license business enterprises. This power 
expired June 16, 1934 and was never used, hence no conditional orders 
were involved under it. 

Inasmuch as orders of approval in their intended effect and 
in many cnau^ their legal effectiveness departed far from the provisions 
of the Act, it ig deemed important to analyze the sections outlined 
•above carefully to determine just what was provided in the Act, particu- 
larly in Section 3 (a) and Section 3 (d) PVithpr.izin^ "conditions". 



Considering Sections 3 {p) and 3 (d) of the Act together, it 
is aDparent that the former ras intended to provide the machinery for 
voluntary codes alone and the latter v.-as intended to provide the 
machinery for prescrihed codes alone (often termed ii.iposed or compulsory 

Section 3 ( a) provided that " Zhe President may, as a condition 
of his aTPproval of any such code, impose such conditions * * * as the 
President in his discretion deen:s necessary * * *" . (Underscoring added) 

It is very evident that this wording in connection with a code 
voluntarily applied for, conteinplatea that conditions imposed "by the 
President were conditions of and antecedant to the granting of his final 
approval, leaving the voluntary code in a suspended state of effective- 
ness prior to inclusion of or assent to the conditions imposed, and did 
not contemplate the authorizing of arhitrary conditions in his final 
approval of any code voluntarily applied for without thereby rendering 
the code in fact a prescribed code. To preserve the voluntarj/' nature of 
codes under Section 3 (a), any such imposed conditions must necessarily 
have heen assented to or included "by duly authorized sponsors of the 
voluntary code prior to its tecoming effective or the code was a pre- 
scribed code. 

It is evident that ho matter what might "be the importance of 
an imposed condition, the principle is the same, for it clearly would 
be impossible to draw any line of demarcation based upon importance of 
the imposed condition. It has been generally considered that there 
were no codes prescribed ujider the provisions of Section 3 (d)-, but 
codes voluntarily applied for and approved with conditions in the order 
of approval unassented to by the duly authorized sponsors must be con- 
sidered as falling under Section 3 (d) "upon the motion" of the 

If such codes were approved by either the Administrator or 
the National Industrial Recovery Board with conditions in the order 
of approval unassented to, the codes would appear to be legally non- 
effective because of lack of delegated power of approval londer Section 
3 (d) . (See Chapter II) 

The only code containing imposed conditions in the order of 
approval \7hich appears to have had the conditions assented to and a 
further clear order of final approval issued, v;as Code IJo. 1, Cotton ^ 
Textile Industry (discussed more fully later herein). 

Thereafter conditions, some of a vital nature, others unim- 
portant, were imposed in many orders of approval and the codes con- 
sidered effecliive by the NRA as voluntary codes without the issuance 
of subsequent orders of final approval after the conditions were 
satisfied by assent or othervrise. In many such cases (probably a large 
majority) the sponsoring bodies proceeded upon the basis of the con- 
ditional approvals and organized for administration of the conditionally 
approved codes and thereby tacitly assented to the conditions imposed. 
This probably legalized the approvals as voluntary codes although the 



eff ectiveness as respecting,- individual industry members might still 
depend upon the forn of authorisation £^;iven to the sponsoring tody. 

Under Section 3 (cl) for codes def iiiitel^^ prescrihod "by the 
President, it -.■■o\-.ld he unlilvel^ th,-.t nny co-iditions '-ould ever he re- 
quired in the order cf approv.?! since the President necessarily could 
control every provision prescrihorl therein. 

Under Section 4 (a) for vorant.ary agreements entered into, or 
approved hy the President , no pover to impose conditions was granted 
hy the Act since the reference in Section 4 (a) to clause (2) of Section 
3 (a) was only to the requirements thereof. 

Under Sections 7 (b) ind 7 (c) for mutual ' agreements and for 
prescribed limited codes covering labor, conditions , no specific power 
to impose conditions was granted by the Act. Such agreements or codes 
upon approval had the same effect as codes approved under Section 3 (a). 
Conditions in the approval order would therefore serve to render such 
ac.Teements noneffective until assented to, unless specifically pre- 
scribed by the President himself. In the case of prescribed limited 
codes under Section 7 (c) it would be unlikely that any conditions would 
ever be required in the order of approval since "the President could con- 
trol every provision prescribed therein. 

In support, if necessary, of the conclusion that Section 3 (a) 
covered voluntary codes only and Section 3 (d) covered prescribed codes 
only, rendering codes approved conditionally by the President, in fact, 
prescribed codes, attention may v/ell be directed to the intent shovm by 
the statements of Senator Wagner in exj laining the original National 
Industrial Recovery Act on May 32, 1933 before the Senate Committee on 
finance as follows: 

"Senator Wa.gner. * * * The national industrial recovery 
bill has as its single objective * * * reemplojTTient * * * at * 
wages sufficient to secure comfort and decent living. This * * * 
end is to be reached by * * * cooperative action within industry, 
encouraged by law and supervised by the President for the pro- 
tection of the public, and * * * expenditures for public works, 

* * * the bill centralizes authority in the President * * *. 
Despite this centralized power, the emphasis is upon voluntary 
action. * * * trade and industrial association or group to 
prepare * * * for approval a voluntary code * * *. YiThen such a 
voluntciTy code is approved by the President * * * binding upon 
the entire trade or industry * * *. * * * no code shall be 
approved unless * * * (certain conditions are met as to true 
representation, no monopoly, no discrimination — embodies labor 
provisions of Section 7 (a) 

"Thus far I have discussed codes which are voluntary 

* * * and it is primarily upon such spontaneous action that 
the bill relies. * * * But if any trade or industry cannot 
or will not cooperate in the formation of voluntary codes, 
the President is authori?,ed, after proper investigations and 



hearings, to prescrilie * * * codes * * * or if any trade or 
industry volvintarily arrives at some of the requirements of 
a code, and neglects others, the President may in a proper 
manner prescribe these others £ind comhine all in a general 
code. * * * in absence of need of general code * * * pre- 
scribe a lir'iitod code dealing only with (labor conditions) 

"Senator Gore. The three categories, what are they? 

"Senator Wagner. The voluntary code, the compulsory code, 
the licensing feature, which -I will come to, and then there 
is the agreement provision." 



J:^1!I^2 il 


T>-e first dele;;r.tion of r.pprovr.l .lowers by tlie President was 
made to tJ.e Aflxiinir-trator oy Executive Or.'.er Ho. 6j43-A, December 30, 
1933, e.-3 fcllcA'is: 

"(l) 1!.^G a^Jproval of codes cf fair competition, 
v.'it:. tAe exception of cedes for major in- 
dustries (beinji in general tlio-e industries 
noriiially employing in excess of 50,000 em- 
ployees) as SG classified by tlie Adminis- 
trator for Industrial Zeccvery pjid witli the 
exception also of any code of fair competi- 
tion i ."posed under secticn 3 (d) of said 
title of the a-ct. 

"(l) 11^3 appr-vel of any amendment or modifica- 
tion to, exception or exemption frci, or . ' . 
eli-.-dnation of rxij one or more provisions of 
any code ox fair competition. 

"(3) i^othinti lierein contained '^...all be con.:trued 
as amendini^ any previous delegations of 
power to any otier Deojr.rti.ient of tl^e ,r-cvern- 

Executive Ordor H c. G443, rTcvember 22, 1S33 delegated ^ower 
to tPe Administrator to .rcdify, or grant exceptions to or exemptions 
from, a.;:^re3ment'- under Title I, tPen or thereafter entered into or 
appr.ved by tie Pi'esic''.ent. 

Pxecutive Crder No. 65S0-A, Febraary 8, 1934, delegated power 
to tlie Acaiiinir-trator to prescribe rales and regulE,tions governing 
amencLuents, modifications, exemptions, exceptions and stays .and 
other forms of relief from approved codes. 

Executive Order No. 6750-A, June 37, 1934, delegated power 
to tie Aih.i..nistrator to enter into agreements under Section 4 (a) 
wit: ersons engaged in trade or industry in Puerto Pico, h'awaii 
and Aip.oha. 

Executive Crder liO. 6764, Jiuie 29, 1934, delegated power of 
approvri of codes covering in ^^eneral food indu'tries jointly to 
tP.e Secretary of A:;riculture and tie A'lrainistrc.tor except major in- 
dustries ajid codes imposed under Section 3 (d) and also delegated 
pcv/er of approval of a:fiendmen t s , otc. to e^.C-i for the codes adiuin- 

•168- - 

istered by eac". . respectively. Tl-:.r: order clarifiec''. tlie "broad dele^a- 
ti.n ,^iven tc tl:e Adi^-mir-trator "ander Zy.ecutive Ordar ITo. 654o~A. 

H;:ec\'.t:'.ve Order "do. 6359, 3e ..te/.iber 27, 193-,.-, rodelej^r.ted, amonj. 
ot'ier!?, all ;,:oi.7ers of approval tderetcfore dele.,ated to tlie Ac'jTiinis- 
trator, to tlie ITaticnal Industri'.l llec^very 3crrd. 

Executive Order Vo. 6999, l.iarc'i 50, 1953, redel3:^ated all of 
t"'.e f-unctions and powers v/itli certairi. specified exceptions, iron 
tae Secretary oi A^'ricul tare to tLs ITational Indastrial Heccvery 
Board vrit'i res,~iect to five specified food indur-try codes. 



:ji?T;.iii III 


cc.NDiTi'ri: Ai-PXVA L CT (_ ) ccij^s, (o) A" :i::]:i.;ekt s . (c) 
Ai.iE: :a:E:"T3 aI'D (d) o^hek ,^^ixi a di.:i:;i5tra.tive actioics ? 

(a) C'DES 

Code IIo. 1, Cotton Textile Industry wp.s approved by the President 
J'aly 'J, ] 933 on thirteen coi.ditio.iS which v/ere immediately referred 
to t.:.3 Indur.try, ^.scented to, or satisfactorily adjusted and the con- 
ditionally'" approved code amended accordinj^ly. Prior to the designated 
effective date, tlie President issued July 16, 1933 a furtier E::ecutive in v»h^ch: 

"It is ordered that the condlti:n heretofore 
imp; sod as to the terrainaticn of approval jf 
t±ic Code is nov/ V'/ithdraivn and that the Code 
of Tair Competition for th.e Cotton Textile 
Industry is linallj'" approved with the condi- 
ti^^ns so proposed, as set f rth. in Schedule 
A rtuFXiiOd lereto." 

Th:i.s action conformed literally to the clfuse in the Act, 
Secti..n 3 (a), "Tl:e President ma~', as a condition of his approval 
of sjiy such code, i.apose such conditions *** as the President in 
his discretion deems necesso.ry to effectuate tl^e policy herein de- 
clared." Cede ilo. 1 thereby retained a purely voluntary status and 
was effectively'' approved under Section -j (r.) of tie Act. 

Code ITo, 3, 'Jool Texti].e Iniv.stry, was tie next code approved 
conditionally. It was approved July 26, 1D33 hy the President on 
condition "a Wool Textile Industry Co-iimittee he created ***". 
In til is case Cas early as Jiily 26, 1933) apparently the literal 
mepjiinj.; of the clause of the Act, of Section 5(a) quoted above, was 
lost si/;;ht of, and tiiis Code was by the terms of the Order in a 
state of suspended approval until the condition was complied witii. 

Code ho. 6, Lace Mn,nufa.cturin£; Industry, approved August 14, 
1933 by the President on c-ndition that a. Ls.ce Manufacturing Indus- 
try (Cede Authority) be elected. Code History states (p. -27) that 
three days later the- industry witi 90fo present held- a meeting to 
elect such comiiiittee, thus satisfying the condition. 

Code No. 12, PhotograpLiic iianuf ac turing Industry, approved 
August 19, l'J33 by the President on condition that a Photographic 
Llanufac turing Committee be created. This condition was not met 
until October 30, 1934, over a year later, apparently througli mis- 
understanding that tne required committee necessitated an election 
and was not satisfied by the group of soven appointed as the code 
committee. The legality of considering the c>:de effective as a 



voluntr.r-' coCc in tlio ■ic'.nti'ie ■ li. 'lit hrvo successfully "ocon ch:,?.lcn-';cc'. 
hr.f. i iportrnt c''Ses fi,;.Gnc'cc. tliorcon, 

Coc.c iro. 13, '■'isiii:,-'- • T.-C' ■■''.:. Inc'i^stry, ■'■■'r- ".TjrovoC. 1$, 1333 
"b;,'' the Frcsic'Gnt a^i.jjcct to ■• co.ifition rcriuirin-;; rncncl lent "as soon as 
prr.cticr/ole" of tl-c Associr.tioji ''r.-l; -rE, -.'hicli -:'ern i'l conflict ^-"ith 
Section 3 (<-) (l) of the Act, ilraifeGtl:-, this coc'.c coulc. not lieon 
lef;r.lly rpprovcc". rnc^ effective until thif ' T.r? c'ono -itnout viol-'^tin," a 
Epccific recjuire icnts of tliF, Act, 

Coc.o JTo, ih, ?.a7on r,nc. S^-ntiiGtic Yai-n K-'-nufacturinf; Inc'ustry, 
"ap;;rove(."- Auiist 2fS, 1S33 "07 the rreGlecnt of the conc.ition, conpliance 
'•'itli '-'hich ±h horcl)"''' -'equiroo, that reports shall "be furnished fron tine 
to ti :c to the Ac-iinistratoi' V/ each nnplo3/cr" concerning Ir.'bor infoma- 
tion. I>uiifest"'.; , failure of any cTToloycr to conpl;/ -;ith this conc.ition 
at "n;;'' .Tcn the coc'.c ler^ally revert to a state of eus jenc.ed r :pro- 

There io no evidence th'^t this condition "as '.et at any tiue acre 
th^n hj'- lero rccifent o'-'' trrnsnittin.-^' a copji of infornation e::changcd 

'.lonthl-/ anon." only four of the principrl nrju^fact^irers r^hordn^' '.7r^f:e 

rates. This v/a'~- in no snnse a. reoort, (See Coce History pp. l6l-lo2.) 

The le,';^al ef:"cctiv>inoss of the code could have heen cha,llen£;ed until 

reports "cre suhiitted "by each enploycr in accordp.nce -'ith the order of 

Code IJo, 31, Line Industry.'', '-as approved Octover 3. 1^33 ""^Y 'the 
President on' condition that the Association a?:iend its "by-la-'s. This is 
reported to have ooen satis;"ied. Sir jiojiths later an avienoxient "as 
.approved April 1, 1935> "'ith e::tennive conditions in its order of 
approval partially a,';reed to "by the incur.try p.r,C. pa.rtially regr,rded "by 
the indxistr;'- as elininatin^- the c'erircc" inclusion of provisions a."bsolutely 
necessary for proper adainistration of the code, ¥.0 assent to the con- 
citions in the order of approva.l of the r:icncr.ient rppCcars froi.i the 

Code No, 9» aiend'-.ient to Liiiiher c'; Ti.n'bGr Products, Action 
Octo'osr '3» 1933 "i^y the ?resit"ent. This is not a conditional order of 
ap.rovrl, "but is cited as an instrnce of en ineffective approval, (See 
"l^ound Yor.vie I, frfje fOJ,, Codes of Pair Corpetition) , The President 
has here :orcly r.i;':ncd a recon londation addressee' to hir: "b;,^ the Auiinis- 
trator, , 

Code Ko, 5'-"'> >juff rnd Folishin:;; '.nieel Industry, '-as approved Koven- 
"oor h, 133fe ^^7 the President on condition that one of the unfair trade 
practice ^niles "be deleted --hich crlled for resale price na.intena,nce. 
There a:: ears to he no evidenc3 of assent to this deletion other than 
tacit asr-ont in the orfjanizatioji and -"unctionin;-; of the code .-u thoritj'', 
■•'hich 'v"s the g-^oup sponsorinf':; the code. 

Code ilo, 12;., Unholstery and Dra;pory Ter.tile Industry '-?a.s approved 
llovei.foer 27> ''■S33 \'' the President on conc.ition that certrin classes of 
r.anufr.cturcr'j cotild elect not to "be "ooimd upon notice ;uven -'ith a. 
given ti;ie linit (later er.tenc.ed to Dece i"ber 23, 1S33«) Industry 



;-.p--arentl;,' cosiroc" this conrition --hiclL w.C.c it 'co; sible fol' then to f;et 
r. coc'e, -\i(. r,ltliour;b. the cor/ition": "■.''>e^,i"' not to been specif icnlly 
£\Hsentec'. to, the orgmizr.tion". oocro.tion of the code rjuthority inplied 
tec it r.sscnt. 

Code Ho, l'>?, Cr.M llr.uufr-.cturi:--/;; T:id\'.r.ti'", -v.s r.ppi'oved Decenber I5, 
1933 ^7 tlie ?:.-e;:;:i('er.t - -itli t'vo c j.;/ i Giorr; , the nocond r eqaiinng s-abnis- 
Eion of atrtistic"! i:i:'or':r-tion to lOA., T'loi-e r; to "be no record of 
asGcnt to the conditions i'-.'OPcd o\-.t 7.ih(vi3e there is no record of o"b- 
lection nnr the coCe authority election .-.nd operation lent tacit assent 
to tho concition-o, in the or('.cr of r: .rovrl. 

Coco iTo. 20;';:, Carpet and liMQ 'fenufacturinc Industry, '-/as approved 
Jrnurrp ].;•;, 193''i- ^"^7 the President on condition that a provision con- 
cerainp "voliiJio ■"llo'-'ance" oc s taycc\ pendin-:; further investigation. 
Thir \-'r.s done on account of opposition raiscid "by hviying syndicates ajid 
••holcsale (."i"-tri"outinp o'r.;;ani;^ations, llo infornation is availahle 
sho ■inj\,' industry reaction or rny assent to the stay. 

Code i\o, 23G, Cool"in:P and Heating Appliance iianufacturing Indv.stry, 
'-'as approved Ja:Taary 3'^, 193^^ ^V 't^'^C' Adninistrator on condition that 
the -aitin.-:; "oeriod hct-'ccn filint" of prices pnd their effective date be 
str.yed, JTo recorc" was found of industry assent to this prescribed con- 
dition, The Ac'ainistrator' s delej^-atec po^er soeci'^icrlly e::cluded ap- 
■orovrl of pv.-:scribed codes. The effectiveness of the approval of this 
code, "-'ith ji condition, 'las therefore subject to challen;;;e until the 
condition ■ -as assented to. 

Code "do, 25s, Crst- Iron Boiler rnd ?.adiator Industry, '7?-s a.pproved 
Feb:.uary j, 193'r by the Ac'ninistrator on condition that the provision 
covering resale price --irintenance be deleted. This '-/as stated to be 
"?- very serious blo" to the ■lopo of the industry that cut-throat conpe- 
tition -ould be retarced or arrested," (Code History, Part II, p. I7). 
J.o p.ssent to this deletion fron the code as approved by the industry 
appears to be of record. 

Code I'o, 33C', Scrap Iron, ]Ion-rerious Scrap iietals and "Jaste 
liaterials Trade, " 'as ap rove." by the Presicient liarch 12, 193^'" on condi- 
tion that a report be lado not later tha.n oO da;rS after effective date 
"hether su.p:rP.e;aentary code 'vas necessary for the "'Taste Paper Tra,de. " 
This report -'as received fron. the code authority on April I7, 193^'- 
requestini^ a heariny on a proposed supplenenta-1 code. Hence, assent 
to the condition --as iirolied by corroliance thercvith. (Code Plistory p, 

Code ilo, 35^, S::all Ai'JS and Ariunition lianufacturin^; Indt\stry 
'.vas approved by the Adninistra-tor subject to conditions (rnon^ others) 
that the "]iedf;e" clause dealing -ith non-i-aiver of cons ti tut iona.l ri^phts 
and non-consent to nodif ications be eliainp.tet. Uritil these conditions 
'-'cre assented to "oy the Industry, the code 'Ta^s in a suspended state of 
effectiveness as r voluntary code unter Section 3 C^-) being approved only 
by the Adnini strator "ilh conc'itions, rnd -jhose delegated authority by 
Er:ec-.i-tive Order sp.-cif ically e:r.ccpted the peer to prescribe codes. 


CocTe L'6, 355> Pi'efor.ioc. Plp-stic Pro.'uctf? Int.ustry, "r.s reproved 
"by the Acur>istr;\tor Iirrcli 23, l.^S''' "'itli ". condition tiir.t the ".revisions 
"be strj'-oc" conccrnin;; r. "^itin • jcrioc. het'een the filinj^ mC. effective 
QpXe of pi'ic3 So frr '-.s l:no".'n, indtis'ir;.' ; iGMbers cid not o'bjcct 
to tliis st'-^Vj rn'- or£;rniz".tion ^nd opciTtions of the code r;athority lent 
tpcit rssent to th-j code r-G r.pcroved --ith tlie conditions. 

Code i'lo, 3S2, rho.toGi-'phic rnd rhoto Finishin,;; Industry, r,"_roroved 
'.Ic.rch 53 » 1S3^» "l^t 'oy i'iie President -'ith r.n idonticr.l condition r'.nd 
pdnilr.r rer.ction of Industry r.s voider code iTo. 339» 

Code V.o. 3^5,".il iIon\inent InduBtry, rp a-ovcd hy the Ad:.iinistra- 
tor darch 26, IQ3U ith an io.onticrl con:Ution to that for Code Ko, 353, 
The; stay \'r.z never lifted, i"o rec'~>rd 0" assent or oljjection appears. 

Code No, UOI, Coper Industry, "as approved April, 21 , IS3U and in 
the order ver3'- c::tensivc, conditions '-ere plrced. 

Assent ■ -as /;ivcn Tj- • :ie:i"bers of the In("ustry, "out under protest thp,t 
ne'-' Article VII (i.'rrhctin': Provisions) ^las "inposed" on the Industry, in 
letters as follo^'s: 

Anerican hotrl Co-pany L'ry 10, I53U 

Anaconda Copper .'lininr;^ Conpan;' April 2U, 153'+' 

Kennecott Cop'^er Corporation ""Uvy U, 193^ 

Phelps Dodge Cor-oration April 2U, I93U 

Five others on dptcs April 2'!- to ilry '(, I53U 

iMpt'/ithstandin,-'?; these 'Protests, the -lenLjers of the Industry proceeded 
•7ith the or.;Tanization of their code authority '•nC- acliercd to all of the 
'jrovisions of the Coc'e, thus the conditions in thP or'cr of ap'oroval 
'icy te consiiTered to~iu.'ve received later i lolied assent. 

Code No. kOZ , Under,2T.rnent and 1-Ie;jli^.:ee Industry, '^"s a'-proved 
April 27, 153^'- "or the Ac ninistrato'.- 0:1 five conditions. The code His- 
tory ;"ives no record of rssent or o'oposition. The code authority '-as not 
recO;:^'nizefr u.ntil July 9, 153'-' ^'^c- to difv'iculty of or.paiization due to 
rivalry to t'TO sponsorinj^; /;;roups. Hf f ectivoncss o:f the approval on 
condition '^rs doubtfrJ-, 

Code No, -1-20, Cypru.: Industry, approved ;iay 7, 193-1- ""^7 the Adiiinis-v 
trator on condition tiiat the ■■aitiny porioT te deleted under price fil- 
in.r; ana, evicence "be suh::itted to avorr„jint_; of hours •"as necussarj'', 

No record of assent. Industry ''as'hat disappointec". in not 
"bcin^; peruitted to \ a weitin-.; perioc in connection '-ith price filing, 
but no strcmious o'bjection'ir. vie? of study being nade ''oy IJ2A. The code 
ruthoritjT- appointed a coi'.ittec to report on averagin,-; o"" hours, and 
upon their report the averaging of hours • -as per litter" to renain in the 

Code No, ^03, Canc'y lianj.ifapturiiv; Incustrjr, '-rr.s approved 11, 
-!;'3'^ ^7 the PresiCent on four conditions to •■hich there .appears no 
sr.ccific assent hy the Industry* Only one "condition," that staying 

-17 ?~ 

the 'T.itinf ocrioc., is re-sorted to lirvo cusec'.. rpprccir.'ble invfiistr;' 
rerctio:i. Here :-.rn7 nc.foors foi-esn;- thr,t the clDsence of the -/p.itinc 
pcrioc. -otilo. heep priccp churnirl^^•, r. phenomenon '-hich r.ctur.lly occurred 
(Co'^-e History, p. yO) . 

Coc.c To, Uo7, Ci.:;p/r hrjiufrcturin-; In, ^^jtry, --p-E r-:provcc June I3, 
153^ ''^7 ^''■'^-- President on four conciti ■^ns. "'hero i?. no rccorc" of r.Esent 
to the concitions nor of olijection thereto. A cofo r.uthority -cs 
electee' July 2, ISy''- "hich lent tr.cit rssont to the code concltionrlly 
rpproved o.s 'bein-': voluntri';'. 

Code ITo. US9, Sulphonr.tod Oil l.rnuf "cturin,'; Infustrp, -t.s r.pproved 
June 2 J, 1934 h;/ the Afninistrr.tor on the condition' that certain provisions 
coverin;-; price filinr end r. --aitin..',- periof^ oe str.ycc".. Industr:" die. not 
desire to str,'" "iid hp resolf.tion of th"-" code rutho'^itp on i'Iove:foer f, 
153-!- stated thrt the str.y operated to revent efficient operation under 
the code anc nade it'ble to carr-' out the xirpose of the _T.ct 
and requested thcat the stay oe terun" ted. This -'ar. not c-onc oecause 
approval of waitin'.; peiiofs ' -as contrary to the ;o!'.ic" 0:^ lUA. The 
election and. functionin.^- of the code- r.uthorit;^ --rohaoly conntituted 
tacit assent to the code -'ith the condition "but the effectiveness of the 
code, arrinst any inc'ivid-cal :;e".iuer of the ind\ir.try ■ dio ii;jht have 
challen/jed it as a ""ropcrited code, -rs, r"ouhtf"o.l. 

Code To. Us'o, Corn Coo Pipe Industry, -.'as rpproved 7, 153^^ 
"by the Aduinistrator on condition that a report he suhi.:itted v;ithin % 
da:-s on a st'id^r of iinin^ju.i rrtos of pay. This --as not ''.one ■-ithin the 
Go c"-ays ll.'it and -^ppp.rently never co'iplied -ith. "The code, therefore, 
hecane non-effective 50 deys after its stated effective date "by the 
tens of the ofder of apj:.'ov"l, anc. probahly :.vipht have "been lailed in 
coxirt PS never effecti'.e bccrusc of lach of c'-eler;ated authority in the 
Administrator to aeorove r. vol^j-ntar^" code c'nanj'jed 'd-j r prescri'bed con- 

Code ifo. 5U1, flat C-lasG i:rnu:"acturirif Industry, -as approved hy 
the h'lI-G, su"bJQct to tiie condition the.t Section 2 ("b) of Article III 
be st-yed. This section provided for tolerance in hours durin.:" a peah 
period '-.'P.s consic^ere';" p. vitl .rrt 0:' the code "oy certain ::r.nufactu— 
rers. The pp/Drovpl "ijih. this condition unassented to, rendered the code 
and as such the lilPfl • 'P.s --itliout dele.^'atcd puthorit" to eff ectivel:'' 
approve. T"-o ie':i'bcrs of the Industry protested. The code coi:ittee 
refiised to orp.^nize t'ne coce p.uthorit;- \inder the provisions of the code 
until the concition -t.s Ir.ter rcriove'." h" m orCer ter:-iin-'ti?ip the 
"ctay", ("hich str;" had not "oeen specif icp.ll" ordered). In tne :ca.n- 
tine, the co'"c coMiittee clr.i'iof. the coce ■ -af.. not lc-f>ally effective. 
Serious coiroli'^ncc cases hine;ed upon the effective date of this code, 
■hich had not "'ooc.n settled at tlic tine of the Schcchter Decision, 

(b) AGZTI]hEhTS 

A representrtivc nufoe:. 0.' liscellancaous oi-dcrs of a;oprovr.l, or 
agree lonts, lip.vo "been revie-.'od p.s fol'^.o-'s: 

(r.) i\;:ro.c:\ ".y tlic Prorif :iit r._""o:-oYin ; laljor provi- 
sionr of AAA coc^.cs, 

(ij) Ai'-rcr-ients on ■_;-":'ti"ll;- cr-pletoc", coi'.os, r.llier- to 
the Cotton Tortile In:'iicti-7. -"'iicse -cvq . ov cert 'in ■.•rovisiona '-'hich. 
receiver', the Prci'^iclent' s fornr.l ,',.yn:.-ovf 1 in r'.c.v.:,nce o:'.' a/Teeiient upon 
the --hole coces. p;irtiP.7L ■'v.Tc'nn.ontr. -.•ere :\r.:'!.c siilDiect to the s?ne 
conditions rs r-^;;.lioc. to the Cotton Ter.ti'^.e Code, '.,'ith the "inrl 
p.p'crov-",! of the Cotton Te:;tile Code tncse con'",itions -•ci'o r.utonf.tically 

llo n-fiiinistrr-.tive ("iff ic\".ltieB or otho:? interruptions to the 
re;5,-al?,r procec'u.rc. in h^^ndlin:;; these crsep-. , d\ie to the r-' i cC. conc'itions 
of r.pprcvr.l, rre recorfcd. 

(c) Ai]:ia)x.I]NTS 

A Ir.rge nuAer of orr'crs of ap roval of r:iend:'.ents to codes -'ere 
revie-,7ed, rnd ver'- fe\' conc.itionc, in the orders of ry-jTovdl found. In 
I'^enerr.l, ariendnents '-ere r.ot svihject to presr/arc for r,_.prov".l. They 
"ere so c^'^refullp end consider jc tlir.t chr.v;n!. rs required '"'ere 
:-!r,dc cnC. asscntec, to prior to prcsentriion for r;;p:-ov-l. 

Such conditions rs, r-jpe^rec" 'ere in the siMple (c_;rv;le sho"'n 
'bolovO.(*) f'nd not vitrl to the Indus^'ry, r:.v. •:orcover, oould oc pres- 
crihed -ith fi\ll le;;;r,l effectiveness j"" rc.^ion of the provifi-ions of 
Section 10 (b) of the Act, "nc tl'e dele;;r-tion of those po- ers of ::odi- 
ficrtion to the Adninistrr.tor rnd Ir.ter to tie 11TP3. specifically hy 
Sr-ecutive orders ITo. 3'_^hj>~A rx.C ITo. Zo'^'^ res"" ectively. 

(c") OTsIER IJlIO.l ADhlillSTlAflVI ^.CTIOITS 

A vast n"ujil)cr of ninor ;:d;vinif.;trative rctions -"-ere acc«^nplished 
"by approvals of tho Adiinisti^rtor, trie National Inc'istrial llecovery 
Ijoard, the Division Ad':'.i;.-iistrrtors, rn;' the Assistrnt Ach'.inistrative 
Officer for Code Axithorit^' Bvi.dpots, for r.uch tatters as approval of 
nethods of code ruthority selections, co'fe avithority elections, ■'oy-la'"-s, 
trac^c prrcticc comlrints' co".r:ittces rnd pl.^ns, juc/":cts, etc, 

A larfie "proportion of tliese a/TO"i-oval'" "-ere raihject to conditions 
in order to ac -jvist the doc\i:ients to H.A "■olic;^. The for"i a;-/ recuire- '■■ 
nents for these focviients 'ere ;;ro"':ul rted in ad:ii-'istrative orc-ers 
fron ti","ie to ti;ic,,anc" "tho ,ar_thority to i rpose conditions -as inherent. 
The i.iroosition of conditions '.'a'-, in the vast .irjority o:' c"ses, to 
pronpf.y "■leriit the functio'nin;-; of the ad/rinistrative rf;:cncy involved, 
'"here only r"iinor adjust 'ents to "olicy "'ero '~ c^c^^c^- neces."-ary """dch "ould 

(*) Enarole: C.ncnt Infastry A: icncf ,„nt llo. 1 r;.^ roved ha-' 11, 1Sj5 hy 
IT.I.h.B. svfo.j ct to conditions: 

(1) Tnat a trrd.c prfcticc s^l'.linp :"il.. a"p"lica'olc to shipy'.cnt 
" to U.S, CT0Vcrn"K."nt rt 1; ."nf .jrant rrtcs oc stayod to rfford 
ti K. for further stxidy. 
(r:) That Article covcrinp non-consent to :odif icrtio"n be dctictv-d. 


not prevent pro;o,.r functioni;"'.;:?. 

These cnn(ritionr,l orc'.err oi r;..provr,l ".rcsontuc'' no t iff iculti^vs in 
^:cn^.rr]. ,'pt in obtrinin^'j cvic'.onco of s^.tisfrctory coiplirncc •■ith 
their terns •,'horo further r.ction ".rr.s rcoTiirec"., 



chapxeh IV 


GGJDITIGNAL C::Dr:RS C? iiPP:X.""'iiL'- 

Prior to the condition&l jvoyirovals there a-imerirs to hpve been, in 
general, consideratle effort in most codes to brin,^ them into ccnfcrmity 
with policy, "but due to the pressure to ,?et codes approved, in-optience 
^ith the last adjustments -^fter T)rior extended delays resulted in abandon- 
ment of efforts tc obtain isscnt to these last chane;es, deletions and 
additions and the practice of taliini' care of then by conditions imioosed 
in the orders of a"onroval. 

In code No. 1, Cotton Textile Industry, and code Ho. 6, Lace Manu- 
facturing Industry, effort w?is made and assent to adjustments received 
before the effective dates of the codes. In the other codes condition- 
ally apTJroved, which have been reviewed, there seens to have been little 
or no attempt to obtain prompt assent of the -nroponents to the conditions, 
in many cases months elapsed, and in some cases no attempt ••'as made to 
obtain assent. 




The Orders of AiD^ircval of 557 Codes -'ere exanined for conditions. 
Of these codes, 261 were found to contain froa one to fovx or five con- 
ditions, some more, a roU;3;h examination of many r.ore sup'olementery codes 
ax)t)ears to sho'^^ an even greater orcportion npnroved conditionally, post 
conditions were of only routine inoort in their effect upon the conduct 
of their business h;r members of the industr">'' concerned, but a number 
'-'ere of vital import and aiio-unted to forcin-- a code upon the industry. 
(a tabulation of details of various tj^pes of conditional orders is given 
in Appendix "3" hereto.) 

The most frequent tj'pes of conditions were; 

(a) In early codes, the condition thot »n administrative 
body be created. This led to the code authoritv. 

(b) Condition that the by-laws of the -r)artici;oating 
as"=ociation be changed to correct discriminatory 

(c) Condition that re-aorts on labor statistics be submitted. 

(d) Condition that attempt to interpret or modif,y 
Section 7 (a) of the Act oe olimin-^ted. 

(e) Condition that provisions for classif ic-^tion of custom- 
ers be stayed pendin-: investigation. 

(f ) Beginning about Feoruary 1, 1934. Condition that waiting 
period between filing of nrices and effective date 
thereof be stayed and hearin^r held thereon. 

(g) Condition that homc'-'orV be xirohibited and a study of 
same made. 

(h) Condition that hearing may be held, at O'otion of 
Administrator on any provision and subseauent 
orders have effect of condition of ar)"i")roval. 

(i) Condition that a "hed.-'e" clause reserving consti- 
tutional rights if the code be modified -as to be 

(j) Condition that provision prohioitin.j couT'^.ns or -ore- 
raiums be stayed. 

(k) Condition that code authority submit recommendations 
to adjust hour and wage rjrovisions to conform with 
other codes. 




TTiLj EECsssiTii^G or ■oiiiiTisTrLJJici: "::?■!: suitj.j by coipitioiial 

0.RDSR3 Qj? ApPriOVAlT 

The principal nocessities of condition?! orders of a-o iroval as used 
T/ere to expedite the ari'iroval of codes '-'here sponsors -»cre tard;'" or 
difficult to reoch in assenting to chanfes, or e.dverse to the changes 
which established -loolicy required. 

Many codes v/ero suhjectetl to procrastin.-'.tion so ni^rhed as to make 
it ap"iea,r they nere heing purposely delayed by the sponsors by the de- 
vice of including provisions rcougnrnt to adininistration -policy. The 
Administration ^-^^.s loath to specifically utilize Section 3 (d) of the 
Act and the alternative selected nas ,fehe conditional order of ap;oroval 
as a supposed means of presrerving a voluntary status under Section 3 
(a) and force a code on the stalling indastry. 

There is verbal evidence th::.t some conditions of rroproval 'lere in- 
sorted at the instance of sponsoring con littecs to taJ-ce fron those com- 
mittees the onus of failiu-e to include or e::clude provisions co:iforming 
to the desires of certain nenbcrs of their industry, but 'vhich the IRA 
rrould not -oermit. In other nords to "save the face" of the committee. 




\ rtlAT ZVIJBI.'Cl': 0? COII P LIAITCE OB- UON-COuPLI/JICi: UITH coiypiiioiis 
OF APPI^OVAL .U^.: 10 IC ECUliS? _J7il4T TL13 IHL LZGAL Ili.'ZZCT 0? 

In the cases of code No. 1, rjid code ITo. 6, heretofore discussed, 
the conditions were incorporated in the code or fully ST'.tisficd end con- 
iTlied nith. 

In ot?ier cases the coip^lirncr: ivr.s usurll;' vcvr trrdy uhere action 

07 ir.dustry r;^cncics rr:^ ronuirod and even thou-'^:h '■ ti,.ir; linit iras net, 
corn-^liaiice '-'.s often not coj-i:)lcto oeforo that date, (As instances zee 
codes llo. 12; ^o 14 rnd ITo 493.) 

In n''jjnerous cases a condition of a^r^rovpl required rcTorts on hours 
and '^a'iCs frcn all raemoors of the industr''' vhich vras not complied nith 
generally or fully \Titliout strcnous effort on the part of the deputies, 
once the code \r-r 6 r.p-irovcd. 

In the cases of conditio::? in the orders of ajriroval for ■ninor actions 
couolipncj \~as usually •ji"'^'-!""'*^ o^: satisfactory adjustments nade and very 
little difficulty erroerienccd. 

The luf'al effect of non-coiv^lf-'nce nith conditions in the ap'oroval 
order for code v;t'S in .-general to render those codes non-effective in 
Liany inst?Jices h.y the v£:ry v;ordi;ig of the order pnd in many instances 'rhore 
approval "oy the President vao to render such codes in fret pr'-scribed codes. 
Liany conditio^:i of r.-j'-iroval ca^rricvl tine li^nits for the carrvin£; out of the 
condition riid th code ^ ■■::ere ler^ally effective u; to that limiting date, 
"but thereuoon "because ineffectiv''. u:itil the condition ■^.•as satisfied. Still 
other codes vere approved suDJect to the condition thr,t all nciahers of the 
industry inaJce reiorts fron tiiac to ti ic. Such codes effective at the start 
lo_';all/ la':)sed into a non-effective stn.tus nncnevor one member of the indus- 
try failed to render r re'.'uii-od re -)crt. 

Many codes after JmurTy 1, 1934 Trero a >iroved "by the ^vt'jn 'nistrator 
or "by the ". "IHA v.'ith conditio-^s vitallv advei-oO to sono or all the nem'bors 
of the industry, rrithoTit Industry rssent. The effect "ps that the. >, codes 
'-^ore, in f^ct -orcncrioed, and as such the A'ininistrrtor and the "illllA. nere 
witliout dele-y-'.ted rinthurity to a-.-'-.irovc. Sucia codes wore non-e"f ective 





In a very large m.^jority of cases tlie conditions imoose;''. by 
t'lB orders of approval of codes were of a miner nature and with 
very little furt'ier effort assent to incorporation witliin tie 
code itself could have "been obtained, definitely pre- 
serving the voluntary nature of such codes and obviating the danger 
of legal non-effectiveness tiirou^;,.: failure of compliance. 

In many other cases where the conditions required were of an 
important natiire and assent not obtainable, or the industry was 
using those rejjaired provisions to stall off approval, there was 
still the avenue of the prescribed code under Section 5 (d) of the 
Act. There is n doubt but th;:.t Section 3(d) should have been 
specifically used frequently. Such action would !:ave greatly 
speeded codification and removed the tendencies of many industries 
to stall off approve.1. It would also have brought better cedes in 
the later stages of codification. 




SUGC-ESTIClvS CA1\T 3E liADZ TO C J 11)2 JNEV; 'LZGlSLj^UOl^ AID • ^:.C3^£5 PLaKS ?GIl 

The principle r^s set frrtii in Section Z{i) nx tae Act fcr v^l-'ontarj'- 
codes is "believed to De so^jjid, namel:'- t^'iot th3 President should liove the 
po\7er tc impose conditions tliat must be met in a volimtrry code -is a 
requisite precedent to his opprovol "out the wordinfi should have heen so 
clarified as to indica.te that every code approved as a volimtary code was 
definitely that, rand that it should contrin nothin,?- not actually assented 
to, so that in every such case necessarily'- a clean order of ap'iroval could 
have heen issued, P?^ilinr: assent the required eliminations, additions or 
alterations should have "been made in the code itself, industry invited to 
assent thereto, and failing to do so, the code should hrve hecn promijtly 
prescrihed under Section 3(d) of the Act. 

Much confusion as to legal effectiveness would thereoy have heen avoided 
at the time of approval cr suhseqn.ent thereto. 

The provision under 3(a) of the Act sho'-ild he rei7orded'-hat as 

"The President, as a r:?q^uisitc precedent to 'ipproval 
of anj"- code voluntarily a iplicd for, may require the 
elimination, addition or alteration of such provisions 
therein as he deems necessa.r;'- for the protection of 
constiraers conroetitors, employees and others in furtherance 
of the public interest, and any such code voluntarily 
applied for shall, upon full assent when altered as so 
required, be approved as a voluntary code. In the ab- 
sence of such full assent of the proponents, the pro- 
visions of Section 3(d) shall arpply. The President 
subsequent to his approval of a-n.j vclontax;/ code may 
grant such exceptions to, or exemptions from any pro- 
visions .thereof v/hich nary be apvlied fcr, and as in his 
discretion he deems just and nccessar^r to effectuate 
the policy herein declared," 



Pj\:.T 7im 



iiPPZllIDIX Ho. 1 

iTi:3:[pL0iGD souHc::s oi' ijni-'jij. I'oii ?u:iTH-;ii study. 

The Coac Histories shonld cont;'in nuch v'^lur'.blo inf ornatioi on con- 
ditions in the orders of f-o u-ovfl. Chpr^tor II, Section D-4, is allocated 
to this subject "07 the st.vndfrd Code History Outline. 

Administr- tive Ord.^rs, includin • the seritjs und^^r the diff.jrent cod^s, 
sho-dld show conditions thr^t 'rere included in r-.V'- orders issued rs codo r,d- 
:iini3tr"tion rets in conjunction ^^^ith the proiroval of stn.ys, -ijaondmonts , 

oxern'otion-; r,nd excc-oticns, clpssif ictio -.s, inilinvs, etc. 

Ajxndi:: '"0. 2 outline, s tho subject of this prrt of the study in 
detrdl and Till he found to su,j-:e3t hrer^.s for further res69,rch. 


APPEIOIX 1:0 . 2 


(Outline) ! . ■•1-;.: 

Ajjpendix No. 2, 


Conditional Orders of Approval of Codes, Agreements 
and A"iencu'nents. 

1.0 Introductory 

1.1 Statement definint-^ subject and field •embraced 
2.0 Basic sources covering subject 

2.1 Provisions in IIIRA 

2.11 Powers conferred upon tlie President 

2.111 Concerninti' codes volvuatarily applied for 

3.112 Concernin;:^ codes imposed 

2.2 Delegations of pov/er of approval made to Administra- 
tor and the Nllffl 

2.21 Authority for delegation 

2.22 Hensons leading to delegation 

2.23 Executive Orders making delegation 

2.24 Reservations in delegation 

3.0 Use of conditional appi'oval 

3.1 By the President 

3.11 First code for \?hich used 

3.111 Purposes of conditions 

3.112 notification to proponents 

3.113 Portion of industry actually affected 

3.114 Evidence of industry assent 

3.115 Reaction of industry and labor 

3.12 Other codes for which used that presented 
unusual circumstances (3.12, 3.13, 3.14, etc.) 

3.2 By the Administrator and NIBB 

3.21 First Code for which used 

3.211 Purposes of conditions 

3.212 Notification to proponents 

3.213 Portion of industry actually affected 

3.214 Evidence of industry assent ,• 

3.215 Reaction of industry and labor 

3.22 Other codes for which used that presented 
unusual circumstances. (3.22, 3.23, 3.24, etc.) 

4,0 Development of Policy 

4.1 Policies announced in Executive Orders, if ?Jiy 

4.2 Policies announced by the Administrator and IJIRB 

4.31 Use of provisions of Office Orders Wos 63,63A 
and 63B, January 27, 1934 

4.3 Circumstances attending first use of conditional order of 

4.31 Facts presented and recommendations 

4.311 By Division Adninistrator 

4.312 By Deputy 

4.313 Reports of Advisory Boards 

4.314 Legal comment 


4.32 Considered "by whom and analysis nipde 

4.33 State:ient of policy, if made 

4.4 Policies, if any, annoiiiiced on subject by policy groups, viz: 

4.41 Policy Board created by 0.0. 7f35, Sept. 16, 1933 

4.42 Policy Board reor.^^ani-^ed by 0.0. ,,-55, Jon. 6, 1934 

4.43 Policy Committee created :b'j 0.0. #58, Jan. 12, 1934 

4.44 Policy Boards created by 0,0. 7f7-i, llrr. 23, 1934 

4.45 Assistant Administrator for Policy under 0.0. 7f83, 
April 9, 1934 

4.46 Advisory Council created by 0.0. 7f89, May 21, 1934 

5.0 Discussion of legal requirements dictating necessity in orders 

of approval for certain conditions 
6.0 Substantive aniilysis of all conditional orders of approval 

(Codes - Amendments) 

6.1 Frequency of use Codes Amendments 

Total orders of ap"oroval to 

Kay 27 , 1955 ■ 

Without condition 

Containing conditions 

6.2 Classification of codes as to groups where conditional 
orders of approval were most frequently used 

6.3 Most usual forms of conditional orders of approval in 
successive stages of code raaicing. 

6.4 Conditional orders of approval in specific cases which 
industry or labor regarded as altering code vitally 

6.5 Evidence of degree of industry assent 

6.51 Specific assent 

6.52 Tacit assent 

6.53 Opposition 

6.6 Types of conditions imposed 

6.61 Hours, T/ages, tolerances, other labor provisions 

6.62 Administration 
6.53 Classification 

6.64 Tracie Practice 

6.65 Reports required 

6.65 Control of production and allocation of business 

6.67 Price or cost accounting 

6.68 Other 

7.0 Substantive Analysis Agreements under Section 7 (b) of the M?Jl 
(Brealcdown to be developed upon examination of data.) 

8.0 Evaluation 

8.1 Justification for use' 

8.11 To avoid approval delays 

8.12 To override opposition to established policy 

8.13 To protect labor interests 

8.14 To protect consumer interests 

8.15 To protect industry interests- 

8.151 Small companies 

8.152 Lai'ge companies 

8.153 Overlapping industry interests 

8.16 To avoid illegality 

8.17 General disctission of other reasons 



8.2 Hefiction oi industry or lobor 

8.21 Com-Dliance 

8.22 I'Ton-compliance 

3.221 Neglect 

3.222 Opposition 

8.223 Challenge of authority under voluntary code 

8.23 Sn for cement, if any requ.ired 

8.3 Discussion of coraplisnce or non-compliance with the conditions 

8.31 Stays, modifications or terminations of conditions 

8.32 Subsequent extension of time limits specified 

8.33 Efforts of N.H.A. to enforce compliance 

8.34 Effects of non-compliance 

8.341 Legal effect upon code itself 

8.342 Effect upon industry 

8.343 Effect upon labor 

8.344 Effect upon consiKier 

8.35 Effects of compliance 

9.0 G-eneral conclusions and constructive su^^rjestions 
10.0 Bibliography 

(Partial sugf-;estions) 

Exec. Order if6175 
Exec. Order 7r6543-A 
Exec. Order 7f685S 
Exec. Order -^'6205-3 
Exec. Order 7f6750-C 
Exec . Order. vr6949 

Administrative Orders in Code Hecord Section 
Minutes of meetings of Policy G-roups 
Vols. II, A and S of codes involved 



FART II . Appendix Ho. 2. 

C-onaitio?ial Orders of Approvrl - i.iinor Aclministrativ-! Acts. 

1.0 Introductory 

1.1. Strtereut dofinin.- subjoct and the field emtraccd 
2.0 Basic Sources covering suliject 

2.1 Administrative actions setting up cooe nuthorit^ conceiot 

2.2 Provision for ac'mini strati ve approvals and delegations of 
poY^er to apnrove indicating any limitations of povers 

2.21 Method of election of Code ^iUtnority 

2.22 Election of Code Authority 

2.23 By-Lav.'s 

2.24 Trade practice;dnts plan aiid committee 
2»25 L:-.bor complaints find disputes plan and committees 

2.25 Stfiys and exemptions or terminations thereof 
2.27 Bur'gets (treated "by Code Autnority finance Unit) 
2 •28 Price systems 

2.29 Cost Systems 

2.2J. Ti;;;.3 extensions for required actions 

2.22 Other code authority agencies 
',2.23 Standards of safety nnd health 

2.24 Lists of ha^arc'ous occupations 

2.25 Applications for increased capacity 
"2.2^ Plans of allocation of production 

2.27 Classification of custouiers 

2.28 Lowest reasonahle cost 

2.29 MDdal marlrjp 
Etc. Etc. 

3.0 Use of conditional approvals ( erxludin,'; all instances involving 
correction of unimportant clerical errors) 

3.1 3y the Administrator 

3.12 First importaiat admi.iistrative order for which used 
3.121 Purposes for vrhich used 

3.1211 Legal re';:uirem3nts 
0.1212 Administrative requirements 
3.1213 To conform to established policy 
3,1314 To avoid delays 
3.1215 To provide for further study of 
conditions imposed 
3.132 notification to applicants 

3.123 Units affected 

3.124 Evidence of compliance 

3.125 Reaction of miits affected 

3.126 Discussion of effect of conditions 

5.1261 On industry uiiits affected 

3.1262 On labor 

3.2 Discussion of other tirp^ca.1 cases of' use of conditional 
approvals by the Administrator, by the HIHB, or by Division 
Admi.iistrators segregated into the following headings: viz: 
3.21 Lethod of election of code authorities 

3.23 Election of Code Authority 
3.23 By-Laws 



3.24 Trade practice complaints plan and committee 

3.35 La"bor complaints and disputes plaii and committees 

3.26 Stays and exemptions or termination thereof 

3.27 Budgets (treattjd b.y Code Authority Finance Unit) 

3.28 Price systems 

3.29 Cost systems 

3.21, Time extensions for ren_uired actions 

3.22 Other code authority agencies 

3.23 St'Uidards of safety and health 

3.24 Lists of hazardous occupations 
3.2:5 Applications for increased capr-city 
3.26. Plans of allocation of production 
3.22 Classification of customers 

3.2.8 Lowest ?Leasona"ble cost 
3.29. hodal mar leap 
Etc. Etc. 
4.0 Development of Policy 

4.1 Policies announced hy Administrative Orders 

4.2 Discussion of policies, if any, announced "by the various 
policy groups 

4.21 Policy Board created oy 0.0.7f35, Sept. 13, 1933 

4.22 Policy Board reorganized hy 0.0. #55, Jan. 6, 1934 

4.23 Policy Committee created "by 0.0. 7f58, Jan. 12, 1934 

4.24 Policy Boards created "o:^ O.C. Tf74, Mar. 26, 1934 

4.25 Assistant Administrator for Policy under 0.0.if83, 
April 9, 1934. 

4.25 Advisory Council created "by 0.0. #89, llay 21, 1934 
5.0 Discussion of legal requireiaents dictating necessity,'- fbr 

conditions in various orders of approval 
6.0 Substantive analysis of all orders of approval of 25 selected 


6.1 Frequenc;' of use of conditional approvals 

Total orders of approval considered " 

Without conditions ■( *) 

Containing conditions (*) 

5.2 Classification of administrative actions where conditional 
orders of approval were most frequently used. 

5.3 Most usual types of conditions imposed in successive stages 
of NSA development of Code Administration 

6.31 Hequiring deletions 

5.32 Requiring material amendment 

6.33 Requiring future actions (Other than documentary 

alternations) " 

5.4 Evidences of compliance with conditions of approval 

5.5 Evidences of op;,josition "by industr;.'' to conditions imposed 
7,0 Evaluation 

7.1 Justification for use 

7.11 To avoid delays in "beginning operation 

(*) .Required t^'po graphical corrections not to "be considered as 



7.12 To override op;oosition to established policj' 

7.13 To protest lator interests 

7.14 To protect cons\iinar interests 

7.15 To protect indastr;' interests 
7.1E1 Small companies 

7.152 Lai'ge cor.ipaiiios 

7.153 Overlapping i.iuustr:/ interests 

7.16 To avoid illegality 

7.17 G-eueral discussion of other reasons 

7.2 Reaction of industry or labor 

7.21 General discussion 

7.22 Compliance 

7.23 Kon-compliance 

7.231 Neglect 

7.232 Opposition 

7.2/4 Eniorcenient (if a:iy) required 

7.3 Discussion of compliance or non-compliance with the 
conditions irripoaed 

7.31 Stays, modification or termination of conditions 

7.32 Extension of time limits specified 
7.53 Efforts of iJ.H.A. to enforce compliance 

7.34 Effect of non-compliance 

7.341 Legal effect upon code administration 

7.342 Effect upon industry or industry members 

7.343 Effect upon labor 

7.344 Effect upon conswaer 

7.35 Effects of compliance 

8.0 General conclusions and co^.structive sug.gestions 
9.0 BibliOi^raphy 

E:::ecutive Orders 

Administrative Orders (X series) 

Code Af'jninistrative Orders in Code Record Section 

Deputy Eiles 



APPEiDi:: iTo. 3 

Details of Various Tj/nes of Conditions in 

oisrr.s 0? .app^.oval 

Coverin,'; ?11 Bo.sic Codes of Tair Co'toetition 




ITo, Industry 

1 Cottoi"'. Textile Industry* 

(Condi tionall]'' ?;o"oroved 
o;- the President 7/0/33) 

*1T0TE: nxecutive Ordc:r 
of Jiil;^ 16, 10u3, 
fi:\r.l r;oproval to the 
Coce, t?,s amended rith- 
the a.ssent of the In- 
dustry-, fiid satisfr.c- 
tion of such of the 
conditions as rrere 
finally reqriired hj 
the President, 

coi'DiTiovs ir or.DZF. or approval 

(1) Li litations on use of productive 
machiner:/ not to appl;!" to tire 
yarns or r'ahrics for rulDljor tires 
for 3 ne^l-s 

(2) Plojining Co;Tiittee of Industry uill 
suDuit ouestion of e:xplo'/ee pur- 
chase of homes in i.iill-villD<2;es, 
especiall;- in the South, to Acu.iin- 
istration hefore Jan, 1, 13 J4 looh- 
in;2 to'.vard eventual employee houe- 

(3) Ap^oroval of minirnurn n.-.ges — suhject 
uc" "be reopened if and as con- 
ditions iiiprove. 

(4) Office e:.r3loyees he included in 
the oenefits of the Code 

(5) The existinfj eziounts "02'' "./hich "rages 
in the hi^^her-paid classes, ut to 
iTorkers receiving $30 ■■ler yeelz, 
©::ceed i.7at"es in the lovest "oaid 
class, shrll he na.intained. 

(5) Tine pxid. one half to he oaid in 
case of overtine for rep:\ir shop 
crens, engineers, electricinJis 
and '.Tatchins crens 

(7) Cleaners and outside '^orhers e-:ce-o- 
ted u:atil 'Pla-nning and Supervisor;- 
Cotiittee suhmit schedule of "lini- 
muji -nd nsjiiviuia hours Jan. 1, 1334 

(C) It is interoreted that nariiiuiji hours 
include ever;r enployee, TThether --orh- 
ing for one or more enplo3-ers, 

(9) hinimun nage mepjis iiininui.i rate of 
pa,;'" whether, con-iensated on a tivie 
rate, piece T/ork, or other hasis 

(10) iiinount of T'orh of employees after 
July 1, 1933 shall not he increased 
hecpuse of aininuia vrages 

(11) Any person not consentin-; to Code 
shall he given hearing and a teiipor- 
axir stay of lia.Dilit-'' -oending such 

(12) Approval limited to 4 noiths Tiith 
right to ask for modification or 

(15) Adrainistration to he given ri];ht to 
ap-Qoint 3 memhers on Planning o:nd 
Supervisory Co-xiittee of Industry, 
'-without vote 





co'^iTioi'3 r^ cr.DZ". or .^pp^.oyal 

Uool Te::tile Industry 
(n-n-oved lJ2&]'oo b^ 
the President) 

6 Lace Ilfg. Industrj'- 

(r;Toroved C/14/33 "bj- 
■ tlie President) 

12 pilot ogra---)liic Lf,> Ind. 
(ar-. roved 3/?,9/?5 "bj/- 

tlie President) 

13 pishing Tachle Indxi-stry 
(a;To roved 8/10 /:>3 t;- 

the President) 

14 ?.a""on r^id SjTithetic Yarn 
Producing Industr-/ 
(a;iproved 8/26/33 D7 

the President) 

19 :Jall Pa-oer ilfg. Ind. 
(cTToroved 9/7/33' "b-- 

the President) 

20 Salt Producing Inclustry 
(a,;roroved 9/7/33 'bj- 

the President) 

23 Underwear a:-id /J.lied 
Products '. :fg, Industr;- 
(aro-oroved 9/18/33 "b-^ 

the President) 

24 3itu;iinous Coal Industry 
(a;^proved J/lO/33 137 

the President) 

Industry co:iriittee to te created as 
a Planning and Pair Practice agenc;?'; 
5 representatives of industr" ?Jid 
3 vrithout vote for Adiiinistration 

One condition. 3-'"Xie X-j-r^e as Code 'Jo. 
3 aoove. 

One condition, Sriie t;'roe 
3 a'bove. 

Association 37-La'"'s to ^•do. pnended to restrictions as to Asso- 
cia.tion "lenoership, 

?.e"oorts required to oe sutaitted \rj 
each erroloyer as to Tropes, hours, ?Jid 
otherwise as the Acininistrator na;'' 

One condition. Sane t:'*oe as Code ITo, 
3 atiove. 

One condition. Sane t'^^ie as Code ;"o, 
3 a'bove. 

Sta"/ of 14 da"'s for nanufacturers to 
sho'7 cr? Thy the-^ should not oe in- 
cliided ui-'.der the Code (Sec. 1(c) of 

(1) Soxie t"~oe rs Code ''o. 14 above 

(3) Srne t^^ie as Code "'"o. 3 above 

(5) ;;ininu:i rates not fi::ed in Schedule 
A nay be a.-^;oroved or "rrescribed 
•orior to effective date of Code 
b'- a supplenento.ry Order. 

(4) AtterTot to interpret Section 7 (a) 
of the Act i;i Schedule 3 (Code Sec, 
(b) of Art, Y) stricken out 

(5) Clerical rearrc?jigenent of li' cita- 
tion of definition of enplo^'"ee 
-placed i;-. Art. Ill instead of 
Art. II 



;j'PnOv"D COD";- 

30 :D:.Tior3 i:' cv-^r: c? i-PP~o"7;.Ji 

25 Oil learner Industry 
{o-yoTOVcd. 9/lC/5r; 07 

the p-^esiclent) 

26 C!-asoli:^e Pimp i.ifg. Ind. 
(a-xjroverl S/lP/3o ■by 

tlie President) 

23 Trr-HBit Indiistr;"- 

("."7oroved 9/1.': /oo 1)7 
the Preside-it) 

CI Line Industry 

(ao"iroved 10/0/j£ "by 
the P:;esider.t) 

33 IJoiler Kfg. Industr:' 
( ap-oroved lO/o/oo "b;;- 
the p-' osideiit) 

59 rn.r:! EcTd"oraeut Ind'-astr; 
(ayoroved 10/3/33 07 
the President) 

41 TTonen* s Delt Indiistiy 
(s,-o-oroved 10/3/35 h;'- 
the President) 

4-3 Ice Industry 

(a;Torovod 10/3/35 07 
the President) 

44 hoot -nd Shoe life* I^-<i» 
(approved 10/S/o3 07 
the President) 

43 Silh Tc::tile Industr7 
(a-r-;roTed 10/7/35 hv 
the President) 

One condition. Srne t'-oe rs Code 0, 
3 ahovo. 

Or.3 condition. Sane t-.^^e e.s Cod-e 7o, 
3 ahove. 

(1) 'lorhijif: in contracts "hich 
na7 he renewed, shall not "oe in 
excess of the rec-u.ired 
137 the code 

(2) Sane t3'-'oe as Code j'o. 13 ahove 

S?ne t""oe rs Code ho, 15 cahove. 

One coridition. Sane t-ppe as Code :.'o. 
24 (4) nhove. 

One condition. Snrae tvme as Code ho, 
P4 (4) ahove. 

Ore co"i''ition. Sarae t'^pe as Code ""^o, 

IS aho-'ie. 

One corJitio'i, Sane t'^-je as Code '.'o, 
3 ajoV'j, 

One co-:dition, 3r"ie t;~oe as Code ho. 
24 (4) above 

hiniiron ".".'age to rp'oly to lowest class 
01 v.'orkers onl;'', e::en-otin;^' shilled --nd 
peni-s!:illef' vorkers. 



AiTP-O'CD com] 

Indus t r;;' 

0--:^tior,l I.'f;> Industr" 
(r.-oproved 10/9/3" 07 
the President) 

Unorella I'fc* Industrj 
(r.pproved 10/9/o'6 ^-r " 
the President) 

:>,r].:inf; Hevicos Industi-^ 
(cvD-oroved lO/.'O/oC; 07 
the Pr^esident) 

Dress i.'fg. In'Justr3'' 
(r-pproved lO/ol/'C "b;'- 
the President) 

£5 Advertising S-pccialt".- 
•■ Ir.dt1.Etr7 

(a-'Toroved IC/ol/;^; h:' 
the President) 

G6 Tc;- rnd Pla7t]tin;-;s In- 
dus tr" 

(rpr roved ll/4/'io oj 
the president) 

96 -Jv.f: nnd Polishing wheel 

( roved ll/4/3o 1)7 
the President) 

105 I;r,chine Tool ,-nd '.''OTQiriQ 
ilc.chiner" Inditstr:" 
(r;Toroved ll/o/r'o "b^" 
the President) 

113 Cotton Cro.rnent Industr^^ 
(r.-o;.)roved ll/\7fc:. 07 ' 
the President) 

coiDiTioirs i;: croz?. oi app~.o/al 

One condition, Sr.n9 ti'-ie f.s Code l!o» 
3 rhove. 

Ovie condition. Sr.ue t'^r^e r.s Code ".'o. 
o n,"oove. 

One CO idition. S-'ie t.-'^pe rs Code :'o, 
5 r.bovo. 

(1) ha-^^e scrdc in .estern r.rer^. (Art, ''/I, 
Sec, 5) stewed uiatil further hep,r- 

( ?) Pendin;'; sta-' niniiuin rate shall 
he $14.00 (Art, IV, sec. 7) 

(3) Ap'olication of code str/'ed -.s to 
nanufacture of dresses in chief of 
cotton content rjitil such hearing; 

(1) '.la^ie a-nd hour "orovisions shall oe 
superseded 'oi' those of the Print- 
in." Indtistr'' v.'hen a-rro roved 

(2) Spiae t;^-ie rs Code 'fo, 3 aoove 

One co:\dition.. Provisions for and 
one-third for overt ine staged tuntil 
Januar-'- 1, 1954, 

One condition, Sta" of (Art, VI 1, Sec, 
a) "orovision attervotin,'; to fir: orices. 

One condition, f.eservation of right 
on "evievr to disapprove or nodif7 cJi;'". 
action taJsen "oy the sur)ervisor7 oQexic" 

(1) Seto v:p rociuirenents. for acceptahle 
Strte prison laoor Codes 

(2) Srne t;~oe a,s Code i'o, 64 (l) -^.bove 



j\pp~o\^:i) coDi; 


ITersprint Industry 
(r.-TOroved 11/17 /:;rj '.r^ 
the P"esiucnt) 

1.10 P?;oei- rjid PuZ.p Industry 
(oriroved 11/17/33 ^3- 
tlie president) 

inl "otel Indvi-str;' 

(a.-y-) roved 11/17/33 07 
the Pres:lde::t) 

124 ; 'ot ion Picture industry 
(rn-^roved ll/:;7/33 h;- 
the President) 

l.?5 Uoh-olster" and Ijraoer" 
[je-:tile Industr-r 
(a-ynroved 11/S7/33 Td"/ 

the President) 

CO Di^±'io::3 I.' cnz-i or app:.07al 

Provision "or hep,rin;_^ for detorrin- 
li-iQ r'derun.c'^ of rinir-ian vrr-es cstahlirjlied 
"d;- the code. 

Ore condition, Sa.-ie t:-r,e rs Code :^o. 
11 D r.'oove. 

(1) S-.Me t---ie r.5 Code I'o. 24 (4) Xmvq 
(:) S-'UC tyoe -3 Code I'o, IIC nljove 
(3) r-arthor order shrll constitute r. 
nodif ication of the Co6.e, 

(1) S''.. ;n t:"- 10 as Code "'o. 103 pfoove 

(.-') !"li.",h-t of re;iov.:il of any ;:e:.ioer o:.! 
the Code imthorit""- rnd 3111)3 titi\t ion 

(3-) ".i.;ht to insure ::!ro-oer re-T'esen- 
tntion of th-e emloyers on the 
code ruthority 

( ') S^ispends provision rei;^nrdin;: e::ces- 
sive co^Toensation to er^tecutiveo 
-oendi:\- "^urther investi-^r.tion 

(3) "./ritersi authors ;jid drrjir-tists 
exerroted fron certain code "provi- 
sions, oein.-\- .considered in "crea- 
tiA-e ^-orh" 

(C) S-ne t'-oe as Code ITo, -.n ahove, 

(1) C-r nts e::e- ration fron this Code 

to : ;r^iuf r.cturer ■^;ho has "been 0"iera— 
tin;' "-aider another code if he so 
elects -nd files intention 

(3) Provision that loo:i na"/ not o-ierate 
t^ro 40 hour shifts "oer '-ee:: stayed 
for 1-3 da-'"s. 

1<:7 3einfurcin./3 materials 
Pabricctin;-; Industrj"" 
(a-yp roved ll/'^7/33 'b:' 
the President) 

130 Precious Jevelr" Proluc- 
i::;;: Industr:'" 
( .a-y-iroved 11/27/33 hy 
the President) 

One coj-Ldition. Sane t"~pe as Code "o, 
103 -hove. 

0;ic condition, Sp/ne t;~oe as Code 
Go aoove. 



APF".0\'2'D CODS 

II 0. Industry 

151 :;illiner;- Indutitr^' 

(rrroroved l,?/l&/3o "b; 
the President) 

152 Crii r.arrj-facturers Iiid, 
(a-D-o roved 12/l5/'uZ "j'f 
tlie President) 

153 7?.lve rnd rittinr;s iifg. 

(c-rroroved 12/15/33 "b:/ 
the President) 

153 0::""-Acet"-lene Iiid. 

(r;o"oroved 12/15/55 ^oy 
the President) 

164 "nit ted Ou-ter'.'ear Ind, 
(a;ip roved l2/in/33 'b-'- 
the President) . 

174 "iihher Tire l^c I'id. 
(a'T-!roved 12/21/33 hy 

the President) 

175 ileditui and Lo': Priced 
JeTelr;- I'.fg. Industry'- 
(a.pp roved 12/23/33 uy 

the President) 

179 i;iectrot:,'^oin{; ?iid Ster- 
eot3'-oinr; Industry 
(avvoroved 12/25/33. h"/ 
the President) 

:o:D':::io::s i:: orTiir. or .-iPpr.ovAL 

(l) Code stayed arter Jiay" 15, 1C34 
until favorable re-oort of Code 
Authority Tor continu?-nce 
(3) SF-ne t;;'-oe as Code I'o. 64 (l) apove 
(3) Persons suf-'erin/^; tmdue hardshros 
i;;r?ated o 5":ortiu^it7" for relief, 

(1) All other territories .-md possess- 
ions of U» S. shall ho suoject to 
Hawaiian '.'a'je District herein. 

(2) Srne t^^^^^e as Code ilo, 14 ahove 

One co:idition. Price lists filed shall 
he availaole for ins;:>ection of nil the 
trade -or.rties concerned. 

Ond condition, 
34 (4) aoove. 

S~'-ie t'jve as Code 

One condition. Sane t:~oe as Code h'o, 
23 aoove 

One condition, p.eservation to :iodify 
code provisions after investigation h; 
Adjni-iistrrtor. and Zr,T,C. r.dthin 90 da^ 

One condition. Sa::ie t^Tie as Code :"o, 
06 ahovc. 

(1) EiTOloyees m.y vorlz ^.-ith local 
nechanics in their trrde ^:''iie:i su-ch 
hours adjusted hy mutual a,'';rec;-jent 
uith their enploj-ers, and such ye- 
ouest riin;^'' he aio^oealed to local 
lahor hoards 

(2) Adiii-iistrator nay v/ithin 3 months, 
reouire this industry to hecone 
■o'-rt of C-ra.phic Arts Industries 
after hearing; and trithoiit chnaa^;® 
of definitions or adi.iinistrative 



\'o, Inc'ustr:/ 

130 pilot o-Ir.iiir.'^.vinr: Ind, 
(c-.-T^rovec. lI'/'o/C'L 07 

103 ' "000. ,0116. CTOcei 

( r.-o; 3 rovod IZl'^Ofo'^ &:' 
the presic^ent) 

iJ'l: jlo-.-:e rnd S^iirt V.i 
Indies tries 
(r-oprovod 12/''0/L~o 
the President) 

196 '"liolescle I'ood and 
(r.-o:?roved l/-l/o-l d; 

202 Crroet r.nd T;ii£; Iir,nu- 
f r c tiir i n^' I ndus t vj 
(a-roroved l/lr/o4 hy 
the P-eoident) 

204 Pl-u.-ihiiij;:- rixtiires I-.-.d, 
(r.-Toroved 1/13/54 07 
the Acx:inisti-:-.,tor). 

217 Dental LalDorr.tor^ T/ad, 
(a-Toroved l/.?2/c;4 jy 
th.e Adaini G tr p.tor) 

co: "iiTioi's ::" o~j)ii:i c:'' .•jpp".ov:.l 

(1) 3rne t---.3 rs Cole ■.'c, 170 r.oovo (l) 
00 Sf:.:o t-^rpe r.s Code '.■^0, 179 -oove {■) 

(1) Provision -purport int.- to set ni:ii;.Tu;'i 
trpjas--Tort.:',tion charf-cs to n^rc' 
stn:-ed ZO dT's -jendintj he-ri-r^- 

(; )" Irovisicn --revioiisl;' covered 07. 
7eder.~l statute eliiiinr.ted 

([■) Sr;:ie t7oo c.s Code "0. lOo roove. 

One condition. I^n-.ifacture -■xio. ^.r-.le of 
r,-,.ecific p.rticles sta^i-ed as conin:; "Ojider 
codo until hefirinc to det'-jrrnine '-.-hether 
or not snch nrooerl"' cones under the code. 

(]) St"/7 of 50 dr.7s on setting up 

clar.sificr.tion of custoners 
{7:) Srr.e t^oe as Code 102 (l) aoove 
(l-) ri-;ht of 17, S. '/holesale Grocer's 

As:j'n to reorescntrtion on code 

ruthorit:^ to he considered 
(4) S-ne t7oe as Code 132 (2) ahovo 
(r) S'-ne t:pe as Code 103 ahove 

Or.a co:idition. Volune discount -:ro- 
vision str.--Gd, (Art. VII, Sec, 10 (a) 

One co'ndition. Sr:ie t"oe as Code 7o. 
105 (1) ahov3 

One condition. Li:iit^,tion of hours 
r.hall he 40 erxe-ot r.-hore th-ire is onl] 
one erT:do7ee in the lahor'-tor7 "hen 
it shall he 44 

231 Si.\rirhcal Tressing Ind, 
(arrro^-ed 1/27/34 hj 
the Acjii'-istrator) 

One co/.dition. Snae t7oe as Code 70i 
13 aoove. 


lio. Indtistry 

232 iierchcindise 'J-rehowsin.'^ 

(r;.rirovGd 1/27/54 "b" 
the Ad:.ii ni ? trr t o r) 

235 ?.ailnr7 Zrass Car p.nd. 
Loconotive Jo^.rrLal ?>ep.r- 
ir.£;s .'^;i':' Cr.stingG Ilfg. 

(ci;o-nroved 1/29 /S4 d;-' 
the Adin.inistrrtor) 

234 '..iacr.roni Indur.tr7 

(r-pprovcd 1/20/34 "b/ 
the Adiainistrr.tor) 

236 Coohin;; and Heatintj kp- 
■jliance lifg. Indtistry 
(rrproved 1/30/34 by 

the Acljiinistrator) 

237 Allej^ Castinj Indiistrj 
(a.-op roved 1/30/34 oy 

the Adninistrator) 

239 Porcelain Breakfast ;?iu-- 
r.ib.ire Assenljiinf^ Ind, 
(a-.TOx'oved 1/50/34 oy 

the Adninistrator) 

240 Advertising Dis-ola:' In- 
stallation Trade 
(a;oproved 1/30/34 ''oy 

the Ac'iiinistr-'tor) 

241 Chev/ing O-ura Ilfg. Ind. 
(a-Toroved l/o0/34 03'- 

the Ac'-^inistrator) 

243 Slide Tastener Ind, 
(approved 1/31/54 "by 
the Ac'j.vinistrator) 

CO- T^i i'io::s i" or.'Di]ri or afp'.icmal 

One cc:".".-' tion. S-'.ne t-'-e as Godo ITo. 
13 ahovn. 

One con'..ition. S^ne t''""ie as Code "o. 
13 above. 

(1) t:-o2 as Code ITo. 151 ( 0) 

(2) O'len orice filing stayed for 50 

Ona conoition. Stay of v;aiting "oeriod 
het'./een filin;- of prices and effective 
date of revised orice list for SO days 

(1) Sp:ig t;Tpo as Code I'o, 13 ahove 

(2) Sane tyoe as Code IIo. 236 a.hove 

One co-.'icition. Sane t^-^e as Code lio. 
235 aDove, 

One co'idition. Sane t^-oe ns Code I'o. 
236 ^.'bove, 

One cor.dition. Sane t':~oe as Code iTo. 
236 abov:i. 

(1) Sane tyje as Code Lo, 13 aaovo. 

(2) Sraie tj'pe as Code llo, 236 above. 







245 Corrugated and Solid 
Fibre Shiprjing Con"- 
tainer Industry 
(a-Dproved S/l/S-i by 
the .Administrator) 

One condition. Samo type as Code I'o. 
2?6 above. 

2-^6 Paper Disc I. ill: I'ottle 
Cap Industry 
(approved 2/l/3^ .by 
the Adr^inistrr^tor) 

One co.ndition. Same t.^rpe as Code No. 
2?6 fibove , couTjled "'ith provision for 
hearing i»'ithin 90 d^ys if so der-ired 
by the .Acnlnistrator. 

2^7 Food -^ish and Pulp and 
Paper PL.te Industry 
(approved 2/l/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type ■ s Code No, 
2-^6 a.bove. 

2'±8 Glazed and Fancy Paper 

(approved. 2/l/3-i by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type as Code ''O. 
2t.-6 above. 

2'±9 Tag Industry 

(approved 2/l/o'i b;; 
the -iidministra.tor) 

One condition. Same t-qrie as Code To. 
2-^6 above. 

250 ""ire, Rod, and Tube Die 
I idustry 

(approvea 2/1/04. by 
tne Administrator) 

One'condit ion. Same t^Ape ? s Code No. 
2Se above. 

252 Cylindrical Liquid 

Xight- Paper Container 


(approved 2/l/2^ by 

the Administrator") 

One co.idition. Sajne tjnae ap Code No, 
2''.ce above. 

25-± Athletic Goods hfi^. Ind. 
(approved 2/2/31 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition., Same type as Code ^'0. 
13 above, coupled '"ith provision for 
hea.'in< '"ithin 90 days if so desired 
by the Administr' tor. 

257 Printing Equipment In- 
dustry and Trado 
(approved 2/2/34 by 
the Administrator) 

'"'ne condition. Same type rs Code No, 
236 above. 




coraiTi Fs ir opj)Er( of approval 



258 Cast-iron Boiler and Cast- 
iron Eadiator Industry 
(approved 2/3/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Provision '"estricting 
sale to '--holesaier "'ho sells to dealer 
at prices belov listed urice of such 
member stricken out. 

259 Hat Mfg. Industry 
(approved 2/5/3^ by 
the Administrator) 

260 Ornamental loiding, 
Carving and Turning Ind. 
(approved 2/5/34 by 

the Administrator) 

One condition. Same tyve as Code No. 
236 above. 

One condition. Same type as Code i^o. 
236 above. 

261 Foundry Supply Industry 
(approved 2/5/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type as Code No. 
236 above. 

263 Machine Knife and Al- 
lied Steel Products 
kfg. Industry 
(approved 2/6/34 by 
the Administr- tor) 

264 Foundry Equipment Ind. 
(approved 2/6/3-i by 
the Administrator) 

265 Coffee Industry 
(pTDp roved 2/6/34 by 
the Administrator) 

267 Used Textile Sag Ind. 
(approved 2/8/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type as Code No, 
236 above. 

(l) Limiting exemntion from hour pro- 
(2/ Relative to Administration Members 

(1) Same type as Code No. 151 (3) above 

(2) Seme type as Code No. 264 (l) above 

One condition. Same tyne as Code No. 
119 above. 

268 Secondary Aluminum Ind. 
(approved 2/8/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type as Code Np. 
236 above. 

269 Carbon iilack Mfg. Ind. 
(approved 2/8/34 by' 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same type as Code No. 




iii?j_ Indu stry 

2V0 "ood Heel Industry 
(a^proTed 2/9/54 liy 
the Adriinistr- tor) 

272 Unit Heater and/-or Unit 
Ventilator i-ifg. ind, 
(approved 2/l0/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One ccnrlition. Same tyije as Code To, 
2oG f.bove. 

One condition. Same type as Code I'^o, 
236 atove. 

274t Sa-^ and Steel Products 
[fs;. Industry 
(apr)roved 2/lO/o4 ty 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Stays filing; of lorices 
for period of 60 days or until s com- 
pletion of a study of open price asso- 
ciations "by NPA. 

276 Pleating, Stitching and 
Bonnaz and Hond. Embroid- 
ery Industry 
(approved 2/lO/o^x by 
the President) 

One condition. Same as Code To, 
119 above. 

Trucking Industry 
(approved 2/10/3^= by 
the President) 

280 Retail Solid luel Ind, 
(approved 2/l-±/'o-± by 
the President) 

281 Laundry Trnde 
(approved 2/16/3^: by 

• the President) 

One condition. Vehicles engaged in 
"■ rehousing of furniture shall register 
'^'ith Code Committee of proposed Code 
for Household Goods Storage and l>:oving 
Trade and if, sporoved, thereafter ^ith 
the Code uthority. 

One condition. Same type as Code To. 
174 above. 

(l) 5 conditions setting uo 

areas and control boards therefor. 

182 Restaurant Industry 
■(approved 2/16/3-^ by 
the President) 

(1) Provisions regarding spread of 
vTorking hours and number of shifts 
per day stayed. 

(2) V/ork '-'oek shall not be increased 
. prior to dote of order. 

(Z) Further investig' t i ^n of stop loss 

nrovision ordered. 
i^i) Same type as Code No. 119 above. 




approv?:d gcde 


285 Railway C^r juilding' Ind. 
(approved S/ie/S-i Isy 
the Administrator) 

286 Beauty and Earber Shop 
iviechanical Equipment 
Mfg. Industry 
(approved 2/16/34 by 
the Administrator) 

287 Graphic Arts Industries 
(approved 2/17/ 3'i by 
the President) 

288 Daily J^Ievspaper Publish- 
ing Business 
(approved 2/17/3^^: by 
the President) 

289 Cloth i-eel Industry 
(approved 2/17/34 "oy 
the Administrrtor) 

290 Photographic Lount Ind. 
(approved 2/17/3"* by 
the Administrator) 


(1) Definitions of Industry and of 
members of the Industry varied. 

(2) I:aximuTi hours of po^er plant em- 
ployees decreased.. 

(3) Same type as Code No. 13 above* 

One condition. Same as type in Code 
No. 236 above. 

(1) Power given to Labor Boa.rd in Sec, 
2'i, pj^rt I given to code authority 
and compliance boards, and Section 
setting up board deleted. Labor 
Board set up by Administrator with 
powers and duties. 

(2) Maximum hours set up not to be con- 
strued as minimum. 

(3) Provision for hearing on definitions 
and other provisions in code, 

(4) Provisions for posting code pro- 
visions as .to hours, wages and em- 
ployment a,s well as the Order. 

(0) Same type as Code No. 13 above. 
(6) Same type as Code No. 113 (l) 

(1) Determination of hours and wages 
for news department workers shall 
be made not later than 60 days 

(2) Administration members shall give 
particular attention to minors de- 
livering and selling newspapers. 

(3) This was inserted to give notice 
that regardless of the hedge against 
modifications under Sec. 10 (b), the 
President could utilize the pro- 
visions of Sec, 3 (d) of the Act. 

One condition, 

One condition. 
2 t£ above. 

Sane type as Code 236 

Same tyoe as Code No, 




L"o. In dus tty/ 

291 '.'ood Cased Lead Pencil Industry 
(au|iroved 2/l7/S% by 
the Adrainistrator) 


One condition. Same type a.s Code No. 

13 above. 

Price structure st-yed -oendin^ further 


292 Chillea Gar 'heel Ind* 
(ao roved 2/17/ 3-± by 
the Administrator) 

293^' Industry 
(aioproved 2J17Jo-x by 
tne ^cminist rater) 

One condition. Sfune type rs Code No. 
13 above. 

One condition. Same tyne ss Code IJo. 
2-i6 above. 

294 Guinned Label and Embossed 
Seal Industry 
(apnroved 2/l7/3'i by 

'the Administrator) 

295 ^.aterp^oof Paioer Industry 
(approved 2/l7/3-i by 

■ the Administrator) 

296 I luted Cup, Pan Liner 

' nd Lnce Paper Industry 
(ap-nroved 2/17/3-^ by 
the Administrator) 

297 Advertising Distributing 
■ Trade 

(aptiroved 2/17/3^ by 
the Presiaent) 

One condition. Same type as Code No. 
2--6 above . 

One condition. Same t;'7-r)e as Code V.o, 
24e abo ve . 

One condition. Same type as Code Fo. 
2'i6 above. 

(1) Eoys l*x and 15 may be eraDloyed 
not to exceed 3 hrs per day be- 
t'^een 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 

(2) Same t^/pe as Code ITo. 287 (3) above 

(3) Effects of hours and r-^tes of pay 
01 office i"orkers to be reported 
in 90 days. 

298 Wipin ; Cloth Industry 
(approved 2/17/3^ by 
the Administrator) 

300 Lye Industry 
(approved 2/19/3t: by 
the Administrator) 

301 Sample Card Industry 

One condition. Same ty^;e as Code No. 
119 above. 

One condition. Same as Code No, 
2-3:6 above. 

One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 
2-- 6 above. 




304 Outdoor Advertisiiv; Trade 
(approved' 3/24/34 "by 

the Aojiinistrr-tor) 

305 Fibre Cr.n and TulDe Ind. 
(approved 2/24/34 ty 
the Aoiiinistrn^tor) 

306 i:ica Industry 
(approved 2/24/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

307 Stay Ilfg. Industry 
(approved 2/25/34 "by 
the Administrator) 

308 Fishery Industry 
(approved 2/26/34 hy 
the President) 

311 Ready Kixed Concrete Ind. 
(approved 2/27/34 hy 

the Ac!jiiinistrator) 

312 Narrow Fahrics Ind. 
(approved 2/27/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

313 Steel ¥ool Indxistry 
(approved 2/28/34 "hv ■ 
the A&viinistrator) 

315 Industrial Safety Equip- 
ment IndvLstry and In- 
dustrial S8.fet2'- Equipment 

(approved "by the Aclninis- 
trator 3/l/34) 

318 lleFsppper printing press 

(approved 3/5/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

323 Die Casting i;ff^. Industry 
(approved 3/s/34 hy 
the Administrator) 



One condition. Snj'.e type as Code ITo 
236 ahove. 

One condition. Same t^Toe as Code Vo . 
245 aljove . 

(1) Importer? must he shorrn to he a 
representative gro-ap hefore in- 

(2) Snme type as Cod.3 x!o .246 ahove. 

(1) Some tj-pe as Code ITo .287 (3) ahove 

(2) Same type as Code ITo .24 (5) ahove 

8ne condition. Sai'ie tjT:e as Code l!o. 
151 (3) ahove. 

One condition. Sane type as Code Vo 
236 ahove . 

One condition. Stay of homework in 
the Indiistry and provision for a 
study of situa.tions relative thereto, 

One condition. Sane type as Code llo 
235 aoove . 

One condition, Ssxie type as Code Vo 
235 aoove . 

One condition. Firemen limited to 45 
hours rather than 48 ner 'jeek. 

One condition. Ssxie tj^pe as Code ITo 
13 ahove. 


afp:"-OVi:d codt: 




Z25 'Iiorseshoe cjicl Allied 
Products ::fA-. lid. 
(approved 3/3/34 'b-j 
the Adiinistrrtor) 

327 i;acuin.e Applied Staple 

and Stapling ilachine Ind. 
(ap;")roved z/io/o'h "by 
the Ai lini s trator ) 

329 Upholstery S'jrinf and Ac- 
cessories Vfs. Ind. 
(approved 3/l0/34 'oy 

the Ad .i:iist:'ator) 

330 Scro.p Iron, llonferros 
Scrap l.'etals rnd 7r,ste 
i-aterials Trpde . 
(aporoved 3/12/34 'ay 
the President) 

331 Lulh Drinlzin^ Strav.', 
trapped Drinhinfj Straw, 
^ijrapped Toothpick and 
Wrapped Vanicure Stic^c 
(approved 5/l4/"4 "by 
the Acjiinistrritor) 

332 Ladies' ^'and'oag Ind. 
(approved 3/14/34 o^'" 
the Ad-iinis t i ator) 

333 C^-nvas Goods Ind. 
(approved 3/16/34 "by 
the Administrator) 

334 3ever;i^e Dispensing- Soui^j 
.nent Industry 

(approved 3/16/34 Iv 
the Awiinistrator) 

341 Pihre and I'etal '.lork 

Clothing Button iXfr.Ind 
(approved 3/17/34 hy 
the Ac'j-iinistrator) 

345 Collapsihle Tube Ind. 
(ap-oroved 3/17/34 hy 
the Ai'ninistrator) 

(1) type as Code ■'0.233 aoove 

(2) S.3J-1C tj'pe as Code ITo . 96 above 

(1) Saie t-^po as Code yo . 236 aliove 
(3) Srxie t;~oe as Coce I^o . 13 ahove 

(1) Spire tj'ne rs Code 'Jo. 235 alDOve 

One condition. Code Authorit3- and/or 
Administration '.Inrj'ber shall report 
whether sur)"''leraental code necessary 
or desirphle . 



- (1 

ScJiC- t/npe as Code ITo. 236 ahove 
hininiin pnd raaicirauia hours 
to ^J^;lly to veah periods only not 
exceeding 12 weeks per year 
Savie t^^e as Code yo . 96 ahove 
S^'.;ie t"^e as Code -llo . 153 a-hove . 

Definition of "scni-s'tilled" en- 
plo",''ee stayed ijntil one 
presented -to Auninistrator . 
Soiie t'"oe as Coc'e Fo . 3 c'bove. 

Sa -e tyoe as Code yo . 243 above 
provision for a j^reneral lahor 
s tudy . 

S'Tie tj^oe as Code jo . 33c ahove 
Srv-ie t^'-^e as Code "do. 96 aoove 

One condition. t^npe as Code llo. 
245 ahove . 

One conditio!. Sane tirpe as Code I"o . 
312 ahove. 

One condition. S?;ie t:^e s.s Code I^o . 
15 ahove . 







llacliinery and AllioA 
Products Industr;.' 
(rjpproved "by 3/17/34 
the President) \ 

Mayonnaise Iic-astry 
(approved 3/21/34 "by 
the Ad].!inistrator) 

co:t):tio:-s t: c^de:. of af?-:OVal 

(1) Sar.e t'-pe as Code "Jo. 13 ahove 

(2) Same t;npe as Code "To . 287 (3) atove 

(1) t-^pe as Code "Jo. 151 (3) alDOve 

(2) Sa;ie t:--e as Code '-o . 245 ahove 

(3) Ho-urs of ■.Tatcliinen limited to 56 
rather than 53 

352 Flag i'fg. Industry One condition, 
(approved 3/21/34 ty ahove . 

the Adj'iiinistrator) 

353 Insulation Board Indus tr^r 
(approved 3/32/34 hy 
the Aduinistrator) 

354 Snail Arms and A"-'.iiunition 
lifg. Indus tr-!- 
(approved S/22/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

355 Fuller's Earth Producing 
and I'arlcetinr; Industry 
(approved "/23/34 hy 
the Adxi in i s t rat or ) 

359 Preformed Plastic Fro- 
due t s I ndus t r ;;'■ 
(approved 3/23/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

350 Brush hfg. Industry' 
(approved 3/25/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

352 Photographic s,nd Photo 
Finishing Industry 
(approved 3/23/54 "by 
the President) 

363 .Ken's Hecla-'ear Industr;'' 

(ap:oroved 3/24/34 "by 
the President) 

364 Clay Drpln Tile Hfg. 
• Indtistry 

(approved 3/24/34 "by 
the Administrator) 

Snme t3nDe as Code 312 

One condition. Hours and wa^es to 
Hawaii shall "be stayed pending fur- 
ther order. 

(1) General amendment to the hour 

(2) r.elative to resale prices 

(3) Same tj'pe as Code j'o .288 (3) ahove 

One condition. Sfjae t-foe as Code Vo . 
246 ahove . 

One condition. Same t^.noe as Code ITo . 
245 ahove 

One condition. Ssxie t;rpe as Code No 
2G8 (3) ahove . 

One condition. Saiie type as Code ".To 
235 a'bove . 

One condition. Provision made for 
study and report on the schedule 
of r.iinimum piece rate wares. 

One condition. SaiaG ty:oe as Code ITo 
245 a'bove . 



app::OVZp code 


cOxiTiTioiis ir opde;:. of ap?:"iovil 

365 Srvicl-Linie Iricl;: Ind. 
(approved 3/36/34 "by 
the Ac^ministrator) 

365 1-ietail i 'ontunent Indf^tr. 
(ap-oroved 3/26/3'! "by 
the Adninistrator) 

357 r.etcJ Tract in,-- Indus try 
(s;oproved 3/26/34 by 
. the Adiiiinistrator) 

359 Exofinding and S;oecip,lty 
Ps,per Products Industry/ 
(approved 5/26/34 "oy 
the Acuiinistrrtor) 

370 Open Pnper I)rin]:in;- Cup 
and iLO-ijuid iTesti-i^; Fap3r 
Food Conteaner Industry 
(approved 3/2 6/ 34 'oy 
the A'Ministrator) 

371 S2j.iitary I'.il]: Bottle 
CloEurG Industry 
(approved 3/26/34 hy 
the Aclj-iinistrator) 

372 Shoe Tlehuilding Trade 
(approved 3/27/34 hy 
the President) 

373 Infants' and Children's 
Wear Industry 
(approved 3/27/34 "by. 
the President) 

374 Tannin^;'- Extract Industry 
(ariproved 3/29/34 0^ 

the A'"^i!iinistrator) 

377 Reclained Euhher I'fy.Ind. 
(approved 4/2/34 "by 

the AAruinistrator) 

378 Peanut Butter Industry 
(approved 4/4/34 "by 
the Adninistrator) 

One conc/ition. Sriie type 
245 rhove 

Code To 

One co^idition. Saine type as Code ;'o 
246 ahove 

0n3 condition, 
245 ahove 

Srxie tjn.-)e as Code yo 

(1) Sane type as Code ITo .246 ahove 

(2) Herring nay "be had at o;otion of 
Adriinistrator on any provision, 
and subsequent orders have the 
effect of conditions in approving 
the code. 

(i) 'Saiae ty;oe as Code ITo . 245 a'bove 

(2) Spn3 tiroe as Code ITo . 359 (2) a'bove 

(1) Sojne tj'pe as Code ITo . 245 ahove 

(2) Saae type as Code Ho . 359 (2) a'bove 

One condition. Saie type as Code ]'o 
93 Eibove 

Three con: itions prescribed to avoid 
overls^ppins' def ^^'ith other 

One condition. Sane tj'pe as Code T.o . 
359 (2) above 

One condition. S.ame t^'-pe as Code ITo . 
245 above . 

(1) type as Code 1^0.151 (3) above 

(2) Sc-,;ae t-ype as Code.Uo. 246 above 







382 Transparent Uaterials 
Converters Industry 
(e^p proved 4/4/34 "by 
the Ac^'oninistrator) 

384 7i.-mero.l Service Indiistr:;'- 
(approved 4/4/34 Toy 

the Adninistrator) 

385 llailroad Special Track 
E qiiipment I If f^ . Indus try 
(approved 4/5/34 ty 
the Adninistrator) 

386 UmlDrella Fr?iie and Un- 
Tsrella Hardvrare llfg. Ind 
(approved 4/6/34 by 

the Administrator) 

388 S ands t o ne I ndus t r j^- 
(approved 4/6/34 hy 
the Adininistrator) 

(l) t --po as Code Ho. 246 above 
(:3) Saie t-pe as Code iTo . 369 (2) above 

One condition. Provides that a certain 
trado practice shall not supersede any 
Stpta Lan. 

One; condition. Sane type as Code ITo . 
24G above 






Sa^.ie t'HTie as Code 'Jo . 
Sane t^^oe as Code iTo . 
Insi~nia provisions s 
fiirther stitdy be made 
Code Authority reorge 
nore representative. 
Same type as Code No • 

Sajne t?'"pe as Code IIo . 
"Jot a true condition 
isation containing a 
precedent by JTRA for 
In event of revision 
visions of Limestone 
Industry shall submit 
visions . 

246 above 

312 above 
tayed until 

by ITEA. 
nized to be 

13 above. 

245 above 
biit a rational- 
disclaimer of 
other codes, 
of labor pro- 
Code, Sandstone 

like re- 

390 Steel Plate Fabricating 

(approved 4/6/34 by 
the Administrator) 

391 Insecticido and Dis- 
infectant ilfg. Industry, 
(approved 4/6/34 by 

the Ac'jninistrator) 

393 Soft Fibre Ih^-'j. Industry 
(approved 4/9/34 by 

the Aoministrator) 

394 Li.~htnin- Rod Ilfg. Ind. 
(Approved 4/19/34 by 
the A^'jninis Lrator) 

One condition. 
369 (2) above 

One condition. 
236 above . 

Snme type ^s Code ITo. 

Srme t;T)e as Code ilo 

One condition. Certain provisions 
regardiiig price filing stricken out, 

(1) type as Code ITo. 245 above 

(2) S? type as Code iJo . 13 above 

397 Spray Painting and Finish- (l) Sane tj'pe as Code :To . 235 above 

ing Equipment Ilfg. Ind. 

(approved 4/13/34 by the 





llo. Industry 

398 Barter Shop Trade 

(a;pproved 4/l9/ v'l- "by 
the President) 

(l) 5 conditions rs to d.esignating 

trade areas, locel adrninintrr.tive 
Boards rnd assents fron represen- 
tative Trade nemters before code 
effective . 

401 Copper Industry 

(approved 4/21/34 by 
the Administrator) 

(l) Subctitutos an entire ne-./ Article 
VII on liarhetin^r iDroviaions. 

402 Se-'.Tin,- Machine Industry 
(approved 4/21/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. 
13 above . 

S? t^Tje as Code ITo . 

403 Bleached Shellac i.'fg.Ind. One condition, 
(approved 4/2l/o4 by 236 above, 
the Adjiinistrr.tor) 

Same type as Code ITo 

)5 Boatbuilding and Boat- 
repairin- Industry 
(approved 4/24/34 by 
the Administrator) 

One condition. Same t^npe as Code ITo , 
23G above . 

407 Dr- Color Indn.stry 
(approved 4/25/3^:- by 
the Auninistrator) 

408 Undergarnent end ITcgligec 

(approved 4/27/34 "oir 
the Administrator) 

One condition, 
280 (3) above . 

Srjiie t'n:)e as Code No 

(1) Study cjid heariiig prescribed to 
determine whethei: code' authority 

is representative. 

(2) Same t^'pe as Code ITo. 333 above 

(3) No reduction of wages to be made 
pending above study. 

(4) Sets up Industrial Relations Board 
(o) tJatcliiien and non-mpjiuf acturing em- 
ployees TDrescribed a maximu-i hour 
rate . 

409 Flexible Insulation Ind. 
(aTjprove'd 4/30/34 by 
the Aclministrator) 

410 P.etail Rubber Tire and 
Batterj' Trade 
(approved 5"/l/34 by 
the President) 

One condition. Same type as Code !To , 
236 above . 



If Ad linistrator determines that an 
eraergenc:^ exists, he may determine 
a lowest reasonable cost. 
Same t^rpe as Code No . 236 above . 
Code Authority to subinit recom- 
mendations to render hour and wage 
provisions similar to other codes. 



No. Industry 

412 Loose Leaf and Blanlc 
Book Indus tr7/ 
(approved 5/l/34 "by 
the Adninistrator) 

413 Pasted Shoe Stock Ind. 
(approved 5/3/34 hy 
the Acl-rninistrator) 

414 BoVoin and Spool Ind. 
(approved 5/3/34- hy 
the Administra,tor) 

415 Commercial Fixtures Ind. 
(approved 5/3/34 hy 

the Ac-rainistrator) 

416 Leather Cloth and Lac- 
quered Fahrics, ¥indo¥7 
Shade Cloth and Roller 
and Book Cloth and Im- 
pregnated Fahrics Ind. 
(approved 5/3/34 hy 
the Afj-ininistrator) 

419 Soft Lime Rock Ind. 
(approved 5/7/34 hy 
the Admini s tr.ator ) 


(1) Srne type as Code iTo . 235 ahove 

(2) type as Code No. 359 (2) above 

(1) Scne tj.'pe r.s Code "Jo. 369 (2) ahove 

(1) Hours cut from 48 to 45 as maxirauia 
for maintenance crews, ens-ineers, 
firemen, etc, 

(2) Seme trpe as Code 'iTo. 236 ahove . 

One condition. S:une tjrpe as Code To. 
13 above . 

(1) Scjne tjnpe as Code Ho. 236 above 

(2) Sajne t-'pe as Code Ho. 96 

(3) Same t:'pe as Code ITo. 28S (3) above 

(1) tjrpe as Code Mo. 236 above 

(2) Code Authority to submit evidence 
that averaging hotirs is necessary 
in the Industry'- 

420 Gypsum IndListry 
(approved 5/7/34 by 
the Administrator) 

421 Marble Q;ua,rrying and 
Finishing Industry 
(approved 5/9/34 by 
the Administrator) 

423 Drop Forgine- Ind. 

(approved 5/10/34 by 
the Ar'jninistrator) 

(1) St'jne t^'pe as Code Ho. 235 above 
•(2) Sejne t-'pe as Code Ho. 419 (2) above 

(1) type as Code Ho. 236 above 

(2) Same type as Code No. 410 (3) above 

(3) Sam.e type a3 Code No. 419 (2) above 



Ha::imum ho\n-s lo'.7ered for peaJc 
periods, seasonal demands, con- 
tinuous processes, etc. t-'/pe as Code ITo. 288 (3) above 
Sp:;ie t-pe as Code No. 235 above 
Sr^xie t/.Tie as Code No . 13 above . 

424 Spice Grinding Industry 
(approved 5/ll/34 by 
the Ac'jninistrator) 

One condition. tyoe as Code Ho. 
151 (3) above. 





426 Paper Haulers' Felt Ind. 
(arp'oroved 5/ll/54 oy 
the Ain i ni s t rat or ) 

430'atsG uedicine Ind. 
(approved 5 /lb/ ''A "oy 
the Acbliinistrator) 

4"! Toll 3rid^':e Industry 

(o.pTsroved s/iv/s-l- "by . 
the Aoj'.inistrator) 

432 Specialty Acco-onting Sup- 
ply Ilfg. I'xltistry 
(approved 5/17/34 'oy 
the AcLniiiistrator) 

435 Cotton Pickery Indtiatry 
(approved 5/17/34 T;y, 
the Airiinisti-ator) 

436 Yar Llfg. Industry 
(approved 5/15/34 hy 
the AjJninistra,tor) 

437 Bicycle V^fg. Industry 
(aoproved 5/21/34 hy 
the A'ninistra-tor) 

444 Shoe Pattern Mf-:;^. Ind. 
(approved 5/26/34 hy 
the Adr::inlstrator) 

445 Bahin; Industry 
(approved 5/2S/34 hy 
the President) 

4-16 Cannin,-: Industry; 

(approved 5/2S/34 h;, 
the president) 


One condition. Sriie type as Code llo . 
236 rhove. 

One condition. Sfie tYP® as Code /^o . 
573 ahove . 

(l) Sa;ie tyoo as Code Ho. 373 ahove 
(r,) S". .e ti^e as Code To. 13 a'oove 
(3) Provision Tiade for puhlicly o'jned 

toll oridres to hecorae nernhers 

of the industry. 

One condition. Saao type as Code IIo . 
235 ahove . 

(1) Provision thp.t nothing in the 
Code shall ra-oly to ejqport trade 
stayed pcnd.inj; filinr; of ohjections 
for 10 days. 

(2) Same t^'pe as Code llo. 410 (3) 
ahove , 

(1) .Sruie type as Code Ho. 151 (3) 
' ' ahove 

(2) Sane t^-pe as Code Ho. 274 ahove . 

(1) S-Jas t^roe as Code Ho. 14 ahove 

(1) Gaiae tj-pe as Code Ho. 236 ahove 

(1) Spme type as Code Ho. 256 ahove 

(2) Stay of provision prohibiting 
,' the givinf; of preniuias a,nd 


(3) S'vie type as Code Ho. 14 ahove. 

(?.) Co:i:Tittee ap:oointed for standards 
of Quality c-^iid labelling re- 
Quireiiients, to raa':e report in 
90 days. 

(2) Sane type as Code Ho. 14 ahove. 





UUS Optical TJholesrJ-e Inclustr/ 
and Trade 

Approved 'ol^S^-l'^'- ''^'J 
the Adrninistrr.tor 



Dog Food Industry 
(approved ^j'^S^j'y^-r "oy 
the Adrainistrctor 

Candle\7ick 3edspraa.d Ind. 
(approved 6/1/3'!- "b;' 
the Adiiinistr.'.tor) 

Metal Etching Industii^'' 
(approved 6/4/34 "by 
the Adrninistrr.tor) 

Ice Cream Cone Inc^ustry 
(approved 6/U/3U oy 
the Adrainistr.-tor) 

TTholesale Con:?ecti oner's' 


(n,]3proved 6/6/3'^ jy 

Admi ni s t r a,t r) 

U59 Bottled Soft DrinI: Ind. 
(approved 6/7/3''" ^L' 
the President) 

U60 ■ Preserve, Ilr/r&.sohin.o 

Cherry and Glr.ce Truit 


(approved 6/0/3U ty 

the Adininistrrtor) 

U62 Wliolesale Totacco Trade 
(approved b/S/3'-!- ''^'J 't-^e 

coiiDiTiOiTs i:: orJDs::i or approval 

(1) Ilnxii'TOii mu'^lj^jr of hours made ider>- 
t i c al r c ;,-. r dl ess f p opul at i o n . 

(2) Code Authority not given po'ier to Ir.oor disputes. 

(3) Same type as Code ITo. I96 (1) above. 

(4) Same t^n^e as Cof.e ITo. 35^ (2) above. 

One condition. Sane type as Code No. 
236 above. 

(1) Minuraura prescribed for hone-jork 
and a stuo^' and hearing provided 

One condition. Sane type as Code No. 
236 above. 

(1) Same type as Code No. 23U above 

(2) Sarae tj'pe as Code No. !-^U5 (2) above 

(1) Same t:r^e as Code No. 236 above 

(2) Sane ty.e r.s Code No. U% (2) above 

(3) Sane t:'pe as Code No. I5I (3) above 
(U) Sanctions of ua^^jon jobbers as tO' 

na::inui'A hours stryed. 

One condition. Sane tj-pe as Code No. 
lU above. 

(1) Same type as Code No. 236 above 

(2) Same tj'pe as CoCc No. 6>-L (l) above 
(female rr-tes and audit aysbem); ,- 




Merchandising pla-n stayed until 
agreement reached ^ith Cigar ln~ 
dustiT and SetaJ.1 Tobacco Trade, 
Same tj-^oe as Code No. 23S above. 
Same t:'-pe as Code No, 27^ above. 
Nei-r section substitu.ted for price 
ctitting piif. declrXation of an 

Hour and wage provision not to 
become effective for tv/o weeks. 







Ub3 Candy Mfg. Inouctr:' 
(approved 6/il/3^ ''oy 
the President) 

U6U Cocoa and ghocolate Ilfg. 

(approved ,6/1^/3^'- "^'J 
the Administrrtor) 

U66 Retail Tobacco Trc.cle 
(approved GjilS/j/h "by 
the President) 

U67 Cigar Ilfg. InduGtr;' 
(approved 6/l3/3^v "b^^ 
the President) 

U69 Sulphonated Oil i.Ifi". 

(approved 6/2b/3^l "ijy 
the Administrator) 

U70 Aluninuni Indiistr:/ 
(6/26/3U hy the_ 
Admini strator) 

U7I Trailer Mfg. Indi\::tr3'' 
(approved 6/^6/3^ oy 
the Admini strr.t or) 

U72 TJarm Air Register Ind, 
(approved 6/r^.o/3':- l>y 
the Adr.iini strator) 

hlh Needlevfork Industr- In 
Puerto Rico 
(approved S/P.C/jM "by 
the President) 

(1) Same tyoc r.s Code No. P.^G atove 

(2) Same t:roe r.s Code No. U% (2) above 

(3) Same type rs Code No. I51 (3) above 

(U) Sa.Tie tjrje ; n Code Ho. II9 above. 

One condition. Stne tj 
hk[) (2) above. 

-.'6 as Cade Ho. 

(1) Same type a.s Code No. U62 (l) abo^e 

(2) Same tjrpe a,s Code No. 235 above 

(3) Same ty;oe as Code No. 27U above 

(k) Some type as Code No. U62 (U) above 

(5) Same type r.s Code No. U62 (5) above 

(1) Same type a.s Code No. U62 (l) above 

(2) Same type as Code Ho. 236 ^^^^^ 

(3) Same type r.s bode uo. 274 above 

(U) Same type rs '^ode Ho. U62 (5) above 

(1) Sane type as Code Ho 27^ above 

(1) Code approved for trial period of 
90 days'. 

(2) Same type as Code No. 17^ above. 

(1) Sane type r,c Code No. 236 above 
Stay of provision saying members 
shall not sell below their indi- 
vidual cost until good cause to 
the contrar" shovm, 

(3) Sane -ty-ps as Code Ho. I3 above, 

(1) Differential discount to large 
purchasers deleted. 

(2) Sajiie tj'pe as Code Ho. U7I (2) above. 

(1) Menb'3rs given er.enption from cer- 
tain en^jj^iercted rel.ated codes. 

(2) Code Authority to siabmit plan to 
• issue uniforn l.rbles rith U.S. 


(3) Homev;orkers to be paid defficiency 
they 'Tould receive if v/orking at 
the'' under the Code. 



No . Industry . 

474- (continued) 


(4) CommisKion set up to maJce recom- 
me-idations for posKible code 

(5; Study of waf;e scale and piece 
work tesis •orescribed. 

475 Yeast Industry 
(a/proved 7/2/34 hy 
the Administrator) 

476 Hatters' Fur Cutting Ind. 
(approved 7/3 /.'54 ty 

the Administrator) 

One condition. Iviinimum wage rate in- 
creased from 40 to 45 cents laer hour. 

One condition, 
151 a"bove. 

Same tvoe as Code llo, 

477 Public Sea.tin;; Industry 
CaioTDroved 7/10/34 by 
the Administrator) 

478 Secondary Steel Product; 
Tferehousing Trade 
(approved 7/10/34 by 
the Administrator"^ 

479 Cold Storaf;e Door ilf^. 

(approved 7/11/34 by 
the Administrator) 

480 Structural Sto?l snd Iron 
i ■•ving Industry 

(a, >d 7/11/34 by 

the i aiistrator) 

One condition. So.rae ty-oe as Code No. 
236 above. 

One condition--Code only a :)^roved for 
90 da^rs. 





'lours and wages stayed temporarily 
imtJ.l cause shown why they sho^uld 
not become effective. 
Members to comply with provisions 
■oending above stay. 

Same ty^e as Code "Jo. 236 above. 
Same tyioe as Code Ho. 13 above. 

Brection work to be governed by' 
Construction Industry. 
■Jew wage rate substituted with ex- 
ception as to hours for watclimen, 

No employee to be dismissed for 
reporting alleged violation. 
Same type as Code 408 (l) above. 
Kew "selling belo"' cost" provision 

Firm of public accoiuitants to make 
within tvro months v report of 
direct and indirect charges. 
Sr-me tyoe as Code 28;:i (3' above. 
', inimxim rates of pa""' set uio by 
district i-.. 
(9) Nev; trade oractices ac'ded: purchas- 
ing beloi-' advertised -orice; ship- 
TDing in transit privilege to other 
iDOints than specified in order. 
('10) Sam:^ tvTDe ^s Code No, 369 (2) above. 






482 Dental Goods and Fquipment (1) Samp tyve as Code 36S (?) above 


(a:ooroved 7/13/34 by 

the Administrator) 




Same t;,rpe as Code 480 (2) above 
S?9me ty-pe ps Code 408 (4) above 
kodel provision substituted ns 
failure to o^y asscssmentt; under 
bud ;^e t . 

Compli^/'ce witn code nnd oaynent 
of assessments to entitle member 
to participate in selection of Code 
Authority and enjoy benefits. 
Prohibition of consip^nnent of 
equipment exceot on contract ao- 
proved by Code Authority. 
Pa^TOent of rebates revised, b"'' lem 

483 Electric Hoist and ' 
rail f'fg. Industry 
(aporoved' 7/13/34 b-, 
tne Administrator) 

One condition. 
13 above. 

Sa'~ic ty-oe as Code ''To. 

484 VAiolpsale l.onumental 
Marble Industry 
(aporoved 7/14/34 by 
the ■ Administrator) 

(1) 'Jar^e rat>=s and overti^ie orovisions 
aDjroved oendin^-^ 90 da?/ study 

(2) Provision re method of pa^'nnent of 
wqgps stayed until stay in P.etail 
Trade Code bp determined. 

485 Cotton O-innin - Kachlnery (1) 

Mfg. Incustry (2) 
(ap'oroved 7/16/34 by 

tiie Administrator) (3) 

Sane tyop as ^oce 236 above, 
kaximam hours of heat firemen 
stayed bO da?/s. 

Southern ''VagF- rate to be recon- 
sidered after oeak oeriod in 

486 Comme-rcial Venicle Body 

(approved 7/16/54 by 
the Ad-^'^inistrator) 

488 ;Velt Ifg. Incustry 

(ap-oroved 7/20/34 by 
t'le Administrator) 

(l^t Same t^rpe as Code 373 above 

(2^ Game type as Code 'To. 119 above 

(3) Same tyae as Core -To. 3 above. 

Cne condition, 
^('n revised. 

i aximum hours of ^'atch- 

489 Safpty Razor and Safety 
Hazor Blade J.'fgi Ind. 
(approved 7/21/34 by 
the Acviinistrator) 

(1) Same t ^oe as Code "lo, 13 above. 

(2) ."revision for sale only thru recoc 
nized v;holesalers sta'''ed . 

(3) Penalty for imitation of lab'ls, 
etc. stayed. 




COKDITlL'i'TS rs L?mi. L^ AP"^HOVAL 



490 Imported Date Fackiric Ind. 
(approved 7/22/34 by 
the Administrator) 

492 Stereotrype Dry Hat Ind. 
(approved 7/27/34 ty 
the Administrator) . 

One condition. Same type as Code i\To. 
236 above. 

(1) Same tyoe as Code No. 236 above 

(2) Stud.y "orovided for Dossibility of 
UTOward. revision of female emoloy- 

493 Industrial Oil Burning 
Equipment hff:. Industry 
(axjproved 7/30/34 by 
the Administrator) 

495 Steel Joist Industry 
(aoTDroved 8/1/34 by 
the Administrator) 

497 Textile Examining, Shrink- 
ing and. Refinishing Ind. 
(approved 8/6/34 by 
the A>'ministrator) 

One condition. Members of this industn; 
given blanket exerarjtion from Oil Burner 
Industry Code 

(1) All wa^e rates and districts set 
up in Schedule A eliminated and 

a basic wage with a Southern dif- 
ferential substituted therefor. 

(2) Uuon termination of code, only 
liabilities shall be liquidated 
damages or unpaid assessments. 

(3) Same tyoe as Code No. 369 (2) above 

(1) Same tyoe as Code No. 373 above. 

(2) Same type as Code No. 13 above.- 

498 Corn Cob Pipe Industry 
(approved 8/7/34 by 
tne Administrator), 

One condition. Same tyoe as Code No. 
119 above. 

499 Refrigerated ./arehousin^ 

(approved 8/8/34 by 
tne Administrator) 

501 Manuf acturimt' ind .Vhole- 
sale Surgical Industry 
(approved 8/9/54 by 

tne Aaministrator) 

502 Upward- Acting Door Ind. 
(approved 8/11/34 by 
the Administrator 

One condition. Same t-pop ^s Code 'Jo. 
369 (2) above. 

(1) Same tjnoe as Code No. 369 (2) above 

(2) Same tyoe as Code 288 (3) above 

(l) Same type as Code No. 13 above. 






502 Pretzel industry 

(aporoved 0/11/34 by 
the Administrator) 

504 Animal Glue Industry 
(ap-oroved 8/?-'?/34 by 
the Administrator) 

507 Surgical Distributors 

(aporoved 8/2'±/34 by 
the Administrator) 

508 Industry of Vvhole saline 
Plumbing Products, Heat- 
ing Products and/or Dis- 
tributing Pipe, Fittings, 
and. Valves. 

(approved 8/25/54 by 
the Administrator) 

509 f arine Equi-oment r';fg. 

(approved 8/27/34 by 
the Administrator) 

510 Assembled 7?a.tch Industry 
(approved 3/27/34 by 
the Administrator) 


One ccnc ition. Cede Autnority to iaves- 
tigate' within cO days T.nd reiDort on 
the effect of machine oxjerators and oven 
men and general r^-^le labor as to ws.-'es. 
















Present hour ^nd •■^a.^e orovisions, 
vith exceuticns thereto, to be 
ao^roved for 60 days, ?ind then 
either those orovisions or nev 
orovisions therein prescribed shall 
be effective, according to +he 
pleasure of the Administrator. 

Same tyoe qs Code No. 359 (2) above 
Definitions of outside salesmen and. 
collectors revised. 
i'Jew wage rates and hours prescribed 
with exceptions thereto provided. 
Provision for handicacoed -oersons 

.('ages above minimum not to be re- 

Provisions made for sefetv and 
health of employees 
Kodel provision for col"'ectin.^ 
information from industry 
}]ev7 provision prescribed for imi- 
tation of design, etc. 
Same tyoe as Code No. 354 (2) above 

Same t" je -as Code No. 
Same t'^'oe as Code "To. 

373 abo^'e. 
236 abn-e. 

Same t:/X)e as Code No. 235 above. 
Provision deleted attem-otin^ to 
tpc': on frei.-^ht and other chareos 
as cost. 
Sa'ne t'.^ce as Code No. 373 above. 

Substitution of provision for re- 
turn of defective products. 
Am.eudec:. orov-ision r<= breaching of 
contracts irith com-oetitoir. 
I odel hours for of.fice employees/ 
Same tj'pe as Code ITo. 369 (2) above/ 


No . Industry 

511 Corrugated Rolled-i, e.t.^1 
Culvert Fipp Industry 
(aporcved 8/27/34 by 
tne Administra'*"or) 

514 Artificial Limli Mfg. Ind. 
(apioroved 8/28/34 ij 
the Ac3niinistrator ) 

517 I?ing Traveler I'ifg. Ind. 
(aporoved 9/7/34 by 
the Ac'ministrator') 

518 Shuttle I 'fg. Industry 
(a;pproved 9/7/34 "by 
the Administrator 

519 Natui-al Cleft Stone Ind. 
(aporoved 9/11/34 hy 
the Acrainistrator) 

521 Adhesive and Ink Industry 
(approved 9/19/34 by 

the Adm inistrator) 

522 Automotive Chemical 
Specialties Iv.fg. Industry 
(approved 9/27/34 by 

the Administrator) 

524 Pickle Packing Industry 
(approved 10/4/34 by 
aTIEB, G. a. Lynch) 

525 Retail Trade in the Ter- 
ritory of Hawaii 
(approved in/ 15/34 by 
NIP^, G. A. Lynch) 

528 Pecan Shellin.r Industry 
(approved in/ 23/ 34 by 
NIRB, G. A. Lynch) 


(1) SaJiip tyoe as Corle No. 369 (2) above 

(2) Same type as Code ';,To. 235 aboA^e 

(1) Same tyoe as Code t^To.369 (2) above 

(2) Same t.-'-pe as Code :Ro.5n7 (5) above 

(3) ¥,0 member shall file revision ut)- 
ward of filed orice within 48 

(l) Order to become ef-^ective within 
in days unless ^'ooc? cause shown 
to contrary 

One condition. Same tjnoe as Code No. 
517 above. 

One condition. Same t^/De as Code No. 
419 (2) above. 

One condition. Same tvne as Code No. 
4in (5) above. 

One conc'ition. Same t'.noe as Code No. 
4in (3) above. 

One condition. Same t^nje as Code No. 
4in (3) above. 

(1) Same type as Code No. 373 above 

(2) I/Iinimum wages as to outside sales- 
men stayed 

(3) I'linim-om wages as to employees en- 
ga^red at least dO^J of time outside 

(4) Same t^'pe as Code Fo. 517 above 

One condition. Same t-',noe as Code No. 
410 (3) above. 



529 Ph.n,i-r;iacr'Uoic-.]. inC- Jdo- 
lo.2,ic'-l Iiu i,i::.try 
(r.^;?rovpd 10/."'5/r '. Dy 
ill?3, G-. A. L-nc'ii) 

531 Stainef^^- a;iu Leadec' G-Lasc 
I:ic -'iptry 

(a/pproved ll/s/Cv''. "oy 
SlZb, YiT. A. i±a.rriirio,n) 

53'1- Horve "a-ir DrRssinj Iiid, 
(s.r.->roved ll/-.,4/' .■■! uy 
iTInIi, 7. A. .-::^.rriin'in) 

535 Lrattico Clotli IL>.'» Ind. 
(approved l.^/ZS/'Z^ 'oy 
rni?, 7. A. :narrir:-n) 

536 Ciilorlne Control A ■;•'?.- 
ratuG Ii'.durtrr ar.;' Tra'"e 
(c:v:-,rQved l,?/l3/C4- ty 

Ellffi, r. A. &-rin'in) 

55c WoMen'r- '.'ec"'?"ear 'ind 
Scarf }'f^, Ir.d-actry 
(ayxoroved lii/lS/S-i 'by 

1113E , Y'. A, irarriinrji) 

54r iictpil 1,'op.t Trade 

(av-roved 12/:;l/G4 ty 
the Prccident) 

CC-'DI JIG'S I.T 0"1lL:^ 0? APniOVAL 

One condition, ^Sti-.tic-ticr- to 'be jatlier- 
oc b;v Code Authority in 4 months with 
the vlo'.- 01; or othervlcc, the 
hours :\r.d va^jos provisions ir. the cede, 

0: •-' condition. Providing for suhmiosion 
of fividc.icc to support vai;je dd'ferentials 
based u '0:i classes of -irocLv-Cts. 

One coiidioion. Sanr t;-;ie as Cod.e I'o. 
517 above. 

O'.ie co.-dition. 
517 ahovG. ''^}npe as Code llo, 

One cor.di '-ion.- .Sant. tr^-pe as .Code IIo. 
"17 ?bnve. 

(l) Sxe?.r)tion niven to manm^ctiirers of 
dresses vhere snch nec''r.'ear mad.e 
1:\ c rn jiuicbion vith the dress in 
tViO ssrac shop 
(?) SoxTj ty->e as Code llo. 54 (l) ahove 
(■:') ".axiniir.1 cash discount -provision 

stayed i^endin^; study, and a maxi- 
inviw "orovided d.urin{^ that period. 

(l) Definition of indnstry amended, as 

nell .as that of "es^.^hlish-ient" , 
(/3) Srj-iC type as Code ITo, 336 (4) above 
(o) ?ollo\ in^;,, provisions stayed Uiitil 
siiitahle suustit"'itGs may he fjinid; 
iiisroprcsentation of non-confomin^ 
articles; nisora.idin." or lahelincj 
pricing provisions, during enercency 
and 1 herv.'i s e , 

541 Flat Glass Hi;:-. Industry 
(approved 12/?2/34 "by 
ITJIffl, W. A. K*,rriman") 

543 r.otor Vehicle [Maintenance 

(a,pproved 1/13/35 'oy 
the President) 

One condition. Stay oi exceptions to 
naximu.;i ho\>rs d.irin^:: peah period.s set 
un hy rn;'ustry. 

(1) Sp.r.:3 ty^e as Code Ho. 373 ah ova, 

(2) price ciitting, e;;er~ency and re- 
cell of hid p revisions stayed 
ui'xtil further order. 



?44 Auto Hebuildivn; -xiid :;c- 
finic-hirii" 'I^r-^Ae 
(:v-y roved l/;>l/35 by 
tiie President) 

545 >.tiiral Or.anic Productc 

(--■Tovad l/-:ji/S5 ty 
I'ini;, ^. A. "■r-.rrinan) 

'"'-7 Seed Trade 

( o:>rovcd ,'j/;:/",5 oi? 

IIIIv:, W. A. Ho,rrinian) 

543 Ci£,,-u-ctte, S:roIf , c-iew- 
ij^ig v'.nci. Srno::int"; Tutacco 
Mfi3,-. Industry 
(approved ^fd/?.^ by 
ti'ie President) 

551 Clock Hi-. lulustry 
(approved ,3/2S/35 by 
2TIS5, W. A. Harrimn) 

552 Music Publishing: lucustrj 
A-.vproved S/-'/;3'5 by 
ITIEB, ?J, A. ":Iarrinn,n) 

553 Hestnujrant Trade ih the 
Territory of -lanaii 
(ap2:)rovod 3/3/35 by 

illPU, YiT. A. Harriman) 




'r;IJic ArtE^ Industry in 
tile I'crritnry of yawaii 
(a-;proved 3/7/55 by 
hllffl, W. A, Harriman) 

2inc Industry 
(aii2\roved 3/2S/35 by 
ITIEB, W, A. Rarrinan) 

Tnolesale and Ptetail Auto-^ 
mobile Sales, Suoply Repair, 
lirantenance and Service In- 
dustry in the Territory of 
Hawaii (approved 3/26/35 b^^ 
HIPdB, W. A. Harriman) 


coiTPiTioHs r.- ojo:np o: ArP.iovAL 

(■3) Pen-.lty of not particiriatin- in 
election fo^ not ^^ayin^, assess- 
iifi^ts, etc. stayed uatil after 
the c^de aut ority is initially 


i-ifi t:-e as Code Ho. 543 (2) above. 

(1) t-'-pe 


0. 533 above. 

One condition. Provisions CTi-.rantee- 
ing against decline of -rice either be- 
fore or after delivery, or canceling- 
of contracts to avoid marhet loss ° 
stayed pending; further order. 


Study by Research and Planning 
on v-aj^es and hours provided for 
v/ith reservation to Board to tpi-e 
action after due notice as it 
deems necessary. 

lg condition. Same t\me a-- 
:^69 (2) above. 

Code Ho, 

--.e condition. Ap-proval of code shall 
iio. or sanction any acts alle-ed 
in tnc petition filed in case noxj pend- 
i^k m J. S. District Court, or rny de- 
crees vmicli nay be entered therein. ' 

(1) Saiae type as Code Ho. 474 (l) above 
U; Same tj-pg as Code Ho. 517 above. 

(1) Sane type as Code Ho. 474 (l) above 
I..; Same tynoc as Code Ho. 517 above 




Sane t;y-pe as Code Ho, 419 (2) pbove 
Impartial investi:,'ator to review 
conditions in South as to code vraces 
11^}; P°ssiDilicy of revision in 90 days 
Same oj^se as Code Ho. 474 (l) above 
Snjue t.^HDe as Code No. 517 above". 
Entire price structure (jpen price 
filinc, emergency and accounting 
provisions) stayed pending shovdng 
of need therefor. 




Executive Order No. 7075, dated June 15, 1935, established the Division of Review of the 
National Recovery Administration. The pertinent part of the Executive Order reads thus; 

The Division of Review shall assemble, analyze, and report upon the statistical 
information and records of experience of the operations of the various trades and 
industries heretofore subject to codes of fair competition, shall study the ef- 
fects of such codes upon trade, industrial and labor conditions in general, and 
other related matters, shall make available for the protection and promotion of 
the public interest an adequate review of the effects of the Administration of 
Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the principles and policies 
put into effect thereunder, and shall otherwise aid the President in carrying out 
his functions under the said Title. I hereby appoint Leon C. Marshall, Director of 
the Division of Review. 

The study sections set up in the Division of Review covered these areas: industry 
studies, foreign trade studies, labor studies, trade practice studies, statistical studios, 
legal studies, administration studies, miscellaneous studies, and the writing of code his- 
tories. The materials which were produced by these sections are indicated below. 

Except for the Code Histories, all items mentioned below are scheduled to be in mimeo- 
graphed form by April 1, 1936. 


The Code Histories are documented accounts of the formation and administration of the 
codes. They contain the definition of the industry and the principal products thereof; the 
classes of members in the industry; the history of code formation including an account of the 
sponsoring organizations, the conferences, negotiations and hearings which were held, and 
the activities in connection with obtaining approval of the code; the history of the ad- 
ministration of the code, covering the organization and operation of the code authority, 
the difficulties encountered in administration, the extent of compliance or non-compliance, 
and the general success or lack of success of the code; and an analysis of the operation of 
code provisions dealing with wages, hours, trade practices, and other provisions. These 
and other matters are canvassed not only in terms of the materials to be found in the files, 
but also in terms of the experiences of the deputies and others concerned with code formation 
and administration. 

The Code Histories, (including histories of certain NRA units or agencies) are not 
mimeographed. They are to be turned over to the Department of Commerce in typewritten form. 
All told, approximately eight hundred and fifty (850) histories will be completed. This 
number includes all of the approved codes and some of the unapproved codes. (In Work Mate- 
rials No^ 1§, Contents of Code His to ries , will be found the outline which govarned the 
preparation of Code Histories.) 

(In the case' of all approved codes and also in the case of some codes not carried to 
final approval, there are in NRA files further materials on industries. Particularly worthy 
of mention are the Volumes I, II and III which constitute the material officially submitted 
to the President in support of the recommendation for approval of each code. These volumes 

-ii - 

set forth the origination of the codes, the sponsoring group, the evidence advanced to sup- 
port the proposal, the report of the Division of Research and Planning on the industry, the 
recommendations of the various Advisory Boards, certain types of official correspondence, 
the transcript of the formal hearing, and other pertinent matter. There is also much offi- 
cial information relating to amendments, interpretations, exemptions, and other rulings. The 
materials mentioned in this paragraph were of course not a part of the work of the Division 
of Review. ) 


In the work of the Division of Review a considerable number of studies and compilations 
of >..ata (other than those noted below in the Evidence Studies Series and the Statistical 
Material Series) have been made. These are listed below, grouped according to the char- 
acter of the material. (In Work Ma terials No . 17 . Tentative Ou tlines and Sum maries of 
Studies in Process , the materials are fully described) . 

I ndustry Studies 

Automobile Industry, An Economic Survey of 

Bituminous Coal Industry under Free Competition and Code Regulation, Ecnomic Survey of 

Electrical Manufacturing Industry, The 

Fertilizer Industry, The 

Fishery Industry and the Fishery Codes 

Fishermen and Fishing Craft, Earnings of 

Foreign Trade under the National Industrial Recovery Act 

Part A - Competitive Position of the United States in International Trade 1927-29 through 

Part B - Section 3 (e) of NIRA and its administration. 
Part C - Imports and Importing under NRA Codes. 
Part D - Exports and Exporting under NRA Codes. 
Forest Products Industries, Foreign Trade Study of the 
Iron and Steel Industry, The 
Knitting Industries, The 
Leather and Shoe Industries, The 

Lumber and Timber Products Industry, Economic Problems of the 
Men's Clothing Industry, The 
Millinery Industry, The 
Motion Picture Industry, The 
Migration of Industry, The: The Shift of Twenty-Five Needle Trades From New York State, 

1926 to 1934 
National Labor Income by Months, 1929-35 
Paper Industry. The 

Production, Prices, Employment and Payrolls in Industry, Agriculture and Railway Trans- 
portation, January 1923, to date 
Retail Trades Study, The 
Rubber Industry Study, The 

Textile Industry in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan 
Textile Yarns and Fabrics 
Tobacco Industry, The 
Wholesale Trades Study, The 

Women's Neckwear and Scarf Industry, Financial and Labor Data on 

iVomen's Apparel Industry, Some Aspects of the 

T rade Practic e Studies 

Commodities, Information Concerning; A Study of NRA and Related Experiences in Control 

Distribution, Manufacturers' Control of: Trade Practice Provisions in Selected NRA Cod^s 

Distributive Relations in the Asbestos Industry 

Design Piracy: The Problem and Its Treatment Under NRA Codes 

Electrical Mfg. Industry: Price Filing Study 

Fertilizer Industry; Price Filing Study 

Geographical Price Relations Under Codes of Fair Competition, Control of 

Minimum Price Regulation Under Codes of Fair Competition 

Multiple Basing Point System in the Lime Industry: Operation of the 

Price Control in the Coffee Industry 

Price Filing Under NRA Codes 

Production Control in the Ice Industry 

Production Control, Case Studies in 

Resale Price Maintenance Legislation in the United States 

Retail Price Cutting, Restriction of, with special Emphasis on The Drug Industry. 

Trade Practice Rules of The Federal Trade Commission (1914-1936); A classification for 

comparision with Trade Practice Provisions of NRA Codes. 

Labor Studies 

Cap and Cloth Hat Industry, Commission Report on Wage Differentials in 

Earnings in Selected Manufacturing Industries, by States, 1933-35 

Employment, Payrolls, Hours, and Wages in 115 Selected Code Industries 1933-35 

Fur Manufacturing, Commission Report on Wages and Hours in 

Hours and Wages in American Industry 

Labor Program Under the National Industrial Recovery Act, The 

Part A. Introduction 

Part B. Control of Hours and Reemployment 

Part C. Control of Wages 

Part D. Control of Other Conditions of Employment 

Part E. Section 7(a) of the Recovery Act 
Materials in the Field of Industri5.1 Relations 
PRA Census of Employment, June, October, 1933 
Puerto Rico Needlework, Homeworkers Survey 

Administrative Studies 

Administrative and Legal Aspects of Stays, Exemptions and Exceptions, Code Amendments, Con- 
ditional Orders of Approval 

Administrative Interpretations of NRA Codes 

Administrative Law and Procedure under the NIRA 

Agreements Under Sections 4(a) and 7(b) of the NIRA 

Approved Codes in Industry Groups, Classification of 

Basic Code, the — (Administrative Order X-61) 

Code Authorities' and Their part in the Administration of the NIRA 
Part A. Introduction 
Part B. Nature, Composition and Organization of Code Authorities 

9768—3 . 

(irfj lo RioecEfl. 


'.1 ;. .1 r. 

.•HOiBisfC . 

;^:li^U liii^ 

- Iv - 

Part C. Activities of the Code Authorities 

Part D. Code Authority Finances 

Part E. Summary and Evaluation 
Code Compliance Activities of the NRA 
Code Making Program of the NRA in the Territories, The 
Code Provisions and Related Subjects, Policy Statements Concerning 
Content of NIRA Administrative Legislation 

Part A. Executive and Administrative Orders 

Part B. Labor Provisions in the Codes 

Part C. Trade Practice Provisions in the Codes 

Part D. Administrative Provisions in the Codes 

Part E. Agreements under Sections 4(a) and 7(b) 

Part F. A Type Case: The Cotton Textile Code 
Labels Under NRA, A Study of 

Model Code and Model Provisions for Codes, Development of 

National Recovery Administration, The: A Review of its Organization and Activities 
NRA Insignia 

President's Reemployment Agreement, The 

President's Reemployment Agreement, Substitutions in Connection with the 
Prison Labor Problem under NRA and the Prison Compact, The 
Problems of Administration in the Overlapping of Code Definitions of Industries and Trades. 

Multiple Code Coverage, Classifying Individual Members of Industries and Trades 
Relationship of NRA to Government Contracts and Contracts Involving the Use of Government 

Relationship of NRA with States and Municipalities 
Sheltered Workshops Under NRA 
Uncodified Industries: A Study of Factors Limiting the Code Making Program 

Legal Studies 

Anti-Trust Laws and Unfair Competition 

Collective Bargaining Agreements, the Right of Individual Employees to Enforce 

Commerce Clause, Federal Regulation of the Employer-Employee Relationship Under the 

Delegation of Power, Certain Phases of the Principle of, with Reference to Federal Industrial 
Regulatory Legislation 

Enforcement, Extra-Judicial Methods of 

federal Regulation through the Joint Employment of the Power of Taxation and the Spending 

Government Contract Provisions as a Means of Establishing Proper Economic Standards, Legal 
Memorandum on Possibility of 

Industrial Relations in Australia, Regulation of 

Intrastate Activities Which so Affect Interstate Commerce as to Bring them Under the Com- 
merce Clause, Cases on 

Legislative Possibilities of the State Constitutions 

Post Office and Post Road Power — Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Industrial Regula- 

State Recovery Legislation in Aid of Federal Recovery Legislation History and Analysis 

Tariff Rates to Secure Proper Standards of Wages and Hours, the Possibility of Variation in 

Trade Practices and the Anti-Trust Laws 

Treaty Making Power of the United States 

War Power, Can it be Used as a Means of Federal Regulation of Child Labor? 



The Evidence Studies were originally undertaken to gather material for pending court 
cases. After the Schechter decision the project was continued in order to assemble data for 
use in connection with the studies of the Division of Review. The data are particularly 
concerned with the nature, size and operations of the industry; and with the relation of the 
industry to interstate commerce. The industries covered by the Evidence Studies account for 
more than one-half of the total number of workers under codes. The list of those studies 

Automobile Manufacturing Industry 
Automotive Parts and Equipment Industry 
Baking Industry 

Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Industry 
Bottled Soft Drink Industry 
Builders' Supplies Industry 
Canning Industry 
Chemical Manufacturing Industry 
Cigar Manufacturing Industry 
Coat and Suit Industry 
Construction Industry 
Cotton Garment Industry 
Dress Manufacturing Industry 
Electrical Contracting Industry 
Electrical Manufacturing Industry 
Fabricated Metal Products Mfg. and Metal Fin- 
ishing and Metal Coating Industry 
Fishery Industry 
Furniture Manufacturing Industry 
General Contractors Industry 
Graphic Arts Industry 
Gray Iron Foundry Industry 
Hosiery Industry 

Infant's and Children's Wear Industry 
Iron and Steel Industry 

Leather Industry 

Lumber and Timber Products Industry 
Mason Contractors Industry 
Men's Clothing Industry 
Motion Picture Industry 
Motor Vehicle Retailing Trade 
Needlework Industry of Puerto Rico 
Painting and Paperhanging Industry 
Photo Engraving Industry 
Plumbing Contracting Industry 
Retail Lumber Industry 
Retail Trade Industry 
Retail Tire and Battery Trade Industry 
Rubber Manufacturing Industry 
Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry 
Shipbuilding Industry 
Silk Textile Industry 
Structural Clay Products Industry 
Throwing Industry 
Trucking Industry 
Waste Materials Industry 
Wholesale and Retail Food Industry 
Wholesale Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Indus- 
Wool Textile Industry 


This series is supplementary to the Evidence Studies Series. The reports include data 
on establishments, firms, employment, payrolls, wages, hours, production capacities, ship- 
ments, sales, consumption, stocks, prices, material costs, failures, exports and imports. 
They also include notes on the principal qualifications that should be observed in using the 
data, the technical methods employed, and the applicability of the material to the study of 
the industries concerned. The following numbers appear in the series: 

Asphalt Shingle and Roofing Industry Fertilizer Industry 

Business Furniture Funeral Supply Industry 

Candy Manufacturing Industry Glass Container Industry 

Carpet and Rug Industry Ice Manufacturing Industry 

Cement Industry Knitted Outerwear Industry 

Cleaning and Dyeing Trade Paint, Varnish, ana Lacquer, Mfg. Industry 

Coffee Industry Plumbing Fixtures Industry 

Copper and Brass Mill Products Industry Rayon and Synthetic Yarn Producing Industry 

Cotton Textile Industry Salt Producing Industry 

Electrical Manufacturing Industry 


The original, and approved, plan of the Division of Review contemplated resources suf- 
ficient (a) to prepare some 1200 histories of codes and NRA units or agencies, (b) to con- 
solidate and index the NRA files containing some 40,000,000 pieces, (c) to engage in ex- 
tensive field work, (d) to secure much aid from established statistical agencies of govern- 
ment, (e) to assemble a considerable number of experts in various fields, (f) to conduct 
approximately 25% more studies than are listed above, and (g) to prepare a comprehensive 
summary report. 

Because of reductions made in personnel and in use of outside experts, limitation of 
access to field work and research agencies, and lack of jurisdiction over files, the pro- 
jected plan was necessarily curtailed. The most serious curtailments were the omission of 
the comprehensive summary report; the dropping of certain studies and the reduction in the 
coverage of other studies; and the abandonment of the consolidation and indexing of the 
files. Fortunately, there is reason to hope that the files may yet be carec for under other 

Notwithstanding these limitations, if the files are ultimately consolidated and in- 
dexed the exploration of the NRA materials will have been sufficient to make them accessible 
and highly useful. They constitute the largest and richest single body of information 
concerning the problems and operations of industry ever assembled in any nation. 

L. C. Marshall, 
Director, Division of Review. 
9768—6 .