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