32 BULLETIN 1230, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
It is interesting to note in Table 6 that nearly a fifth of the farmers 
interviewed (17.5 per cent) obtained enough labor from their own 
localities while 8.4 per cent made contracts each year with satis- 
factory men to return the following season. It is surprising that a 
larger number do not make such advance contracts. 
WAGES AND HOURS OF HARVEST AND THRESHING HANDS. 
The hours worked in harvest and threshing are shown in Table 8, 
and wage rates are summarized in Figures 10 to 12 and in Table IV 
of the appendix. On more than two-thirds of the farms visited the 
prevailing labor day in harvest was 10 hours, and on about one-third 
10 hours in threshing. Omitting Nebraska, the 10-hour day ob- 
tained in the harvest on 74.4 per cent of all farms visited. In the 
Dakotas and Minnesota it was the rule on 79.3 per cent of the farms. 
In threshing, the 11-hour day was more common. In Oklahoma it 
was the rule and in Nebraska and Minnesota was found on nearly 
half of the farms. In Kansas and the Dakotas, however, the 10-hour 
day was practically as common as the 11-hour day, even in threshing, 
and in North Dakota more farms were found threshing 10 hours than 
11 hours. It was pointed out in the previous bulletin on harvest-labor 
problems, and was also ascertained in the present study that nearly 
three-fourths of the transient harvest hands are industrial rather than 
agricultural workers. The distinct tendency toward a shorter work- 
ing-day in the harvest is probably in large part due to this fact. The © 
industrial laborer, accustomed to a 9 or 10 hour day during the re- 
mainder of the year, is strongly opposed to working 11 or 12 hours 
during the harvest. 
TABLE 8.—Hours worked per day by harvest and threshing crews, 1921. 
wn n 
& | Per cent of harvest crews which 5 Per cent of threshing crews — 
|S. worked each number of hours in} 5 |. which worked each number 
(Sa | 1921 % 8 | of hours in 1921. 
state. | BS EE 
. | o e . Cie 8 ~ > 2 54 
| - . <2 n n n n ~” n n 
\ae | 20) 8 lB | 98 | 88) ea) 8 8 ce cee 
[S28 | Sosa SS.) Se eee Seo eae ee 
lacs S) a ra qj || s aq q q a _ 
le | om. (Se) cs Meee Sey ae eed tee a 
| | 
Oklshomas 522/25: le S66) e266 25L A aiedt|) c.On|. cose eee 13 | 7.7 | 69.2 | 23.1 |. Sociecemee 
BRGUINAG He einae Seach 20 .| TAL | 70505) 12.3) 3.3 eee eens 19 | 36.8.| 36.8 | 26.4°}25 Rec pleee 
INGDraskase ese. eee 132 | 6.1 | 37.1 | 39.4 | 10.6 (G\) (opal 04} 23.1 | 45.2 | 16.3 | 3.9] Tike 
South Dakota....... fo eT Semencye | ae ALO Ao | rate ete aera 116 | 36.2 | 43.1 | 18.9 9 | 9 
North Dakota....... | PED lecoode | 80.3 | 13.0] 6.3 At \eooocs 123 | 46.4 | 37.4 1 Ae eosee 1.6 
Minnesota.......-..- BYf |esccing} 86; 55/410. Shel ieee see eas = 33°] 21.2 | 48.5 | 80.3 | .s o)eoooae 
ee ———_— |-—_—} | ee 
Motalaew.ste | 885 6.0 | 68.8 18.8) 5.3 ae .9| 408 | 33.8 | 42.9| 18.4] 12] 3.7 
There are wide variations in the wages paid during harvest and 
threshing, from State to State, county to county, and farm to farm. 
About one-third of the Oklahoma farmers interviewed in Woods 
and Alfalfa Counties in 1921 paid $4 a day, about 7 per cent of them — 
$4.50, and about 60 per cent $5 a day. ‘The Oklahoma counties south 
and east of those visited, as shown in Figure 12, paid lower wages. 
2.) Wadd ba bie ‘ 5 
“" eee eee eee a a a 
v0 ate SS 
Woods and Alfalfa Counties had to compete for labor with southern — 
Kansas and had to meet the Kansas rates. 
In south-central Kansas, from Sumner to Comanche Counties (as 
listed in Table 1) the $4 wage was three times as frequent as the $5 
rate, but in the remainder of the Kansas counties a $5 wage obtained 
on 8 out of every 10 farms. 
