Category: Harvard
For five Harvard economics Ph.D. candidates this posting provides information about their respective academic backgrounds, the six subjects of their general examinations along with the names of the examiners, the subject of their special subject, thesis subject and advisor(s) (where available).
________________________________________
DIVISION OF HISTORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEGREE OF PH.D.
1909-10
Notice of hour and place will be sent out three days in advance of each examination.
The hour will ordinarily be 4 p.m
Melvin Thomas Copeland.
Special Examination in Economics, Friday, December 14, 1909.
General Examination passed May 13, 1908.
Committee: Professors Ripley (chairman), Hart, Carver, Sprague, and Munro.
Academic History: Bowdoin College, 1902-06; Harvard Graduate School, 1906-09; A.B. (Bowdoin), 1906; A. M. (Harvard) 1907. Austin Teaching Fellow (Harvard), 1908-09; Instructor, 1909-10.
Special Subject: Economic History of the United States.
Thesis Subject: “The Organization of the Cotton Manufacturing Industry in the United States.” (With Professors Taussig and Gay.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Gay, Ripley, and Sprague.
William Jackman.
Special Examination in Economics, Monday, May 9, 1910.
General Examination passed Wednesday, May 22, 1907.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Channing, Ripley, Sprague, and Cross.
Academic History: University of Toronto, 1892-96; University of Pennsylvania, 1899-1900; Harvard Graduate School, 1905-07; A.B. (Toronto), 1896; A. M. (ibid.) 1900. Assistant Professor of Economics, University of Vermont, 1901-.
Special Subject: Modern Economic History of England.
Thesis Subject: “The Development of Transportation in Modern England before the Steam Railway Era.” (With Professor Gay.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Gay, Sprague, and Cross.
Eliot Jones.
General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 19, 1910.
Committee: Professors Ripley (chairman), Hart, Carver, Gay, and Sprague.
Academic History: Vanderbilt University, 1900-07; Harvard Graduate School, 1907-10; A.B. (Vanderbilt), 1906; A. M. (Harvard) 1908. Austin Teaching Fellow (Harvard), 1909-10.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Statistics. 4. Money, Banking, and Industrial Organization. 5. Transportation and Foreign Commerce. 6. History of American Institutions.
Special Subject: Transportation.
Thesis Subject: “The Anthracite Coal Trade.” (With Professor Ripley.)
George Milton Janes.
General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 20, 1910.
Committee: Professors Ripley (chairman), Emerton, Gay, Carver, and Sprague.
Academic History: Bangor Theological Seminary, 1896-99; Dartmouth College, 1899-1901; Harvard Divinity School, 1901-02; 1906-08; Middlebury College, 1902-03; Harvard Graduate School, 1908-10; B.Litt. (Dartmouth), 1901; S.T.B. (Harvard) 1902; A.B. (Middlebury) 1903.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History to 1750. 3. Economic History since 1750. 4. Sociology and Social Reform. 5. Transportation and Industrial Organization. 6. Church History since the Council of Constance.
Special Subject: Economic History of the United States.
Thesis Subject: “Canal and Railroad in New York.” (With Professor Gay.)
Charles Edward Persons.
Special Examination in Economics, Monday, May 23, 1910.
General Examination passed February 23, 1909.
Committee: Professors Ripley (chairman), Gay, Carver, and Sprague.
Academic History: Cornell College (Iowa), 1898-1903; Harvard Graduate School, 1904-05, 1906-09; A.B. (Cornell College), 1903; A. M. (Harvard) 1905. Instructor in Economics, Wellesley College, 1908-09; Preceptor, Princeton University, 1909-.
Special Subject: Industrial History of the United States.
Thesis Subject: “The History of the Ten-Hour Law in Massachusetts.” (With Professor Taussig.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Taussig, Bullock, and Ripley.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1909-10”.
Image Source: Widener Library, 1915. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. Digital ID: cph 3c14486
Harvard students first experienced Joseph Schumpeter’s teaching in 1927-28 in an advanced theory course (Economics 15: Modern Schools of Economic Thought) previously taught by Allyn Young [examination questions for Economics 15 for 1921-27 have been posted earlier] and in a money and banking course. For both courses this posting provides the reading period assignments, course enrollments and final examination questions from the end of the second term. The examination questions for the first term of Economics 15 for 1927-28 are posted here. The examination questions for the first term of Economics 38 for 1927-28 are posted here.
_________________________________________
Course Enrollments
[Economics] 15. Professor J. A. Schumpeter (University of Bonn).—Modern Schools of Economic Thought.
Total 16: 10 Graduates, 1 Senior, 1 Junior, 4 Radcliffe.
[Economics] 38. Professor J. A. Schumpeter (University of Bonn).— Principles of Money and of Banking.
Total 25: 19 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 2 Radcliffe, 1 Other.
Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1927-1928, p. 75.
_________________________________________
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
(Inter-Departmental Correspondence Sheet)
Cambridge, Massachusetts
December 6, 1927
Dear Burbank:
The question of the assignment of readings for the reading period is, of course, no easy one in the case of an audience which is so little homogeneous as mine. In both courses I have told them that what I really want is to advise them individually according to everyone’s own needs, and that I wish them to call in my consultation hours before breaking up. With this proviso, I have recommended for those who do not wish for such individual advice, and at the same time still want to take the course for credit, the following:
First, as to Money and Banking:
The looking over of the two volumes of the Senate Commission of Gold and Silver Inquiry on European Currency and Finance, serial 9, volume I and [volume] II, Washington, 1925, (not that they will read it through, all of them, but they will get out of them a quantity of ideas of the European currency situation which, after all, is both theoretically and practically important for them to know).
Second, for the course Economics 15:
I have told them that we do not want to make them read, but to make them think, and I have suggested that they should take one of the three following books and read it critically, and follow up problems or arguments which may strike them in doing so:
Allyn Young, Economic Problems
Hawtrey, The Economic Problem
Sir Alfred Mond, Industry and Politics.
Cordially yours,
[signed]
Josef Schumpeter
Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics. Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950 (UAV.349.10), Box 7.
_________________________________________
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
SPRING READING PERIOD—1928
Economics 15
- Students who have had a modicum of mathematical training are recommended to work up carefully either:
A. L. Bowley: Mathematical Groundwork of Economics (1924).
or
A. Cournot: Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth, ed. of 1927. - Others:
A. C. Pigou: Economics of Welfare. [1932 edition]
or The Colwyn Report.
[Report of the Committee on National Debt and Taxation (1927); Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on National Debt and Taxation. Vol. I and II. (1927)]
Economics 38
- W. R. Burgess: The Reserve Banks and the Money Market, 1927.
- Kirsch and Elkins: Central Banks, 1928.
- W. S. Jevons: Investigations in Currency and Finance, ed. 1909.
[1884 edition]
or
3a) Report of the Royal Comm. On Indian Currency and Finance, 1926.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1). Box 2, Folder “Economics, 1927-28”.
_________________________________________
1927-28
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 15
Modern Schools of Economic Thought
- Write as fully as possible on any one of the following subjects:
- What is the meaning and importance of the doctrine of maximum satisfaction and its relation to the concept of economic equilibrium?
- What do you think of the view that recurrent depressions are due to the inability of earnings to flow promptly into the hands of consumers?
- Describe the principle underlying Professor Irving Fisher’s method of measuring marginal utility. What do you think of it?
- Answer briefly two out of the four following questions:
- Professor H. L. Moore’s statistical demand curve for pig iron slopes up instead of down. How do you account for this?
- What is an indifference curve in the sense of Pareto as distinguished from the sense in which Edgeworth uses that concept?
- Discuss Professor Edgeworth’s proposition that equilibrium is indeterminate in the case of bilateral monopoly.
- What is the difference between physical and value marginal product? Which seems to you more significant, and why?
Final. 1928.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Examination Papers 1928 (HUC 7000.28, 70 of 284). Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, Church History,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science. June, 1928.
_________________________________________
1927-28
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 38
Principles of Money and of Banking
I
Discuss ONE of the following topics, devoting at least half your time to this part of the paper.
- A capital levy is among the measures recommended for the restoration of a disorganized currency. State the conditions under which this measure may be expected to improve the situation.
- The Bank of France used to defend its gold reserve by redeeming its notes in five-franc silver pieces and charging a premium if redemption in gold was insisted upon. How does this method differ from the method of protecting the gold reserve by means of an increase in the discount rate?
II
Discuss TWO of the following questions more briefly.
- It has been stated that open market operations cannot stave off credit inflation because of their comparatively insignificant amount. (Lehfeldt.) Is this correct?
- What is meant by saying that savings do not create deposits?
- The chances are that gold production will slow down in the next decade. Are we to expect a general depression on that account? (Cassel.)
- During the first three months of the current year there was a net outflow of more than $90,000,000 of gold from this country. How do you interpret this fact and what consequences do you expect therefrom?
Final. 1928.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Examination Papers 1928 (HUC 7000.28, 70 of 284). Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, Church History,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science. June, 1928.
Image source: Joseph A. Schumpeter at table with books, photograph, ca. 1930. Detail from image posted at Harvard University Archives. Joseph Schumpeter Papers. HUGBS 276.90p (38).
In this 1960 memo to the executive committee of Harvard’s economics department, the polyglot economic historian, Alexander Gerschenkron, provided his written blessing for, indeed he initiated, the abolishment of a foreign language requirement for the graduate study of economics. Since the copy of the mimeographed memo was found in John Kenneth Galbraith’s papers, it is fitting to add his brief assent together with his comment on Gerschenkron’s obiter dicta with respect to math requirements.
______________________________
Memo to the Executive Committee
from Alexander Gerschenkron
(March 19, 1959)
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Mass.
CONFIDENTIAL
March 19, 1959
TO: Members of the Executive Committee
I should like to give you an advance warning of my intention to propose, at the next regular meeting of the department, a radical change in our language requirements.
I have administered our language examinations for about ten years. You may recall that in the first year of operation I proposed, and the department accepted, a considerable reform of the way in which language examinations were given. The duration of the examination was extended from one hour to two hours, and the length of the material to be translated was more than doubled. At the same time much more difficult passages began to be selected; and finally, the examination was graded much more rigorously than it had been before. At that time I had the hope that it would be possible to stimulate through the language examination an increased interest in, and a fuller mastery of, foreign languages. It is perfectly clear to me now that this hope has not materialized. It is true that the students had to work harder in order to pass the examination, but it is equally true that whatever knowledge was acquired was allowed to fall into disrepair following the examination. The long run effect, which after all is the only thing that matters, has been zero point zero.
At the same time it is perfectly clear that the opportunity cost of preparing for the language examination is extremely high. Our students are a hard-working lot and we keep them very busy. I wonder very seriously whether it can be justified to force our students to cut out of a working day of some 10 or 11 hours and hour or two in order to master a language which in all likelihood will never be used by the student in his professional career. To some extent our language requirements are in the nature of an anachronism and we might do well to admit the fact frankly. At the turn of the century reading knowledge of French and German may have been the necessary prerequisite of any well rounded economics education. This is certainly not so now. The center of gravity shifted and at the same time the interest in the history of doctrines has greatly diminished. I am fully aware of the general benefit inherent in the study of languages. But I believe that we have to think in terms of professional proficiency. I doubt that the foreign language requirement could be justified under any circumstances, least of all if one consider how negligible its effect has been.
I plan therefore to make the following motion: All foreign language requirements for Ph.D. as well as for M.A. are abolished beginning with the class entering in September 1959. An examination in mathematics becomes an absolute requirement from which there is no dispensation and to which accordingly every candidate is subject. The Chairman should appoint a committee to discuss in which way, if any, the standards for the examination in mathematics should be improved.
Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Alexander Gerschenkron
Chairman, Language Requirements
AG/jw
______________________________
John Kenneth Galbraith’s Reply to the Memo
March 23, 1959
Professor Alexander Gerschenkron
Littauer M-7
Dear Alex:
I approve your proposal on languages with some reservations about the mathematics examination. I do not question your goal. But would it not be better — and better for secondary and college preparation — to put the mathematics requirement firmly in the requirements for admission?
Yours faithfully,
J.K. Galbraith
Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. Papers of John Kenneth Galbraith. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526, Folder “Department of Economics, Executive Committee 5/22/56-11/29/60”.
Image Source: Alexander Gerschenkron in the Harvard Class Album, 1952.
The course outlines and reading lists (very extensive!) for the two-term sequence “Trade Unionism and Collective Bargaining” and “Public Policy and Labor” taught by John Dunlop at Harvard in 1947-48 have been posted earlier along with figures for the respective course enrollments. Following the memorial minute from Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences next, the transcriptions of the final examination questions for each of these courses from the Harvard University Archives will be found.
_____________________________
At a Meeting of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences May 18, 2004, the following Minute was placed upon the records.
John Thomas Dunlop
John Dunlop was an extraordinary labor economist, dean, colleague, and mentor to students and practitioners in the world of labor. He was extraordinary because he was more than an economist, and because he was driven by a moral vision of what economists and academics should do to make the world better.
John saw the world through his own eyes and experience. You might think that all good social scientists see the world in that way, but in fact economics provides a particular set of glasses that exaggerates some parts of reality and hides others. Some of us need these glasses to see. John did not put on those glasses. John could see without them.
He looked at data and made his own judgment. In doing so, he helped set a foundation stone of labor economics which is deeply empirical. John’s first major academic publication on real wages over the business cycle forced Keynes to admit that the General Theory was wrong on its assessment of this issue: Real wages fall in recessions not in booms, contrary to simple marginal productivity analysis.
Throughout his career, Dunlop followed his own vision. His book Wage Determination Under Trade Unions modeled unions as optimizing organizations. He engaged in a famous debate with Arthur Ross about treating unions as economic or political organizations. Later, John decided that the optimizing model was not a useful path to follow, and reversed direction. His book Industrial Relations Systems sought to develop a broader perspective on how labor relations fit into economics. In the 1980s, Dunlop carped at economists for failing to see what he could see in the labor market. Much of the economics profession might be marching off to “natural rate of unemployment” or to firm-specific human capital, but not John. More often than not, he was right.
Dunlop approached his work – from advising presidents and cabinet officials, to telling academics about the real world and telling practitioners about academic theory and testing of propositions – with one goal: to help solve problems. A classic example was John’s response to a 1978 request from Murray Finley, President of the Mens Garment Workers Union, to explore what might be done to increase the productivity of American apparel workers. John visited dozens of plants, investigated automation, and met with all the practitioners: academic design engineers, industry production experts, suit manufacturers, textile firms, a chemical firm, the Union, the apparel retailers, and the Federal Department of Commerce. His vast knowledge and curiosity, combined with his ability to convince people that it was in their best interest to work together, led to the formation of the non-profit firm [TC]2, designed to help the U.S. apparel industry survive, and later to the formation of the Harvard Center for Textile and Apparel Research. This was just one of John’s many extra-curricular activities that enriched both the University and the world.
His legacy in the University is immense. His legacy to labor economics is immense, both for his ideas and for his being the intellectual “father” and “grandfather” of many labor economists. His legacy in the world is immense. The moral principle that guided him – that academics should use their knowledge and skill to help solve problems faced by real people, by workers and firms, and governments – represents Harvard at its best in dealing with the world outside of academia. His legacy in labor economics and economics more broadly – to look at the world with your own eyes and experience, with direct knowledge of the institutions and practitioners – represents social science at its best in interpreting and analyzing the world.
Those of us who were close to John miss his curmudgeonly criticisms and vast knowledge. We will keep alive his legacy of applying our knowledge to the world to help understand and solve social problems. This is the greatest memorial the University can give to him.
Respectfully submitted,
Frederick Abernathy
Caroline M. Hoxby
Lawrence Katz
Richard B. Freeman, Chair
Source: Harvard Gazette, September 16, 2004.
_____________________________
Final Examination
Trade Unionism and Collective Bargaining
Associate Professor John Dunlop
1947-48
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 81a
- Develop what you consider to be the differences, if any, in the functions and role of trade unions in capitalist, socialist, and communist societies.
- The Webbs, in their “Industrial Democracy,” stated that “to competition between overlapping unions is to be attributed nine-tenths of the ineffectiveness of the trade union world.”
A recent writer in the American Economic Review states:
“Leadership rivalry is the lifeblood of unionism in the United States. After all, the American trade union is pragmatic to the core. It is neutral in ideology and weak in political purpose. In the absence of competition for the allegiance of workers, there would be little else to ensure its militance and guarantee its role as an agency of protest. Moreover, rivalry has been the most effective stimulus to organize the unorganized. Let the reader ask himself if the labor movement would be as far along as it is today, in terms of total membership, had there not occurred the split between the A.F.L. and the C.I.O. in the 1930’s.”
In the light of your reading of trade union history, which of these statements do you consider more accurate? - “From the point of view of the whole economy, monopoly, in business or in labor, will always result in a misallocation of resources and will usually result also in an under-utilization of resources. Business monopolies do not raise the ‘general’ rate of profits and labor monopolies do not raise the ‘general’ rate of wages. Both raise the incomes of minorities, reducing the income of the rest by more than they themselves can gain through their ‘restrictive policies’.”-Professor Fritz Machlup.
Does this statement constitute an accurate appraisal of the impact of a trade union on the labor market? - The policies developed by the parties in collective bargaining in regard to (a) seniority in layoffs and (b) methods of wage payment have been significantly shaped by the economic environment. Illustrate this generalization by reference to specific industries.
- Case Background:
The Committeeman in Zone 1 of the Hyatt Bearings Division several times requested that additional time studies of particular operations be made following failure to adjust certain disputes. He further requested that he be permitted to be present at such studies on the ground that Paragraph 79 of the Agreement should permit him this privilege.Paragraph 79:
“When a dispute arises regarding standards established or changed by the Management, the complaint should be taken up with the foreman. If the dispute is not settled by the foreman, the committeeman for that district may, upon reporting to the foreman of the department involved, examine the job and the foreman or the time study man will furnish him with all the facts of the case. If there is still a dispute after the committeeman has completed his examination, the foreman or the time study man will then reexamine the operations in detail with the committeeman on the job. If the matter is not adjusted at this stage, it may be further appealed as provided in the Grievance Procedure.
Position of the Union:
While the Union did not cite a specific instance of failure of Management to abide by Paragraph 79, it was indicated that the grievance had been filed following a disagreement on an actual case. The Union claimed that Management has often refused to make additional time studies on disputed operations, and has not permitted the committeeman to be present in instances when studies have been made as part of a re-examination of a job following a dispute. The Union states that it has appealed this case to the Umpire in order to “get the correct interpretation of Paragraph 79.”Position of the Company:
Management takes the position that Paragraph 79 of the Agreement permits the committeeman to “re-examine the operations” or to be present with the foreman or the time study man “to review the operations.” Management maintains that nothing in Paragraph 79 can be construed as giving the committeeman the right to be present when actual time studies are being made.- Does the contract require the Company to permit a representative of the Union to be present when time studies are made?
- Would the Company be wise, as a matter of policy, to ask the Union to have a representative present?
Final. January, 1948.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final examinations, 1853-2001. HUC 7000.28, Box 15 of 284. Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions,…Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science. January, 1948.
_____________________________
Final Examination
Public Policy and Labor
Associate Professor John Dunlop
1947-48
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 81b
- In Alternative to Serfdom Professor John Maurice Clark develops the problems of a modern community in terms of the conflict between competition and monopoly and between progress and security.
- What are the principal aspects of this conflict?
- What resolution of these problems does Professor Clark suggest?
- How do you appraise his position?
- Discuss the economic implications of a chronic state of “over full employment”, i.e., a situation in which the demand for labor exceeds the supply of labor, in terms of the probably effects upon
- the absolute and relative money wage rates
- the allocation of the labor force
- the size and composition of the labor force
- Contrast the National Labor Relations Act with the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, with respect to the following
- the right of the employer to speak to employees in favor of or against a labor organization
- the right of employees to go out on strike
- the rights of non-union employees.
- The following case arose under the unemployment compensation system:
“The claimant, 72 years old and a union carpenter for 27 years, was referred to a non-union job. He refused to take the job because it would violate the rules of his union. Union rules provided for a fine for working on a non-union job. The Ohio statute disqualifies an individual who ‘has refused to accept an offer of work for which he is reasonably fitted’ and further provides that ‘…no individual otherwise qualified to receive benefits shall lose the right to benefits by reason of a refusal to accept new work if: as a condition of being so employed he would be required to join a company union, or to resign from or refrain from joining any bona fide labor organization, or would be denied the right to retain any membership in and observe the lawful rules of any such organization’,”- State concisely the issue involved in this case.
- How would you decide the case, indicating the basis for your decision?
- In the provision for old age in the community, what are your views concerning the relative roles of a federal program a unilateral company pension system, a system of pensions negotiated in collective bargaining, and individual savings?
Final. May, 1948.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final examinations, 1853-2001. HUC 7000.28, Box 15 of 284. Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Examinations. Papers Printed for Final Examinations in History, History of Religions, … , Economics, … , Military Science, Naval Science. May, 1948.
Image Source: Museum of the City of New York, Cigar Box Label “Union Workers”.
Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economics Programs Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Stanford Texas Undergraduate Vanderbilt Wisconsin Yale
Size distribution of graduate and undergraduate programs in economics. U.S., 1963-65
These are the last two statistical tables from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of leading economics departments in the U.S. intended to provide orientation for departmental chairpersons in salary negotiations. Today’s posting gives the numbers of undergraduate and graduate majors reported by 29 departments.
Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67. Those first five reports from The Cartel provide distributions of median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.
Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.
____________________
TABLE 7c
Graduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions:
| 1963-64 | 1964-65 | 1965-66 (Estimate) |
|
| 300 and over | 2 | 2 |
1 |
|
200-299 |
0 | 0 | 2 |
| 150-199 | 3 | 4 |
5 |
|
100-149 |
6 | 5 | 6 |
| 80-99 | 4 | 4 |
3 |
|
60-79 |
5 | 7 | 5 |
| 40-59 | 6 | 4 |
4 |
|
20-39 |
2 | 1 | 0 |
| 1-19 | 1 | 1 |
1 |
| Number of departments reporting: |
29 |
28 |
27 |
| Total number of students: |
2,963 |
3,057 |
3,118 |
____________________
TABLE 8C
Undergraduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions
| 1963-64 | 1964-65 | |
| 300 and over | 4 |
4 |
|
250-299 |
1 | 1 |
| 200-249 | 3 |
2 |
|
150-199 |
4 | 6 |
| 100-149 | 8 |
5 |
|
80-99 |
1 | 1 |
| 60-79 | 2 |
1 |
|
40-59 |
2 | 3 |
| 20-39 | 1 |
1 |
|
1-19 |
1 |
1 |
| Number of departments reporting: |
27 |
25 |
| Total number of students: |
4,550 |
4,312 |
Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.
Image Source: quick meme website.
The following course outline and syllabus come from the second term of a two term course in collective bargaining and public policy offered by John Dunlop at Harvard in 1947-48. Material for the first term was posted earlier. The final examination questions for both terms will be posted soon.
______________________________
Course Enrollment
[Economics] 81b. Associate Professor Dunlop.–Public Policy and Labor (Sp).
Total 147: 2 Graduates, 85 Seniors, 37 Juniors, 11 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 11 Radcliffe.
Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1947-1948, p. 90.
______________________________
Economics 81b
Spring 1948
LABOR AND PUBLIC POLICY
- Introduction
- General Setting of the Problems of the Course
- Governmental Attitude toward Labor and Employer Organizations
- Organized Labor’s Relation to Government
- Issues of Public Policy
- The Extent of “Public” Encouragement to Organization
- The Regulation of Labor Organizations
- The Machinery for the Settlement of Disputes
- The Treatment of the Parties to a Dispute
- The Status of Labor Organizations under the Anti-trust Laws
- Minimum Wage and Hour Regulation
- The Risk of Unemployment
- Old Age Insurance
- The Risks of Accident and Sickness
- The Process of “Public Policy” Formulation
- The Determination of Community Values
- The Operation of “Pressure Groups”
- The Role of the Press
- The Legislative Sphere
- The Influence of Administrative Agencies; Board Members, Administrators, and Staff
______________________________
SOME FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF PUBLIC POLICY
- Does the process of collective bargaining between labor organizations and employers give assurance that the “public interest” will be best served? How do you evaluate the possibility of collective bargaining resulting in continuing warfare or “combination” against the “public interest”?
- “The threat of strike and lockout, and probably some work stoppages, are vital to the functioning of collective bargaining.” Do you agree? Do you have “vigorous” or “healthy” labor and management organizations where there have been no work stoppages for long periods? How can the “public” be made to understand the necessity for the social costs of voluntarism?
- Do you think it is possible to prohibit strikes by law? May not workers always bring equal pressure by turning out a smaller quantity of work? How do you distinguish between the right to strike and the right of an individual to refuse to work? Are the concepts identical? Are “wildcat strikes” and similar spontaneous walkouts, in part at least, a desirable social safety valve?
- Is it possible to have private collective bargaining when bargaining units become in effect National in scope as in the railroad and steel industries? Do you think the parties in such cases are likely to reach settlements without governmental intervention? Is it possible to keep the Government out of such disputes? If not, do you think it follows that the “government” is required to adopt some explicit wage policy in peacetime?
- The Department of Labor was established to “promote the interests of wage earners.” The mediation and conciliation functions of the Government were located in the Department of Labor? Do you believe employers had any valid objections to this arrangement? What should be the relation of the two assistant Secretaries of Labor, “representing” the AFL and CIO, to the administration of the Department of Labor?
- For the purposes of “public concern” with the “internal affairs” of a labor organization, would you regard a union more like a “private club” or a “public utility”? Does the presence of a Governmental guarantee of the right to organize affect the answer to this question?
- How is “public policy” in fact formulated? Contrast, for example, the mechanics used in formulating: the old age insurance program, the “cooling-off period” of the War Labor Disputes Act, the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, the Fair Labor Standards Act.
- What mechanism would you propose to formulate working compromises between agriculture and organized labor? Consider the interest of agriculture in industrial employment for “surplus population” and in cheap prices of industrial goods; also consider the interest of organized labor in food prices and in extending the area of organization.
- Where would you draw the line between “management personnel” and “labor” for the purpose of determining the rights to self-organization and protection from “unfair labor practices”? How would you constructively treat the issue of the “organization of supervisors” from the point of view of management? From the point of view of the labor movement?
- Do you think it possible to extend gradually the area of labor-management agreement fast enough to preclude the necessity of legislation to prescribe in detail the rights and duties of both sides? How would you speed up the process of agreement? Consider this question in the light of American experience in contrast to that in England, Sweden, Germany and Australia.
- How would you define the “legitimate” interests of management in the organization of its employees? What criteria would you establish to draw lines between cases of coercion on the one hand and the exercise or the expression of the “legitimate” interests of management you have defined?
- How would you define the area on which you would allow an employer as a matter of public policy, to deal with an employee as an individual rather than through the collective bargaining agent? Does the union have the right to insist that individual merit increases be “negotiated or bargained” with the union? May the company install a pension plan without “bargaining”?
- Can the Federal Government avoid having a “wage policy”? Are labor and management organized along lines which would facilitate the formulation of a national wage policy? What are the dimensions or ingredients you would suggest for a national wage policy—the rate of change of the wage level, wage rate differentials, etc.?
- Under a system of unemployment compensations how would you define “availability for work”? Should men on strike be allowed benefits? May one refuse to accept a lower wage rate and still draw benefits? How far away must a job be before refusal of the job is a bar to benefits?
- What different concepts of the labor force, employment and unemployment do you regard as essential to public policy-making?
- What procedures would you recommend to formulate public policy on a health program?
______________________________
Economics 81b
LABOR AND PUBLIC POLICY
I. INTRODUCTION
- General Setting of the Problems of the Course
- Conflicts of interests in a political democracy
- The meaning of “public policy formation”
- Fundamental issues of public policy in this field
Required Reading
Sumner H. Slichter, Trade Unions in a Free Society
Twentieth Century Fund, Trends in Collective Bargaining. A Summary of Recent Experience, 1945, pp. 1-33; 188-211; 215-50. (Students who have had Economics 81a need only read pp. 215-50.)
Henry C. Simons, “Some Reflections on Syndicalism”, Journal of Political Economy, March 1944, pp. 1-25. (To be read by students who have not taken Economics 81a)
Frederick H. Harbison and Robert Dubin, Patterns of Union—Management Relations, pp. 3-178.
Richard A. Lester, “Reflections on the ‘Labor Monopoly’ Issue”, Journal of Political Economy, December 1947, pp. 513-36.
Recommended Reading
Élie Halévy, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism, translated by Mary Morris, 1928, pp. 89-150; 249-310.
Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, Chapter 8, “Business Principles in Law and Politics”.
Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942.
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. 2, pp. 158-61; 177-91; (Alfred A. Knopf, 1945 edition)
Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Industrial Democracy.
- Governmental Attitude toward Labor and Employer Organizations
- The evolution of public policy.
- The present status of both types of organization
- The role of the Department of Labor
Required Reading
Charles O. Gregory, Labor and the Law, pp. 13-82.
Pendleton Herring, The Politics of Democracy, 1940, pp. 368-90.
D. O. Bowman, Public Control of Labor Relations, 1942, pp. 3-57.
John Lombardi, Labor’s Voice in the Cabinet, A History of the Department of Labor from its Origin to 1921, pp. 15-95.
Recommended Reading
Felix Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Holmes and the Supreme Court, Chapter 1, “Property and Society”, pp. 13-48.
Edward S. Corwin, The Twilight of the Supreme Court, pp. 52-101.
Leo Wolman, “The Turning Point in American Labor Policy,” Political Science Quarterly, June 1940, pp. 161-75.
H. Samuels, The Law of Trade Unions.
Calvert Magruder, “A Half Century of Legal Influence upon the Development of Collective Bargaining”, Harvard Law Review, May 1937, pp. 1071-1117.
James M. Landis and Marcus Manoff, Cases on Labor Law, (1942 edition) Chapter 1, “Historical Introduction”, pp. 1-40.
Charles O. Gregory and Malcolm Sharp, Social Change and Labor Law.
U. S. Department of Labor, Division of Labor Standards, Federal Labor Laws and Agencies, Bulletin 79.
Frances Perkins, The Roosevelt I Knew, pp. 182- 336.
II. ISSUES OF PUBLIC POLICY
- The Extent of “Public” Encouragement to Organization
- The Wagner Act and the NLRB
- The Labor Management Relations Act, 1947
- Selected problems of policy determination
Required Reading
The Labor Management Relations Act, 1947 and The Conference Report
Herbert Unterberger and Max Malin, The Taft-Hartley Act in Operation
E. E. Witte, “Labor-Management Relations under the Taft-Hartley Act”, Harvard Business Review, Autumn 1947, pp. 554-75.
Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., “The Open Window and the Open Door”, California Law Review, Vol. 351, pp. 336-51.
C. O. Gregory, Labor and the Law, pp. 223-52; 289-33.
Carl Raushenbush and Emanuel Stein, Labor Cases and Materials, 1941, pp. 286-370.
D. O. Dowman, Public Control of Labor Relations, pp. 133-186.
Recommended Reading
La Follette Committee Reports
Lewis L. Lorwin and Arthur Warbnig, Labor Relations Boards, 1935.
E. Merrick Dodd, “The Supreme Court and Organized Labor, 1941-45”, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 58, pp. 1018-71.
Joseph Rosenfarb, The National Labor Policy and How It Works.
National Labor Relations Board, Government’s Protection of Labor’s Right to Organize, Bulletin No. 1.
E. B. McNatt, “The Appropriate Bargaining Unit Problem”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1941.
Robert R. R. Brooks, Unions of their Own Choosing, 1939.
William E. Mosher and J. Donald Kingsley, Public Personnel Administration, 1941, pp. 558-85.
David Ziskind, One Thousand Strikes of Government Employees
Gordon R. Clapp, Employee Relations in the Public Service, A Report Submitted to the Civil Service Assembly, 1942.
National Labor Relations Board, Legislative History of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947.
Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. The New Labor Law
Herbert O. Eby, The Labor Relations Act in the Courts.
Paul Herzog, “Labor Relations Acts of the States”, Annals of the Academy of Political and Social Sciences, November 1942.
Report and Findings of a Panel of the National War Labor Board in Certain Disputes Involving Supervisors.
Harold W. Metz and M. Jacobstein, National Labor Policy, 1947.
National Labor Relations Board, Annual Reports
- The Regulation of Labor Organizations
Required Reading
Florence Peterson, American Labor Unions, 1945, pp. 84-126.
Recommended Reading
Joel Seidman, Union Rights and Union Duties, 1943.
Neil Chamberlin, “Judicial Process in Labor Unions”, Brooklyn Law Review, 1940
Henry V. Rothschild, “Government Regulation of Trade Unions in Great Britain”, Columbia Law Review, 1939.
American Civil Liberties Union, Democracy in Trade Unions
Report on Certain Aspects of Labor Union Responsibility and Control
O. de. R. Foenander, Industrial Regulations in Australia, pp. 169-216.
Clyde W. Sumners, “The Admission Policies of Labor Unions”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Nov. 1946.
Ludwig Teller, A Labor Policy for America, A National Labor Code
- The Machinery for the Settlement of Disputes
- Types and characteristics of disputes related to methods of settlement
- Mediation, conciliation, and arbitration
- The railroad machinery
- Wartime machinery for settlement of disputes
- The fact-finding procedure
- Recent legislative proposals
Required Reading
C. O. Gregory, Labor and the Law, 378-412; 413-46.
U. S. Department of Labor, Division of Labor Standards, Arbitration of Grievances, Bulletin 82 (scan only)
Report of the Commission on Industrial Relations in Great Britain, 1938, pp. 1-25.
Twentieth Century Fund, How Collective Bargaining Works, pp. 318-80.
Paul Fisher, “The National War Labor Board and Postwar Industrial Relation”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1945, pp. 483-523.
The President’s National Labor-Management Conference, Summary and Committee Reports, (Division of Labor Standards Bulletin 77) pp. 1-71.
Report of the Governor’s Labor Management Committee, Massachusetts, 1947
Recommended Reading
T. R. Fisher, Industrial Disputes and Federal Legislation, pp. 141-53; 154-86.
Kurt Braun, The Settlement of Industrial Disputes, 1944.
Howard S. Kaltenborn, Governmental Adjustment of Labor Disputes, 1943.
Frances Kellor, Arbitration in Action, 1941.
J. J. Robbins, The Government of Labor Relations in Sweden, 1942.
J. Henry Richardson, Industrial Relations in Great Britain, 1938.
Herbert R. Northrup, Labor Adjustment Machinery.
Ducksoo Chang, British Methods of Industrial Peace.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 287, The War Labor Board Report of the National Defense Mediation Board.
The Reports and Proceedings of the Labor Management Conference
The Fact-Finding Reports: General Motors, Oil Companies, and the Meat Packing Companies
John T. Dunlop, “Fact-Finding in Labor Disputes”, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, May 1946, pp. 64-74.
B. M. Stuart and Walter J. Couper, Fact-Finding in Industrial Disputes.
Ludwig Teller, A Labor Policy for America, A National Labor Code.
Clarence M. Updegraff and Whitley P. McCoy, Arbitration in Labor Disputes.
Herbert R. Northrup, “The Railway Labor Act and Railway Labor Disputes in Wartime”, American Economic Review, June 1946, pp. 324-43.
C E. D. Research and Policy Committee, Collective Bargaining: How to Make it More Effective, Feb. 1947.
- The Treatment of the Parties to a Dispute
- The Injunction
- Boycott and Picketing
- The Use of Seizure
Required Reading
C. O. Gregory, Labor and the Law, pp. 83-199; 334-77.
Harry A. Millis and R. E. Montgomery, Organized Labor, pp. 613-29; 629-51.
Recommended Reading
Carl Raushenbush and Emanuel Stein, Labor Cases and Materials, 1941, pp. 5-213.
Samuel Yellen, American Labor Struggles
Felix Frankfurter and N. Greene, The Labor Injunction
- The Status of Labor Organizations under the Anti-trust Laws
Required Reading
C. O. Gregory, Labor and the Law, pp. 200-22; 253-88.
C. D. Edwards, “Public Policy toward Restraints of Trade by Labor Unions: An Economic Appraisal”, American Economic Review, Supplement, March 1942, pp. 432-48.
E. E. Witte, “A Critique of Mr. Arnolds Proposals”, American Economic Review, Supplement, March 1942, pp. 449-59.
Recommended Reading
Thurman Arnold, The Bottlenecks of Business, Chapter XIX
A. T. Mason, Organized Labor and the Law
Carl Rauschenbush and Emanuel Stein, Labor Cases and Materials, 1941, p. 46-62.
- Minimum Wage and Hour Regulation
- Conditions Leading to Legislation
- Economic Principles and Consequences
- Administrative Agencies and Procedures
- Problems of Administration and Policy-Making
Required Reading
The Fair Labor Standards Act
Harry Millis and R.E. Montgomery, Labor’s Progress and Some Basic Labor Problems, pp. 324-56.
Recommended Reading
Richard B. Morris, Government and Labor in Early America
Dorothy Sells, British Wage Boards
Paul H. Douglas and J. Hochman, “Fair Labor Standards Act,” Political Science Quarterly, LIII (491-515); LIV (29-55)
Marion Cahill, Shorter Hours, A History of the Movement since the Civil War
E. Merrick Dodd, “The Supreme Court and Fair Labor Standards, 1941-45,” Harvard Law Review, February 1946, pp. 321-73.
E. M. Burns, Wages and the State
E. J. Riches, “Conflicts of Principles in Wage Regulation in New Zealand”, Economica, August 1938.
Orme W. Phelps, The Legislative Background of the Fair Labor Standards Act
Attorney General’s Committee on Administrative Procedure, Administrative Procedure in Government Agencies.
Wage and Hour Division, Annual Reports.
Bureau of National Affairs, Wage and Hour Manual, Cumulative Edition 1944-45
US. Department of Labor, Maximum Hour Regulation in France, 1936-40
U. S. Department of Labor, Wartime Regulation of Hours of Labor and Labor Supply in Great Britain.
Bureau of National Affairs, Your Working Time Problem under the Wage and Hour Law.
- Labor Supply and Unemployment
- Characteristics of the Labor Market
- Definitions and Measurement of Employment, Labor Force and Unemployment
- Employment Exchanges
- Unemployment Compensation
Required Reading
E. Wight Bakke, The Unemployed Worker, A Study of the Task of Making a Living Without a Job, pp. 1-34.
S. H. Slichter, “The Impact of the Social Security Program upon Mobility and Enterprise,” American Economic Review, March 1940.
Lloyd G. Reynolds, “The Supply of Labor to the Firm”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1946, pp. 390-411.
Louis J. Ducoff and M. S. Hagood, Labor Force Definitions and Measurements, Current Issues, Social Security Bulletin, pp. 1-35.
Recommended Reading
Dewey Anderson and Percey E. Davidson, Recent Occupational Trends in American Labor
G. E. Bigge, “Strength and Weakness of our Unemployment Compensation Program,” Social Security Bulletin, February 1944, pp. 5-11.
W. S. Woytinsky, Three Aspects of Labor Dynamics
Joan Robinson, “Mobility of Labor” in Essays in the Theory of Employment
A. C. Pigou, The Economics of Welfare, pp. 488-511, 656-70.
Elizabeth Gilboy, Applicants for War Relief, pp. 31-46; 69-83; 98-122
W. S. Woytinsky, “Controversial Aspects of Unemployment Estimates in the United States,” Review of Economic Statistics, May 1941, pp. 68-77.
Henry H. Collins, Jr., America’s Own Refugees, pp. 89-180; 249-67
E. Wight Bakke, Citizens without Work, A Study of the Effects of Unemployment upon the Workers’ Social Relations and Practices, pp. 71-106, 283-306.
W. H. Beveridge, “An Analysis of Unemployment”, Economica, November 1936, pp. 357-86.
Harry Malisoff, “The Emergence of Unemployment Compensation,” Political Science Quarterly, 1939 (3 parts)
Harrison Clark, Swedish Unemployment Policy—1914-1940
Atkinson, R. C., Adencrantz, L. C., and Deming, B., Public Employment Service in the United States, Chs. 1 and 3.
Breckinridge, Sophonisba, Public Welfare Administration in the United States, Selected Documents (2nd edition)
Abbott, Edith, Public Assistance, Vol. 1, American Principles and Policies
Pilgrim Trust, Men without Work, Report
Huntington, Emily, Doors to Jobs
Matscheck, W., and Atkinson, R. C., Problems and Procedures of Unemployment Compensation in the States
White, R. C., Administering Unemployment Compensation
Kulp, A. C., Social Insurance Coordination, An Analysis of British and German Organization
F. N. Ball, Statute Law Relating to Employment, 1946 (English experience)
8,9 Security Against Accident, Ill Health, and Old Age
Required Reading
Harry Millis and Royal E. Montgomery, Labor’s Risks and Social Insurance, pp. 187-270; 353-420.
E. E. Witte, “Postwar Social Security” in Postwar Economic Problems, edited by S. E. Harris, pp. 263-77.
Bernhard J. Stern, Medicine in Industry, pp. 17-48 and 133-56.
“Union Health and Welfare Plans”, Monthly Labor Review, February 1947, pp. 191-214
Recommended Reading
J. Douglas Brown, “Economic Problems in the Provision of Security against the Life Hazards of Workers, American Economic Review, Supplement, March 1940
Twentieth Century Fund, More Security for Old Age, pp. 1-18; 69-86.
Seymour E. Harris, Economics of Social Security, pp. 161-279
Barbara Armstrong, The Health Insurance Doctor, pp 1-98
Heinrich, H. W., Industrial Accident Prevention
National Research Council, Committee on Work in Industry, Fatigue of Workers
Federal Security Agency, Social Security Board, Annual Reports
Abraham Epstein, Insecurity—A Challenge to America
Stewart, Maxwell S., Social Security
Davis, Michael M., America Organizes Medicine
William Beveridge, Full Employment in a Free Society
E. Wight Bakke, “America and the Beveridge Plan,” Yale Review, June 1944, pp. 642-57.
Social Security Bulletin, “A Basic Minimum Program of Social Security,” January 1944, pp. 3-12.
Franz Goldmann, Public Medical Care, Principles and Problems
Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, 79th Congress 1st Session, Issues in Social Security.
Verne Zimmer, “New Developments in Workmen’s Compensation”, Social Security Bulletin October 1944.
THE PROCESS OF “PUBLIC POLICY” FORMULATION
(The reading in this Section is to be distributed throughout the term rather than concentrated at the end of the course. The study of the Process of “Public Policy” Formulation must be interwoven with the actual problems of public policy.)
Required Reading
Neil W. Chamberlain, The Union Challenge to Management Control, (Pages to be assigned)
R. A. Gordon, Business Leadership in the Large Corporation, pp. 67-188.
Peter F. Drucker, Concept of the Corporation, pp. 1-114 (Optional)
Paul H. Appleby, Big Democracy, 1-144.
Walter Gellhorn, Federal Administrative Proceedings, pp. 1-40
Fritz Marx, Editor, Elements of Public Administration, pp. 314-338, 365-80
John M. Gaus, Reflections on Public Administration, (Optional)
Dorwin Cartwright, “Public Opinion Polls and Democratic Leadership”, Journal of Social Issues, May, 1946, pp. 3-12.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1893-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 4, Folder “1947-48 (2 of 2)”.
Image Source: John Dunlop in Harvard Class Album 1950.
Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale
Economics Professors’ Salaries by Rank (6), 1965-66
This is the sixth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. In the previous five tables The Cartel reports median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. In this posting we have Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.
Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67.
Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.
Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.
____________________
TABLE 6c
Salaries of Economists (9-10 month, academic year, 1965-66) in 27 of the 29 Departments of Economics (The Cartel):
N = Number of Persons
| MID POINT OF RANGE | PROFESSORS | ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS | ASSISTANT PROFESSORS |
| 26,750/and over | 2 | ||
| 26,500 | 0 | ||
| 26,000 | 2 | ||
| 25,500 | 1 | ||
| 25,000 | 8 | ||
| 24,500 | 0 | ||
| 24,000 | 4 | ||
| 23,500 | 2 | ||
| 23,000 | 7 | ||
| 22,500 | 2 | ||
| 22,000 | 12 | ||
| 21,500 | 7 | ||
| 21,000 | 10 | ||
| 20,500 | 5 | ||
| 2,0000 | 22 | ||
| 19,500 | 10 | ||
| 19,000 | 13 | ||
| 18,500 | 11 | ||
| 18,000 | 24 | ||
| 17,500 | 8 | ||
| 17,000 | 19 | ||
| 16,500 | 23 | ||
| 16,000 | 27 | ||
| 15,500 | 20 | 1 | 0 |
| 15,000 | 21 | 2 | 1 |
| 14,500 | 14 | 2 | 0 |
| 14,000 | 22 | 10 | 0 |
| 13,500 | 10 | 12 | 0 |
| 13,000 | 10 | 13 | 1 |
| 12,500 | 7 | 18 | 2 |
| 12,000 | 6 | 20 | 1 |
| 11,500 | 3 | 21 | 7 |
| 11,000 | 3 | 13 | 9 |
| 10,500 | 0 | 18 | 18 |
| 10,000 | 0 | 9 | 35 |
| 9,750 | 1 | 9 | |
| 9,500 | 2 | 28 | |
| 9,250 | 1 | 11 | |
| 9,000 | 0 | 24 | |
| 8,750 | 0 | 8 | |
| 8,500 | 0 | 13 | |
| 8,250 | 2 | ||
| 8,000 | 15 | ||
| 7,750 | 1 | ||
| N=335 | N=143 | N=185 |
Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.
Image Source: “Me and my partner” by C. J. Taylor on cover of Punch, December 25, 1889. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.
Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale
Expected New PhD Starting Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (5), 1966/67
This is the fifth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Table 5c give figures for the anticipated range of salaries for “freshly completed PhD’s” for the coming academic year (1966-67) across the departments reporting. Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors. The previous posting has the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.
The copy of this table in the Johns Hopkins University archives has a useful handwritten addition. It is noted that the median lower bound of the range is $9,250 and the median higher bound of the range is $10,000. Thus one might say a measure of the range of the anticipated, as of December 1965), 9-10 month salary offers for “freshly completed PhDs” for 1966-67 was ($9,250 — $10,000), though such a range was not necessarily anticipated by any one of the 27 departments responding to that question.
Compared to Table 4c, this table tells us that the range of offers for “freshly completed PhDs” was anticipated to move up $250 about a 2.67% nominal increase from 1965-66 to 1966-67.
Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.
____________________
TABLE 5c
Departments Expect to Have to Offer to Get
“Freshly Completed PhD’s for Next Year, 1966-67
|
MID-POINT OF RANGE |
FROM | TO |
| 13,000 | 0 |
0 |
|
12,500 |
0 | 0 |
| 12,000 | 0 |
1 |
|
11,500 |
0 | 0 |
| 11,000 | 0 |
6 |
|
10,500 |
0 | 7 |
| 10,000 | 5 |
6 |
|
9,750 |
0 | 0 |
| 9,500 | 8 |
4 |
|
9,250 |
1 | 0 |
| 9,000 | 8 |
2 |
|
8,750 |
1 | 0 |
| 8,500 | 1 |
1 |
|
8,250 |
0 | 0 |
| 8,000 | 3 |
0 |
|
N= |
27 |
27 |
Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.
Image Source: Caption under the drawing: “No class of labor feels the grip of grinding monopoly more than our underpaid, overworked ball-players.” “The base-ball Laocoon” by L. M. Glackens. Cover of Punch, May 14, 1913. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.
Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale
New PhD Starting Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (4), 1964/5-1965/66
This is the fourth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Table 4c give figures for the distribution of salaries for “freshly completed PhD’s” across the departments reporting. Previous postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors. The next posting has the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.
Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.
______________________
TABLE 4c
Entering Salaries of “Freshly Completed PhD’s” of New Staff Members
in the Fall of 1965-66 1964-65
| MINIMUM | MEDIAN | MAXIMUM | ||||
| MID-POINT OF RANGE | 1965-66 | 1964-65 | 1965-66 | 1964-65 | 1965-66 |
1964-65 |
|
Over 10,999 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 10,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
1 |
|
10,000 |
2 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 0 |
| 9,750 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
0 |
|
9,500 |
4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| 9,250 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
3 |
|
9,000 |
3 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 6 |
| 8,750 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 0 |
1 |
|
8,500 |
4 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 5 |
| 8,250 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
1 |
|
8,000 |
2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 7,750 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 |
|
7,500 |
0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 7,250 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0 |
|
N= |
21 | 21 | 21 | 25 | 20 | 23 |
| Median | $9,000 | $8,500 | $9,250 | $8,750 | $9,750 |
$9,000 |
|
Mean |
$8,952 | $8,583 | $9,190 | $8,820 | $9,600 |
$8,913 |
Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.