-227-


ach month was credited against his assessment based on 1/3 of 1%o of the
*olurme of *sales each month. Adjustments were mac'.e with the manufacturers
,t the end of each month. The system was equitable to all manufacturers,
nd operated perfectly. Assessments were collected each month and com-
iliance on assessments was had almost one hundred per cent. At the end of
he first fiscal year, the Code Authority had a surplus of $41,000 of
which amount $30,0(00 was returned to the members on a basis of the amount
ach contributed. For the following year, the rate was reduced to of 1%.

 The work of administering the code was divided between two Directors
nd an Executive Secretary. One Director had charge of the labor provis-
ons, the other Director of trade practices and planning and research; the
executive Secretary supervised the office staff, the statistics and label
distribution. Each Director was familiar with the work of the other, and
he work was ul.'Lned so that all of the work was thoroughly coordinated.

 The greatest difficulty encountered in securing compliance was due to
he overlapping of our code with industries who made handbags in addition to
their products, which came under other codes. They competed strongly with
he manufacturers who made handbags exclusively. An important ruling on
his matter was made by Col. Brady, which definitely placed all handbags made
f any kind or nature, under our code. However, we had difficulty in making
their Code Authorities accept this ruling. The matter was adjusted satisfac-
orily just at the time the codes were declared invalid. Ve also found diff-
culty in enforcement, because a branch of the industry making the very cheap-
st grade of handbags had been allowed to become a division of the luggage
ode. This branch of the industry seriously interfered with the manufactur-
rs making low price goods under our code, because labor conditions were
ore favorable under the luggage code, they preferred to remain under this
ode. We made application to have this branch separated from the luggage
ode, and put under our code, so that the industry would not be divided into
uo codes according to price goods. The transfer of this group from the
luggage code to the ladies' handbag code, had just been accomplished when
he codes were declared invalid.

 Under labor compliance, our chief difficulties were encountered with
nily a few manufacturers who tried to chisel on the hours and wages. Some
f these violators vere ordered to pay restitution to their workers, mount-
ng to many thousands of dollars. "In some of the most flagrant cases, monies
me the workers for restitution were ready to be paid when the codes were
olded.

 We can definitely state that 75% of the industry immediately accepted
he code as being the law of the industry, and that they complied with it
ally.. The remaining 25% soon. learned that-chiseling on the code, to gain
monetary advantage, did not pay. We are certain that in another six months
rider the codo, the industry would have had very nearly 100o compliance with
hie code.

 The strong features of the NBA. administration under codes was the gen-
ral respect the manufacturers had for any law or ruling that had the back-
ng of the government. The manufacturers accepted the labor provisions and
rade practice rules as benefits in that theyr were protected from their com-
etitors who were restrained from indulging in harmful practices. At first,
here was uncertainty as to the ability of the Code Directors to control the