known. This they will not do without proper incentive. Detailed, thorough resumes on arbitrators might provide this incentive.

We are planning to provide the parties with an up-to-the-minute summary of an arbitrator's experience. We hope to be able to provide citations to published opinions (where available) and to state the industries and types of issues with which the arbitrator has dealt. Presently, the arbitrator's resume is updated only on request. In the future, it will be updated automatically as soon as he receives an appointment to hear a case.

Many new arbitrators do not have published opinions. Often, this is because the publishing labor services limit themselves to significant decisions and to those by well-known arbitrators. The FMCS is now considering the advisability of publishing opinions (for a service charge) written by the "unknowns," either on a subscription service basis or on individual request. We are presently only considering such an innovation and have yet to do a market survey of possible demands for it. This is one possibility and another is that of providing detailed copies of arbitrators' resumes covering all the arbitrators in an area, or in the whole Nation, on a fee basis. This might allow the parties more options than are now provided and keep them abreast of new men entering the field.

The Service is also contemplating the possibility of developing a national list of arbitrator "trainees"-individuals who have the background and skill required for arbitration, but lack the visibility and actual experience necessary to be chosen on an ad hoc basis. Many professional arbitrators need some assistance and would be willing to take on someone new to the profession. Arbitrator Ralph Seward is an outstanding example of an arbitrator who has launched many presently well-known arbitrators through this type of apprenticeship.

Often, however, a professional arbitrator will not know of anyone competent and willing to undergo a period of training. The Service may be able to provide a vehicle through which the professional and the trainee can be matched. We already have programs underway in St. Louis and Cleveland through which labor and management representatives select a "class" of potential arbitrators, who are then assigned on a case-by-case

basis to attend hearings and draft awards under the tutelage of experienced arbitrators. Their opinions are then evaluated and, after a specified number have been recorded, they are placed on the FMCS roster and are assured of a degree of acceptability in their home areas.

The Service is also eager to work with the Industrial Relations Research Association and other joint labor-management associations in the development of similar programs. We are also willing to check potential additions to our roster with responsible labor and management associations, as well as the bar associations, in order to gain additional perspective on the abilities of the individuals in question. In addition, we would be happy to work with civil rights groups, universities, and others to attract a greater number of minority group members to the arbitration profession. Allegations of racial, religious, and ethnic discrimination are becoming more common, and the Service has begun to receive requests for arbitrators from minority backgrounds. The increasing industrialization of the southwestern United States will see a growing demand for Spanish-speaking arbitrators.

COST. As noted in table 1, the average fee of an arbitrator on the FMCS roster is approximately $160 a day. The FMCS no longer sets a maximum fee which an arbitrator can charge. Our hope is that fees will vary with experience and acceptability, although this has not proven to be the case in many instances. We are contemplating the possibility of rating arbitrators-perhaps by years of experience and setting maximum fees by group. The aim would be simple: to give parties desiring arbitration panels a cost option so that they will have an incentive to choose less experienced arbitrators for the less complicated, less critical cases, leaving the higher priced professionals for the more complex and critical decisions. Combined with the greater availability of information on new arbitrators which we hope to provide, and an opportunity to participate in the development of new arbitration talent, the parties would be able to make sound judgments regarding the abilities of the younger, lower priced arbitrators. The total yearly cost of arbitration for a union or company should therefore be reduced.

The grading of arbitrators by the FMCS might permit a new service to develop supplying the parties with "consultation arbitration." Some parties have already begun to use arbitrators in this fashion. A "consulting arbitrator"-sometimes called a "friend of the parties"-reviews a number of grievances with management and labor at a joint conference. As many as a thousand grievances may be involved and the conference may last a week or longer. The arbitrator, having reviewed the cases beforehand, then advises the parties on how each case might come out. He may recommend a compromise settlement; he may recommend that labor "forget this one;" or that management "come up with some money." The parties need not accept the arbitrator's recommendation. The only ground rules are that any reviewed grievance which subsequently went to arbitration would be heard by another arbitrator and events of the consultation would be

inadmissible as evidence. The consulting arbitrator's fee may but need not conform to his normal daily charge. In any event, the cost should be substantially less than the cost of ad hoc arbitration for each grievance. This form of arbitration service would be appropriate in only a limited number of instances, but it may be worth experimenting with.

The labor arbitration process in the United States has progressed a great deal since 1948, when then General Counsel Peter Seitz warned the parties against regarding arbitrators as "easily expendable." But there are new developments and challenges, including the possibility of arbitrators choosing industries in which to specialize, arbitration of racial disputes in an industrial context, public sector arbitration, contract (or "interest") arbitration, and others, that will tax and perhaps change the process, and thereby the role of the FMCs, in the future.

THE MOST important criteria for admission as a journeyman in the building trades unions-and the most frequently occurring criteria specified in 17 national union constitutions studied by the Office of Labor-Management Policy Development— are work experience or competence, approval by membership, examination, good moral character, and nomination or endorsement by members. Local unions generally follow their national constitutions in this regard.

Admission and Apprenticeship in the Building Trades Unions, a forthcoming publication of the U.S. Department of Labor's Labor-Management Services Administration, reports on a survey of the journeyman admission policies and apprenticeship requirements contained in the constitutions of the 17 national craft unions affiliated with the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO and in the constitutions of 98 of their local unions. Also examined in the study were national and local apprenticeship standards under

the program of the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training.

The study concludes that national unions appear to exercise a great deal of constitutional control over local union practice as far as qualifications for admission as a journeyman are concerned, but that local unions have more autonomy in establishing their apprenticeship requirements.

National apprenticeship standards as approved by the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training are intended to serve as guides for locals establishing their own apprenticeship systems. Though the locals in many cases follow these guides, the variations show that they are under no obligation to do so in the exercise of their local autonomy.

The report also reviews recent court decisions in which Federal courts have set aside admission and apprenticeship requirements which have been discriminatory in effect and have decreed that all such requirements must be objective in character and nondiscriminatory.

in the petroleum

pipelines industry

Output per man-hour rises

as improved pipelines, additional refineries, and new uses of petroleum are developed

CAROLYN S. FEHD

PRODUCTIVITY INCREASED faster in petroleum pipeline transportation,' between 1947 and 1968, than in any other industry examined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Output per employee rose an average of 9 percent a year,2 producing a 1968 index of nearly 6%1⁄2 times its 1947 level. (See chart.)

Productivity in petroleum pipelines grew in every year but one between 1947 and 1968. Even when output dropped in recession years such as 1949 and 1958, productivity increased, though at a reduced rate. This trend was exemplified by output per nonsupervisory worker, which mounted steadily at a rate of about 11 percent a year between 1958 and 1968, the period for which this measure was available.

Factors affecting productivity

The major transporter of petroleum in the United States, the petroleum pipelines industry is one in which labor costs are relatively low and capital investment is extremely important. An example is a crude oil pipeline system, opened in 1969, which required an initial investment of nearly $140 million but needed only 50 persons to operate it. Thus, a high sustained productivity growth in this industry reflects a combination of (1) growing demand for petroleum products, (2) rapid increases in the amount of petroleum transported through pipelines, (3) large capital investment, and (4) extensive technological improvements in pipeline transportation and construction.

Trends in output and demand

Productivity growth in petroleum pipeline transportation between 1947 and 1968 is closely related to the more than fourfold increase in output that occurred. Output in this industry is measured in barrel miles. A barrel mile is one barrel

of petroleum (crude or refined) moved through one mile of pipeline.

Rapid increases in output are generally associated with increased demand for an industry's products, and the industry's capacity to fill that demand. Demand for petroleum products grew substantially between 1947 and 1968, leading to construction of new, larger refineries. Refineries near the sources of supply needed new pipelines to move refined petroleum to market areas. Refineries near markets needed new pipelines to receive the crude petroleum. As a result, pipelines were constructed and capacity more than doubled between 1950 and 1968, including a sixfold increase in capacity for refined petroleum.

The greater length of these new pipelines contributed to growth in the industry's output. The average number of miles traveled by petroleum through pipelines went up 27 percent for refined petroleum and 15 percent for crude petroleum between 1947 and 1968.

Part of the increased demand for petroleum products is attributable to population growth; however, this factor applies to industry in general. More specifically, new developments in both petroleum and petroleum-using products contributed to the heightened demand, particularly in the growing transportation industry. Motor vehicle fuel consumption nearly tripled over the period. The shift from steam to diesel engines caused railroad use of diesel fuel to nearly quadruple. Airplanes consumed 338 million barrels of jet fuel in 1968; this product hardly existed in 1947.

Demand for distillate fuel oil for heating also grew substantially, even though natural gas became the most popular heating fuel in the United States. There were almost 3 times as many oil

Carolyn S. Fehd is an economist in the Division of Industrial Prices and Price Indexes, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Capital investment

The largest year-to-year increases in petroleum pipeline productivity coincided with the opening of major new pipeline systems or the replacement of old ones by new larger-diameter pipe. Opening new lines and replacing old ones involves large capital expenditures. Productivity grew 21 percent in 1950 following the opening of the more than 1,000 mile Basin and Ozark system, and 15 percent in 1951 after the slightly shorter Mid-Valley line was completed. Productivity jumped about 19 percent again in 1965, after the $360 million Colonial line went into operation between Texas and New Jersey. Increases in subsequent years were partially accounted for by pumping stations added to this line to expand its capacity.

The new pipelines were largely responsible for the industry's productivity growth. Their larger capacity permits transportation of more petroleum with fewer employees. The largest pipe in 1969 (42 inches in diameter) had twice the capacity of the largest pipe in 1959 (30 inches in diameter).

Technological developments

Technological developments made these capacity increases possible. Pipes are now made with a higher tensile steel that can be molded into pipes with thinner walls and larger diameters. Because these pipes have less fluid friction, they need less horsepower per barrel mile to move petroleum. Consequently, fewer persons are employed.

The industry's investments in automated pumping and monitoring equipment also reduced man-hour needs. Nonautomated equipment required a man to operate almost every pumping station, while other men walked the line checking for leaks. Automated equipment allows remote control of pumping stations by microwave radio relays and computers that both regulate the flow and check for leaks. In addition, single engine airplanes were used increasingly to check for leaks by looking for oil spots or for changes in vegetation. The proportion of pumping stations operated by remote control went from less than 50 percent in 1964 to nearly 70 percent in 1968.

Employment

As a result of technological advances, increasing automation, and other factors, employment in petroleum pipelines dropped even within a context of sharply rising output. Employment in 1968 was 17,900, having declined an average of 2.4 percent a year between 1947 and 1968. Man-hours also declined steadily.

Most of this decline took place in nonsupervisory employment, which accounted for 81 percent of all petroleum pipeline employees in 1969, compared to 86 percent in 1958.

-FOOTNOTES

1 The petroleum pipeline industry as defined in this report is composed of two of the three subindustries that make up Industry Group 461, Pipelines, except Natural Gas, as defined in the 1967 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Manual. sic 4612 includes companies primarily engaged in transporting crude petroleum by pipeline, while SIC 4613 includes companies primarily engaged in transporting refined petroleum products such as gasoline and fuel oil by pipeline. The third subindustry-sic 4619, which includes companies primarily engaged in pipeline transportation of commodities other than crude petroleum, petroleum products, and natural gas-is not covered in this report because these pipelines are secondary operations in other industries.

2 A technical note describing the methods and procedures used in developing the indexes is available on request. All average annual rates of change are based on the linear least squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers.