COMPARATIVE LEVELS OF LABOR PRODUCTIVITY IN THE US AND AND THE USSR 195

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 19
• Document Creation Date: November 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 7, 1999
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: December 6, 1954
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 1 79-01093A000700100006-5
S-
US OFFICIALS ONLY
PROVISIONAL INTELLIGENCE REPORT 1,2 8
COMPARATIVE LEVELS OF LABOR PRODUCTIVITY
IN THE US AND THE USSR
1951
CIA/RR PR-88
6 December 1954
NOTICE
The data and conclusions contained in this report
do not necessarily represent the final position of
ORR and should be regarded as provisional only and
subject to revision. Comments and data which may
be available to the user are solicited.
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE
NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE
MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS, TITLE 18, USC, SECS.
793 AND 794, THE TRANSMISSION OR REVELATION OF
WHICH IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS
PROHIBITED BY LAW.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Office of Research and Reports
No - )
.
US OFFICIALS ONLY DOCUMENT
QLAsa. CHANGED TO:~,~s44
KXT REVIEW DA t:
gU TH: rr HR 7
HR ?2
00
R
@ E41-M-79
49W OW
0
EVIEWER: g~5114
100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/0
CONTENTS
Pag
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II. Comparative Levels of Labor Productivity in the US and
the USSR in the Prewar Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
III. Comparative Levels of Labor Productivity in the US and
the USSR in 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
A. Coal Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B. Petroleum Extraction . . . . 7
C. Iron Ore Mining . . . . . . . 7
D. Blast Furnace Operations . . 7
E. Timber Industry . . . . . . . 8
F. Cotton Textile Manufacturing 8
G. Metal-Fabricating and Machinery Industries . . . . . 8
H. Railroad Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendixes
Appendix A. Gaps in Intelligence . . . . . . . . . ? . . 11
Appendix B. Sources and Evaluation of Sources . . . . . 13
Tables
1. Relative Labor Productivity in Individual Industries in
the US and the USSR, Selected Years, 1936-39 . . . . . .
2. Comparison of Indexes of Labor Productivity in the US
and the USSR, 1950. . .
3. Comparison of Output per Worker In the US and the USSR,
1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Indexes of Output per Man-Hour of Direct Labor in the
US Selected Types of Equipment and Selected Years,
1947-50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Re
IA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
Page
5. Indexes of Annual output per Worker in the USSR
1950 and 1953 . . . . . . . . '
9
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/0
CIA,/RR PR-S$
(ORR Project 45.546)
X093A000700100006-5
COMPARATIVE LEY;-74S, OF;:,LA3OR PRODUCTIVITY
E; U AND THE_ USSR* .
1,
For those industries for which comparisons could be made, in-
creases in productivity.since 1939 have been somewhat more rapid
in the US than in the USSR. 'The.depress.ing effects of World War II
on Soviet productivity account to_some extent for the lower Soviet
rate. In both the.US.and the..USSR.the rates of change in produc-
tivity have been wide in range. - The greatest increases in the USSR
have been in those industries where investment was concentrated.
In the.mining industries, the considerable Soviet lag behind US
productivity. levels results, to a large extent, from natural factors
which cannot easily be overcome.
In the producer goods industries, where the rate of investment
has been.high, Soviet data indicate rapid advances toward US levels,
although few direct comparisons could be made.
In consumer goods industries, the greater lag in. Soviet produc-
tivitycould be overcome in a relatively short period of time with
investment in more productive equipment.
1. Introduction.
This report undertakes to compare thelevels of productivity in
those US and Soviet industries for which information could be ob-
tained. It should-be noted that: for several reasons the estimates
* The estimates and conclusions contained in this report. represent
the best judgment of the responsible analyst as of 15Septerrb er 1954.
CONFIDE
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
for the USSR and the US are not strictly comparable.
The US man-year is approximately 2,000.hours, the Soviet man-
year approximately 2,400 hours. Although "production workers" are
nearly the same categories in both countries, the data are not de-
tailed enough t9 permit determination of the degree of difference.
If it is true that the USSR is still overstaffed with nonproduction
workers compared with the US, "all workers" would be a more revealing
basis for comparison, but current Soviet data are lacking for this.
In any event, there has been a significant increase in the proportion
of nonproduction personnel in many US industries.
On a man-year basis, the above factors tend to make the 1951
comparison appear more favorable to the USSR. To the extent that no
increase was assumed between the 1937 output-per-worker figures and
the 1.940 base of the indexes used for projection, the Soviet current
output-per-worker estimates are understatements.
Those industries in which the USSR claims that is has made
the greatest strides in increasing productivity cannot be presented
for comparison. US data for steel works cannot be separated from
data for rolling mills which would be necessary to match Soviet
categories. In the metal-fabricating and machinery industries,
either Soviet data or US data are not available, or estimates can be
made only in monetary terms, the comparability of which is most un-
certain.
The date of information used was determined by availability.
Discrepancies from lack of comparability in dates are not believed to
be large.
II. Comparative Levels of Labor Productivity in the US and the USSR
in the Prewar Period
By 1937, the USSR had made considerable advances in labor pro-
ductivity, but output per worker still lagged far behind levels
attained in the US. Soviet output per worker as a percent of US
output per worle r is shown in Table 1.4
* T :)le 1 follows on p. 3.
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
T,ablea 1
Relative Labor Productivity in Individual Industries
in the .US. and the USSR /*
Selected,,Years, 1936-39
Industry
Unit of Measure
Years
USSR as a
Percent
of US
Coal Mining
Metric tons per year
USSR 1937
38.8
per wage earner
US 1936
Petroleum and
Metric tons per year
USSR 1938
50.6
Gas Extraction
per wage earner
US 1937
Iron Ore Mining
Metric tons per year
1937
25.8
Iron and Steel
per wage earner
Ne~ric tons of:pig
1937
46.7
Machinery
iron per year per
wage earner
Annual value per
.1936
55.7
wage earner.:
Metric tons of,sulfuric
1937
40.0
Cotton Textiles
acid per wage earner
per year
Metric tons of yarn per
USSR 1939
1.8.6
wage earner per year
US 1937
Meters of cloth per wage
earner per year
USSR 1939
38.0
US 1937
It will be observed that the relatively new, high-investment
machinery industry was closest to US levels. From 1928 to 1937,
those Soviet industries which had the greatest increases in equip-
ment per worker showed the greatest increases in labor productivity./
Footnote references in.arabic numerals. are to sources listed in
Appendix-3.
-3-
S-E-C-R-E-T:
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
In the period since 1937-39, the rates of change in productivity
levels have been wide in both. countries. Selected rates of increase
are shown in Table 2. Because of changes in Soviet statistical
practices as well as in Soviet boundaries, a continuous series in-
eluding the years 1937 through 1939 could not be constructed. In
those industries for which indexes for both countries were available,
the rates of increase were generally more rapid in the US than in
the USSR. The primary exception was pig iron smelting.
Comparison of Indexes of Labor Productivity
in the US and USSR
1950
Industry
US Output per
Man-Year
1939 - 100
Soviet Output per
Man-Year Y
1910
100
x
Coal Mining
Bituminous
98.2
123.3 a/ 4/
Anthracite
87.2 //
Pig Iron Smelting
92.0 b/ LI y
149.0
Crude Petroleum and
Natural Gasoline
173.0 b/ 1 ii
103.6
Railroad Transportation
149.9 a/ 3/
a. ?r man-hour.
b. Per man-year.
c. 1951.
Although the effects of World War II retarded improvement in the
Soviet extractive industries and in transportation, this may not
have been true of various branches of heavy malufacturing. Some of
the productivity increases attained under wartime pressure in Soviet
engineering industries probably were maintained and contributed to
the rapidity with which prewar levels of productivity in the machine
-4-
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
industry as a whole were regained and surpassed in the postwar
period. 9/
In the exception noted above, pig iron smelting, much of the
productivity increase resulted from the installation of more pro-
ductive equipment to'replace that damaged by the war. Similar
improvements were probably made in other war-damaged installations,
with consequent increments in productivity.
III. Comparative Levels of Labor Productivity in the US and the
USSR in ..51.*
In those economic sectors for which estimates of output per worker
could be made in terms of physical units, Soviet productivity in 1951
ranged from about 15 to about 73 percent of US productivity levels.
Comparisons of output per worker in the US and the U:3SR in 1951 are
shown in Table 3.4** Those industries for which reasonably valid and
comparable estimates could not be made, especially the metal-fabricating
and machinery industries, are those in which the USSR has probably
made the greatest productivity advances, and would probably be closer
to US levels.
The factors which condition the sizable variation of Soviet
levels of labor productivity compared witn US levels are described
in general terms in the following sections of this report. Avail-
able information does not permit more precise evaluation of the
relative influence of the various factors. In the mining industries,
where Soviet productivity in relatively low, the nature of the
resources exerts considerable limitations on the possibility of in-
crease in productivity. In most other sectors of the Soviet economy,
the level of productivity as well as the increases in productivity
appear to be conditioned primarily by technology and investment.
It will be observed that the industry in which Soviet productivity
is lowest in comparison with the US level is the textile industry,
in which the rate of investment has been relatively low. In 1951,
productivity in Soviet industries varied from US levels in much
the same pattern as in 1937-39.
#
1951 is the latest year for which US information was available.
Table 3 follows on p. 6.
-5-
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
Table 3
Comparison of Output per Worker in the US and USSR
1951
Industry
USSR as
Percent
US
of US a/
Coal Mining, Metric
Tons per Annum
323.0 10/
1,297.8 11/
25
P
371.9 U/
28
etroleum Extraction,
per Annum
Metric Tons of Crude Oil
per Annum
820.0 13
2,5014.711/
33
Iron Ore Mining, Metric
Tons per Annum
1,000.0 15/
2,920.3 16/
34
Blast Furnaces, Metric
Tons per Annum
1,217.0 17/
1,674.9 18
73
Cotton Textiles
Spinning, Kilograms per
Hour
W
i
2.36 L9/
20/
15.38
15
eav
ng, Meters per hour
11.4 21/
_
62.4 _/
18
Logging, Cubic Meters
Hauled per Day
1.03.23
2.36 24/
42
Rail Transportation
Thousand Cumulative Ton-
Kilometers per Annum (1953)
473.0 25/
948.1 26/
50
a. Rounded.
be CIA estimate is 323.0; RA1 estimate, 371.9.
A. Coal Mining.
Output per worker in Soviet coal mining in 1951 was 323 or
371.9 metric tons, or only about 25 to 28 percent of that in the
us.
Much of the difference between US and Soviet productivity
6 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
in coal mining results.,from natur..al?.factors. The thin seams and
deep shafts of Soviet mines and the lower proportion of strip
mining in the USSR limit the possibilities of mechanization and
therefore limit Soviet.productivity. Nevertheless, increases
above present Soviet levels' of?productivity can be made through
improved mechanization and technology. 27
B. Petroleum Extraction.
Output per worker in the Soviet petroleum extraction in-
dustry in 1951 was about B20 metric tons of crude oil extracted, or
33 percent.of the US level.
Natural factors, such as the depth of wells, are generally
more favorable in the USSR. Soviet drilling technology is good,, but
there may be much idle time. Another reason for the disparity be-
tween Soviet and US productivity is the high degree of mechanization
and automatization of operations in the-production and field gathering
phases of the petroleum industry in the US. 28 Better management
practices may also beta factor..
C. Iron Ore Mining.,
Output per worker in Soviet iron-ore mining is little more
than one-third that in the US, or about 1,000 metric tons per year.
The difference results from the operation of several factors. Only
about 30 percent of Soviet iron ore comes from open-pit mines, com-
pared with about 65 percent of US output. Open pits lend themselves
to a greater degree of mechanization, and their productivity is
usually several times higher than that of underground mines. In-
creases in Soviet productivity in terms of usable ore are also
limited by decreasing yields of usable ore from crude. 29
It has been estimated that.these natural factors cause
Soviet productivity to lag 3,0 percent behind that of the US.30
The remainder of the Soviet lag behind US levels results from
differences in technology and: the utilization of equipment.
D. Blast Furnace Operations.
Output per work -,r in 1 951 in Soviet blast furnaces was 73
percent of the US level of productivity, or 1,217 metric tons per
year.
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
This level is above previous Soviet attainments and has
resulted largely from investment in high-productivity equipment,
especially since World War II. It has been estimated that the
productivity of modern Soviet blast furnaces is comparable to
that of US operating equipment, but that Soviet staffing patterns
result in lower output per worker. 31
E. Timber Industr
Soviet output per worker in logging camps is approximately
1 cubic meter per day, or about 42 percent of that in the US. Much
of this difference results from low levels of mechanization and the
utilization of equipment. Further important reasons for the
relatively low Soviet level of output are the isolation and the
adverse climate of Soviet logging areas, both of which cause trans-
portation and labor problems. L2/
F. Cotton Textile Manufacturing.
The output per worker in the Soviet textile industry is con-
siderably below that in the US textile industry. In spinning, Soviet
productivity was in 1951 about 2.36 kilograms per hour, or 15 per-
cent of the US level; and in weaving, 11.1 meters per hour, or about
18 percent of the US level.
This lag in Soviet productivity is largely the result of
technological differences which cam be overooi'ze. The number of
spindles per spinner in the USSR approximates 170, while in the US,
the number ranges from 6 to 18 times as high. 33 In"weaving, in
the USSR, each weaver handles about 3 looms, while in the US
weavers average from 17 to 1Q0 looms each. 3
It is clear that conversion in the Soviet textile industry
to power equipment of a higher productivity could contribute to a
considerable increase in output per worker.
G. Metal-Fabricating and Machinery Industries.
The information available on this sector of Soviet industry
is not sufficient to permit detailed comparisons with US levels of
productivity. The productivity indexes available for both countries,
S -E-C -R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C:-R-E-T
as shown in Table 4 and Table's, however, suggest that the USSR is
making rapid advances toward US levels. Other information on the
output and techniques of individual-Soviet plants also indicates
increasing productivity. L VA'
Table 4
Indexes of Output per Mazi-Hour of .Direct Labor in the US,
Selected Types.of;auipment and Selected Years
,1947-50
Index
Types of Equipment
Year
1939 = 100
General Industrial Equipment,.
1.950
134.9 36/
Including:
Ball Bearings
1950
200.4 37/
Lift Trucks
1950
238.6 79/
Freight Cars
1948
115.9 39/
Metal-Forming ` Machinery
1949
112.2/
Electrical Equipment and Supplies
1947
126.4 T/
Machine Tools
150
109.7 T2/
Table 5
Indexes of Annual Output per Worker in the USSR of 1i3/
1950 and.1953
Index
Types of Equipment
Year
1940
100
Ministry of Machine and Instrument
1950
188.8
Construction
1953
255.6
Antiftiction Bearings
1950
170.7
.Automotive and Tractor Industry
1950
145.0
Oil Machinery Production
1950
200.0,
Transportation Equipment
1950
200.0
* Footnotes for Table 5 follow on p. 10.
-9-
~;~ S-E-C ~Z-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-Q-R-E-T
Table
Indexes of Annual Output per Worker in the USSR / /
1950 and 1953
a. The indexes of annual outpu per worker in t'ze U MR Tor 'the-
metal-fabricating and machinery industries were developed on the
assumption that Soviet productivity in 1950 and 1953 was still
only 66 percent of US levels of 1947.
b.,. Planned, probably not achieved.
H. Railroad Transportation.
Soviet output per worker in rail transport in terms of
cumulative revenue ton-kilometers is about 50 percent of that in the
US, or about 473 thousand tonr,kilometers per year.
The differential is almost, if not entirely, the result of
the much greater degree of mechanization of antomatization of trans-
port in the US, as well as better traffic control.
Kaganovich pointed out in his recent speech that dispatch
centralization would make it possible to establish control from a
single center over an area of 1S0 or more kilometers, and thereby
reduce the operations staff by 50 percent.
The difference in the average net weight of freight trains
also contributes to the gap between Soviet and US levels of pro-
ductivity.
$,E,C,-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
APPENDIX A
GAPS IN INTELLIGENCE
Information is lacking for comparison of labor productivity in
the Soviet chemicals industry, consumer goods industries other than
cotton textiles, nonferrous metallurgy, transportation, and con-
struction.
More detailed analysis of changes in US productivity in relation
to changes in technology and equipment would make it easier to es-
timate the changes which might have occurred in Soviet productivity
in response to similar changes in equipment and technology.
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
APPENDIX B
SOURCES AND EVALUATION OF SOURCES
1. Evaluation of Sources.
The primary sources of information on the USSR were Soviet pub-
lications and broadcasts. Information concerning factors affecting
productivity was found conveniently summarized in various CIA and
other US Government publications. Soviet Economic Growth, edited by
A. Bergson, and containing a veryy use ul chapter by. Walter Galenson
("Industrial Labor'Productivity"), was also valuable. Galenson's
later work, A Comparison of Labor Producti..vit in Soviet and American
Industr , published under the auspices of RAND in January 19 , con-
tains detailed breakdowns of Soviet productivity data for the period
from 1928 through 1939.
Information on US output per worker was taken primarily from US
government publications.
2. Sources.
Evaluations, following the classification entry and designated
"Eval.," have the following significance:
Source of Information Information
Doc. - Documentary, 1 - Confirmed by other sources
A - Completely reliable 2 - Probably true
B - Usually reliable 3 - Possibly true
C - Fairly reliable 4 - Doubtful
D - Not usually reliable 5 - Probably false
E - Not reliable 6 - Cannot be judged
F - Cannot be judged
"Documentary" refers to original documents of foreign governments
and organizations; copies or translations of such documents by a staff
officer; or information extracted from such documents by a staff
officer, all of which may carry the field evaluation "Documentary."
- 13 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
Evaluations not otherwise designated are those appearing on the
cited document; those designated "RR" are by the author of this report.
No "RR" evaluation is given when the author agrees with the evaluation
on the cited document.
1. Walter Galenson, "Industrial Labor Productivity," in Soviet
Economic Growth, Abram Berg-son, ed., 1953, p. 203. U. Eval. RR 2.
2. Ibid.., pp. 198-202.
3. CIA RR PR-68, Industrial Labor Productivity in the USSR, 9 Aug 1954.
S, US OFFICIALS ONLY.
4. Monthly Labor Review, Oct 1951, Pp. 422-424. U. Eval. Doc.
5. Ibid.
6. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1951, pp. 754, 796.
U. Eval. Doc.
Annual Survey of Manufactures, 1951, p. 30. U. Eval. Doc.
Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, p. 826. U. Eval. Doc.
7. Monthly Labor Review, Mar 1954, p. 325. U. Eval. Doc.
Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, pp. 733-4.
val. Doc.
Statistical Abstract of the United States 1946, p. 734. U. Eval. Doc.
8. Monthl Labor Review, Oct 19 1, off. cit.
9. 7,WWi , .off-21-1-
10. '
Ibid.
11. Monthly Labor Review, Mar 1954, p. 325. U. Eval. Doc.
Statistical Abstract., 1953, 22' cit.
12. Z, R- , op. cit.
13. Ibid.
14. Monthly Labor Review, Mar 1954, o . cit.
"eitat s ie Abstract, 1953, op. t.
15. - - , op. cit. -"
16. Monthly Labor Review, Mar 1954, op. cit.
tatistical Abstract, 1953, op. cit.-
17. PR-6019 op, c t.
18. Annual Survey of M nufactures, 1952, p. 29. U. Eval. Doc.
Statistical Abstract- 19 , op* cit.
19. CIA/RR M-60, OP* cit.
20. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Report No. 16, Coarse Cotton Grey
Goods, Mar 1953, pp. 50-52. U. Eval. Doc.
21. CIA/ PR-68, op. cit.
22. Bureau of Labor Stat stics, op. cit.
23. C.IA/RR PR-68, op~. cit.
24. National LumberlIanufactures Association, Lumber Industry Facts,
:L953, p. 42. U. Eval. RR 1.
- 14 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093AO00700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
25. CIA/RR PR-68, op. cit.
26. Association of American Railroads, Bureau of Railway Economics,
A Review of Railway Operations_in_1M , Special Series No. 88,
1954. U. Eval. RR 1.
ICC, Statement No. M-300, Wage Statistics of Class I Railways
in the US, 1953. U. Eval.-TM 1.
27. A. E on, op. cit., pp. 185-187.
Solid Fuels I n- tie USSR, 29 Jan 1954, pp. 18-19, 31-32, 91-145,
156-15 , US 0T. . ALS OMLY.
28. CIA/RR PR-17 (I-B), Petroleum in the Soviet Bloc; Production
and Exploration of Petroleum in the R, 13 Jun 1952., pp.
44-4
NIS 26, Supplement V. Petroleum, Oct 1952, pp. 2-35 to 2-43. S.
29. Nicholas Rodin, RAND, Project N. RM 1116, Productivity in
Soviet Iron Mining. 1890-1960, 7 Jul 1953.E Eva l. .
30. I bid.
STATSPEC 31. Bergson, op. cit., p. 223.
32. Izvestiya, 187 ar 1953. A. 1. U. Eval. RR
94, 10 Sep 1954. S US OFFICIALS ONLY.
25X1A
33. USSR Estimate, CIA FDD, U-1782, Development of the Cotton
Industry in the USSR, 26 Mar 19 2. val. RTZ 2.
US Estimates. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Report No. 16,
Coarse Cotton Grey Goods, oa. cit.
34. USSR Estimates. CIA FDD, U-1782, op. cit.
U E~ stimates. i3ureau of Labor Statistics, No. 16, 22. cit.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 58., Fine Cotton Grey Goods,
35.
36. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Trends in Man-hours Expended per
Unit of Selected Types of General Industrial Equipment,
1949-50 "Supplement.," May 1953# p. 3. U. 11;val. Doe.
37. Ibid.
- 15 -
Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
 Approved For Release 1999/09/26 : CIA-RDP79-01093A000700100006-5
S-E-C-R-E-T
38. Ibid.
39. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Manhours Expended per Car,
Selected Types of Railroad r reight Cars, 1939-, Nov 1950,
p. 5. U. v . Doc.
40. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Trends in ianhours Expended
per Unit, Selected Metal Forning Machinery, 1939-49.,
Feb 1952, p. 4. U. Eval. Doc.
41. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Trends in Manhours Expended per
Unit Electrical Equipment and Supplies.- 1939-47, Apr 1950,
p. . U. Eval. Doc.
L2. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Trends in Manhours Expended par.
Unit Selected Types of Machine Tools 19}9-O,