DOCSLIB.ORG

The Status of Labor in Puerto Rico, Alaska, Hawaii

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Status of Labor in— P u e rto Alaska Hawaii Reprint from the Monthly Labor Review Bulletin No. 1191 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR James P. Mitchell, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Ewan Clague, Commissioner Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The Status of Labor in— PUERTO RICO ALASKA HAWAII R eprint from the M onthly Labor Review Decem ber 1955 Bulletin No. 1191 January 1956 UNITED STATES DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR Jam es P. M itchell, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Ewan Clague, Commissioner Por sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C, Price 55 cents Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Contents Page A prefatory note_______________________________________________________________________________________________ vi Contributors to the special section_____________________________________________________________________________ vm Puerto Rico The labor force and level of living_____________________________________________________________________________ 1 Population and labor force______________________ 1 Industrial development____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 Improvement in economic well-being______________________________________________________________________ 5 Tables: 1. Industrial distribution of employed persons in Puerto Rico, April 1940, 1950, and 1954_____________ 3 2. Employment and unemployment in Puerto Rico, April 1950 to October 1954_______________________ 4 Charts: 1. Relationship between net migration from Puerto Rico to United States, and mainland unemployment, 1945-55_________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 2. Distribution of w^,ge earner’s family income, Puerto Rico, 1941 and 1953___________________________ 6 Migration to the mainland_____________________________________________________________________________________ & Farm labor migration_____________________________________________________________________________________ 8 City migrants_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 Dispersion of the migrants________________________________________________________________________________ 10 The Commonwealth migration program___________________________________________________________________ 10 Labor unions and labor relations_______________________________________________________________________________ 13 Union organization and membership_______________________________________________________________________ 13 Union structure and collective agreements_________________________________________________________________ 14 Arbitration and conciliation_______________________________________________________________________________ 15 Labor disputes____________________________________________________________________________________________ 15 Future course_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 16 Labor laws and their enforcement______________________________________________________________________________ 17 Minimum wages__________________________________________________________________________________________ 17 Hours of work____________________________________________________________________________________________ 17 Workmen’s compensation_________________________________________________________________________________ 18 Vacations, sick leave, and severance pay___________________________________________________________________ 18 Collective bargaining______________________________________________________________________________________ 19 Employment of women and children_______________________________________________________________________ 19 Other labor laws_______________________________________________________________________ 20 Enforcement of labor legislation___________________________________________________________________________ 20 Wage structure and minimum wages___________________________________________________________________________ 22 Wages by industry________________________________________________________________________________________ 22 Occupational wages_______________________________________________________________________________________ 25 Minimum wage legislation_________________________________________________________________________________ 25 Tables: 1. Number and average daily wages of wage and salary workers in agricultural industries, Puerto Rico, 1945-46 and 1953-54____________________________________________________________________________ 23 2. Number and average gross hourly earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries, Puerto Rico, April 1946 and April 1955__________________________________________________________________ 23 3. Minimum wage rates in Puerto Rico under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended_____________ 24 4. Minimum wage rates in Puerto Rico under the Commonwealth Minimum Wage Act_______________ 25 5. Number and straight-time average hourly wage rates of workers in selected nonprocessing occupations in manufacturing industries, by major industry groups, Puerto Rico, October 1953________________ 26 Alaska The economy and the labor force______________________________________________________________________________ 29 Physical characteristics___________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Economic characteristics__________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Population________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31 Labor force and employment______________________________________________________________________________ 33 m Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis IV Alaska— Continued Tables: Page 1. Relative differences in costs of goods, rents, and services in selected Alaskan cities and Seattle______ 30 2. Federal obligations in Alaska, fiscal years 1948-54__________________________________________________ 31 3. Alaska’s income from production and other activities, by region____________________________________ 32 4. Alaskan civilian population________________________________________________________________________ 34 5. Distribution of Alaska’s population, by military status, race, and place of residence, by regions, 1950. 34 6. Average number of workers and wages in covered employment in Alaska, 1940-54________ __________ 36 7. Seasonal variation in covered employment in Alaska, selected years_________________________________ 36 Charts: 1. Alaska’s population, total and military, monthly average, 1940-54__________________________________ 33 2. Percentage distribution of average monthly employment in Alaska, by industry division, 1940, 1943, and 1954________________________________________________________________________________________ 35 The U. S. Government as an employer_________________________________________________________________________ 37 Classified and wage-board employees______________________________________________________________________ 37 Employee attitudes_______________________________________________________________________________________ 37 Territorial pay inequalities________________________________________________________________________________ 38 Working rules_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 39 Problems of recruiting____________________________________________________________________________________ 40 Table: Paid civilian employees in executive branch of Federal Government in Alaska, by agency, compen­ sation authority, and residence, June 30, 1954_______________________________________________________ 38 Wages and working conditions_________________________________________________________________________________ 42 History of wage developments_____________________________________________________________________________ 42 Industry wage levels______________________________________________________________________________________ 43 Underlying factors________________________________________________________________________________________ 43 Typical wage scales_______________________________________________________________________________________ 44 Alaska-stateside wage differentials_________________________________________________________________________ 46 Hours of work____________________________________________________________________________________________ 46 Workinging conditions____________________________________________________________________________________ 47 Tables: 1. Average weekly earnings in employment covered by the Employment Security Act of Alaska, selected industries, 1940 and 1954________________________________________________________________________ 43 2. Wage and salary scales for selected occupations, by industry category, Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Ketchikan, May 1955___________________________________________________________________________ 45 Labor law and its administration_______________________________________________________________________________ 49 Equal rights and child labor_______________________________________________________________________________
Recommended publications
  • A Study of the Significant Relationships Between the United States and Puerto Rico Since 1898

    A Study of the Significant Relationships Between the United States and Puerto Rico Since 1898

    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1946 A Study of the Significant Relationships Between the United States and Puerto Rico Since 1898 Mary Hyacinth Adelson Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Adelson, Mary Hyacinth, "A Study of the Significant Relationships Between the United States and Puerto Rico Since 1898" (1946). Master's Theses. 26. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/26 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1946 Mary Hyacinth Adelson A STUDY OF THE SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PUERTO RICO SINCE 1898 By Sister Mary Hyacinth Adelson, O.P. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements tor the Degree ot Master ot Arts in Loyola University June 1946 TABLB OF CONTBNTS CHAPTER PAGE I. PUERTO RICO: OUR LATIN-AMERICAN POSSESSION • • • • 1 Geographical features - Acquisition of the island - Social status in 1898. II. GOVERNMENT IN PUERTO RICO • • • • • • • • • • • • 15 Military Government - Transition from Spanish regime to American control - Foraker Act - Jones Bill - Accomplishments of American occupation. III. PROGRESS IN PUERTO RICO • • • • • • • • • • • • • 35 Need for greater sanitation - Education since 1898 - Agricultural problems - Commercial re­ lations - Industrial problems - Go~ernmental reports. IV. PUERTO RICO TODAY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 66 Attitude of Puerto Ricans toward independence - Changing opinions - Administration of Tugwell.
  • District of Columbia Statehood and Voting Representation

    District of Columbia Statehood and Voting Representation

    Updated June 29, 2020 District of Columbia Statehood and Voting Representation On June 26, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives have included full statehood or more limited methods of considered and passed the Washington, D.C. Admission providing DC residents the ability to vote in congressional Act, H.R. 51. This marked the first time in 27 years a elections. Some Members of Congress have opposed these District of Columbia (DC) statehood bill was considered on legislative efforts and recommended maintaining the status the floor of the House of Representatives, and the first time quo. Past legislative proposals have generally aligned with in the history of Congress a DC statehood bill was passed one of the following five options: by either the House or the Senate. 1. a constitutional amendment to give DC residents voting representation in This In Focus discusses the political status of DC, identifies Congress; concerns regarding DC representation, describes selected issues in the statehood process, and outlines some recent 2. retrocession of the District of Columbia DC statehood or voting representation bills. It does not to Maryland; provide legal or constitutional analysis on DC statehood or 3. semi-retrocession (i.e., allowing qualified voting representation. It does not address territorial DC residents to vote in Maryland in statehood issues. For information and analysis on these and federal elections for the Maryland other issues, please refer to the CRS products listed in the congressional delegation to the House and final section. Senate); 4. statehood for the District of Columbia; District of Columbia and When ratified in 1788, the U.S.
  • Environmental Assessment for the Replacement of the Pier and Boat Ramp at the U.S

    Environmental Assessment for the Replacement of the Pier and Boat Ramp at the U.S

    Draft Environmental Assessment for the Repairs and Replacement of the Boat Ramp and Pier at the US Border Patrol Air and Marine Facility, Ponce, Puerto Rico Environmental Assessment for the Replacement of the Pier and Boat Ramp at the U.S. Border Patrol & Air and Marine Facility, Ponce, Puerto Rico U.S. Customs and Border Protection February 2019 Draft Environmental Assessment for the Repairs and Replacement of the Boat Ramp and Pier at the US Border Patrol Air and Marine Facility, Ponce, Puerto Rico Environmental Assessment for the Replacement of the Pier and Boat Ramp at the U.S. Border Patrol & Air and Marine Facility, Ponce, Puerto Rico Environmental Assessment for the Replacement of the Pier and Boat Ramp at the U.S. Border Patrol & Air and Marine Facility, Ponce, Puerto Rico Lead Agency: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Proposed Action: The demolition and removal of the temporary structure, removal of the original pier, construction of a new pier, and replacement of the boat ramp at 41 Bonaire Street in the municipality of Ponce, Puerto Rico. The replacement boat ramp would be constructed in the same location as the existing boat ramp, and the pier would be constructed south of the Ponce Marine Unit facility. For Further Information: Joseph Zidron Real Estate and Environmental Branch Chief Border Patrol & Air and Marine Program Management Office 24000 Avila Road, Suite 5020 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 [email protected] Date: February 2019 Abstract: CBP proposes to remove the original concrete pier, demolish and remove the temporary structure, construct a new pier, replace the existing boat ramp, and continue operation and maintenance at its Ponce Marine Unit facility at 41 Bonaire Street, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
  • Ruling America's Colonies: the Insular Cases Juan R

    Ruling America's Colonies: the Insular Cases Juan R

    YALE LAW & POLICY REVIEW Ruling America's Colonies: The Insular Cases Juan R. Torruella* INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 58 I. THE HISTORICAL BACKDROP TO THE INSULAR CASES..................................-59 11. THE INSULAR CASES ARE DECIDED ......................................... 65 III. LIFE AFTER THE INSULAR CASES.......................... .................. 74 A. Colonialism 1o ......................................................... 74 B. The Grinding Stone Keeps Grinding........... ....... ......................... 74 C. The Jones Act of 1917, U.S. Citizenship, and President Taft ................. 75 D. The Jones Act of 1917, U.S. Citizenship, and ChiefJustice Taft ............ 77 E. Local Self-Government v. Colonial Status...........................79 IV. WHY THE UNITED STATES-PUERTO Rico RELATIONSHIP IS COLONIAL...... 81 A. The PoliticalManifestations of Puerto Rico's Colonial Relationship.......82 B. The Economic Manifestationsof Puerto Rico's ColonialRelationship.....82 C. The Cultural Manifestationsof Puerto Rico's Colonial Relationship.......89 V. THE COLONIAL STATUS OF PUERTO Rico Is UNAUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND CONTRAVENES THE LAW OF THE LAND AS MANIFESTED IN BINDING TREATIES ENTERED INTO BY THE UNITED STATES ............................................................. 92 CONCLUSION .................................................................... 94 * Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The substance of this Article was presented in
  • Testimony Medicaid and CHIP in the U.S. Territories

    Testimony Medicaid and CHIP in the U.S. Territories

    Statement of Anne L. Schwartz, PhD Executive Director Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission Before the Health Subcommittee Committee on Energy and Commerce U.S. House of Representatives March 17, 2021 i Summary Medicaid and CHIP play a vital role in providing access to health services for low-income individuals in the five U.S. territories: American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The territories face similar issues to those in the states: populations with significant health care needs, an insufficient number of providers, and constraints on local resources. With some exceptions, they operate under similar federal rules and are subject to oversight by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. However, the financing structure for Medicaid in the territories differs from state programs in two key respects. First, territorial Medicaid programs are constrained by an annual ceiling on federal financial participation, referred to as the Section 1108 cap or allotment (§1108(g) of the Social Security Act). Territories receive a set amount of federal funding each year regardless of changes in enrollment and use of services. In comparison, states receive federal matching funds for each state dollar spent with no cap. Second, the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) is statutorily set at 55 percent rather than being based on per capita income. If it were set using the state formula, the matching rate for all five territories would be significantly higher, and for most, would likely be the maximum of 83 percent. These two policies have resulted in chronic underfunding of Medicaid in the territories, requiring Congress to step in at multiple points to provide additional resources.
  • Excavations at Maruca, a Preceramic Site in Southern Puerto Rico

    Excavations at Maruca, a Preceramic Site in Southern Puerto Rico

    EXCAVATIONS AT MARUCA, A PRECERAMIC SITE IN SOUTHERN PUERTO RICO Miguel Rodríguez ABSTRACT A recent set of radiocarbon dated shows that the Maruca site, a preceramic site located in the southern coastal plains of Puerto Rico, was inhabited between 5,000 and 3,000 B.P. bearing the earliest dates for human habitation in Puerto Rico. Also the discovery in the site of possible postmolds, lithic and shell workshop areas and at least eleven human burials strongly indicate the possibility of a permanent habitation site. RESUME Recientes fechados indican una antigüedad entre 5,000 a 3000 años antes de del presente para Maruca, una comunidad Arcaica en la costa sur de Puerto Rico. Estos son al momento los fechados más antiguos para la vida humana en Puerto Rico. El descubrimiento de socos, de posible talleres líticos, de áreas procesamiento de moluscos y por lo menos once (11) enterramientos humanos sugieren la posibilidad de que Maruca sea un lugar habitation con cierta permanence. KEY WORDS: Human Remains, Marjuca Site, Preceramic Workshop. INTRODUCTION During the 1980s archaeological research in Puerto Rico focused on long term multidisciplinary projects in early ceramic sites such as Sorcé/La Hueca, Maisabel and Punta Candelera. This research significantly expanded our knowledge of the life ways and adaptive strategies of Cedrosan and Huecan Saladoid cultures. Although the interest in these early ceramic cultures has not declined, it seems that during the 1990s, archaeological research began to develop other areas of interest. With the discovery of new preceramic sites of the Archaic age found during construction projects, the attention of specialists has again been focused on the first in habitants of Puerto Rico.
  • Puerto Rico, Colonialism In

    Puerto Rico, Colonialism In

    University at Albany, State University of New York Scholars Archive Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship Studies 2005 Puerto Rico, Colonialism In Pedro Caban University at Albany, State Univeristy of New York, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/lacs_fac_scholar Part of the Latin American Studies Commons Recommended Citation Caban, Pedro, "Puerto Rico, Colonialism In" (2005). Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship. 19. https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/lacs_fac_scholar/19 This Encyclopedia Entry is brought to you for free and open access by the Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies at Scholars Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholars Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 516 PUERTO RICO, COLONIALISM IN PUERTO RICO, COLONIALISM IN. Puerto Rico They automatically became subjects of the United States has been a colonial possession of the United States since without any constitutionally protected rights. Despite the 1898. What makes Puerto Rico a colony? The simple an­ humiliation of being denied any involvement in fateful swer is that its people lack sovereignty and are denied the decisions in Paris, most Puerto Ricans welcomed U.S. fundamental right to freely govern themselves. The U.S. sovereignty, believing that under the presumed enlight­ Congress exercises unrestricted and unilateral powers over ened tutelage of the United States their long history of Puerto Rico, although the residents of Puerto Rico do not colonial rule would soon come to an end.
  • Hunger and Poverty in Puerto Rico

    Hunger and Poverty in Puerto Rico

    FACT SHEET MARCH 2019 Hunger and Poverty in Puerto Rico What’s the Problem? Even before Hurricanes Irma and Maria struck Puerto Rico in 2017, hunger and food insecurity were much more common among Puerto Ricans than among their fellow U.S. citizens in the 50 states. Before the hurricanes, 1.5 million Puerto Ricans were food insecure. The child food insecurity rate was 56 percent—nearly triple the average for the rest of the United States.1 Hurricane Maria was a Category 4 hurricane that caused extensive destruction. As of October 10, 2017, the Federal Emergency Management Agency estimated that only 15 per- cent of the island’s electricity had been restored2—leaving 85 percent of the island without electricity. The island was finally able to restore power for every resident in August 2018.3 For one year, families had limited opportunities of earning money for their basic needs such as food, water, and shelter—let alone the additional resources needed to rebuild their homes, farms, and businesses. This contributed to the majority of the island experiencing food insecurity right after the hurricanes. Unfortunately, the island still faces ongoing challenges to help residents overcome hunger. Recovery has been slow, in part, because assistance from FEMA to repair bridges and roads, clean debris, and rebuild homes has been difficult for some parts of the island, and for every resident, to access. Various iStock photo 5 PUERTO RICANS ARE FAR MORE LIKELY TO BE FOOD INSECURE barriers contribute to this, including residents not having U.S. Puerto Rico Rate Puerto Rico Rate the records or deeds for their homes.4 Rate (October 2017) (Today) Before the Hurricanes 11.8% 30-60%* N/A The Background After the Hurricanes 11.8% At least 85%** 38.3%*** In 1898, Puerto Rico became a permanent U.S.
  • The Status of Puerto Rico Revisited: Does the Current U.S.-Puerto Rico Relationship Uphold International Law?

    The Status of Puerto Rico Revisited: Does the Current U.S.-Puerto Rico Relationship Uphold International Law?

    Fordham International Law Journal Volume 17, Issue 4 1993 Article 5 The Status of Puerto Rico Revisited: Does the Current U.S.-Puerto Rico Relationship Uphold International Law? Dorian A. Shaw∗ ∗ Copyright c 1993 by the authors. Fordham International Law Journal is produced by The Berke- ley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj The Status of Puerto Rico Revisited: Does the Current U.S.-Puerto Rico Relationship Uphold International Law? Dorian A. Shaw Abstract This Note argues that the establishment of the Commonwealth government fails to fulfill the requirements of a free associated territory as detailed in United Nations General Assembly Resolu- tions 742 (“Resolution 742”) and 1541 (“Resolution 1541”) because the Puerto Rico Constitution remains subject to the Territorial Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Territorial Clause gives the U.S. Congress plenary authority to govern territories of the United States. Part I of this Note introduces the factual and legal background of Puerto Rico’s hybrid legal status. Part II describes the different interpretations regarding the validity of Puerto Rico’s status in international law. Part III argues that the present status of Puerto Rico requires that the U.S. Congress enact legislation that allows a binding plebiscite to define the status of Puerto Rico in a manner consistent with U.N. General Assembly Resolutions 742 and 1541. Finally, this Note concludes that the U.S. Congress should act to prevent the continuation of a system of government where unequal treatment of U.S. citizens in Puerto Rico is allowed under the U.S.
  • PUERTO RICO Information on How Statehood Would Potentially Affect Selected Federal Programs and Revenue Sources

    PUERTO RICO Information on How Statehood Would Potentially Affect Selected Federal Programs and Revenue Sources

    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters March 2014 PUERTO RICO Information on How Statehood Would Potentially Affect Selected Federal Programs and Revenue Sources GAO-14-31 March 2014 PUERTO RICO Information on How Statehood Would P otentially Affect S elected Federal Programs and Revenue Highlights of GAO-14-31, a report to Sources congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Puerto Rico has access to many Of the 29 federal programs GAO reviewed (which accounted for about 86 federal programs, and is subject to percent of federal program spending for states or their residents in fiscal year certain federal tax laws; however, for 2010), statehood would likely affect 11 programs. For 3 other programs, while some programs and for some aspects the programs themselves would likely not change under statehood, eligibility of tax law, Puerto Rico is treated determinations for these programs could be affected indirectly by changes that differently than the states. Options for could occur to benefits in other programs. Statehood would not likely affect the Puerto Rico’s political status include 15 remaining programs. See figure below. statehood. GAO was asked to review potential fiscal implications for federal programs if Puerto Rico were to become a state. This report examines potential changes to selected federal programs and related spending changes, and changes to selected federal revenue sources that would be expected should Puerto Rico become a state. This report also discusses economic and fiscal factors under statehood that could influence changes in spending and revenues. To evaluate potential changes to selected federal programs and revenue sources, GAO reviewed federal laws and regulations and interviewed federal and Puerto Rico agency officials.
  • "Puerto Rico Industrial Development Act" [188-1942]

    "Puerto Rico Industrial Development Act" [188-1942]

    “Puerto Rico Industrial Development Act” Act No. 188 of May 11, 1942 as amended (Contains amendments incorporated by: Act No. 11 of November 20, 1942 Act No. 325 of May 15, 1945 Act No. 285 of April 5, 1946 Act No. 99 of April 18, 1952 Act No. 134 of April 23, 1952 Act No. 456 of May, 14, 1952 Act No. 6 of July 24, 1952 Act No. 1 of February 23, 1954 Act No. 80 of June 20, 1955 Act No. 27 of June 9, 1956 Act No. 77 of June 19, 1957 Act No. 86 of June 22, 1957 Act No. 47 of June 18, 1958 Act No. 15 of May 1, 1973 Act No. 203 of December 29, 1997 Act No. 123 of June 7, 1999 Act No. 163 of December 14, 2001 Act No. 293 of December 26, 2006) An Act creating the Puerto Rico Industrial Development Company; providing for its powers and duties; authorizing it to conduct research and experimentation, make plans and designs, acquire, operate and improve industrial and commercial enterprises; authorizing it to make loans and encourage the development and fullest usage of the economic and human resources of Puerto Rico, form and hold interests in subsidiary corporations and. enterprises; authorizing it to accept grants, borrow money, and issue bonds on such terms and conditions at is may decide; transferring all rights and interest of The People of Puerto Rico in the Puerto Rico Cement Corporation to it; making an appropriation, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Legislature of Puerto Rico: Section 1.
  • Puerto Ricans in Orlando and Central Florida

    Puerto Ricans in Orlando and Central Florida

    Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños Hunter College (CUNY) Policy rePort | VOLUMe 1 | No. 1 |sPriNg 2006 Puerto Ricans in Orlando and Central Florida Jorge Duany Félix V. Matos-roDríguez Puerto Ricans in Orlando and Central Florida Jorge Duany Department of sociology and Anthropology University of Puerto rico, río Piedras This report was sponsored by the Orlando Regional Chamber of Commerce and Orange County Government. Félix V. Matos-roDríguez centro de estudios Puertorriqueños Hunter college, city University of New york Contents Summary of Main Findings . 2 Acknowledgments . 5 Introduction . 5 Changing Settlement Patterns . 8 Historical Background . 12 Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños A Contemporary Socioeconomic Portrait . 15 Hunter College (CUNY) Political Incorporation . 22 695 Park Avenue, Room E-1429 New York, New York 10021 Cultural Identities . 24 212.772.5686 Toward a New Research Agenda . 26 www.centropr.org Conclusion . 29 Notes . 30 References . 33 Biographical Sketches . 39 ...2... ...1... SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS • Between 1990 and 2000, the city of orlando experienced the largest increase (142 percent) in the number of Puerto ricans • During the 1990s, Florida displaced New Jersey as the second largest stateside. today, orlando is the fourth-largest metropolitan concentration of Puerto ricans in the U.s. mainland (after New york). area for Puerto ricans in the United states, after New york city, Florida’s Puerto rican population grew from slightly more than 2 percent Philadelphia, and chicago. of all stateside Puerto ricans in 1960 to more than 14 percent in the year • Puerto rican migration to central Florida is not highly selective by sex. 2000. Furthermore, the number of Puerto rican residents in Florida island-born and mainland-born residents have very similar proportions rose from 482,027 in 2000 to 571,755 persons in 2003.