[Transcriber's Note: Underscores are used as delimiters for _italics_]
THE
EXPERT MAID-SERVANT
BY
CHRISTINE TERHUNE HERRICK
AUTHOR OF "HOUSEKEEPING MADE EASY"
"WHAT TO EAT AND HOW TO SERVE IT"
"CRADLE AND NURSERY" ETC.
NEW YORK AND LONDON
HARPER & BROTHERS
PUBLISHERS :: 1904
Copyright, 1904, by Harper & Brothers.
_All rights reserved._
Published October, 1904.
TO
A FRIEND IN NEED
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. Engaging the Maid 1
II. When the Maid Arrives 19
III. Mistress and Maid 36
IV. The Duties of the Maid-of-all-work 52
V. Duties of Two or More Servants 70
VI. Certain Problems of Service 88
VII. General Suggestions 104
VIII. A Recapitulation of Daily Duties 125
THE
EXPERT MAID-SERVANT
I
ENGAGING THE MAID
The most common method of engaging a servant is through an intelligence
office. There are nearly as many different kinds of these as there are
types of domestics who patronize them. An office with a high standing
should be selected. This is not only because a lower grade of employées
is to be found at the other variety, but also on account of the
methods followed in some of the cheaper offices. Such establishments
occasionally have unscrupulous managers, who make a business of
encouraging the maids they place to change often, in order that the
renewed fee of the employer may come to the office. This practice has
become common enough in some States to justify legislative intervention.
In nearly every city or town there are reputable agencies, sometimes
conducted as business enterprises simply, sometimes run in connection
with church or benevolent societies, where a register is kept of the
references of servants for whom places are secured. These references
are usually held as confidential between the agent and the would-be
employer, and the latter is thus enabled to learn with some certainty
the qualifications of the maid she thinks of engaging.
Once in a while a mistress is so fortunate as to secure a maid by the
recommendation of some other housekeeper or through a servant in her
own or a friend's employ. Maids engaged in this fashion are often more
satisfactory than those found at an office, from the fact that they
enter their new positions somewhat prejudiced in favor of the employer,
instead of holding the attitude of armed neutrality often found in
servants who seek places through an office.
Wherever the maid is met and in whatever capacity she is engaged, there
should be a clear understanding from the beginning as to what her work
shall be. The mistress should begin the interview with the maid she
seeks to employ by stating what are the duties of the place she offers
and inquiring as to the capabilities of the maid for the position. Often
a few questions and answers will prove the unsatisfactoriness of the
situation or of the applicant. In this case, the affair should be
dropped at once. Never, no matter what the exigency, should the
housekeeper endeavor to persuade a domestic into taking a place for
which she is disinclined. It is a mistake almost sure to result badly.
The housekeeper should come to an interview with a prospective maid with
an open mind, and not allow herself to be prejudiced by appearances. An
aspect of sullenness is frequently the result of shyness and does not
indicate unwillingness to work or a bad temper. The would-be employer
should speak gently and not ask questions with a manner of having the
maid in the witness-box. Such treatment will sometimes frighten a timid
maid into inability to answer intelligently, and the employer will
produce an impression of her own hardness and severity which she will
find it difficult to overcome later. The pert and self-sufficient maid
is likely to declare her nature within a very few minutes. Kindness will
not intensify these qualities in her, while it will enable a bashful
girl to appear to better advantage.
Before interviewing a maid, the mistress should have clearly framed
in her own mind the outlines of the work required, and should know
definitely what queries she means to put. Each mistress probably has her
own way of learning the maid's capabilities and of explaining the work
she wishes done. The housekeeper who has had little practice in engaging
servants will do well to make up a formula of inquiries in advance. To
begin with, it should be ascertained what experience the maid has
had, what was her last place, how long she stayed in it, what were her
reasons for leaving it. Having thus learned if the servant seems to
be in the main satisfactory, so far as disposition and willingness are
concerned, the mistress should proceed to explain what is the work of
the house, putting such questions as will enable the girl to tell of her
competency.
For instance, in engaging a maid for general housework, she should be
asked if she understands plain cooking of meats and vegetables; if she
can make bread, biscuit and muffins, soups and plain puddings; if she
can follow a recipe, etc. More elaborate culinary accomplishments can
rarely be looked for in a maid-of-all-work. She should also be able
to do washing and ironing, have some knowledge of chamber-work and of
waiting, and be willing to learn. There are so many qualifications
for the general-housework girl, who must be a sort of Pooh Bah in
petticoats, that it is no wonder the supply is usually inadequate to the
demand.
There should be no attempt on the part of the mistress to make things in
the place she offers seem better than they are. A servant who is brought
into a house under false pretences is never likely to do well. If the
prospective mistress entertains a good deal, if she is likely to have
guests staying in the house often, she should give full notice of
her intention from the start, explaining at the same time that she is
willing to do all she can to lighten the burden of extra work. So far as
possible, the amount of labor should be put clearly before the employée,
so that if the place does not suit her she may know its drawbacks from
the beginning. Naturally, it should also be the part of the mistress to
point out what are the especial advantages of the situation, and to let
the maid see that the employer is ready to do anything in her power to
prevent unusual toil from being too heavily felt. No chance should be
left for misunderstanding upon any point, and from the first it should
be comprehended that a spirit of accommodation and kindliness will be
accorded by the mistress and expected from the maid.
After the mistress and maid have reached some kind of an adjustment that
makes them feel the relation of employer and employed would be desirable
to both, it is time for the housekeeper to make special inquiry about
the maid's references. If the office is a reputable one it may be taken
for granted that the servants' characters are in the main what they
should be, but the mistress will wish to go into details and either see
the former employer or write to her.
This matter of references is most important. The mistress owes it to the
maid as well as to herself to see that these are all they should be. No
matter how excellent is the written reference shown by the servant,
it should be verified by the prospective employer. In many cases the
mistress of a departing maid will write for her an uncandid reference
for the sake of saving herself an unpleasant scene or from a mistaken
kindliness. She does not wish to endanger the maid's chances of securing
further employment, and she prefers to stretch the truth to being honest
in the recommendation she bestows. A lamentable want of honor prevails
between housekeepers in this regard, and the woman who has not found
a maid in the least satisfactory while in her own employ will send her
forth with a reference which makes it tolerably sure she can obtain
a situation elsewhere without difficulty. On the other hand, the new
mistress is no less heedless and will take a servant into her employ
simply on the strength of a written reference without giving herself the
pains to inquire as to its accuracy.
Too much stress can hardly be laid upon this necessity for honesty in
the references given. It is the protection of the maid as well as of
the mistress. So long as any servant can secure a good place by a forged
reference or by one granted to incompetency by easy good-nature,
she will not feel that her employment depends upon her merits. The
conscientious trained worker stands on precisely the same plane as the
careless, unqualified shirk. A good part of the reformation of the much
criticised domestic service lies with the mistress who deplores its
faults. When a maid understands that laziness, impertinence, dishonesty,
ill-temper, incompetency, will be mentioned in her reference just
as frankly as the contrary good qualities, she will take more pains
concerning the recommendation that will win or lose her a place.
As a matter of course, there is always the chance that an unscrupulous
or bad-tempered mistress may take advantage of the power of the
reference. But this risk is small, especially in the present condition
of our domestic service. We have not yet reached the point attained by
the English, with whom a false reference--that is, one not written by
a genuine employer of the servant holding the reference--is punished by
fine or imprisonment. From present appearances, it does not seem likely
that we shall ever get to that. But the mistresses might at least have
the sense of mutual responsibility that marks "living-out girls." If a
place is once known as hard, or a mistress as unreasonable, unkind, or
a "driver," it is difficult to find servants to fill it. There is an
unorganized trades-union among servants which helps to protect them,
in a measure. The mistresses have too little _esprit de corps_ when
references are in question.
It is difficult to describe to a prospective maid exactly what her
work will be, but she can have a general outline of it given to her.
Concerning her privileges it is possible to be more explicit, although
the privileges vary with the position the maid occupies in the
household. Where one servant is kept, it is customary to allow her every
other Sunday afternoon and evening out, and an afternoon and evening
besides on a week-day, once a fortnight--or else an evening every week.
When two servants are employed the same privilege is allowed to each,
and it is the general rule that one shall take the work of the other on
the days and evenings out of the latter. Thus, the second maid prepares
dinner as well as serves it, when the cook is out, while the cook does
the waiting and serving and answers the bell, in addition to doing her
own work, when the second maid has her holiday. In some households it is
the custom to have supper instead of dinner on the night when the cook
goes out, thus lightening the task of the waitress. The Sunday evening
supper is practically universal, as it gives the maids their heaviest
work in the early part of the day and lessens the labor of the afternoon
and evening. In the household where three women servants are employed,
it is the custom to have but one out at a time, except on Sundays. More
or less planning is required to divide the work satisfactorily
under these circumstances, and the method in which the division is
accomplished must be decided by the features of each case. Whatever the
peculiarities of the position, they must be made plain to the maid when
she is engaged, and not left at random to be decided upon later.
The arrangements once made, it must be understood that the rules formed
are not to be lightly broken, either by mistress or maid. The employée
is to know that she can count positively on a certain day a week, and
the mistress must submit to great personal inconvenience sooner than
vary from this rule. If, for instance, it is more agreeable for her to
entertain guests on Thursday than on Wednesday, and the former is the
maid's evening out, the mistress should waive her own preferences
and convenience sooner than break in upon the maid's outing. The same
principle should be followed by the maid. Her day out is agreed upon
to be this or that. She should not feel that she can change it to suit
herself, merely by requesting the indulgence of her mistress.
In other matters about the household there should be a fixed routine,
and this should be understood from the outset. Meals will be served at
certain hours, the maid will be expected to have them on time and the
family to be prompt at the table. Such system as this does much towards
simplifying the work of a household and gives a maid a feeling of
stability that helps her to do her work to better advantage. She knows
what she has to do in the line of work and what to depend upon in the
way of time, and as a consequence the wheels of the home move more
smoothly.
Such a hard-and-fast rule as this cannot prevail, perhaps, in every
household. Take the case of a physician, for instance, of a newspaper
man, of some business-men. It is almost out of the question for them to
conform to an immutable regulation. If a doctor has been up all night
with a patient, it is rank absurdity to say that he must be on hand in
the morning for an eight-o'clock breakfast, or that if a commuter loses
his train he must stop in town and get his dinner sooner than derange
the times and seasons of the domestic economy. In such cases it is well
to remember that the house is made for the family and not the family for
the house. But instances like these are exceptions, and do not affect
the general application of the rule.
On the other hand, it may be urged that there are happy and, in the
main, well-conducted homes where a different principle is followed. In
these the establishment is considered more as the home and less as a
piece of machinery. Concessions are rendered to the preferences of the
servants when they wish to vary their days out, and they in turn are
ready to accommodate themselves to the wishes of their employers when
a change of holidays seems desirable. Such liberties as these it is
not safe to advise. They are the exceptions, and, in the long run, the
stricter plan will probably prove more satisfactory to all concerned.
At the time of engaging the maid, the mistress should make stipulations
as to the minutiæ of caps, aprons, broad collars and cuffs, and the
like. In some parts of the country there are maids who object to
anything that seems to suggest a livery or uniform, and, if there are
protests to be made and met, the process should be disposed of at the
start.
Many mistresses and maids fail to grasp the fact that the engagement
between them is in the nature of a legal contract. Mistress and maid are
equals in the eyes of the law, and an agreement is as binding upon one
as upon the other. It should be perfectly understood at the beginning
for what term the maid is engaged and at what rates. In some places it
is the custom to pay by the week, and the servant is then engaged by
that term. In other localities she is engaged and paid by the month,
although she is frequently taken at first on a week's trial, with the
understanding that, if she gives satisfaction and is suited with the
place, she is to continue her services by the month. When the latter
period is the term of engagement, it is understood that the employer is
expected to give not less than a week's notice of discharge to a maid,
and that the latter should announce a week before her month is up her
intention of leaving. Should the mistress prefer, she can give a week's
wages in lieu of a week's notice, but the former method is in more
general use.
When a servant is engaged by the week, two or three days' notice is
demanded on either side. The "month's notice" with which English books
have made us familiar is not common here, unless the servant has been
for a long time in the place. Immorality, drunkenness, dishonesty, and
absolute refusal to obey orders are sufficient causes for dismissing a
servant without warning or wages; but this is an extreme measure, and
should be resorted to only in circumstances of great provocation. Even
then, complications are often avoided by paying a servant something, if
not all of what is due. The servant who leaves without warning in the
middle of her term is not legally entitled to her wages, but in this
case, also, trouble is usually saved by paying her up to date.
Among the stipulations incident to the engagement of a maid, it is well
to make mention of breakages. This may not be needful when hiring a
cook, but it is a safeguard when engaging a waitress or even a general
housework servant. Inquiries should be put as to the maid's carefulness
with china, and there should be an agreement that the maid is
responsible for breakages except in cases of unavoidable accident. Such
a proviso as this may deter some maids from taking a place, but the
careful girl is not likely to object to the rule, and the mistress would
probably be unfortunate should she engage a maid who resented such a
regulation.
II
WHEN THE MAID ARRIVES
The first days of a servant in a new place are not easy either for
mistress or for maid. This should be recognized by the mistress, and she
should lay in an extra supply of patience for the emergency. She will
need it, in order to endure with equanimity the sins, negligences, and
ignorances of the new-comer--especially the ignorances. Yet, looked at
impartially, the blunders made by the maid are probably not so much the
result of ignorance as of unaccustomedness. The situation is much
harder for her than for the mistress. The latter is at least on familiar
ground. To the former the place is an unknown quantity. She does not
know where anything is kept. She is ignorant of the preferences of her
new employer. She is encompassed by novel surroundings and faces; and--a
fact that is not always recognized by employers--the very phraseology of
the new mistress is strange to her. The maid lacks the mental
training that would enable her to adapt herself quickly to the changed
conditions, the unusual expressions. Under the circumstances, the wonder
is not that she does things so badly, but that she accommodates herself
as readily as she does to the fresh environment.
I have spoken of the diffidence that sometimes produces the impression
of sullenness. This same diffidence often takes other forms that are
even more trying than gloom. I have known of one maid who, during the
first fortnight of her stay in a new place, received every order with a
loud giggle--the fashion in which her embarrassment manifested itself.
Another was so much at a loss what to do with her hands when they were
not occupied with her work, that she slapped them together constantly as
she moved about the house or stood waiting for orders. Yet both of
these maids, after their first shyness had worn off and they had found
themselves and their relation to their work, became admirable servants
and overcame the defects that had at first tried the patience of the
mistress almost beyond endurance.
In the average American household, where there is only a small domestic
force, the mistress should always show the servant what are her duties
or direct how these are to be performed. In large households, where
there is a housekeeper, the training of the new servants may be
delegated to her, but these establishments are too few to be weighed
in making up the main account. As soon as the maid comes the mistress
should direct her or show her to her room, and tell her to change her
street garb for her working-dress and then to report herself to the
mistress. She, on her own part, should be ready for the new-comer, not
only with a clearly framed idea of the work she will put her to first,
but also with the house in good order for the work that is to be done.
Nothing is more discouraging to a servant than to come into a place that
is dirty from the carelessness of the former occupant, or untidy and
topsy-turvy. The maid is as susceptible to first impressions as the rest
of us, and the moral effect of bringing her into a dirty and disorderly
kitchen is distinctly bad. The mistress should have had the kitchen
and pantries cleaned by the outgoing maid--and it should have been done
under her own supervision or else thoroughly inspected after the work
is finished. Should the maid who is leaving not have done her task
thoroughly, it is better for the mistress to give her own time and labor
to cleaning closets and shelves, or engage a charwoman to do it, than
to permit the maid to come in before the work is properly performed. The
servant who finds dust in the corners, the stove unpolished, the cellar
and refrigerator uncleaned, is likely to draw the conclusion that the
places can remain as she found them, or may be suffered to drift into
the same condition again whenever she is too lazy or too careless to
give them proper attention.
A word about the maid's bedroom. In some circumstances it is impossible
to make it very alluring. When all of a family are tucked away in dark,
inside rooms, as is the case in many city apartments, it cannot be
expected that the maid will fare better than her employers. But,
fortunately, all humanity are not cliff-dwellers. There are plenty of
homes where it is possible for the maid to have a light, airy bedroom,
which could be made attractive at a small expenditure of time and money.
Yet it is seldom that a servant's room has anything pleasing about
it. The mistresses defend themselves by saying that the servants are
heedless with good things, that they do not take care of what is given
them, and any mistress can cite facts to prove this position.
Without disputing the truth of these statements, it may yet be urged
that it is hard for a servant to come into a room that bears plainly the
traces of its former occupant's untidiness. Possibly the new-comer has
in her the potentialities of neatness and cleanliness, and it is unfair
to check these at the start. The room cannot be refurnished for every
new maid; but the furniture it contains can be of a sort that is readily
freshened. The white iron cots are neat as well as comfortable, and
there should be a good mattress always. A hard-working maid has a
right to a comfortable bed. If there are two servants, they should have
separate beds. This should be an invariable rule. The mattress should be
protected by one of the covers that come for this purpose. This can
be washed as often as it needs it. The blankets, too, should be washed
between the departure of one maid and the arrival of another. A neat
iron wash-stand, a plain bureau that can have a fresh bureau-cover or a
clean towel laid over it, a comfortable chair, a rug by the bed, are not
expensive and add much to the comfort of a room. It is wiser to have the
floor bare and painted, or spread with a matting, than covered with a
shabby and worn-out carpet which gathers dust and dirt. The walls
are better painted than papered. The mistress can consult her own
preferences as to whether or not she shall put pictures on the walls,
but she should not make of the maid's room a lumber place for the old
engravings and chromos that will be tolerated in no other part of the
house, and do it under the impression that she is making the place
attractive to the maid-servant within her gates. The bed should, if
possible, be made up before the maid arrives, with a fresh spread, and
the room should have the absolute cleanliness that is always a charm.
One more point should be looked after in preparing for the maid's
arrival. The mistress should make sure that the supply of china and
cutlery that the maid will use for her own meals is in decent order.
It cannot be pleasant for any one to have bent and tarnished forks and
spoons, cracked and stained cups, saucers, and plates for her food. The
cost of replacing these by new is very slight and pays for itself in the
agreeable impression given the maid by the fresh, bright articles.
A list of the dining-room silver, linen, and china should be made by
the mistress and gone over by her with the maid the day of the latter's
arrival. By thus verifying the list the maid has a clear idea of
the property that is given into her charge and knows for what she is
responsible. If the china is nicked or cracked, mention should be made
on the list of each piece thus disfigured, and there should be a note
of linen that is worn or broken. By means of such a list the mistress is
able to keep track of her possessions and there is no possibility of the
maid's excusing a chipped plate or a cracked dish with the plea that
it was injured before she came. Such a list is also a safeguard to the
maid, who is by it enabled to prove that she is not to be blamed for
disasters that occurred during the stay of a predecessor.
When the servant presents herself ready dressed for her work, the
mistress should tell her as simply as possible what this will be. The
instruction would better be given in broken doses. The workings of the
untrained mind are peculiar, and in mental equipment the average servant
is often on a level with a child of ten or twelve. Bestow too many facts
at once and you produce only confusion. So it is not well to make an
attempt to give the maid a bird's-eye view of what will be her whole
duty, but rather to acquaint her by degrees with her occupations. The
first step is for the mistress to show her where her work is to be and
the instruments with which she is to perform it. Should she be a cook,
she must be introduced to the kitchen, the management of the range
explained to her, the whereabouts of the principal utensils made clear.
If it is the waitress who is to be inducted into office, she should be
taken to the china-closet, the contents of this and of the silver and
linen drawers displayed, and the particular pieces pointed out that are
in daily service. When the waitress is also the chambermaid, there are
explanations required as to the upstairs work. But, as I have said, it
is better to supply these little by little.
For example, if the cook comes into the house in the morning, give
her time to get used to her kitchen and her tools before too much
information is offered as to the preferences of the family in cookery.
Since the first meal she will have to prepare will be luncheon, tell her
about this, and do not burden her with the details of dinner until after
lunch is over. Still less try to give her at one fell swoop all she
will need to know about breakfast the next morning or what she will be
expected to do on washing and ironing day.
These instructions may sound unnecessary to the trained and experienced
housekeeper; but the world is not entirely made up of these. The
majority of women are more or less lacking in sense of proportion and
in perspective, and this lack leads to a jumbling of their ideas which
makes life complex for those to whom the ideas are to be imparted. Of
course, once in a while one finds an intelligent servant who understands
herself well enough to slip at once into her place and do the work of
it smoothly, but she is the rare exception to the rule. The housekeeper
must plan for the average, not for the exception.
This way of giving orders naturally confines the housekeeper more or
less during the first days of her new maid's arrival--but a domestic
convulsion of any sort is attended with drawbacks. The mistress must
appreciate the fact that she will have to sacrifice herself a little in
order to train her new maid properly, and that the result will be worth
the trouble.
This does not mean that the mistress should stand over a servant and
dictate the way in which every duty is to be performed. The employer
should bear in mind that there is more than one right way of doing
nearly everything, and if the new maid has a special way of her own of
accomplishing this or that, she should be allowed to follow her custom
until she has proved that it is not so good as that of her mistress.
This may sound reckless, but it has common-sense to commend it. When the
maid is given a chance to prove or disprove the excellence of her method
and it turns out to be as good as that of the mistress, there is the
saving of just so much friction and effort in teaching and learning a
new way.
In advocating this I am taking it for granted that the maid has some
idea of the manner in which her work is to be done. If she is absolutely
"green," she will have to be taught from the beginning, and then the
mistress has no option. Such servants are discouraging and tiresome at
the outset, but they often turn out the best in the long-run. In their
cases the mistress has no bad impressions to efface and she can implant
her own modes in virgin soil.
When, however, the maid has some knowledge of her duties, the mistress
should show her where she is to work, give her directions for the
services that come next, and then leave her to herself. She will learn
her way about her domain much more quickly if she is unembarrassed by
the presence of an observer.
The mistress must be prepared for blunders even after she has given
explicit directions. As I have said, it is quite possible the maid
may not understand the mistress at first, or, in the confusion of new
impressions, she may forget or confound directions. Should she serve
a dish in a different fashion from that in which it has been ordered,
reproof should be reserved until the mistress has made sure of the
reason for the variation. If the wrong china or silver or linen is
used, corrections should be made judiciously. The fault may have been
forgetfulness, it may have been misunderstanding, and, in any case,
fresh confusion will be the result if too many blunders are commented
upon at once. The maid should be directed to repair one or two
omissions, and the rest should be ignored for the time being, to be put
right later on.
Occasionally a maid will be found who seems chronically unable to set a
table right. I have known of several who persisted in putting on crooked
the square of damask that was used at breakfast and luncheon instead
of the large cloth that covered the entire table at dinner. The square
would be laid in a slanting, to-one-side fashion that gave the whole
table a drunken look. The mistress finally hit upon a successful plan.
She put four chairs on the four sides of the table, each exactly in
the middle of a side, and then laid on the cloth with each of its four
corners precisely in front of a chair. The object-lesson worked to a
charm and crooked cloths became a thing of the past.
Forgetfulness of some piece of table-furniture is a more common fault
and one more difficult to rectify. If it seems impossible to overcome it
in any other way, the mistress may make a ground plan of the table as it
should look when properly laid, or write a list of all the objects that
should go on it for different meals. It is not necessary to resort to
this, however, until several days' experience has proved the new maid's
inability to grasp what is required.
A chambermaid will make corresponding blunders for a time. She will
have to be told more than once how the beds are to be made, will have
to receive repeated instruction never to put the blankets on with the
doubled end at the top, and to be careful about stretching tight the
lower sheet and tucking in the coverings properly at the bottom. At the
beginning the mistress should establish her standard about this sort of
thing as she does about sweeping, dusting, and other cleaning, and
she must never relax her requirements if she expects to have her house
properly kept.
All this need not be told the maid the first day she comes, but even
then she may be made to understand that work is not to be slighted or
neglected. This principle, at least, she must have clearly in her mind
at the end of the first day's service, even although her thoughts may
be a trifle chaotic as regards details. Those it will be the work of the
mistress to make clear as time goes on and the maid becomes accustomed
to her work.
III
MISTRESS AND MAID
There is a type of mistress who seems to regard servants as beings of an
inferior order. Her directions are given curtly--sometimes harshly.
She takes the ground that the servant is paid for her work and that
for anything beyond the business relation there is no need for
consideration. She may be called one extreme type.
The other extreme is more common. In her desire to propitiate her
employée she is herself almost servile. She is in frank fear lest the
servant may leave her, and in order to retain her services makes almost
any concession. Such mistresses as these furnish materials for most of
the jokes on the servant question--jokes that are hardly exaggerated.
Between these two extremes there is room for a mistress who unites
considerateness with self-respect. She speaks pleasantly to her
servants, but she does not spoil them by an ingratiatory manner or show
herself ready to make any sacrifice sooner than run the risk of parting
with them. She gives orders as orders, instead of asking services as
favors; but she issues her commands in a kindly way and with none of the
tone or manner of a dictator, still less of a shrew. When her servants
are to be reprimanded, she does it quietly, lowering rather than raising
her voice. If a servant cannot be managed in this manner, she feels it
is better to part with her. In the words of a veteran housekeeper of
this variety, "I will not have a servant in my house whom I have to
scold."
Every one recollects the saying that in herding sheep it is necessary
not only to teach the dogs to drive the sheep, but to accustom the sheep
to obey the dogs. So it is as desirable for the mistress to learn
the proper method of dealing with the maids as it is for the maids to
understand the mistress. There are many kinds of manners in both.
But few are the servants who do not respond more quickly to a kindly,
gracious manner than to one tinged with severity.
Mention has been made of the difficulty a maid sometimes has in
accustoming herself to the phraseology of a new mistress. To the girl's
hesitancy about asking for a repetition of an order, or an explanation,
are due some of the blunders she makes. The mistress should be sure she
is entirely understood before she sends the girl about her work.
Also, she should be clear as to the cause of a mistake or of apparent
disobedience before she finds fault. Always the mistress should be ready
to make explanations about the work. When the maid comes for instruction
she should be met patiently, and if there seems to be a difficulty of
understanding, a practical illustration will often do more than half an
hour of verbal directions. When the mistress can show the maid how
the table is to be set, how the beds are to be made, can give her an
object-lesson in sweeping or dusting or dish-washing, she will have
accomplished more than a dozen lectures would have wrought. Nothing
better in instruction has been devised than the Squeers method. "First
they spells it and they goes and does it." But it is the mistress who
does the spelling as well as the doing if she wishes the new maid to
grasp a novel mode of performing a household duty.
The mistress should not shrink from reproof when it has to be
administered. There are very few employées in any walk of life who are
possessed of so large a supply of conscientiousness that they discharge
their duties as well without oversight as with it. To every gang of
workmen there is an overseer. In housekeeping the mistress is overseer
as well as planner. She must "follow up" her maids--not so obviously
that they feel she does not trust them, but closely enough to produce
the impression upon them that she takes an interest in their work and
means to see that it is thoroughly done. When it is not accomplished to
her liking she should call them to account, not unkindly, but decidedly.
If a ring of dust around the bric-à-brac shows where the duster has
been flourished about the furniture instead of being used to wipe each
surface carefully, the mistress should call the maid to bring her cloth
and point out to her the defects in that portion of her work. Should
there be dirt left in the corners of the room, finger-marks on the
paint, streaks on the windows, the same course should be pursued. When
this has been done a few times, unless the employée is exceptionally
slow-witted, she learns that it is less trouble to perform the work
properly in the first place than to have to go over it twice, and the
second time under the supervision of the mistress.
All this the employer can do without joining the ranks of the fussers
or belonging to that class known as the "nasty particular" housekeepers.
The latter, who put the cleanliness of the house so far above the
comfort of its inmates that these feel they would rather have dirt with
peace than tidiness without it, are common enough to make a word of
warning in place. But it is possible to accomplish neatness without
sacrificing family concord, and in the desire to secure the latter the
housekeeper should not permit herself or her servants to drift into
carelessness.
From the first the mistress should have it clearly understood that there
is no place in the house into which she may not penetrate. Her daily
inspection of the refrigerator and the pantries should be a matter of
course. Her presence in the kitchen should never excite surprise or
provoke criticism. Naturally, she should exercise tact in this as in
every other relation of life. For instance, she should not choose the
time for her morning visit to the kitchen when the maids are at their
breakfast. In fact, she should be punctilious not to call her servants
from their meals except in cases of absolute necessity. They have a
right to take their food undisturbed, and this right the mistress should
respect. Nor should the housekeeper choose the cook's busiest day for
doing cooking on her own account, if this is going to add to the sum of
the servant's labors. It is lack of consideration on these points that
gives a house the reputation of being a "hard place." When such details
as these are observed, servants are more likely to be contented, even if
the work is heavy, than they are in a lighter place where they feel that
their rights and privileges are disregarded.
If a servant is to be reprimanded, it should never be done in the
presence of a third person. The maid is no less human because she is
in a subordinate position, and it is hard for any of us to take reproof
kindly when it is bestowed in the hearing of some one else. If the
mistress is inclined to be hasty, it is well for her to wait a few
minutes after the discovery of the fault before she utters her rebuke.
That will give her time to get the fault a little in perspective and
to see its true proportions. Then she should summon the maid to her and
deliver her words of warning or reprimand. Never should she go to the
kitchen to scold the cook. There the knowledge of the latter that she
is, so to speak, on her own ground has sometimes the unfortunate effect
of provoking an impertinent rejoinder, which would not be forthcoming
if the interview had taken place in the mistress's own room or in the
drawing-room.
There is a peculiar sting in a reproof given for a fault that is due to
accident, to misunderstanding, or to some other pardonable cause. Very
often the request for an explanation will bring out facts that
the mistress had not known and which put a different face upon the
occurrence. When rebuke is essential it should not only be delivered
quietly, but there should be no mark of anger in the manner of the
mistress. Such demeanor as this is more impressive than the harsh tones,
the sharp words, for which the culprit might have been prepared.
There are, of course, limits to which faults may be permitted to go. If
it is impossible to conquer them by reproof, it is better to discharge a
servant than to have to persist in fault-finding. Life is too short for
perpetual rebukes.
Never should the mistress forget that there is as much demand for
courtesy in her terms with her servants as in any other relation in
which she is placed. This is a fact that is often overlooked. A woman
does not make herself less but more of a lady by prefixing "please" to
her requests to her servants, or by rewarding a service with a word of
thanks. This sounds so obvious that the injunction may seem absurd, but
a little observation of mistresses and maids will convince any one that
there is need for the advice. In many households not only the mistress
but the master of the home gives orders harshly and discourteously, and
the children are quick to take their cue from their elders. A degree of
rudeness is permitted by parents in their children that should not
be tolerated for an instant. The small boys and girls in presumably
well-bred families bully and "sauce" the servants in a fashion that
would do credit to a gang of hoodlums in a tough district. Sometimes the
parents do not know it, at other times they know of it and do not take
the pains to correct it. The children should be taught to show courtesy
to servants as well as to any one else with whom they are brought
into contact. The very fact that the employées are not at liberty
to retaliate in kind should be used as an argument to teach them the
cowardice of insolence and unkindness.
When courtesy is given by the employers it seldom fails to be accorded
by the employed. A courteous order meets a respectful response, and,
as a rule, willing service is more likely to be granted. As a matter of
course, the service is in a way an obligation that is bought and paid
for, but the introduction of a little kindliness into the transaction
does much to diminish friction. Apart from that, however, the courtesy
is a duty the employer owes herself, quite irrespective of its effect
upon her servants.
While reproof should be given where it is needed, the mistress should
never suffer herself to neglect the virtue of praise. It is a hard life
when one's shortcomings only are recognized and one's good deeds are
taken as a matter of course. If humanity were at its highest level the
thought that the work was well done would perhaps be enough to bring
satisfaction, but as it is, a word of commendation is grateful to all of
us. It is a little thing to praise the latest baking as remarkably good,
to commend the maid who has waited exceptionally well at a company lunch
or dinner, to say a kindly word when a fault of heedlessness or neglect
has been corrected; but such words as these are the oil that greases the
domestic machinery. Without them it runs hard and demands more power to
keep it in motion.
There is always the possibility of such commendation being given so
often that it comes to mean nothing. This danger the mistress must guard
against. There is also the chance that the maid may be of the variety
with whom praise must be cumulative in order to produce any effect. I
have known one of that sort. If her biscuit were praised once as being
good, they had to be called excellent the second time, surpassing the
third, and so on, until the adjectives applicable to biscuit had been
exhausted and the mistress saw dark gloom on the servant's face, and was
asked coldly if the biscuit were not as good as usual. But such cases
as these are not common, and in any circumstances the housekeeper must
gauge the appetite for praise and administer it with judgment.
Sometimes one meets a presuming maid who takes advantage of the kindness
of the mistress to force an undue familiarity. This, too, must be
watched for, but the possibility of this result does not do away with
the desirability of consideration on the part of the mistress to the
maid. Fully as often as one finds this trouble does one see a foolish
mistress who, taking a fancy to a maid, lets the latter drift into
a position of pseudo-intimacy which is hard to break off. It is not
probable that the latter would have put herself forward without a
certain amount of encouragement. Once in a blue moon one meets a pearl
of a serving-woman who is worthy of all the confidence and affection
that can be bestowed upon her, and who grants to her employers an
unselfish devotion that one rarely gets from one's next of kin. Such
cases are few and far between, and blessed among women is she who has
such a treasure in her household. The average housekeeper should not
be too ready to think she has drawn one of these prizes in the
domestic-service lottery. If she goes ahead too quickly on this
hypothesis, she may have an unpleasant awakening. When advances are
made by the mistress, and the maid presumes upon them, it is only the
mistress who is to blame if the maid "forgets her place."
The mistress should avoid taking sides in any controversy between
servants. Often there is a good deal of jealousy between the employées
in a household, and if one maid is favored more than another there is
likely to be hard feeling. This pitfall must be kept in mind by the
mistress. Even without expressed preferences for one over the other, she
is sometimes in danger of being drawn into quarrels the servants have
between themselves. Almost always she is wise to decline to espouse the
part of either one. Occasionally, if she has good servants who seem to
misunderstand one another it may be worth while, for her own sake as
well as for theirs, to attempt to adjust differences between them. As a
rule, it is well for her to keep out of it after one trial has shown her
that her intervention has worked no good. Never should the mistress
be led into discussing one servant with another, or listening to the
complaints that a domestic makes of her fellow-workers. Class-feeling
is stronger than the relation of employer and employed, and the mistress
who takes up the cause of one maid against another is by way of finding
she has put her fingers between the bark and the tree. The two employées
are likely to make up the quarrel and combine in common cause against
the mistress. This does not bespeak any especial depravity on their
part. They are simply human beings, and the tie that binds them together
holds where that which attaches them to the mistress fails. They go with
their own as she would with her own.
In order to avert complications it is safe for the mistress to give her
orders direct to her servants instead of sending them by one maid
to another. The latter course makes room for misunderstanding and
recriminations. When a maid has been in the same employ for a good
while, this rule may be waived, but when she is new to the place there
should be no go-between in the matter of giving directions. The mistress
should announce her own orders.
IV
THE DUTIES OF THE MAID-OF-ALL-WORK
The general housework servant has already been referred to as a Pooh Bah
in petticoats. She takes practically all labor for her province. It
is an illustration of the value of specialization that as a rule she
commands lower wages for her services than does a maid who fills any one
alone of the functions the general housework servant performs.
Since the duties of the maid-of-all-work are what they are, the mistress
should make a stipulation at the time of the engagement that the
employée should be ready to "turn her hand to anything." For it is fatal
if she once begins to say that this or that is not "her work." That
phrase is reserved for the use of the specialist. The general servant
should understand that one of the conditions of her position is
the necessity for making herself useful in every department of the
household.
This does not mean that she is to be a domestic drudge of the London
"slavey" type. She needs no warning against this. Domestic service of
a good sort is too hard to secure in this country for there to be any
danger of the maid becoming down-trodden and imposed upon. The country
bound-girl may have to submit to imposition, but it would not be
tolerated for a moment by the ordinary independent serving-maid. If
there is domination on either side it is more likely to be found on the
part of the maid, who feels the advantage at which she holds her alleged
mistress.