here and there among the men, and the struggles made to form and keep
alive tiny local unions we shall probably never know, for no complete
records exist. The only way in which the ground can be even partially
covered is by a series of studies in each locality, such as the one
made by Miss Lillian Matthews, through her work in San Francisco.
In this connection it must be remembered that those uprisings among
women of the last century, were after all local and limited in
their effects and range. Most of them bore no relation to national
organization of even the trade involved, still less to an
all-embracing, national labor organization, such as the American
Federation of Labor. In these earlier stages, when organization of
both men and women was mainly local, women's influence, when felt
at all, was felt strongly within the locality affected, and it is
therefore only there that we hear about it.
Still, twenty-five years ago, the day of national organization had
already dawned. To organize a trade on a national scale is at best a
slow process, and it naturally takes a much longer time for women to
influence and enter into the administrative work of a national union,
than of a separate local union, which perhaps they have helped to
found. They are therefore too apt to lose touch with the big national
union, and even with its local branch in their own city. It is almost
like the difference between the small home kitchen, with whose
possibilities a woman is familiar, and the great food-producing
factory, run on a business scale, whose management seems to her
something far-removed and unfamiliar. It was not until 1904, when the
National Women's Trade Union League was formed out of unions with
women members, that women workers, as women, can be said to have begun
national organization at all. The account of that body is reserved for
another chapter.
Meanwhile as instances of the many determined localized efforts among
women to raise wages and better conditions, there follow here outlines
of the formation of the Working Women's Society in New York, the
successful organization of the Laundry Workers in San Francisco, and
of the splendid but defeated struggle of the girls in the packing
plants of Chicago.
In 1886 a small body of working-women, of whom Leonora O'Reilly was
one, began holding meetings on the. East Side of New York City, to
inquire into and talk over bad conditions, and see how they could be
remedied. They were shortly joined by some women of position, who saw
in this spontaneous effort one promising remedy, at least for some of
the gross evils of underpayment, overwork and humiliation suffered by
the working-women and girls of New York, in common with those in
every industrial center. Among those other women who thus gave their
support, and gave it in the truly democratic spirit, were the famous
Josephine Shaw Lowell, Mrs. Robert Abbé, Miss Arria Huntingdon and
Miss L.S. Perkins, who was the first treasurer of the little group.
Mrs. Lowell's long experience in public work, and her unusual
executive ability were of much value at first. The result of the
meetings was the formation of the Working Women's Society. They held
their first public meeting on February 2, 1888. In their announcement
of principles they declared "the need of a central society, which
shall gather together those already devoted to the cause of
organization among women, shall collect statistics and publish facts,
shall be ready to furnish information and advice, and, above all,
shall continue and increase agitation on this subject." Among their
specific objects were "to found trade organizations, where they do not
exist, and to encourage and assist existing labor organizations, to
the end of increasing wages and shortening hours." Another object was
to promote the passing and the enforcement of laws for the protection
of women and children in factories, and yet another the following up
of cases of injustice in the shops.
The Working Women's Society gave very valuable aid in the
feather-workers' strike. Without the Society's backing the women could
never have had their case put before the public as it was. Again, it
was through their efforts, chiefly, that the law was passed in 1890,
providing for women factory inspectors in the state of New York. It is
stated that this was the first law of the kind in the world, and that
the British law, passed shortly afterwards, was founded upon its
provisions.
Not limiting itself to helping in direct labor organization, and
legislation, the Working Women's Society undertook among the more
fortunate classes a campaign of sorely needed education, and made upon
them, at the same time, a claim for full and active coöperation in the
battle for industrial justice.
This was done through the foundation of the Consumers' League of New
York, now a branch of the National Consumers' League, which has done
good and faithful service in bringing home to many some sense of
the moral responsibility of the purchaser in maintaining oppressive
industrial conditions, while, on the other hand it has persistently
striven for better standards of labor legislation. It was through the
Consumers' League, and especially through the ability and industry of
its notable officer, Josephine Goldmark, that the remarkable mass of
information on the toxic effects of fatigue, and the legislation
to check overwork already in force in other countries was brought
together in such complete form, as to enable Louis Brandeis to
successfully defend the ten-hour law for women, first for Oregon, and
afterwards for Illinois. The Working Women's Society did its work at a
time when organization for women was even more unpopular than today.
It did much to lessen that unpopularity, and to hearten its members
for the never-ending struggle. All its agitation told, and prepared
the way for the Women's Trade Union League, which, a decade later,
took up the very same task.
In the year 1900, the status of the steam-laundry-workers of San
Francisco was about as low as could possibly be imagined. White men
and girls had come into the trade about 1888, taking the place of
the Chinese, who had been the first laundrymen on the West Coast.
Regarding their treatment, Miss Lillian Ruth Matthews writes:
The conditions surrounding the employment of these first white
workers were among those survivals from the eighteenth century,
which still linger incongruously in our modern industrial
organization. The "living-in" system was the order, each laundry
providing board and lodging for its employés. The dormitories were
wretched places, with four beds in each small room. The food was
poor and scanty, and even though the girls worked till midnight or
after, no food was allowed after the evening meal at six o'clock.
Half-an-hour only was allowed for lunch. Early in the morning, the
women were routed out in no gentle manner and by six o'clock the
unwholesome breakfast was over, and every one hard at work....
The girls were physically depleted from their hard work and poor
nourishment. Their hands were "blistered and puffed, their feet
swollen, calloused, and sore." One girl said, "Many a time I've
been so tired that I hadn't the courage to take my clothes off.
I've thrown myself on the bed and slept like dead until I got so
cold and cramped that at two or three in the morning I'd rouse
up and undress and crawl into bed, only to crawl out again at
half-past five."
As to wages, under the wretched "living-in" system the girls received
but eight dollars and ten dollars a month in money. But even those who
lived at home in no instance received more than twenty-five dollars
a month, and in many cases widows with children to support would be
trying to do their duty by their little ones on seventeen dollars and
fifty cents a month.
In the summer of 1900, letters many of them anonymous, were received
both by the State Labor Commissioner and by the newspapers. A reporter
from the _San Francisco Examiner_ took a job as a laundry-worker, and
published appalling accounts of miserable wages, utter slavery as to
hours and degrading conditions generally. Even the city ordinance
forbidding work after ten at night (!) was found to be flagrantly
violated, the girls continually working till midnight, and sometimes
till two in the morning.
The first measure of improvement was the passing of a new ordinance,
forbidding work after seven in the evening. The workers, however,
promptly realized that the more humane regulation was likely to be as
ill enforced as the former one had been unless there was a union to
see that it was carried out.
About three hundred of the men organized, and applied to the Laundry
Workers' International Union for a charter. The men did not wish
to take the women in, but the executive board of the national
organization, to their everlasting credit, refused the charter unless
the women were taken in as well. Even so, a great many of the women
were too frightened to take any steps themselves, as the employers
were already threatening with dismissal any who dared to join a union,
but the most courageous of the girls, with the help of some of the
best of the men resolved to go on. Hannah Mahony, now Mrs. Hannah
Nolan, Labor Inspector, took up the difficult task of organizing. So
energetic and successful was she, that in sixteen weeks the majority
of the girls, as well as the men, had joined the new union. It was all
carried out secretly, and only when they felt themselves strong enough
did they come out into the open with a demand for a higher wage-scale
and shorter hours.
By April 1, 1901, the conditions in the laundry industry were
effectually revolutionized. The boarding system was abolished, wages
were substantially increased and the working day was shortened; girls
who had been receiving $8 and $10 a month were now paid $6 and $10 a
week; ten hours was declared to constitute the working day and nine
holidays a year were allowed. For overtime the employés were to be
paid at the rate of time and a half. An hour was to be taken at noon,
and any employé violating this rule was to be fined. The fine was
devised as an educative reminder of the new obligation the laborers
were under to protect one another, and to raise the standard of the
industry upon which they must depend for a living, so fearful was the
union that old conditions might creep insidiously back upon workers
unaccustomed to independence.
The next step was the nine-hour day, and this in good time was
obtained too, but only as the result of the power of the strong,
well-managed union.
The union was just five years old, when unheard-of disaster fell on
San Francisco, the earthquake and fire. Well indeed did the members
stand the test. Like their fellow-unionists, the waitresses, they
made such good use of their trade-union solidarity, and showed such
courage, wisdom and resource, that the union became even more to the
laundry-workers than it had been before this severe trial of its
worth. Two-thirds of the steam laundries had been destroyed, likewise
the union headquarters. Yet within a week all the camps and bread
lines had been visited, and members requested to register at the
secretary's home, and called together to a meeting.
Temporary headquarters were found and opened as a relief station,
where members were supplied with clothing and shoes. Within another
week the nine laundries that had escaped the fire resumed work, the
employés going back under the old agreement.
By the time the next April came round nine of the burnt laundries were
rebuilt, all on the most modern scale as to design and fittings, and
equipped with the very newest machinery. But still there were only
eighteen steam laundries to meet all San Francisco's needs, and
therefore business was very brisk. So in April, 1907, it seemed good
to the union leaders to try for better terms when renewing their
agreement. When they made their demand for the eight-hour day as well
as for increased wages, the proprietors refused, and eleven hundred
workers went out, the entire working force of fourteen laundries. The
other four laundries, with but two hundred workers altogether, had the
old agreement signed up, and kept on working. The strike lasted eleven
weeks, and cost the union over $24,000. Meanwhile the Conciliation
Committee of the Labor Council, after many conferences and much effort
succeeded in arranging a compromise, the working week to be fifty-one
hours, with a sliding scale under which the eight-hour day would
be reached in April, 1910. Work before seven in the morning was
prohibited, all time after five o'clock was considered overtime,
and must be paid for at time-and-a-half rate. The passing of the
eight-hour law in May, 1911, suggested to some ingenious employers a
method of getting behind their own agreement, at least to the extent
of utilizing their plant to the utmost. They accordingly proposed to
free themselves from any obligation to pay overtime, as long as the
eight consecutive hours were not exceeded. The leaders of the union
saw the danger lurking under this suggestion, in that it might mean
all sorts of irregular hours, or even a two-shift system, involving
perpetual night work, and going home from work long distances in the
middle of the night. After many months of haggling, the union won its
point. All work after five o'clock was to be paid at overtime rate,
with the exception of Monday, when the closing time was made six. This
because in all laundries there is apt to be delay in starting work on
Monday, as hardly any work can be done until the drivers have come in
from their first round, with bundles of soiled linen. This arrangement
remained in force at time of writing.
As regards wages, Miss Matthews estimates the average increase in the
twelve years since the Steam Laundry Workers' Union was first formed
at about thirty per cent. With the exception of the head marker, and
the head washer at the one end, each at twenty-two dollars and fifty
cents per week, and the little shaker girl on the mangle at seven
dollars per week at the other, wages range from eighteen dollars down
to eight dollars, more than the scale, however, being paid, it is
said, to every worker with some skill and experience. Apprentices are
allowed for in the union agreement.
The union does not permit its members to work at unguarded machinery,
hence accidents are rare, and for such as do happen, usually slight
ones, like burns, the union officials are inclined to hold the workers
themselves responsible.
All of the steam laundries in San Francisco, now thirty-two in number,
are unionized, including the laundries operated in one of the largest
hotels. The union regards with just pride and satisfaction the fine
conditions, short hours and comparatively high wages which its trade
enjoys, as well as the improved social standards and the spirit of
independence and coöperation which are the fruit of these many years
of union activity.
But outside the labor organization, and at once a sad contrast and a
possible menace, lie two groups of businesses, the French laundries
and the Japanese laundries. The former are mostly conducted on the
old, out-of-date lines of a passing domestic industry, housed in
made-over washrooms and ironing rooms, equipped with little modern
machinery, most of the work being done by hand, and the employés being
often the family or at least the relatives of the proprietor. In their
present stage it is quite difficult to unionize these establishments
and they do cut prices for the proprietors of the steam laundries.
But both steam laundries and French laundries, both employers and
workers, both unionists and non-unionists are at least found in
agreement in their united opposition to the Japanese laundries, from
whose competition all parties suffer, and in this they are backed
by the whole of organized labor. The possibility of unionizing the
Japanese laundries is not even considered.
The story of the Steam Laundry Workers' Union of San Francisco is an
encouraging lesson to those toilers in any craft who go on strike. But
it also holds for them a warning. A successful strike is a good thing,
for the most part, but its gains can be made permanent only if, when
the excitement of the strike is over, the workers act up to their
principles and keep their union together. The leaders must remember
that numbers alone do not make strength, that most of the rank and
file, and not unfrequently the leaders too, need the apprenticeship
of long experience before any union can be a strong organization. The
union's choicest gift to its membership lies in the opportunity
thus offered to the whole of the members to grow into the spirit of
fellowship.
A few words should be said here of another strike among
laundry-workers, this time almost entirely women, which although as
bravely contested, ended in complete failure. This was the strike of
the starchers in the Troy, New York, shirt and collar trade. In the
Federal Report on the Condition of Women and Child Wage Earners, Mr.
W.P.D. Bliss gives a brief account of it. In 1905 the starchers
had their wages cut, and at the same time some heavy machinery was
introduced. The starchers went out, and organized a union, which over
one thousand women joined. They kept up the struggle from June, 1905,
throughout a whole summer, autumn and winter till March, 1906. It was
up till that time, probably the largest women's strike that had
ever taken place in this country and was conducted with uncommon
persistence and steadiness of purpose. They were backed by the
international union, and appointing a committee visited various
cities, and obtained, it is said, about twenty-five thousand dollars
in this way for the support of their members. Many meetings and street
demonstrations were held in Troy, and much bitter feeling existed
between the strikers and the non-union help brought in. The strike at
length collapsed; the firms continued to introduce more machinery,
and the girls had to submit. Mr. Bliss concludes: "The Troy union
was broken up and since then has had little more than a nominal
existence."
During the nineties there were a number of efforts made to organize
working-women in Chicago. Some unions were organized at Hull House,
where Mrs. Alzina P. Stevens and Mrs. Florence Kelley were then
residents. Mrs. George Rodgers (K. of L.), Mrs. Robert Howe, Dr.
Fannie Dickenson, Mrs. Corinne Brown, Mrs. T.J. Morgan, Mrs. Frank
J. Pearson, Mrs. Fannie Kavanagh and Miss Lizzie Ford were active
workers. Miss Mary E. Kenney (Mrs. O'Sullivan), afterwards the first
woman organizer under the American Federation of Labor, was
another. She was successful in reaching the girls in her own trade
(book-binding), besides those in the garment trades and in the shoe
factories, also in bringing the need for collective bargaining
strongly before social and settlement workers.
Chicago has long been the largest and the most important among the
centers of the meat-packing industry. None of the food trades have
received more investigation and publicity, and the need for yet
more publicity, and for stricter and yet stricter supervision is
perpetually being emphasized. But most of the efforts that have
been made to awake and keep alive a sense of public rights and
responsibility in the conducting of huge institutions like the Chicago
packing-plants, have centered on the danger to the health of the
consumer through eating diseased or decomposed meat. The public cares
little, and has not troubled to learn much about the conditions of the
workers, without whom there could be no stockyards and no meat-packing
industry. Not that some of the investigators have not tried to bring
this point forward. It was the chief aim of Upton Sinclair, when he
wrote "The Jungle," and yet even he discovered to his dismay that, as
he bitterly phrased it, he had hoped to strike at the heart of the
American people, and he had only hit them in their stomach.
But that is a story by itself. Let us go back to the brave struggle
begun by the women in the packing-plants in the year 1902 to improve
their conditions by organizing.
For a great many years prior to this, women had been employed in
certain branches of the work, such as painting cans and pasting on
labels. But towards the close of the nineties the packers began to put
women into departments that had always been staffed by men. So it was
when girls began to wield the knife that the men workers first began
to fear the competition of the "petticoat butchers." The idea of
organizing the girls, were they painters or butchers, as a way of
meeting this new menace, did not occur to them.
At this time, in the fall of 1902, the oldest and best workers were
Irish girls, with all the wit and quickness of their race. Especially
was Maggie Condon a favorite and a leader. She was an extremely quick
worker. With the temperament of an idealist, she took a pride in her
work, liked to do it well, and was especially successful in turning
out a great amount of work. Quicker and quicker she became till, on
the basis of the good wages she was making, she built up dreams of
comfort for herself and her family. One of her choicest ambitions was
to be able to afford a room of her own. But just so surely as she
reached the point where such a luxury would be possible, just so
surely would come the cut in wages, and she had to begin this driving
of herself all over again. Three times this happened. When her well
and hardly earned twenty-two dollars was cut the third time Maggie
realized that this was no way to mend matters. The harder she worked,
the worse she was paid! And not only was she paid worse, she who as
one of the best workers could stand a reduction better than most, but
the cut went all down the line, and affected the poorest paid and the
slowest workers as well.
Hannah O'Day was not one of the quick ones. Her strength had been too
early sapped. There was no child-labor law in Illinois when she should
have been at school, and at eleven she was already a wage-earner.
Along with the rest she also had suffered from the repeated cuts that
the pace-making of the ones at the top had brought about. It was
evident that something must be done. Maggie Condon, Hannah O'Day and
some of the others, began, first to think, and then to talk over the
matter with one another. They knew about the Haymarket trouble. There
were rumors of a strike the men had once had. They had heard of the
Knights of Labor, and wrote to someone, but nothing came of it. So
one day, when there was more than usual cause for irritation
and discouragement, what did Hannah O'Day do but tie a red silk
handkerchief to the end of a stick. With this for their banner and the
two leaders at their head, a whole troop of girls marched out into
Packingtown.
The strike ended as most such strikes of the unorganized, unprepared
for, and unfinanced sort, must end, in failure, in the return to work
on no better terms of the rank and file, and in the black-listing of
the leaders. But the idea of organization had taken root, and this
group of Irish girls still clung together. "We can't have a union,"
said one, "but we must have something. Let us have a club, and we'll
call it the Maud Gonne Club." This is touching remembrance of the
Irish woman patriot.
Time passed on, and one evening during the winter of 1903 Miss Mary
McDowell, of the University of Chicago Settlement, was talking at a
Union Label League meeting, and she brought out some facts from what
she knew of the condition of the women workers in the packing-houses,
showing what a menace to the whole of the working world was the
underpaid woman. This got into the papers, and Maggie Condon and her
sister read it, and felt that here was a woman who understood. And she
was in their own district, too.