Transcriber’s Notes:
Underscores “_” before and after a word or phrase indicate _italics_
in the original text.
Small capitals have been converted to SOLID capitals.
Footnotes have been moved so they do not break up paragraphs.
Old or antiquated spellings have been preserved.
Typographical and punctuation errors have been silently corrected.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
DIVISION OF ECONOMICS AND HISTORY
JOHN BATES CLARK, DIRECTOR
PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC STUDIES OF THE WAR
EDITED BY
DAVID KINLEY
President of the University of Illinois
Member of Committee of Research of the Endowment
No. 4
ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE WORLD WAR
UPON WOMEN AND CHILDREN
IN GREAT BRITAIN
BY
IRENE OSGOOD ANDREWS
Assistant Secretary of the American Association
for Labor Legislation
AND
MARGARETT A. HOBBS
SECOND (REVISED) EDITION
NEW YORK
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
AMERICAN BRANCH: 35 WEST 32ⁿᵈ STREET
London, Toronto, Melbourne and Bombay
1921
FIRST EDITION
FEBRUARY, 1918
SECOND (REVISED) EDITION
MAY, 1921
COPYRIGHT 1921
BY THE
CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE
2 JACKSON PLACE
WASHINGTON, D. C.
PRESS OF BYRON S. ADAMS
WASHINGTON, D. C.
Preliminary Economic Studies of the War
EDITED BY DAVID KINLEY
_President of the University of Illinois
Member of Committee of Research of the Endowment_
1. EARLY ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE WAR UPON CANADA.
By Adam Shortt, formerly Commissioner of the Canadian
Civil Service, now Chairman, Board of Historical
Publications, Canada.
2. EARLY EFFECTS OF THE EUROPEAN WAR UPON THE FINANCE,
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY OF CHILE. By L. S. Rowe,
Professor of Political Science, University of
Pennsylvania.
3. WAR ADMINISTRATION OF THE RAILWAYS IN THE UNITED
STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN. By Frank H. Dixon,
Professor of Economics, Dartmouth College, and Julius H.
Parmelee, Statistician, Bureau of Railway Economics.
4. ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE WORLD WAR UPON WOMEN AND
CHILDREN IN GREAT BRITAIN. By Irene Osgood Andrews,
Assistant Secretary of the American Association for
Labor Legislation.
5. DIRECT COSTS OF THE PRESENT WAR. By Ernest L.
Bogart, Professor of Economics, University of Illinois.
6. EFFECTS OF THE WAR UPON INSURANCE WITH SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO THE SUBSTITUTION OF INSURANCE FOR
PENSIONS. By William F. Gephart, Professor of
Economics, Washington University, St. Louis.
7. THE FINANCIAL HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN,
1914-1918. By Frank L. McVey, President,
University of Kentucky.
8. BRITISH WAR ADMINISTRATION. By John A. Fairlie,
Professor of Political Science, University of Illinois.
9. INFLUENCE OF THE GREAT WAR UPON SHIPPING. By
J. Russell Smith, Professor of Industry, University of
Pennsylvania.
10. WAR THRIFT. By Thomas Nixon Carver, Professor
of Political Economy, Harvard University.
11. EFFECTS OF THE GREAT WAR UPON AGRICULTURE IN THE
UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN. By Benjamin H.
Hibbard, Professor of Agricultural Economics, University
of Wisconsin.
12. DISABLED SOLDIERS AND SAILORS—PENSIONS AND
TRAINING. By Edward T. Devine, Professor of Social
Economy, Columbia University.
13. GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF THE LIQUOR BUSINESS IN
GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES. By Thomas
Nixon Carver, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard
University.
14. BRITISH LABOR CONDITIONS AND LEGISLATION DURING THE
WAR. By Matthew B. Hammond, Professor of Economics,
Ohio State University.
15. EFFECTS OF THE WAR UPON MONEY, CREDIT AND BANKING IN
FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES. By B. M. Anderson,
Jr., Ph.D.
16. NEGRO MIGRATION DURING THE WAR. By Emmett
J. Scott, Secretary-Treasurer, Howard University,
Washington, D. C.
17. EARLY EFFECTS OF THE WAR UPON THE FINANCE, COMMERCE
AND INDUSTRY OF PERU. By L. S. Rowe, Professor of
Political Science, University of Pennsylvania.
18. GOVERNMENT CONTROL AND OPERATION OF INDUSTRY IN
GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES DURING THE WORLD
WAR. By Charles Whiting Baker, C. E., Consulting
Engineer.
19. PRICES AND PRICE CONTROL IN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE
UNITED STATES DURING THE WORLD WAR. By Simon
Litman, Professor of Economics, University of Illinois.
[1]20. COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT IN RUSSIA. By E. M.
Kayden.
[2]21. THE GERMANS IN SOUTH AMERICA: A CONTRIBUTION TO
THE ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE WORLD WAR. By C. H.
Haring, Associate Professor of History, Yale University.
[3]22. EFFECTS OF THE WAR ON PAUPERISM, CRIME AND
PROGRAMS OF SOCIAL WELFARE. By Edith Abbott,
Lecturer in Sociology, University of Chicago.
[4]23. (Abandoned.)
24. DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS OF THE GREAT WORLD
WAR. By Ernest L. Bogart, Professor of Economics,
University of Illinois. (Revised edition of Study No. 5.)
25. GOVERNMENT WAR CONTRACTS. By John F. Crowell,
THE CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE
2 JACKSON PLACE, WASHINGTON, D. C.
[1] These numbers have not yet been published.
[2] These numbers have not yet been published.
[3] These numbers have not yet been published.
[4] These numbers have not yet been published.
EDITOR’S PREFACE
The following work on the “Economic Effects of the War upon Women and
Children in Great Britain,” by Mrs. Irene Osgood Andrews, Assistant
Secretary of the American Association for Labor Legislation, is
the fourth in the series of preliminary war studies undertaken
by the Endowment. Mrs. Andrews’ monograph is a sympathetic study
of the situation by one who has long been familiar with working
conditions of women and children in this country and abroad and the
methods undertaken for their improvement. The author points out the
difficulties and evil results of the hasty influx of women and children
into industrial fields vacated by men who had gone into the army, but
reaches the conclusion that on the whole the permanent effects are
likely to be good. Such a conclusion by an author whose sympathies with
laboring women and children are deep and whose outlook is broad is
hopeful and cheering.
In the opinion of the editor, Mrs. Andrews has done her country
a service in preparing this monograph, for her recital of the
difficulties and evils of the British readjustment will enable our
people to meet the same crisis when it comes upon us, as it surely will
if the war continues, in the light of the experience of our Allies. If
we go about the matter intelligently in the light of this study, we
should be able to avoid some of the difficulties and evils of British
experiences in this matter and open the way for a larger industrial
life to women, while maintaining and indeed even improving, as we
should, the conditions under which they are called upon to work and
live.
DAVID KINLEY,
_Editor_.
AUTHOR’S PREFACE TO REVISED EDITION
Following the publication of the first edition, opportunity came
in 1919 to visit again both England and France and to secure first
hand information concerning the effects of the war upon the economic
position of women. As a member of the commission sent by the Young
Women’s Christian Association to study the industrial outlook for women
and children, there was occasion to interview many representative
people in this field and to collect a large amount of recently
published material bearing upon the subject.
The world conflict brought to women, in those countries where the
industrial system was kept intact, an extraordinary invitation to
active employment outside the home and in new occupations. In England
and France millions of women were dislodged from their accustomed tasks
and thrown into novel positions in industry, in trade and commerce
and even in the professions. Many thousands have remained in the new
occupations, and the vast majority will never be content to go back to
their former places on the old terms.
The remarkable physical endurance of the women doing war work has been
very generally recognized. This endurance has been attributed partly
to the zeal of the women, but more particularly to higher wages, which
enabled them to secure better food, clothing and lodging. Comfort from
increased income was supplemented by canteens, welfare work and greater
consideration in general for the health of wage earners.
Will woman’s improved income level be permanent? Careful analysis
shows that during the war, despite government pledges, women did not
receive equal treatment with men in respect to wages. Moreover, while
money wages in many cases were greatly increased, seldom did they
keep pace with the advancing cost of living. Furthermore, it became
doubtful whether women were to be allowed to retain the more attractive
positions if these were desired by men.
No one, since the war experience, doubts the skill and adaptability of
women in performing a great number of tasks formerly considered “men’s
work.” With the extensive standardization which British industry has
adopted many more places can be successfully filled by women. Equal
opportunity to secure positions, as well as equality of payment,
appeals therefore to many thousands of women as merely a matter of
justice. But such a new status for women, it is recognized, calls for
more scientific methods in fixing wages. The old basis of sex, family
obligation, tradition as to “men’s work” and “women’s work,” must be
abandoned. Instead, some definite rate for a specified occupation, and
where possible specified qualifications as to ability for such work,
must be adopted. Moreover, it is increasingly recognized that the
national welfare demands that money wages must be at least equal to the
cost of living.
Such a program would place men and women more nearly on a strictly
competitive basis, with the awards given to the most efficient. It
would practically eliminate the constant “undercutting” now taking
place and would introduce a more scientific element into the present
chaotic wage market.
The insistent need for a thoroughgoing revision as to methods of
determining wage rates is recognized by Mrs. Sidney Webb in her
minority statement in the _Report of the War Cabinet Committee on Women
in Industry_, 1919. Mrs. Webb recommends for immediate adoption four
main principles. (1) The establishment of a national minimum rate of
wage; (2) the determination of a standard or occupational rate above
the national minimum; (3) the adjustment of money wages to the cost
of living; and (4) wherever possible the requirement of efficiency
qualifications. As to children and “young persons” in Great Britain
the Fisher Education Act already has indicated a greater emphasis on
training and there is hope that their employment will eventually
become either subordinate to or, better still, a part of education.
The scarcity of labor now presents an appalling problem in several
countries and one of the outstanding effects of the loss of human life
in all war stricken nations is renewed interest in the protection of
motherhood. In these countries measures are being adopted to conserve
the lives of mothers and babies. Better medical and nursing care are
recognized as essential, cash maternity benefits are increasing,
maternity centers are being greatly extended and in England the
endowment of motherhood is proposed.
This revised monograph, while attempting to present a fairly complete
history of the industrial experience of women and children during
and immediately following the war, is still necessarily tentative.
Some years must elapse before it will be possible to measure the full
effects of the world war upon the economic condition of women and
children. This revision is brought out, however, at this time to supply
a demand which quickly exhausted the first edition, and in the hope
that it will be of service to those interested in the progress of women
industrial workers.
IRENE OSGOOD ANDREWS.
New York City,
April, 1920.
CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I Introductory Summary 1
II Work of Women and Children before the World War 14
III First Months of the World War—Labor’s Attitude
toward the War—Unemployment among Women Workers 20
IV Extension of Employment of Women 28
V Organized Efforts to Recruit Women’s Labor 50
VI Sources of Additional Women Workers 75
VII Training for War Work 84
VIII Women and the Trade Unions 87
IX Control of Women Workers under the Munitions Act 92
X Wages 99
XI Hours of Work 126
XII Safety, Health and Comfort 146
XIII Effects of the War on the Employment of Children 167
XIV Effects of War Work on Women 191
XV Peace and Reconstruction 204
Appendices 229
Index 251
ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE WORLD WAR
ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN
IN GREAT BRITAIN
CHAPTER I
Introductory Summary
Under the conditions of modern warfare the industrial army in factory,
field and mine is as essential to national success as the soldiers
in the trenches. It is estimated that from three to five workers are
necessary to keep a single soldier at the front completely equipped.
Accordingly, it is not surprising that Great Britain during four years
of warfare saw what was little short of an industrial revolution
in order to keep up the supply of labor, to heighten the workers’
efficiency, and to secure their cooperation. No changes were more
interesting and important than those which concerned working women and
children.
_Increase in Numbers_
Upon women and children fell much of the great burden of keeping trade
and industry active and of supplying war demands when several millions
of men were taken away for military service. “Without the work of the
women the war could not have gone on,” said representatives of the
British Ministry of Munitions while in New York in November, 1917.
Before the increased demand was felt, however, the dislocation of
industry during the first few months of war brought far more suffering
to women workers than to men. In September, 1914, over 40 per cent of
the women were out of work or on short time. The “luxury” trades, which
employed a large proportion of women, were most severely affected,
and the women could not relieve the situation by enlisting as the
men did. The prewar level of employment was not reached until April,
1915. Between that date and July, 1918, the number of females gainfully
occupied increased by 1,659,000 over the number at work in July, 1914.
It is more difficult to ascertain the exact increase in the number of
working children and young persons under eighteen, but apparently more
children left school for work directly at the end of the compulsory
education period and more were illegally employed. Official reports
show an increase from 1,936,000 in July, 1914, to 2,278,000 in January,
1918, or 17.6 per cent, in the number of boys and girls under eighteen
who were gainfully employed. In addition, in August, 1917, Mr. Herbert
Fisher, president of the Board of Education, admitted in the House
of Commons that in the past three years some 600,000 children under
fourteen had been “put prematurely to work” through the relaxation of
child labor and compulsory school laws. But in October of the same year
the Board of Trade stated that 90,000 boys had left school for work
during the war. The earlier exemptions, statistics of which have been
published, were almost entirely for agriculture, but judging from Mr.
Fisher’s statement a considerable number of exemptions were made for
mining and munitions work during the third year of the war.
One of the most notable effects of the war was the number of
occupations which women entered for the first time, until, in the
winter of 1916-17, it could be said that “there are practically no
trades in which some process of substitution [of women for men] has not
taken place.” According to official figures, 1,816,000 females were
taking men’s places in April, 1918.
During the first year of the war, however, women took men’s places
for the most part in transportation, in retail trade and in clerical
work rather than in manufacturing. In factory work, while some women
were found to be undertaking processes slightly above their former
level of skill in establishments where they had long been employed,
the most general change was a transfer from slack industries to fill
the expanding demands of firms making war equipment. There women were
employed in the same kinds of work they had carried on before the war.
The rush into the munitions industry, where women engaged in both
“men’s” and “women’s” work, was one of the most important features of
the second year of war. While a few additional women had begun to be
taken on very early in the war, the increases were not large until
the autumn of 1915 and early winter of 1916. During 1915-1916 also a
decline was first noticed in the number of women in domestic service,
in the printing trades, and in such typical “women’s trades” as
confectionery and laundry work.
In the third year of the war the substitution of women for men on a
large scale was extended from munitions to numerous staple industries
having a less direct connection with the war. In many cases, of course,
the women did not do precisely the same work as their masculine
predecessors. Especially in the engineering trades almost an industrial
revolution occurred between 1914 and 1917. Skilled processes were
subdivided, and automatic machinery was introduced, all the changes
tending toward greater specialization and the elimination of the
need of all round craft skill. Early in the war it was generally
considered that women were not as efficient as men except on routine
and repetition work. But as the women gained experience it was observed
that more and more of them were undertaking the whole of a skilled
man’s job, and the testimony as to relative efficiency, on work within
a woman’s strength, became far more favorable. During the last year
of the struggle, while a few new fields were invaded, the process of
substitution had progressed nearly as far as possible, and the year
witnessed mainly a settling down into the new lines of work previously
entered.
Though the increase in women workers in agriculture was less marked
than in industry, beginning with the summer of 1916, the numbers rose,
being 113,000 in 1918, in contrast to 80,000 in 1914. The widening of
professional opportunities and the opening of some executive positions
in industry and commerce were other important features of the changes
in women’s work.
Women even engaged in work ordinarily a part of soldiers’ duties.
Besides thousands of military nurses, a special corps of women under
semi-military discipline was recruited for work as clerks, cooks,
cleaners, chauffeurs and mechanics behind the lines in France. These
“Waacs,” as they were popularly called, numbered over 50,000 by the
end of the war. The “Wrens” did similar shore duty for the Navy, and
the “Wrafs,” woodcutting for the Board of Trade. The women were able
to take up their new lines of work with surprisingly little formal
training, the chief exceptions being short practical courses for farm
workers and semi-skilled munition makers.
Changes in the work done by children were considerably different for
girls and for boys. For girls the choice of occupations widened much as
for adult women. But for boys, though a few received earlier promotion
to skilled men’s work than would ordinarily have been the case, on the
whole training for skilled trades declined. With the men drawn into
the war and with the increasing cost of living, it was natural that an
increase should take place in the number of child street traders, and
in the number of children working outside school hours.
_Wages_
Under war conditions the wages of both women and children were raised,
probably the largest gains being made by boy and girl munition makers.
The smallest rise seems to have occurred in the unregulated, so-called
“women’s trades,” like laundry work. The trade boards made a number of
increases in the industries within their jurisdiction, but the changes
were seldom proportionate to the increase in the cost of living.
Instead, what it was believed the industry would be able to support
after the war was usually the determining factor. The economic position
of the women who took men’s places was undoubtedly improved, though,
even taking into account differences in experience and efficiency
and the numerous changes in industrial method, the plane of economic
equality between the two sexes was rarely attained. The government had
the power to fix women’s wages on munitions work and in so doing it
seemed at first to go on record in favor of the equal pay principle.
But, in practice, the principle was not applied to unskilled and
semi-skilled time work and the women failed to receive the same cost
of living bonuses as the men, though unquestionably the wages of women
substitutes in munitions work was much higher than the prewar level
of women’s wages. Where other industries were covered by trade union
agreements, women in most instances received “equal pay,” but in the
remaining cases of substitution, for instance in agriculture, though
considerable increases were gained, the men’s rates were by no means
reached.
_Recruiting New Workers_
It is of interest to learn how England secured women workers to meet
the demands of war. For the most part they came from three different
groups. First, workers changed from the low paid “women’s trades”
and various slack lines of work to munitions and different kinds of
“men’s work.” Second, the additional women workers were mainly the
wives and other members of working men’s families, most of the married
women having worked before marriage. Soldiers’ wives often found their
separation allowances insufficient. In general both patriotic motives
and the rising cost of living undoubtedly played a part in sending
these women and many young boys and girls into industry. Finally, a
comparatively small number of women of a higher social class entered
clerical work, agriculture and the munitions factories, in many
instances in response to patriotic appeals.
Many of the women and children were recruited through the activities of
local representative “Women’s War Employment Committees” and “County
Agricultural Committees,” formed by the government, and working in
close cooperation with the national employment exchanges. A large
number of women, about 5,000 a month in the winter of 1917, and even a
good many young boys and girls were sent through the exchanges from
their homes to work at a distance. According to representatives of
the Ministry of Munitions, the securing of their well being outside
the factory under such circumstances was the most serious problem
connected with their increased employment. Efforts to provide housing,
recreation and improved transit facilities were at first in the hands
of the voluntary committees, but later it proved necessary for the
Ministry to appoint “outside welfare officers” to supplement and
coordinate this work. The “hostels” with their large dormitories and
common sitting rooms which were frequently open in munition centers for
the women proved unsatisfactory because of the rules required and the
difficulties of maintaining necessary discipline. In many cases, also,
they were unpopular with the women themselves. In an attempt to solve
the housing problem, the government, in the summer of 1917, was forced
to enact a measure making compulsory the “billeting” of munition makers
with families living in the district, but this does not seem to have
been put into actual practice.
_Removal of Trade Union Restrictions_
Trade union restrictions on the kinds of work women were allowed to
perform were set aside for the war period and “dilution” was made
widely possible by the munitions acts, in the case of munitions of
war, and by agreements between employers and employes in many staple
industries. In all cases the agreements included clauses intended to
safeguard the standard wage rate and to restore the men’s places and
the trade union rules after the war. Even where the munitions acts gave
the government power to force “dilution” it proceeded mainly through
conferences and agreements.
Officials of the Ministry of Munitions claimed to believe that the
substitution of women or any other important change intended to
increase production could only proceed peacefully if labor’s consent
and cooperation were secured. They believed also that provisions to
safeguard labor standards are essential to gain such cooperation, and
that anything in the nature of coercion or a “labor dictatorship” would
necessarily fail to reach the desired aim of enlarged output.
_Control of Labor by the Munitions Acts_
Considerable irritation was aroused among the munition makers, both
men and women, by the control exercised over them through certain
features of the munitions acts. Strikes were forbidden and provision
for compulsory arbitration was made. Special munitions tribunals were
set up which might impose fines for breaches of workshop discipline. In
order to stop the needless shifting from job to job which was hampering
production, a system of “leaving certificates” was established. Workers
who left their previous positions without such cards, which could be
secured from employers or from the tribunals only under specified
conditions, might not be employed elsewhere for six weeks. The
clearance certificate system was obviously open to abuses, especially
during the first few months of its operation, before a number of
safeguards were introduced by the first munitions amendment act, in
January, 1916. It created so much unrest among the workers, that it
was abolished in October, 1917. The British Government’s experience
with these features of the munitions acts which approach nearest to the
conscription of labor illustrates the difficulties attendant upon such
devices for obtaining maximum output without interruption.
_Safety, Health and Comfort_
The effect of the war on the working hours of English women and
children centers in the changes made in the restrictive legislation
in force at the outbreak of the war. This legislation forbade night
and Sunday work, and hours in excess of ten and a half daily and sixty
weekly in nontextile factories; and ten daily and fifty-five weekly in
textile factories. But from the beginning of the war up to the latter
part of 1915 hours were lengthened and night and Sunday work became
frequent, both by means of special orders from the factory inspection
department and also in defiance of the law. Two special governmental
committees were finally created to deal with the unsatisfactory
situation. The studies by one of them, the Health of Munition Workers
Committee, on the unfavorable effects of long hours on output, were a
determining factor in securing a virtual return to prewar standards of
daily hours, and provided scientific arguments to strengthen the active
postwar movement for a general eight hour day.
The introduction of women into factories and offices for the first time
often led to the making of special provisions for their safety, health
and comfort. In the interests of output, the Ministry of Munitions
fostered such developments in the establishments under his control,
encouraged the engagement of “welfare supervisors” for women, girls
and boys and gave special attention to the well being of munition
makers outside the factory. The Ministry allowed owners of controlled
establishments to deduct the cost of special welfare provisions for
women, such as wash rooms and rest rooms, from what would otherwise
be taken by the excess profit tax. It provided housing accommodations
on a large scale—for 60,000 workers, it is said, between July, 1915,
and July, 1916, and subsidized similar projects by cities and private
organizations. That the war brought increased recognition of the
importance of measures for safety, health and comfort was evident from
the passage of a law in August, 1916, empowering the Home Office as a
permanent policy, to make special regulations for additional “welfare”
provisions in factories.
_Effects of War Work_
It was hardly possible to judge the full effects of war work on women
and children by the summer of 1919. Among women, while individual
cases of overfatigue undoubtedly existed, signs of injury to health
were not generally apparent. The effects when the excitement of war
work is over and the strain relaxed were still to be reckoned with,
however. Higher pay, which meant warmer clothing, sometimes better
housing and especially better food, was believed to be an important
factor in counteracting injury to health. It doubtless accounted for
the improvement in health which was not infrequently noted in women
entering munitions work from low paid trades and which is a sadly
significant commentary on their former living conditions. Among boy
munition makers the evidences of overwork and a decline in health were
much more striking.
Particularly in the crowded munition centers, home life suffered on
account of the war. Overcrowding, long hours spent in the factory
and in traveling back and forth, an increase in the work of mothers
with young families, the absence of husbands and fathers on military
service, and the more frequent departure from home of young boys and
girls for work at a distance, all contributed to the undermining of the
home.
Yet even the additional responsibility placed on many women by the
absence of their men folk seems to have been one of the stimulating
influences which are said in three years of war to have “transformed”
the personality of the average factory woman. As a class, they have
grown more confident, more independent, more interested in impersonal
issues. The more varied and responsible positions opened to women, the
public’s appreciation of their services, their many contacts with the
government on account of war legislation also helped to bring about the
change, which promises to be one of the most significant of the war.
Among the younger workers, on the contrary, it was feared the
relaxation of discipline, unusual wages, long hours of work, the
frequent closing of schools and boys’ clubs and the general excitement
of war time were producing a deterioration in character. “Had we
set out with the deliberate intention of manufacturing juvenile
delinquents, could we have done so in any more certain way?” said Mr.
Cecil Leeson, secretary of the Howard Association of London. A marked
increase in juvenile delinquency was noted, particularly among boys of
eleven to thirteen, the ages for which school attendance laws have been
relaxed and premature employment allowed.
_Peace and Reconstruction_
With the coming of peace and the extensive readjustments in industry
which necessarily followed, new problems confronted the woman worker.
Chief among these were the danger of unemployment during the transition
period, the question of what should be done with the “dilutees,” who
had taken up work formerly reserved for skilled men, frequently under
pledges that they should be displaced at the end of the war, and the
burning issue of “equal pay for equal work” as between men and women.
In Great Britain a remarkable amount of attention had been paid, while
the war was still in progress, to preparation for the adjustment
to peace as well as to the improvement of evils disclosed by war
experience. In addition to much unofficial discussion and organization
an official Ministry of Reconstruction had been formed, having numerous
subcommittees. But the end of the war came sooner than had been
expected when the government’s plans were still incomplete, so that the
English had, after all, to trust largely to hastily improvised schemes
or to chance to carry them through the transition.
As had been anticipated, for a time a large number of women were
unemployed, the reported total rising as high as 494,000 in the first
week of March, 1919, but gradually falling from that point to 29,000
in November. In place of the comprehensive program outlined by one of
the committees of the Ministry of Reconstruction, the government’s
main reliance in dealing with unemployment was a system of doles or
“donations.” An unemployed woman worker might draw 25s. ($6.00)[5]
weekly for thirteen weeks and then 15s. ($3.60) weekly for a like
period. Many complaints were made about the administration of the
donations, particularly in the case of women workers. On one hand it
was alleged that the women were refusing to accept positions offered
and “taking a vacation at the taxpayers’ expense.” On the other hand
protests were made that unemployed women were forced by the denial of
donations to take places at sweated wages, especially in laundry work
and domestic service. The plan of unemployment donations, originally
established for six months, was renewed for an additional six months in
May, 1919, and finally ended for civilians in November.
[5] Throughout this monograph English currency has been reduced to
American on the approximate prewar basis of $4.80 to the pound sterling.
Three distinct points of view were evident in regard to the closely
allied problems of dilution and “equal pay for equal work.” Not a
few persons held that women would and should return to their prewar
occupations, in which they seldom did the same work as men. A large
body of moderate opinion held that an entire return to prewar
conditions was impossible. Women should be retained in all “suitable”
employments, with due protection through labor laws and minimum wage
fixing. Where men and women were employed in the same occupation, the
equal pay standard should prevail. The more radical view was that all
occupations should be open to both sexes at the same wage standard.
As a corollary to this policy there was proposed the endowment of
motherhood.
Even by the end of 1919 it was hardly possible to state definitely
what the after war occupations and wages of the woman worker would
be. But it appeared probable that she would continue in some, if not
all, of her new occupations, and that her improved wage standards
would be protected. After war industrial conditions in themselves
naturally stimulated some return to prewar employment by reviving the
luxury trades and curtailing munitions work. In certain cases, as in
the woolen trade, agreements between employers and employes shut out
the women. But in other important cases, as in engineering, it is
probable that a compromise will be reached, permitting women to stay in
at least the semi-skilled lines of work. Considerable protection has
been given war time wage rates. The Minimum Wage (Trade Boards) Act
has been widely extended. By two separate enactments, war time wage
rates were continued until September 30, 1920, unless other agreements
were reached or official awards put in force. Government proposals
for eight hour day and minimum wage legislation for both sexes and for
an extension of maternity care reflect the position of the feminist
advocates of occupational equality between the sexes.
Undoubtedly the war, while it had a most unfortunate effect on many boy
and girl workers, at the same time roused the nation to a far greater
appreciation of their value as future citizens. There was general
agreement on their needs during the reconstruction period. Action must
be taken to modify the effects of any postwar unemployment, while as a
permanent policy more attention must be paid to their welfare during
the first years of working life. Unemployment donations, the payment of
which was contingent on attendance at training centers, if available,
was the method adopted to meet the unemployment crisis. The Fisher
Education Act represents the government’s effort permanently to improve
the condition of young workers. This law requires school attendance of
every child under fourteen. Gainful employment outside school hours
is absolutely forbidden, except a very limited amount by children
between twelve and fourteen. Working boys and girls are required to go
to continuation school eight hours a week until eighteen years of age
when the law goes into full effect, and the time of attendance must
be taken out of working hours. It is unfortunate that the children
who in some ways most need the help of the act, namely those who went
to work during the war, are expressly exempted from its provision.
Nevertheless, by the enactment of this law, the final effect of the war
on English child labor standards will apparently be to lift them to a
higher plane than ever before.
Final judgment can hardly yet be passed on the effects of the war on
the woman worker. Some far reaching changes are, however, already
evident. While the disadvantages of war work, its long hours,
overstrain and disruption of home life, seem likely to pass as
conditions return to normal, the gains in the way of better working
conditions, higher wages and a wider range of opportunities, seem more
likely to be permanent. Many professional doors have for the first time
been opened to her. Most important of all is the fact that because of
her awakened spirit and broader and more confident outlook on life, the
woman worker is able consciously to hold to the improved position to
which the fortunes of war have brought her.