View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT O'

BOR

BULLETIN OF THE WOMEN’S BUREAU,

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES
AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
IN 23 CITIES

\jwn3
'ho- 7 f
l

-

A




[Public—No. 259—66th Congress.]
[H. R. 13229]

An Act To establish in the Department of Labor a bureau to be known as the
Women’s Bureau

fV
%nate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That there shall be estabWomen's BureauPartment °f ^ a bureaU to be
as'the
Sec. 2 That the said bureau shall be in charge of a director a
woman, to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice
of *5C000en ifshall bWft6’/!10 1lttll-,frivC “ &nnual compensation
i11 K*he du,y of,said bureau to formulate standards
and policies which shall promote the welfare of wage-earning women
improve their working conditions, increase their cffiScy and
advance their opportunities for profitable employment. The said
bureau shall have authority to investigate and report to the said
******* the welfPam of'woment
moustiy. I he director of said bureau may from time to time
publish the results of these investigations in such a manner and to
such extent as the Secretary of Labor may prescribe.
tn
5 f itlLere+vha! be in saici bureau an assistant director,
to be appointed by the Secretary of Labor, who shall receive an
annual compensation of $3,500 and shall perform such duties as
of l!aborPreSCnbed by the director and aPProved by the Secretary

Sec. 4. lhat there is hereby authorized to be employed by said
other Am ?hlCf C Cfk arJd such sPecial agents, assistants, clerks, and
flfrLTP °yeeS f SUC,h rates 0± compensation and in such numbers
" Q™
time to 'iIne Provide by appropriations.
Sec. 5. That the Secretary of Labor is hereby directed to furnish
tln?burcauUarterS’ °ffiCG furniture and equipment, for the work of

affeHtepaSage*18 AC‘ Sh,“

Approved, June 5, 1920.




6fleC‘ “d be in for“

^

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
JAMES J. DAVIS, Secretary

WOMEN’S BUREAU
MARY ANDERSON, Director

BULLETIN

OF THE WOMEN’S

BUREAU, NO. 78

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES
AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
IN 23 CITIES
By
ETHEL L. BEST

and
ETHEL ERICKSON

UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1930

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C,




Price 30 cents

r




1

*

CONTENTS

i

i-

.

V

Letter of transmittal______
vii
Introduction
Purpose, method, and scope
Purpose of the study
Method
Scope
Summary
10
Working conditions
17
Ventilation and temperature,
Local exhausts or other protection____ r
22
Lighting
23
Floors
24
Seating
25
Drinking facilities
26
Washing facilities
26
Toilet facilities
27
First-aid provision
28
Service facilities
28
Cloakrooms
29
Rest rooms
29
Lunch rooms
29
Uniforms
30
Employment machinery
30
Welfare provision
31
Hazards
31
Strain
35
Hours
37
Hour laws
38
Scheduled hours
39
Scheduled weekly hours____ :
Weekly hours of laundries in State studies of the Women’s
Bureau
44
Scheduled weekly hours of laundries in New York______________
Scheduled daily hours
46
Daily hours of laundriesin State studies of the Women’s Bureau.
Scheduled daily hours oflaundries in New York________________
Saturday hours
52
Lunch period
53
Lunch-period legislation
53
Rest periods
54
Hours worked in holiday week'_______________________ __________
Actual hours worked
55
Full time, lost time, andovertime
55
Comments on hours worked in home visits_____________________
Night work .
Wages .
Week's earnings__________________________________________________ _
Earnings of all women
61
Median of the earnings____________
Full-time earnings
65
Median earnings for full-time laundry workers in other Women’s
Bureau studies
69
Summary of findings of earnings in New York power-laundry
study_______________________________________________________
Methods of payment
71
Earnings of timeworkersand pieceworkers______________________
Comparison of the median earnings of timeworkers and piece­
workers
72




- ni

Page
1
6
6
6
7
18

39
46
51
52

55
60
60
61
61
64

70
71

IV

CONTESTS

Wages—Continued.
Week’s earnings—Continued.
Piecework and timework earnings in New York laundry study. _
Earnings by occupation
73
Range of earnings by occupation
75
Earnings of timeworkers and pieceworkers by occupational
group-------------------------------------------------------Earnings and scheduled hours
77
Earnings and time in the trade
78
Earnings and time with the firm
80
Rates
82
Minimum-wage legislation
84
Rates and occupations
84
Rates and time with the firm
85
Changes in rates during the year preceding the survey_________
Rates and scheduled hours
86
The workers~
Nativity and race
87
Age.---------------- -------- ----------------------------------------------------- IIIIIII”
Marital status______________________
Time with the firm
90
Age and occupation1
Reason for working
92
Time in the trade
94
Work experience
96
Type of work preferred__________
Appendixes:
A.—General tables
102
B.—Schedule forms
159

Page

72

76

86
87
88.
89
92

97

TEXT TABLES
Table 1. Number of establishments visited and number of men and
women they employed, by sectionandcity___________________
2. Scheduled weekly hours, by section and city__________________
3. Scheduled daily hours, by section and city____________________
4. Per cent of women who worked, during the week reported,
under 44 hours, 44 hours and over, 48 hours and over, and
54 hours and over, by section and city_____________________
5. Week’s earnings, by section and city
63
6. Median of the week’s earnings of full-time workers and of all
workers for whom hours worked were reported, by section
and city-----------------7. Median of the week’s earnings according to time with thejirm,
by section____________________________________________ ____
8. Weekly rates, by section and city
83
9. Median of the rates according to time with the firm, by section.
10. Median of the rates according to scheduled hours, by section..

8
41
48
59

68
81
85
86

APPENDIX TABLES
Table I. Dry-bulb reading near presses and flat-work ironers, by out­
side temperature
102
11. Wet-bulb reading near presses and flat-work ironers, by outside
temperature
102
III. Wet-bulb reading near presses and flat-work ironers, by dry-bulb
reading-----------------------------------------------------------------------------IV. Relative humidity near presses and flat-work ironers, by drybulb reading
103
V. Impression of agent as to temperature near presses and flat-work
ironers, by dry-bulb reading
104
VI. Scheduled weekly hours of laundries in other Women’s Bureau
surveys, by section, State, and date of survey______________
VII. Scheduled daily hours of laundries in other Women’s Bureau
surveys, by section, State, and dateofsurvey________________
VIII. Scheduled Saturday hours, by sectionandcity_________________
IX. Scheduled lunch period, by section andcity
108




103

104
105
106

CONTENTS

V
Page

Table X. Scheduled rest period, by section and city
XI. Hours actually worked, by section and city
110
XII. Week’s earnings, by section and city
112
XIII. Median of the week’s earnings of undertime, full-time, and
overtime workers, by section and city
XIV. Extent of undertime, full time, and overtime, by section and
city
XV. Week’s earnings of full-time workers, by section and city______
XVI. Week’s earnings, by occupation
122
XVII. Median of the week’s earnings, by occupation and by section
and city
124
XVIII. Extent of full-time work and median of the earnings in laundries
reported in State surveys by Women’s Bureau, by State and
year
127
XIX. Median of the week’s earnings of timeworkers and of piece­
workers in four occupations having most women, by section
and city
128
XX. Median of the week’s earnings, by scheduled weekly hours
and by section and city
XXI. Median of the week’s earnings, by time with the firm and by
section and city'XXII. Median of the weekly rates, by occupation and by section and
city
136
XXIII. Median of the weekly rates, by time with the firm and by
section and city
XXIV. Median of the rates and earnings of timeworkers and of the
earnings of all women, by section and city_________________
XXV. Marital status of the women who supplied personal informa­
tion, by section and city
143
XXVI. Nativity and race of the women who supplied personal in­
formation, by section and city
144
XXVII. Age of the women who supplied personal information, by
section and city
146
XXVIII. Time with the firm of women who supplied personal informa­
tion, by section and city
148
XXIX. Occupation, by section
150
XXX. Occupation, by age
151
XXXI. Woman’s reason for working, by marital status--------------------XXXII. Mothers with children under 14 years of age, by marital
status
153
XXXIII, Actual time worked in the laundry industry, by over-all time
since first laundry job- - XXXIV. Industrial experience, by kind of work done and by section
and city
154
XXXV. Preference for laundry work or for other employment, by kind
of work and reason for preference
XXXVI. Reason for leaving job, by kind of job left

109

116
117
118

130
132

140
142

152

153

155
150

ILLUSTRATIONS
Facing page

Plate 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

An airy, well-routed laundry _
The heat from the flat-work ironers is carried off------------------Natural ventilation; slat blinds; chair--------------A light and airy marking department
24
Presses operated by hand, making them easy and safe-----------A well-planned ironing department
87

CHARTS
Scheduled weekly hours_____
Scheduled daily hours____________
Distribution of earnings
Median of the week’s earnings (white women)--------------Median of the week’s earnings (negro women)----------------------------------------




1
11
17
33
Page

37
47
62
66
67




m
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
United States Department of Labor,
Women’s Bureau,

Washington, February 25, 1930.
I have the honor to submit herewith a report on the wages,
hours, and working conditions of women in the laundry industry,
covering 290 of the larger commercial laundries in important cities
from coast to coast.
The survey was made with the cordial cooperation of the Laundryowners National Association, and my thanks are extended to that
organization and to the individual employers and employees whose
courtesy made the survey possible.
t
The study was in charge of Ethel L. Best, industrial supervisor, and
the report was written by Mrs. Best and Miss Ethel Erickson.
Respectfully submitted.
Mary Anderson, Director.
Hon. James J. Davis,
Secretary of Labor.
Sir:




VII




EPi '>w

1

4A. ji. *

■y4.'0*~'

PLATE 1.—AN AIRY, WELL-ROUTED LAUNDRY

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN
WORKERS IN 23 CITIES
INTRODUCTION

The laundry industry, like most of the fundamental or necessary
services, is an outgrowth from a far older home industry. It might be
even more accurate to think of it as a development of two lines of
employment one the family washing done in the home and the other
the lulimg of clothing done out of the home. Both these occupa­
tions are centuries old. Pictures from Egypt as early as the eight­
eenth century B. C. show fullers at work by hand, and many centuries
later the Roman toga was made clean by the simple method of treadmg into the garment, in a large vessel of water, a cleanser such as
iulier s earth.1
In the latter part of the thirteenth century a fullers’ guild was
organized m England “by all the brethren and sistern of the fullers in
.Lincoln.
This organization established certain standards in the
industry, passing a rule that “none of the craft shall work in a
iTne
Tn <'mpI°yers’ Suild was formed at Bristol, England, in
MUb with tour commissioners to enforce good work and penalize bad,
m order to save the good name of the town and the craft.
Presses to smooth the clothing were used in the early days and out
ol them has grown the present flat-work ironer, with its large padded
roils Ihe early names for machines with rollers were “calender”
which came by way of France from the Latin word “cylindrus”
and mangle,” from the Dutch “mangelen,” meaning to roll with a
rolling-pin.
The first British patent on a washing machine was taken out as
early as 1691 and that on a mangle in 1774. The washing machine
can be called that only by courtesy, as its powers were far too numer­
ous lor any one term to define. It could be used for “the raiseing of
watei, washing of cloaths, milling of sugar canes, pounding of min­
erals, and pounding and bruising of all sorts of seeds, pounding of
charcoale to make powder of, and pounding and making raggs fitt to
make paper, and the like, which said engine was never used in Eng­
land before.”
6
Not until the introduction of steam as a means of power did the
laundry industry begin its development along present lines. Two
laundries lor washing clothes with steam had been started by 1789 in
.rrance, and m the United States some 200 patents on washing
machines alone were issued in the first half of the nineteenth century.
Ihe earliest record in the United States of a power laundry at all
resembling the present commercial laundry was of the Contra Costa
Laundry established in Oakland, Calif., in 1851. The gold rush of
th,e brief historical sketch on this page are from Power Laundrie
Hundred Million Dollar Industry, by Frederic H. Bradshaw. True, Webber & C




The Story of a Five
Chicago, 1926.

1

2

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

1849 sent thousands of men without families to California, but they
went there to dig gold, not to wash clothes, and something had to be
provided to take the place of the washing ordinarily done by their
women folk. To expedite the work, a carpenter built a 12-shirt
washing machine, which was run by a 10-horsepower donkey engine.
From that small beginning the laundry industry has grown until a
business of $453,877,518 was done in power laundries alone m 1927.
Not only has its growth been tremendous but the character of the
industry has changed. Until 1915 it was chiefly a shirt-and-collar
business, with a slowly growing commercial and family trade. Then
came the home electric washer, and the laundryman, in order to com­
pete, provided a wet-wash service with a pound basis of charge.
From this have developed the rough-dry and finished family services,
frequently on the pound basis of payment. The need for these new
services is plainly shown by their rapid growth. According to facts
presented in the laundry owners’ magazine, The American Outlook,
the family-bundle business in the group of laundries reported showed
an increase of 10.9 per cent in the first six months of 1928 over the
same period, in 1927. More than 70 per cent of the laundries reported
an increase in this type of work.3
The following statement gives the number of laundries, number of
wage earners, and amount taken in for work done reported by the
United States Bureau of the Census in the past 20 years.4

Year
Number1

3,
4,
4,
4,
5,

1909
1914
1919
1925
1927

845
639
881
859
962

Per cent of
increase
over last
report

20. 7
5. 2
2.5
22. 7

Received for work done

Wage earners

Laundries reported

Number

105,
126,
130,
169,
203,

Per cent of
increase
over last
report

216
665
489
200
215

20.
3.
29.
20.

4
0
7
1

Per cent of
increase
over last
report

Amount

$100,
138,
233,
362,
453,

900,
373,
815,
294,
877,

182
117
827
749
518

37.
69.
54.
25.

1
0
9
3

1 Power laundries doing a business of $5,000 or more in a year.
2 In this case it was a decrease.

The most striking fact brought out by these figures is the tre­
mendous increase during the period covered in the amount of work
done, measured in dollars, and the markedly smaller increases m
number of wage earners and number of establishments.
Per cent of increase,
1909 to 1927

Amount received for work done
Number of wage earners---------Number of laundries----------------

349. 8
93. 1
55. 1

The figures illustrate the result of two marked changes in the
laundry industry, one in the character of articles laundered and the* S
t U. s. Department of Commerce. Census of Commercial Power Laundries, 1927. News release, Feb.
2nj The' American Outlook. American Laundry Machinery Co., of Cincinnati, New York, Chicago, and
S™uTSABureau ofthe Census1.' Fourteenth Census: 1920, vol. 10, Manufactures, 1919, p. 1>S3’B[X“'1‘1
Census of Manufactures, 1925, p. 1,255; and Census of Commercial Power Laundries, 1927. News release,
Feb. 25, 1929,




INTKODUCTION

3

other in the way in which the work is done. The change in type of
work, from men’s linen, chiefly collars and cuffs, to the inclusion of
commercial work and family bundles that may be returned damp,
rough-dried, or ironed, has greatly increased the volume of work with­
out a proportionate increase in wage earners or plants. The second
change is that from an industry run on haphazard and individualistic
lines to one operated on scientific and group methods. These changes
could not have taken place without a transition in the social whole.
A New York State report briefly enumerates the conditions that
have played their part in the revolution of the laundry industry:
A steadily increasing number of women are employed outside the
home; those not so employed engage others to do their washing in
greater numbers than ever before; servants are becoming increas­
ingly difficult to obtain and increasingly expensive; more people are
living in apartments than formerly; apartments are becoming smaller
with poorer facilities for washing and ironing.5
The laundry industry, unlike other factory work, does not create
a commodity from raw material; rather, it renovates an already
completed product and does not even own the material on which
it works. In other words, it receives pay for service and it competes
not so much with other laundries as with possible customers. In
spite of these points on which it differs from other factory-run indus­
tries, however, the laundry industry has followed them in its devel­
opment. The best laundries are laid out on a production-line basis
orv °Pera^ed much as highly specialized and systematized factories.
Close attention is given to motion study and to time study. Every
mechanical operation is carefully controlled as to time, as to tempera­
ture, as to materials, and as to other essential factors.” 6 This
may be rather an efficiency goal than an actual accomplishment,
but the laundry is one of the few industries that carry on laboratory
studies not for the benefit of a single plant but for all in the industry,
and the willingness to learn and to pass on information from one
to all is a marked feature of the yearly meetings of the employers’
association.
In considering the census figures another feature of the efficiency
move is noted: The merging of several laundries, offering many
kinds ol service, under one operating control. This consolidation
ol a number of single laundries into corporations, in some cases
privately owned and in some having many stockholders, was coinci­
dent with the requirement of much larger capital for the operation
ot a laundry equipped with the latest and most up-to-date machinery,
this necessary increase in invested capital made necessary also more
expert management, wholesale buying of supplies, combined collec­
tion and delivery of goods—all part of sound and economic operating.
the decrease in the proportion of owners and firm members to
number of laundries gives a picture of the consolidation that is now
going on of groups of laundries under one management. According
Eflert uplntte H^h SwoS.^ectaf BuLlM^fp^00^^8 * St6am LaUndries and their
Tme?Webbe?&dCa Chief goggle?




Hundred

Miili0’n

Dollar Industry, by Frederic H. Bradshaw.

4

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

to the United States census figures, the number of owners or firm
members to a laundry changed over a period of years as follows:7
In
In
In
In

1909
1914
1919______________________
1925-_____________________

1.
1.
1.
.

1
0
0
8

Authorities consulted in the present survey spoke of one city in
which all the laundries were corporation-owned and said that in
certain others a considerable number were under one management.
Combination is the trend of the times and it is being followed in the
laundry industry.
What effect has all this on the woman worker? Any careful and
scientific study of undesirable conditions usually results in their
betterment, especially when combined with the modern knowledge
that bad conditions “don’t pay.” It used to be taken for granted
that great irregularity of hours—very long ones on certain days in
the week and short ones on others—was a necessary handicap of
the industry. In 1912 a study of laundries showed 86.8 per. cent
of the workers as having two or more short days in the week and
others correspondingly long.8 In the present study there was little
variation in daily hours except the Saturday half holiday. House­
wives are being educated to the fact that to insist on the completion
of laundry work in the earlier part of the week means long hours for
the workers and fatigue that is not compensated for by shorter hours
later in the week.
This education may be accomplished in different ways: Sometimes
by a lower rate for bundles picked up after Wednesday, sometimes by
an explanation to the housewife, and sometimes, as in one leading
plant, by experiment. In the case last mentioned, the experiment
was made necessary by a heavy snow that for some time made it
impossible to visit each customer oftener than once a week, and the
results were so satisfactory that the management decided to run the
laundry on a weekly-service basis. When notified of the change less
than 5 per cent of the customers withdrew, and for a number of years
this laundry has operated on a 1-week-service basis.
More scientific operation within the plant usually results in better
arrangements and fewer steps for the worker. The new machinery is
easier of operation and better guarded than the old, and if combined
with this increased efficiency of operation there is cooperation and
consultation with the employees, the results to the worker are better
pay, better hours, and better working conditions. The aim of modern
laundry management is well expressed by a prominent laundry owner:
“There must be included as a means of arousing and retaining interest
some plan which gives to the employee an opportunity to freely and
frankly discuss with management on a man-to-man basis such matters
as intimately affect the well-being of the worker.” 9
Certain conditions of the laundry industry must be kept in mind in
the discussion of facts in the present study.
7 U. S. Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census: 1920. vol. 10, Manufactures, 1919, p. 1027; and
Biennial Census of Manufactures, 1925, p. 1266.
a U. S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment of Women in Power Laun­
dries in Milwaukee. Bui. 122,1913, p. 74.
s Laundry owners National Association. Advance report, Thirty-sixth Annual Convention, New York
City, October, 1919, p. 6.




INTRODUCTION

5

It is a year-round industry, not a seasonal one. Census figures of
volume of business done in each month of 1925 by 3,568 power laun­
dries show an average variation of 3.6 per cent.10 This is supported
by the variation in number of laundry employees in one State in 1927
reported by another authority, the per cent being almost the same—3.
Furthermore, one laundry employing more than 400 people reports
for 1926 an average variation of 3.6 per cent. These figures indicate
remarkable steadiness in the industry.
The laundry industry is very closely tied up with the textile industry.
When garments are torn the housewife blames the laundry. This is
not always just, as the fault may lie in the material itself, through
imperfections that the dressing in the cloth concealed. If the material
is at fault, the store where it was purchased receives complaint and the
store, in turn, complains to the manufacturer. Thus the manufacturer,
the merchant, and the laundry operator are beginning to realize that
they are part of a whole and should work together to give satisfactory
service. In one large city a conference of representatives of the three
groups, with technical experts, was held recently to determine how
they could insure to their joint customers good textiles and good
laundering.
Air conditions are a constant problem in the laundry industry. The
washing and ironing generate heat and steam, and in too many
laundries this condition is taken for granted, as was the irregularity
of daily hours before that was found possible of correction. No
matter how good, how expensive, the mechanical equipment may be,
with temperatures of 80° and over no human machine can remain
efficient for long or continue to produce good work.
The industry employs large numbers of women, two-thirds of its
operatives, according to the 1920 census, being females.11 Women
are found in all the laundry processes, though in rare instances only
do they operate the mechanical washers.
When the clothes are brought to the laundry women mark them
and in many cases sort them. They wash by hand the fine linen
and silk. After the washing the starching is done, usually by a ma­
chine but sometimes by hand, and then the clothes must be dried.
There are three different ways of drying. The flat pieces and com­
mon body clothes are put in an extractor, a spinning metal basket that,
revolving within a container at great speed, forces through the holes
almost all the moisture. Women sometimes operate these, but usually
they are run by men, women having charge of the smaller starch
extractors. Clothes are dried also in a tumbler, somewhat on the
principle of the extractor except that it tumbles the clothes back and
forth in a large container filled with hot air. The third method, used
principally for collars but sometimes for body clothes, consists of
hanging the articles on a rack that revolves or travels on moving
hangers into a heated room.
The clothes from the tumblers go direct to the ironer, but those
from the extractor must first be shaken by hand. Frequently they
are run through a cold tumbler so as to loosen those that are tightly
wound. The ironing is done in three ways—by running the articles
through flat-work ironers with steam-heated rollers, by placing
them in steam-heated presses, and by the use of an iron by hand. The
U. S. Bureau of the Census. Biennia] Census of Manufactures, 1925, p. 1259.
Fourteenth Census; 1920, vol. 4, Population, Occupations, p, 43,

11 Ibid,




6

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

ironing processes are done almost exclusively by women. The clothes
are then folded and laid on tables or on moving belts to be sorted into
their respective bundles. In almost every instance the sorting and
bundling are done by women.
The foregoing are the major processes on finished work. There
are other kinds of services, such as “wet wash,” where the clothes are
returned damp for the housewife to iron, “rough dry,” where the flat
work is ironed and the wearing apparel starched and dried, and other
variations of partly completed work. These different services are
built on the needs of the communities and illustrate the primary
function of the laundry to give service. The future of the industry
may be summed up in the words of the progressive laundry owner
who said: “We are not so much an industry as a public utility and as
such should be classed with electric-light companies and telegraph
and telephone services.”
PURPOSE, METHOD, AND SCOPE

Purpose of the study.
In certain industries women play a far more important part than in
others. Cotton-goods, clothing, candy, and paper-box factories, like
laundries, employ large numbers of women, and in some of these the
women actually outnumber the men. The knowledge of what is
happening to these hundreds of thousands of women is the concern
not only of their respective industries but of their communities and
the country as a whole. The laundry. industry, though not so old as
the manufacture of textiles and clothing, is rapidly becoming one of
the major woman-employing industries. The number of women
laundry operatives, according to the last occupational censuses greater
than the number of women in paper-box and candy factories and
more than half as many as those in cotton mills.12 The rapid growth
of the laundry industry in size and efficiency and its importance to the
woman worker and to the public were felt to warrant a survey of
conditions within the industry by the Women’s Bureau. Accordingly,
such a survey was made, the field work beginning in September, 1927,
and ending in May, 1928.
Method.
The survey covered the hours, wages, and working conditions in
laundries and the composition of the working force, including such
facts as nationality, age, marital condition, and length of service.
An effort was made, through home interviews, to learn of the advan­
tages and drawbacks in laundry work from the point of view of the
employee, and this was done mainly through a comparison with
work done by the woman herself in other industries. Further infor­
mation that threw light on this subject was obtained by learning the
worker’s reason for leaving her previous job, whether in a laundry or
in any other line of work.
Information concerning the laundry practices was obtained through
the cooperation of laundry owners and the assistance, freely given, of
their national and local organizations. In the individual laundries
an inspection of working conditions was made, scheduled hours were
noted, a one week’s pay roll was copied and, wherever such records11
11V. S, Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census: 1920. vol. i, Population, Occupations, pp. 38-13.




INTRODUCTION

7

were available, the actual hours worked by each woman during that
week were recorded.
Information concerning the workers was obtained from two sources:
(1) Cards, with questions as to nativity, age, marital status, and
length of service, were distributed to the women at work in the laundry,
to be filled out by them; (2) visits were made to a number of women
in their homes and questions were asked as to their present work, time
in the laundry industry, past work history, preference as regards kind
of work, reason for leaving previous job, reason for working, and, if
married, number of children under 14 years of age. The women to
be interviewed were selected by the sampling method, two or three
different sections of the city being visited so that more than one type
of worker and one land of laundry would be included.
Scope.
In the Census of Manufactures for 1925, the number of power laun­
dries reported was 4,859.13 This includes large and small, those in
cities and in small towns, and those classified as wet-wash, familywork, and general commercial laundries. In the present study an
effort was made to cover a cross section of the industry, with two
conditions in mind—that only the larger and more representative
cities should be surveyed, and that the laundries selected should be
those in which a considerable number of women were employed.
Naturally, the Women’s Bureau is most concerned with industry as
it affects women workers, and with its limited resources the most
efficient outlay could be made in the more populous centers. In
consequence, the conditions, earnings, and hours reported cover
large cities only and may not be representative of small towns. No
laundry doing wet wash only was included in the study, as very few
women are employed in that work.
Records were obtained from 290 laundries in 23 cities. In the
tabulations certain cities that are adjoining are treated as a unit,
laundries in Minneapolis and St. Paul being thrown together, as are
those in Jersey City and Newark and in St. Petersburg and Tampa.
A further condensation was effected by combining the figures of cities
in the same part of the country. The following table gives the
laundries by section and shows the number and sex of the employees.
13 Ibid. Biennial Census of Manufactures, 1925, p. 1252.




8

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Table 1.

Number of establishments visited and number of men and women they
employed, by section and city
Number
of estab­
lishments
visited

Section and city

All places____ _________

All employees
White

Men

Negro

White

Women

Negro

White

Negro

290

18,052

6,285

3,571

1,008

14,481

5,277

51

3,071

425

645

89

2,426

336

30
11
10

1,860
529
682

103
302
20

381
110
154

29
59
1

1,479
419
528

19

_

127

7,338

2,505

1,412

489

5,926

2,016

Chicago.. ......... ................ .
Cincinnati_____
_
Cleveland_______ ___
Dos Moines.
Detroit..___ _____
___
Indianapolis______ _____
Milwaukee_ ___________
Minneapolis and St. Paul..

22
14
16
6
20
12
13
24

1,118
712
739
286
1,565
1,062
652
1,204

1,310
93
547

282
170
126
48
301
153

260
42
86

836
542
613

1,050

74
24

1,264
909

402
50

5

216

3

988

2

________ _____

65

6,753

29

1,186

13

5, 567

16

Los Angeles
Portland________ _
San Francisco.
Seattle........................... ........

21
12
17
15

3,131
887
1,870
865

29

518
117

13

. 2,613

47

890

3,326

328

417

562

2,909

12
11
6
6
12

299
172
62
41
316

1,105
831
404
575
411

119
54
15
29
m

154
87
46
87
43

180
118
47
12
205

951
744
358

Eastern________
Boston.......... ............ ..........
Jersey City and Newark_
_
Providence_________ ____
Middle western_____ _____

Western____

Southern _______________
Atlanta
Birmingham
Jacksonville
Richmond_____
St. Petersburg and Tampa..

476
74

368

Notwithstanding that only 23 cities in the entire country were
visited and that in those cities all laundries could not be scheduled,
the number of wage earners is more than one-seventh of the number
reported for the entire industry in 1925. As all but three of the
cities visited by the Women’s Bureau had a population in 1920 of
over 100,000, it was to be expected that the 290 laundries would
average a greater number of wage earners than did the 4,800 reporting
for the census. The average number of employees per laundry in
the present study wTas 83.9 and the average according to the 1925
census was 34.8. The larger average in the laundries selected by
the Women’s Bureau may be partly due to the trend, already noted,
for the laundry industry to develop larger and larger units. This
trend is illustrated by the following brief summary from the Census
of Manufactures.14
Number of wage earners
Year

Number of
laundries
Total

1914__________
.
_______
1919_______________________________
1925____________________________




6, 097
5, 678
4, 859

130, 641
131, 879
169, 200

Average per
laundry
21. 4
23. 2
34. 8

INTRODUCTION

9

Here is shown a steady decline in the number of establishments
together with an increase in the number of wTage earners.
Unfortunately, there are no very recent census figures showing the
proportion of men and women in the laundry industry. The Census
of Occupations in 1920 shows two-thirds of the laundry operatives to
be women, a very slight decrease from the figure reported in 1910.15
In the study by the Women’s Bureau the proportion of women was
very much higher than the census figures, more than four-fifths of
the workers being females. This difference in the proportion of
women may be due to the fact that the laundries selected were the
larger, general-commercial laundries, doing, as a rule, all varieties of
work, while the laundries in the census records include many wetwash laundries where very few women arc employed and more small
establishments.
The proportion of women employed in different sections of the
country shows no great variation.
Section

Per cent
of women

All places'81. 2
Eastern 79. 0
Middle western80. 7
Western82. 3
Southern;82. 3

There was, however, a wide variation in the proportion of white
and negro women, as naturally would be the case with the much
larger representation of negroes in the total population of some
sections of the country than of others. As a whole, negro women
composed a little more than one-quarter (26.7 per cent) of the women
employed in laundries. In the South somewhat more than 4 in
every 5 female workers were negroes, wrhile on the Pacific coast there
were but 16 negroes in a total of 5,583 women.
In different cities in the same section of the country the extent to
which negro women were employed showed wride variations. None
were found in the laundries visited in Milwaukee, though in Chicago,
two hours away by rail, more than half of the women working in the
laundries for which records were taken were negroes. In Detroit
nearly one-fourth of the women were colored, while in Indianapolis
there were only 5.2 per cent. Cleveland had a very much larger
proportion of negro workers than had the more southern city of
Cincinnati (42.9 and 8.6 per cent, respectively), while Jacksonville,
which, according to the 1920 census, had a smaller proportion of
negroes in the female population than had Birmingham, showed a
larger per cent of negro women in laundries than did the Alabama city.
Very few women were found who worked in laundries at night.
Four plants reported a regular night shift, employing a total of 72
white and 16 negro women, and a fifth laundry had a shift of 15
women who began at 12.30 noon and worked until 11 o’clock at night.
The laundry industry as a whole is essentially a daylight industry,
as is shown by the fact that in 290 laundries visited, w'here employ­
ment was given to 19,758 women, only 103 women worked on an
evening or a night shift.
The range of women’s occupations in a laundry covers almost every
variety of job but that of engineer and driver. Women were found
18 TJ. S. Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth census: 1920, vol. 4, Population, Occupations, p. 43.

103127°—30------ 2




10

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

operating presses, tumblers, blanket driers, and, more rarely, washing
machines. They marked and sorted, starched and ironed, packed
and wrapped, and did general cleaning. They superintended the
work as forelady and, in at least eight cases, as superintendent.
Apparently there was almost no laundry work that they could not
do, but figures show that the great majority were massed in certain
occupations. Nearly two-fifths of all the white women reported were
on flat-work ironers, as shakers, feeders, or folders. Markers and
sorters were the next largest group, comprising more than half as
many white women as those on flat-ironing machines. Women
operating presses and doing hand ironing were the only other groups
with as many as 10 per cent of the total number. The smallest group
was of women engaged on machine washing, with a total of only 12.
Excepting superintendents, negro women were found in every occu­
pation where white women were employed, some even being foreladies,
but their proportions in the various occupations were different.
Their largest group was engaged in work on or connected with the
flat-work ironers, as was the case with the white workers, but nearly
one-half of the negro women compared to not quite two-fifths of the
white were so employed. Pressing and hand ironing occupied large
groups of negro women, while a much smaller per cent than in the case
of white women were employed as markers and sorters. In actual
numbers negro women exceeded the white in only two laundry pro­
cesses, hand and machine washing, and the numbers so employed
were only 51 negro women on hand washing and 15 on machine
washing.
SUMMARY
NUMBERS
The survey included 290 power laundries in 23 cities situated in 17 States.
It was begun in September, 1927, and ended early in May, 1928.
The number of men and women workers in the laundries was 24,337, of whom
19,758 (81.2 per cent) were women.
Negro women comprised a little more than a fourth (26.7 per cent) of the women
employed.
Women were found in all occupations except those of collection and delivery
and of engineers.
Negro women were employed in all occupations where white women were work­
ing, with the exception of superintendent.
WORKING CONDITIONS

Ventilation and temperature.
In the temperature readings taken by means of a sling psychrometer, one-fourth
of the dry-bulb readings were 80° and over.
Of these dry-bulb readings of 80° and over, one-half had wet-bulb readings of
70° and over.
A little more than a fifth of the dry-bulb readings of 80° and over had a relative
humidity of 60 per cent and more.
Nearly one-half (46.7 per.cent) of the readings were reported by the investi­
gator as being “comfortable” and about the same proportion as being “warm”
or “hot.”
One-half of the readings reported as “comfortable” were from 70° to 75° dry
bulb and 60° to 65° wet bulb.
More than three-fourths of the readings under “hot” had a dry bulb of 80°
and over and all had a wet bulb of 70° and over.
_
_
No artificial ventilation was found in one-third of the laundries visited.




si ill

iflM

* -‘•in,




|

HI ■ t V­

ST*?

“PtfV

Siinr

.

PLATE 2.—THE HEAT FROM THE FLAT-WORK IRONERS IS CARRIED OFF

11

INTRODUCTION
Local exhausts and protection.

Of the 214 laundries for which this item was reported, 11.2 per cent had hoods
with exhausts over all their flat-work ironers and a number of others had some of
their machines so equipped.
Of the laundries reporting, over four-fifths of those with hot tumblers and onesixth of those with drying rooms were equipped with outside exhausts.

Lighting.
Natural lighting was found satisfactory in half the laundries.
was found satisfactory in more than three-fourths.

Artificial lighting

Floors.
Floors throughout the entire plant were of cement in 60 and of wood in 50 of the
290 laundries visited.

Seating.
Seats for all employees were supplied by 19 laundries and for some workers by
118 others.

Sanitation.
More than half (56.2 per cent) of the laundries were equipped with bubble
fountains, but only 27 had bubblers that were sanitary.
A little over a fifth (21 per cent) of the laundries used common drinking cups.
Special washing facilities were provided in all but 28 laundries. In two-fifths
of the laundries toilet accommodations were insufficient in number, according to
Women’s Bureau standards, and in 27 there was but one seat for 40 or more
women.
In more than a third (37 per cent) of the laundries the toilets had no outside
ventilation.
Toilet rooms were clean in about 60 per cent of the cases.

First-aid provision.
First aid was provided in all but 15 laundries and a special person to administer
it in all but 58.

Cloak rooms.
Special cloak rooms were found in about one-half of the laundries.
sion for wraps was recorded in 33 plants.

No provi­

Rest rooms.
Only 27 laundries had special rest rooms; 27 more had rest facilities in a cloak,
lunch, or wash room.

Lunch rooms.
A lunch room was provided in 55 laundries and a gas or electric plate for the
employees’ use in 99 others.

Uniforms.
Uniforms were required in 116 laundries and in 33 they were furnished by
the management.
As a rule uniforms were laundered free of charge to the worker.

Employment machinery.
Employment departments were found in five large laundries.
the employing of labor was under a single person.

In 198 plants

Hazards.
Seven laundries of the 290 had flat-work ironers without a guard, and 92 had
extractors without guards. In 45 laundries extractors were operating with the
covers fastened up.
No guards on presses were reported in 44 laundries.
Slippery floors in departments where women worked were found in 24 laundries.
Handrails for stairs were lacking in 21 plants.
Stairs were in bad repair in 30 plants, and the construction of stairways was
unsatisfactory, because of high risers or narrow or triangular treads, in 76 laundries.

Strain.
In 166 laundries some presses operated with foot treadle were in use.
Old-fashioned body ironers were found in a small number of plants.




12

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
THE WORKERS

Nationality (18,369 women).
Over four-fifths of the 18,369 women in the laundries were native born.
and Canada furnished 28.2 per cent of the foreign-born women.

Mexico

Age (16,462 women).
Women 40 years of age and over comprised 27.7 per cent of the white workers
and 12 per cent of the negro.
Women under 20 years of age comprised 13.4 per cent of the white workers
and 15.1 per cent of the negro.

Marital status (16,554 women reported).
Married women composed the largest group, 43.1 per cent of the white women
and 41.1 per cent of the negro women.
The widowed, separated, and divorced women were nearly a fourth (23.3
per cent) of the white workers and 30 per cent of the negro women.

Length of service (16,181 women).
Over two-fifths of the women (43.1 per cent of the white and 42.8 per cent
of the negro) had been from one to five years with the same laundry.
A little less than two-fifths (37.2 per cent) of the white women and a little
more than two-fifths (40.2 per cent) of the negro women had had less than a year
of service, and 12.5 per cent of the white and 14.7 per cent of the negro less than
three months of service.
The group with service of 10 years and over included but 6.3 per cent of the
white women and 4 per cent of the negro, and in the group with service of 15
years and over were 2.4 per cent of the white and less than 1 per cent of the
negro women.

Time in the trade (1,821 women).
Over one-half of 1,296 white women interviewed had been in the industry
off and on for five years and more, and 15.4 per cent of the women had worked
off and on in laundries for 15 years or more.
Only 4.4 per cent of the negro women had worked in laundries off and on for
15 years or more. A larger proportion than of the white women had been in
the industry less than five years.

Reason for working (1,850 women).
Of 1,315 white women giving in the home interviews their reasons for working,
91.7 per cent reported “necessity.”
Only 2 per cent gave as a reason the desire for “extras.”
All but one of those who were single were working to support themselves or
themselves and family.
•
The largest group of married women were working because of the failure of
the husband to provide adequate support.
_
Of the 535 negro women reporting on this subject, all but one of the single,
■widowed, separated, and divorced, worked from “necessity,” while 61.8 per
cent of the married women were working to support self and family.
A little over one-third of the mothers of both races had children under 14
years of age.

Age and occupation (1,837 women).
The largest proportion of white women shaking, feeding, or folding on the large
flat-work ironers were 20 and under 40 years of age. A fifth were under 20 years.
Nearly half of the white women doing hand ironing were 40 years of age
and over.
On presses nearly three-fifths of the workers were from 20 to 40 years of age.
The markers and sorters had 70.2 per cent from 20 to 40 years of age.
In each occupation, except hand ironing, more than half of the negro women
were between 20 and 30 years of age.
Of the negro women doing hand ironing, over a fifth were 40 years and over
and a third were 30 and under 40 years of age.

Work experience (1,858 women).
A third of the white and a fifth of the negro women reporting had worked in
laundries only.
About 1 in 5 of the white women had worked in two or more industries besides
laundries.




13

INTRODUCTION

A tenth of the white and over two-fifths of the negro women had trieddomestie
service and laundries, and manufacturing and laundry work had occupied 1 in 6
of all the women reporting.

Reason for leaving last place (1,493 women).
Separation from laundries for personal reasons had occurred in two-thirds_ of
the cases of the white and in three-fifths of the cases of the negro women reporting
on this.
.
Almost three-fifths of the reasons given by the white women for leaving manu­
facturing were connected with the industry, while stores and hotels and restau­
rants showed practically the same proportions to have left for industrial and for
personal reasons.
. .
.
Personal reasons were the most important for those quitting domestic service,
but the per cent in this group was not so high as in laundries.

Type of work preferred and reason given (740 women).
Of 740 women expressing preferences, 587 preferred laundry work to that in
other industries.
Thirty per cent of those giving their reasons for preferring laundry work
mentioned “better hours.”
Nearly as many of the answers, 26.8 per cent, reported “better pay.
Of. the women preferring other industries to laundries, 54.5 per cent gave as the
reason “better pay.”
A small proportion of the women (6.6 per cent) gave better hours as the
reason for preferring other than laundry work, but “better working conditions”
was given in 20.7 per cent of the answers.
HOURS

Weekly hours (19,481 women).
The highest per cents of the women had scheduled weekly hours as follows:
Per cent

East, 48 and under------------------------------------- ---------------------- 80. 2
Middle West, 50 and under 54-------------------------------------------- 51. 7
West, 48 and under 97. 2
South, 54 and over------------------------------------------------------------- 48. 4
and over 50 and under 54 39. 7

Daily hours (19,478 women).
For the scheduled daily hours the figures are—

Per cent

East, over 8 and under 9 58. 9
Middle West, 9------------------------------------------------------------------ 67- 9
West, 8_______________________________________ __________— 97. 2
South, over 9 and including 10-------------------------------------------- 82. 0
(Over 9 and under 10 hours, 42 per cent; 10 hours, 40 per
cent.)

Saturday hours (19,461 women).
For Saturday hours they are—
East, under 6_____________
Middle West, 5 and under 6
West, 8 and under 9______
South, 6 and under 8______

Per ■'ent

.
.
_

70.2
50. 3
99.3
47. 4

Lunch period (19,529 women).
For 62.9 per cent of the women the lunch period was 30 minutes.
per cent it was 1 hour. The remainder fell between.

For 21.9

Rest periods.
Only 2,216 women, in 32 plants, were allowed rest periods.

Actual hours worked (12,822 women).
The full scheduled hours were worked by 50.2 per cent of the white and 29
per cent of the negro women. Full time was greatest in the East and the West.
Less than scheduled hours (time lost) was worked by 39.6 per cent of the white
and 52.1 per cent of the negro women. It was greatest in the Middle West.
More than scheduled hours (overtime) was worked by 10.2 per cent of the white
and 18.9 per cent of the negro women. It was greatest in the South.




14

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
WAGES

Week’s earnings (19,180 women).
Per cent of women whose earnings were—
White
(14,104

women)
Under $8 . _. __ _ ________
Under $10 .
__ ______
_
Under $12__ ____ ____ _
_
_
Under $15._______
. .
Under $18
_______
Under $20. ...
___

3.
5.
12.
39.
69.
82.

Negro
(5,076

women)

4
9
8
0
5
7

43.
59.
72.
91.
97.
99.

3
2
9
8
9
0

The medians of the earnings—half the women receiving more and half receiving
less—were—
White

All places. .....
East
_ _______
Middle West__ ____ ...

__

South_______

...

_

.

. .

$16.
14.
14.
17.
13.

10
50
75
90
95

Negro

$8.
12.
12.
117.
7.

85
50
25
50
15

116 women.

For the 5,983 women who worked the full scheduled week the medians were—
W’hite

All places____ _.
.. ______
East_______ ...
.
.
Middle West____ .. _ __ _
_
West .. .
_____
__
South
_
_

$17.
15.
15.
19.
15.

80
05
90
05
55

Negro

$10.
13.
12.
(')
7.

25
80
75
25

■ Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

Of the four lines of work employing the most women (16,277) the numbers of
women and their median earnings were—
White women
Number

Mark and sort..
Flat work
Press operate__
Hand iron
_

.
________
__ ________
. ______
_ _____

2,
5,
1,
1,

914
296
711
883

Negro women

Median

$17.
14.
16.
16.

35
55
70
60

Number

241
2, 367
838
1, 027

Median

$11.
8.
9.
7.

90
65
50
95

Only about 10 per cent of the women were pieceworkers.
Earnings correlated with time with the firm (13,016 women) show medians for
white women of $14.55 with service of less than a year, $15.65 with one and under
two years, and a steady advance to $19.30 with service of 15 years or more. For
negro women the medians are $7.90 with less than a year’s service, $8.70 with
one and under two years, advancing to $10.65 with 10 and under 15 years and
then falling slightly.




15

INTRODUCTION
Weekly rates (15,873 women).

The per cent distribution of women according to their weekly rates of pay is—
White
Under $10

_

_____

$15 and under $20_
$20 and over

_

_

_

_____________
_

__ _

_

_

0.
30.
51.
18.

Negro
5
0
4
1

The highest rates were paid in the two California cities and in Seattle.




54.
36.
8.
.

9
6
2
4




f




.wm

PLATE 3.—NATURAL VENTILATION; SLAT BLINDS; CHAIR

WORKING CONDITIONS

Probably only within the last 30 years have employers in general
begun to realize that business and humanitarian conditions may go
hand in hand. . It would have been admitted earlier that light airy
rooms, with well-guarded machinery, seats, and good sanitary facili­
ties, constituted a better and more heathful place to work in than one
with poor light, stuffy air, and inadequate comfort provisions. But
only since management became to a greater degree scientific and less a
matter of trial and error has it been discovered that good equipment
and housekeeping in plants, other factors being equal, attract and hold
the better workers and that the result also shows in dollars and cents.
Any mechanism—an engine running in an automobile or one in a
factory shows in results the care it receives, and this is true to almost
as great an extent of the human being. One large plant experimentm0,
m production found that merely moving a group of women into a
bright sunshiny room incrGflsod their output. Although poor working
conditions do not often create enough dissatisfaction to culminate in a
strike, without doubt they do cause a low morale and occasion in­
dividual stoppages.
Doctor Florence, in his book on fatigue and unrest, lists in the
following order the factors most important to the human body in the
physical environment of industrial establishments: Good air, good
lighting, freedom from excessive noise, safety, sanitation and tidiness
seating, and rest rooms.1 Good air, of course, implies healthful tem­
perature and humidity, ventilation (freedom from dust, fumes, odors)
and space; sanitation includes cleanliness, drinking water, lavatories'
The ease or difficulty of arriving at good conditions of air, of light
of qmet would depend to a great degree on the industry. In a textile
mill glass factory, candy-dipping or laundry plant air conditions
ideal for the worker would be far more difficult to obtain than in a
clothing shop, paper-box factory, or store. It is harder to have
satisfactory lighting where there are many overhead belts and shafts
and quiet is more difficult of attainment in a tin-can or nail factory ’
In laundries the large number of washing and drying machines and
the wet or damp clothes render the problem of good air conditions
exceedingly difficult. In the present study readings by a sling
psychrometer of dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures were taken
near the flat-work ironers and the presses and hand ironers. Readings
of the outside air also were taken on the same day, so that some allow­
ance could be made for very hot or cold weather. The study was
begun in September, 1927, and ended in early May, 1928. During
several of the winter months the survey was carried on in California
and m the South, so that extremes of outdoor temperatures were
avoided as much as possible.
iFtoM.f.SMgant, Economics of Fatigue and Unrest.




George Allen & Unwin (Ltd.), London, 1924,

17

18

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Ventilation and temperature.
The comfort and efficiency of the worker are very materially affected
by the conditions of air in which she works. It has long been under­
stood that stale air is injurious and that air must be fresh or it will be
harmful, but within recent years it has been shown that ill effects upon
health and efficiency are noticeable when the air is hot, stagnant, and
contains high humidity. Professor Winslow says that1 ‘ overheating is
the most serious aspect of underventilating,”2 and in a more recent
article on ventilation of the industrial plant the same fact is brought
out in these words: “Present-day concern is not with the air that is
breathed but with the air lived in.” The article referred to gives a
definition of desirable air conditions to “live in.” To be refreshing to
the skin and stimulating to the various parts of the body, air must be
moderately cool, in gentle motion, moderately moist, and slightly
variable in temperature, and an effort should be made to keep the air
temperature between 66° and 68° F.3 This desirable standard of
air not too hot, without too much moisture, and with sufficient move­
ment is, like all ideals, worth striving for but difficult of attainment.
In each plant in the present study readings were taken with a-sling
psychrometer near the flat-work ironers and presses. (See Appendix
Tables I to V.) If the presses were in more than one department a
reading was taken in each department. The wet-bulb readings
probably err on the side of being too low, as there was some difficulty
in keeping the cloth covering of the bulb fresh and clean and in some
cases the time allowed for swinging may have varied The investi­
gator also noted her feelings—that is, whether the place where the
readings were taken seemed cold, warm, or hot and these sensations
have been correlated with the readings. Without doubt the in\ estigator’s sensations were not always those of the laundry workers,
most of whom were engaged in considerable physical exercise but
probably were acclimatized to a certain extent. How far a physical
and psychological adjustment to heat or cold can be made it .is difficult
to tell. Doctor Vernon found that “unendurable limits of air
temperature are greatly affected by acclimatizations. Toward the
end of an experimental series it was about 6° b. higher than in the
experiments made a month earlier.”4 Even when an adaptation is
made, as was found to be the case with a laundry worker whose
reactions to high temperatures were compared with those of persons
not accustomed to high temperatures, the results of the examinations
are modified by the statement that while the workers in the ironing
room appear to be able to adapt themselves remarkably well to the
atmospheric conditions, this adaptation constitutes an undue strain
upon them and must, therefore, be regarded as injurious to health.
Thus, although the woman working constantly m warm, moist air
may become to a certain extent immune as far as immediate bad effects
are concerned, she nevertheless pays a price, according to Doctor
Vernon, through the additional strain endured.
i Winslow, C.-E. A. Effect of Atmospheric Conditions upon Fatigue and Efficiency. In Monthly
L“wood'Tho’matm" a’nrt1Uendritsen, Ethel M. Ventilation of the Industrial Plant. In Industrial
“.“‘ffs1.’ The'Effect Atmospheric Conditions on Health and Efficiency (with special reference to
the cotton industry). In Journal of Industrial Hygiene, July, 1925, p. 330.
, .
,
.
a New York
Department of Labor. A Study of Hygienic Conditions in Steam Laundries and their
Effect upon the Health of Workers. Special Bui. 130, 1924, p. 15.




WORKING CONDITIONS

19

In tests made by the New York State Commission on Ventilation
which covered a 3-year period, it was found that in labor involving
slight muscular activity, such as typewriting, the amount of work
performed with the thermometer at 68° F. was 6.3 per cent greater
than the amount with the temperature at 75° F. The results of the
experiments are summarized in the following words: “The experiments
cited 1 mulish very clear evidence that a temperature of 24° C. (75° F.l
and still more one of 30° C. (86° F.) produces a marked disinclination
to any form of physical work, even such light work as typewriting.”6
Near the flat-work ironers more than one-half of the dry-bulb
readings (53.9 per cent) were 75° and over, with 3.5 per cent 85° and
over Ihe temperature readings of the dry bulb near the presses
were high m more instances than near the flat-work ironers, nearly
three-1 ourths (72 per cent) being 75° and over and 7.5 per cent 85° and
over, ihe combined dry-bulb readings of the flat-work ironers and
presses showed 38 cases of 85° and over and only 9 below 65°, while
the largest single group was from 75° to 80°. 'These figures differ
widely irom desirable temperatures advocated in an article in Man­
agement Review: “For people normally clothed, and slightly active,
m still air, the most favorable temperature conditions are 68° F on
the dry bulb and 58° wet bulb * * * relative humidity of
approximately 55 per cent.” The article continues, “as temperatures
are higher * * * conditions are less favorable for efficient
working. A temperature of 75° dry-bulb with the usual relative
numidity, or wet-bulb reading, is likely to lower one’s efficiency or
productivity as much as 15 per cent.”7
The majority of the readings of the wet bulb near the flat-work
ironers and the presses were 60° and under 70°, with nearly three1 ourths (70.1 and 74.7 per cent, respectively) falling in this classifi­
cation. Readings of 70° and over were fairly frequent, a little more
than an eighth of all the wet-bulb readings being in this high group.
JDoctor Haldane, through experiments carried on in England, decided
that the endurable limit of wet-bulb temperature was about 78° F.
li a moderate amount of mechanical work was being done.8 This
limit was seldom reached in the readings taken in the present study
It is, however, a question whether the jobs in laundries would come
under the classification umoderate amount of mechanical work.”
Some ol them would seem, instead, to be fairly strenuous muscular
work especially the jobs of shakers and folders. The combination
ol high temperature with considerable moisture is fatiguing, without
doubt. Doctor Pembrey and Doctor Collis state that “the prolonged
exposure to the hot moist atmosphere would appear to be more
injurious than exposure to even higher temperatures (wet-bulb) for a
shorter time.”9
. The combination of dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures is far more
important than either one, considered separately, except in the case of
excessively high readings. Of the 66 dry-bulb readings of 80° and
over near the flat-work ironers, 57.6 per cent had wet-bulb readings of
70 or more; near the presses, although the proportion was lower, the
RevTiSf

pp

a“d &C0DditiOI1S UP°n PatigUe “d Efficiency' Iv Monthly Labo^

I w°Y?I
In Management Reviewmanuury, 1827, pp. 6-7.
, rhe Effect of Atmospheric Conditions on Health and Efficiency (with special reference to
the cotton industry). In Journal of Industrial Hygiene, July, 1826, p. 322
P
reierence to
’ I Did., p, o^o.




20

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

actual number of wet-bulb readings over 70° combined with the dry
bulb of 80° or more, was about the same as in the ease of the flat-work
ironers. Relative humidity of as much as 60 per cent combined with
high dry-bulb temperatures was found in a greater proportion of cases
near the flat-worlc ironers than near the presses. Nearly a third
(31.8 per cent) of the dry-bulb readings of 80° and over near the flatwork ironers had a relative humidity of 60 per cent and over, while
near the presses only 14.7 per cent had this relative humidity combined
with dry-bulb temperatures of 80° or more. The combined readings
near the flat-work ironers and presses recorded more than a fifth
(21.1 per cent) of the dry-bulb temperatures of 80° and over with
relative humidity of 60 per cent or more.
.
In spite of the fact that temperature readings were not taken during
the hottest months, there was considerable variation in the out-of­
doors dry-bulb temperatures recorded. They had a wide range,
3 being 5° and under 10° and 15 being 80° and under 85°, with the
majority (50.6 per cent) 50° and under 65°. The effect of the outside
temperature on the dry-bulb readings is clearly reflected in the fact
that with outside temperatures of 60° and over, 84.1 per cent of the
inside readings were 75° or more. The temperatures of 75° and over
inside the laundries, however, were not confined to days when the
outside temperature was warm. Without doubt it is more difficult
to keep temperatures low when the outside air is mild, but that the
difficulty is still present in cool weather is apparent by the fact that
nearly a sixth (15.7 per cent) of all the indoor readings of 75 and over
occurred with outdoor temperatures at less than 45°; with 12 readings
the outside temperature was below 30°.
• The indoor wet-bulb readings are even harder to keep down when
there is much dampness in the outside air than are the dry-bulb
readings when it is warm out of doors. With outdoor wet-bulb read­
ings of 50° and over there was no indoor reading of less than 55°.
However, when the moisture in the outer air was low the same con­
dition was not necessarily reflected indoors, for when outdoor wetbulb readings were under 45° more than 6 per cent of the inside
readings were 70° and over.
Each investigator as she went through the laundry and swung her
psychrometer near the flat-work ironers and presses also made a note
of her sensations of comfort or discomfort. These feelings were
charted with the 604 dry-bulb readings and an interesting uniform­
ity of sensation with certain degrees of temperature was the result.
When the records read- “comfortable” one-half of the readings were
from 70° to 75° dry bulb and 60° to 65° wet bulb. The range of read­
ings when “comfortable” was tabulated was about the same for the
dry and the wet bulbs; one agent reported it comfortable with the
dry bulb between 60° and 65° and six readings of between 80° and
85° were so reported. No agent found it comfortable with the wet
bulb below 50° or as high as 75°. In all, 282 readings were listed as
comfortable. As would be expected, it was not commonly found to
be too cool in laundries, but 42 readings were thus reported. Among
these readings pronounced as cool a smaller proportion than in the
group termed comfortable were between 70° and 75° dry and 60°
and 65° wet, and a larger proportion were between 65° and 70° dry
and 55° and 60° wet. More than one-half of the “cool” readings
were under 70° dry and about two-fifths were below 60° wet. Where




21

WORKING CONDITIONS

the sensation was put down as “warm” S7.1 per cent of the cases
had a dry-bulb reading of 75° and over and 61.2 per cent of the wet
bulbs registered 65° or more. The largest group of readings under
“warm” were 75° to 80° dry and 65° to 70° wet.
Under the heading “very warm” not many readings were recorded,
probably because of the difficulty of determining when the sensation
was “very warm” and when it was “hot.” Because of this diffi­
culty, the two classifications have been combined under “hot.”
Three-fourths (75.5 per cent) of the dry-bulb readings under “hot”
were 80° and over, and all these readings had a wet-bulb temperature
of 70° or more. The highest temperatures were three with the dry
bulb at 90° and over and seven with the wet bulb at 75° and over.
Reviewing all the 604 readings, the following distribution is found:
Per cent

Cool_____ __________
Comfortable 46.
Warm____________________________________________________
Hot__________________________________

7. 0
7
29. 5

It must be emphasized again, however, that the sensations re­
ported were not of the laundry workers themselves but of the bu­
reau’s agents, passing through the plants and neither accustomed to
the temperature through habit nor exercising as were the women at
work.
In most plants an effort had been made to insure moving air by
natural or artificial means, and the provisions, both natural and arti­
ficial, were observed by the investigators when going through the
plants.
One-third of the 290 plants for which air conditions were reported
had only natural ventilation throughout, while in 103 establishments
some rooms had only natural ventilation and in others there was arti­
ficial as well. The dependence on natural means of ventilation was
greater in some sections of the country than in others. The least
artificial ventilation was found in laundries in the western group, and
it was stated by employers here that because of the equable climate
and cool winds in summer special ventilating facilities were not neces­
sary. About two-thirds of the laundries in this group had no artifi­
cial system of ventilation. Next to the western group, the southern
showed the least artificial ventilation, nearly one-half (46.8 per cent)
having nothing to supplement the window, door, or skylight. More
than 80 per cent of the plants in the middle-western group of laun­
dries improved the ventilation by such means as wall fans or exhausts.
Means for natural ventilation were reported good throughout 196
laundries of the total of 290 and in some rooms in 57 others. The
proportion of establishments where natural ventilation was definitely
unsatisfactory constituted a tenth of the whole, and in addition a
number of plants were noted that had unsatisfactory conditions in
certain rooms. The most usual form of artificial ventilation was the
wall exhaust, found in 67 establishments and in certain rooms in 95
others. Some laundries had paddle or individual electric fans as well
as wall exhausts, and some had fans but no exhausts. There seemed
to be some question as to the effectiveness of the small fan for work­
ers on the large flat-work ironers. A number of women complained
that it drove the hot air down on them and was worse than having




16

22

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

no fan. From the press operators and hand ironers, however, there
was no such complaint.
General systems of artificial ventilation were rather uncommon.
Only nine laundries had a complete system installed, eight of these
being in the middle-western group of laundries. Systems such as
the carrier were much more frequently found in certain rooms than
in entire plants. The greatest number of plants equipped with
special artificial ventilation for single rooms or departments were
found in the middle-western group of laundries and the next largest
in the western group.
An intensive study made in New York City 10 emphasized the
vital importance to the laundry industry of controlling temperature,
conditions. A resume of its findings as applying in a greater or less
degree to all laundries is given here:
1. Natural ventilation alone is inadequate in practically every case.
2. Any attempt to combine natural with artificial ventilation must
fail because the air currents within the room are too complex and
seasonal variations in temperature too great to permit of sufficient
flexibility in such a combined system.
3. A well-thought-out plan of artificial ventilation has been found
in a few model laundries to be entirely satisfactory. In these places
windows are opened when desired, but they are not a part of the
ventilating scheme.
4. The number of ironing machines permitted on any single floor
should bear definite relation to their heat-radiating capacity.
5. Special attention should be paid to drafts.
6. There should be properly constructed hoods, not only over the
flat-work ironers but over all ironing machines giving off steam.
These hoods should be provided with adequate exhaust fans (not too
strong).
7. Ceilings should be high.
8. Since the temperatures and humidities at the flat-work ironers
are considerably higher than elsewhere, special ventilating installation
should be placed with reference to the comfort of the operators of
these machines.
Local exhausts or other protection.
Many laundries with no general method of removing heated air
from the workroom had hoods and exhausts over individual machines.
On certain kinds of machines probably this is the most effective
method. The New York State Industrial Commission, in a report
published in 1924, advised, as steps in the right direction, the in­
stallation of adequate hoods over the flat-work ironers and the insula­
tion of the dry room.11 Some of the large flat-work ironers, where
the articles are ironed as the rolls revolve, had hoods over them and
exhaust fans to carry off the hot air and steam. (See pi. 2.) More
than 10 per cent (11.2) of the 214 laundries reported had all their
flat-work ironers so equipped, and a number had some machines with
this protection and some without. In a few laundries hoods without
exhausts were reported. This absence of exhaust fans probably would
throw the steam down, and though it might make the air in the rest
10 New York. Department of Labor. A Study of Hygienic Conditions in Steam Laundries and Their
Effect upon the Health of Workers. Special Bui. 130, 1924, pp. 45 and 48.
u Ibid,, p, 45,
.




WORKING CONDITIONS

23

of the room better it would concentrate the heat and steam on the
operator. Several plants had screens of heavy canvas before the
workers on the flat-work ironers, which were of considerable benefit
to the operators but allowed the heat and steam to escape into the
room. Many establishments had skylights over the large ironers,
and when the outside air was not too cold this answered fairly well.
However, on very cold days the hot air was driven back into the room.
Hot tumblers and, much less frequently, drying rooms were in some
cases equipped with exhaust pipes that carried off the hot air directly
from the drying chamber. More than 80 per cent of the laundries
with hot tumblers had this system and it was found in about a sixth
of the drying rooms.
Handkerchief and collar ironers had hoods with exhausts in only a
fewT cases and, in the opinion of many superintendents, the need for
such equipment was a question. It would appear, however, that local
hoods and exhaust fans, as in the case of the larger ironing machines,
would prevent the heat escaping into the room.
There were no local exhausts over presses, but the newer presses
that were operated by electricity, steam, or compressed air had an
asbestos pad or covering in the ironing head. This was supposed to
prevent the dissipation of the heat and also to protect the worker,
but it was impossible to find out to what extent the latter purpose
was fulfilled. For the same reasons, pipes had been covered with
asbestos in some laundries, and this was declared by the superin­
tendents as most effective in conserving heat and protecting the
workers.
Lighting.
In some industries the lighting prolusions, both natural and arti­
ficial, always have been regarded as of the greatest importance. Where
fine work is done, such as sewing, knitting, or assembling, lighting
engineers have made experiments and ascertained the best lighting
conditions under which the work should be done. The laundry indus­
try needs good general lighting but, except for the marking and mend­
ing, the work is not of a close or exacting nature, and therefore the
need for engineers to plan the lighting installation has been realized
only lately. Laundry owners building plants in recent years have
been careful to arrange for good lighting because they realize that not
only does it affect the quality of the work but it results in a healthier
and happier work force.
Among the recommendations passed at the thirty-sixth annual
convention of the laundry owners is the following: “Fresh air and
sunlight. Necessary from a standpoint of health and an important
factor with the applicant for a position.”12
The natural lighting in 146 laundries, one-half of all visited, was
reported as satisfactory, and in 134 laundries it was found to be good
in some departments and poor in others. When the natural lighting
was found unsatisfactory the trouble was not that insufficient light
was furnished but rather that the conditions resulted in glare for the
workers, who must face windows having no shades or awnings or
work under a skylight allowing the sun to beat directly down on the
machines.
12 Laundryowners National Association. Advance report, Thirty-sixth Annual Convention, New
York City, 1919, p, 12,
.




24

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Satisfactory natural lighting throughout the entire plant was found
in a larger proportion of laundries in the East than in any other section
of the country; the smallest .per cent with good lighting throughout
was in the middle-western group. Good artificial lighting, although
usually of less importance to the worker than is natural lighting,
is more easily achieved; especially is this true in old or reconstructed
buildings. It is not surprising, therefore, that good artificial lighting
was found in more than three-fourths of the laundries visited. In 13
establishments the artificial lighting was insufficient, but in nearly
three times that number (35) glare was reported from unshaded bulbs
hanging on a level with the workers’ eyes. In 48 other laundries
glare was reported in some departments. The best artificial lighting
throughout the plant was in the group with the poorest natural
lighting, the middle-western group, and this would, of course, compen­
sate to some extent for the less adequate natural lighting. In the
western group, with shorter daily hours, and in the southern, with
more daylight and sunshine, the use of artificial light would he less
than elsewhere, but good artificial lighting was almost as common on
the Pacific coast as in the Middle West. It was found less commonly
in the South.
Floors.
The material of the floors in the different laundries visited depended
largely upon whether or not the building had been erected especially
for laundry purposes. When a building originally planned for another
purpose was used, as a rule the floors were not changed except in
the wash room, where cement took the place of wood. If the entire
plant had cement floors they were kept, but rarely were cement
floors laid throughout in an old building. Generally where a new
building was erected cement floors were provided.
Probably there is no question but that a cement floor is desirable in
the wash room, but in the press and flat-ironing departments, where
there is no problem of wet floors except around the starching table,
the advantage of cement is open to question. It is likely to stand up
better and to need less repair, but if satisfactory mats or platforms
are not provided the hardness and lack of resilience make it exceed­
ingly fatiguing to the worker. Practically all laundry work requires
constant standing, and when this is done on cement floors, without
mats or wooden platforms, tired and aching feet are the result. How
much this condition affects the work is difficult to determine, but in a
study of another occupation where workers are continuously on their
feet the discomfort was so pronounced that when rest periods were
installed the whole attitude of the workers toward the job was altered,
production increased, and turnover showed a marked decline.13
In 60 laundries floors throughout the entire plant were of cement,
in 136 cement floors were found in some departments, and in 68 there
were floors with cement around the machines. The women working
on the large flat-work ironers more frequently were found standing
on cement floors than were either the press operators or the hand
ironers. In many cases the workers on cement floors were well
supplied with wooden platforms and mats. Wooden floors throughout
13 Mayo, Elton. Revery and Industrial Fatigue. In Journal of Personnel Research, vol. 3, No. 8,
December, 1924, pp. 273 and 278,







m I r'

PLATE 4.—A LIGHT AND AIRY MARKING DEPARTMENT

fill,!

j4

WORKING CONDITIONS

25

were found in 50 establishments, and in 158 others all floors were of
wood except where the washing was done.
Whether or not cement floors are more easily kept clean and in
good repair, it is a fact that they were more generally reported good
in these respects. As regards wet floors, however, a much higher
proportion of wooden floors than of cement ones were found in good
condition.
Material of floors

Per cent of establishments in which
floors were—
In repair

Cement_ ____
_
Part cement___
Wood_______

__

.
_

91. 8
81. 4
74. 0

Clean

Dry

87. 8
87. 1
80. 8

87. 8
95. 7
99. 5

The employers’ association advises “Clean floors, walls and win­
dows free from the accumulation of dust and dirt. The psychology
of neatness and order has an undeniable influence on the mind of the
worker.” 14
General arrangements good and aisles free from obstructions were
found in a large majority of the laundries visited. In 43 laundries
the arrangement might have been improved somewhat, and in 99
establishments all or some of the aisles were blocked by trucks, boxes,
or other objects.
Seating.
The majority of occupations in a laundry require that the worker
stand. However, some of the operations may be done either sitting
or standing, and even with jobs that require standing there are times
when a few minutes’ rest may be taken if seats are available. Chairs
should be provided, therefore, as part of the necessary equipment
in every plant. (See pi. 3.)
The few minutes’ rest is not wasted time. Doctor Vernon has
summed up the situation in the following words: “In any case the
healthy worker has each day a certain supply of energy which he puts
into his daily task, and it is evident that the more of this energy he
expends in wasteful and unnecessary directions, the less he has for
application to useful ends.” He goes on to say that a man’s work
may be lightened by the adoption of labor-saving methods and devices,
and that “Such devices leave him a greater stock of energy to expend
m other directions, and he is thereby enabled to exert himself more
vigorously, and to increase his productivity.” 16
The soundness of these findings by industrial physicians has been
realized by certain laundry managers who have expressed their con­
viction by furnishing chairs and in some cases by installing rest
periods. Nineteen of the firms visited furnished seats for all their
employees and 118 supplied seats for some of the workers. In 153
establishments seats were supplied only for the few women whose
jobs required sitting, such as the menders.
iOrK ciiy, lyiy, p. 12.

A®"ation' Advance report. Thirty-sixth Annual Convention.

New

u Vernon, H. M. Industrial Fatigue and Efficiency. Oeorge Routledge & Sons (Ltd.), London, 1921
pp. d-4.
'
*

103127°—30------ 3




26

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

The best seating provisions were found in the eastern group of
laundries. The poorest were in the southern group, where nearly
three-fifths of the laundries had no seats.
Where seats were furnished there was a wide variation in type.
Some establishments provided chairs, some stools, and some wooden
boxes, and frequently all these would be found in the same plant.
In other words, seats were, as a rule, neither carefully placed nor of
comfortable type, but were a haphazard afterthought in the equipment.
Drinking facilities.
In a laundry, where the processes of the industiy generate heat, it is
very important to the worker that there should be a plentiful supply of
cool drinking water. That this need is appreciated by the manage­
ment is evidenced by the fact that in more than one-half (53.4 per
cent) of the laundries visited the water was artificially cooled through­
out the plant or in one or more departments. There is greater need
for artificially cooled water in some sections of the country than in
others, and in the South, where the outdoor temperatures are high
over long periods, more than 90 per cent of the firms visited supplied
cooled water.
Of all the establishments visited the majority (56.2 per cent) had
bubbler fountains, but in most instances these were of the insanitary
type where the jet of water falls back on the orifice. The best ar­
rangements were in 27 laundries with sanitary bubblers and in 26
others with individual drinking cups. The common cup, the least
desirable of all, was found in about a fifth (21 per cent) of the laundries
visited. Its use was most prevalent in the southern group. In­
dividual cups were supplied to the greatest extent in eastern laundries
and bubblers in the western group, while the laundries in the middlewestem States had the largest proportion of sanitary bubblers.
The insanitary bubbler, like the individual drinking glass, has been
found to be a carrier of infection,16 but this fact is not generally
realized by employers, who feel that their workers are protected from
risk of infection by the installation of bubblers of whatever type. It
is becoming more generally known, however, that the jet of water
should be projected not vertically but at an angle, and, according to
the National Safety Council, an angle of at least 30° is desirable.17
Washing facilities.
In a soap-and-water industry like the laundry it may sound absurd
to discuss washing facilities, but that these are a necessity is shown
by the fact that 262 of the 290 laundiies visited had made such
provision. In most laundries the washing of clothes is done in
machines, operated by men, and the only place where employees may
wash, unless special provision is made, is in a tub where fine hand
laundering is done. This tub seldom is conveniently placed and
frequently is not available, so a special trough or basin is necessary.
Less than half of all the laundries that had washing facilities
furnished hot water; a little more than half furnished soap. In the
majority of cases towels were not supplied, the management feeling
that sufficient clean linen or rags were available. This arrangement
would appear to be unsatisfactory from the viewpoint both of the
•e Journal of American Medical Association, vol. 67, No. 20, Nov. 11,1916, p. 1451.
17 National Safety Council. Drinking Water, Wash and Locker Rooms, and Toilet Facilities. Safe
Practices, No. 27.




WORKING CONDITIONS

27

workers and of the customers. Common towels were found in more
than a fourth of the laundries having special washing facilities. As a
rule, when washing facilities were supplied they were found to be
clean, only 50 of the 262 plants being reported as unsatisfactory in
this respect.
Toilet facilities.
Many conditions in a plant may affect the worker and her work
that apparently are without direct connection. In a study where the
question was asked, “Why did you leave your previous job?” one
answer was “The drinking water was kept in pails—that’s not
healthy,” and another was “The toilets were a disgrace.” These
physical conditions, not connected with the actual performance of
work, had proved sufficiently irritating to cause the women to quit
their jobs. In most plants superintendents and foremen are so
busy that they feel they have little time for plant housekeeping,
yet that may be the sore spot affecting their whole organization.
In many States laws have been passed providing certain minima
of comfort and decency in toilets. The number of seats that shall be
furnished in relation to the number of women using them is one of
the most frequent specifications. The standard number advised
by the Women’s Bureau is one seat for every 15 women. According
to this standard three-fifths of the establishments visited in the
present study provided adequate facilities, the highest proportion
of laundries with this satisfactory standard being in the South.
_ A considerable number of establishments supplied too few seats,
either for their whole force or in certain departments, and in over
one-fourth of the 290 laundries there were more than 25 women to a
seat. As many as 72 women in one laundry and 65 in another had
but one seat provided, while in 27 plants the number of women to
a seat was 40 or more.
Two very important conditions that frequently are required by
law are proper ventilation and lighting. For example, the New York
State law requires either a window or a skylight opening directly to
the outer air, its size regulated by the number of fixtures, or a mechan­
ical and regularly operated system of ventilation. Where the natural
ventilation is inadequate the authorities may require that further
measures be taken. The law demands that lighting shall be such
that “ail parts of the room and compartment arc easily visible at all
times during working hours.” 18
Either an outside window or a shaft leading to the outside air
was found in 358 of 568 toilet rooms in the present study. The
highest proportions of properly ventilated rooms were in the eastern
and western groups. The smallest proportion was in the South,
where nearly a third of the plants (31.4 per cent) were without
adequate ventilating facilities.
Lighting provisions were rather better than ventilating, with a
little more than two-thirds of the toilet rooms properly lighted through­
out and less than 10 per cent (7.2) with wholly inadequate lighting
arrangements. Some form of artificial lighting in addition to outside
window or skylight is considered a necessity by the Women’s Bureau
investigators, and where none was supplied the lighting was reported
IS New York. Department of Labor. Industrial Code. Buis. 9 and 18. Rules Relating to Sanitation
of Factories and Mercantile Establishments, pp. 12 and 13,




28

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

as unsatisfactory. The southern group of laundries failed in this
respect more than did the other groups, about a fifth (19.8 per cent)
of their toilets being unsatisfactorily lighted.
Toilets separate for men and women are the rule in all well-kept
establishments and the doors should be plainly marked. In the
present study 189 rooms were not marked in any way to show whether
they were allotted to men or to women.
As a rule the toilets were in good condition, but in 55 rooms some
seats were out of order and in 5 the plumbing systems were not
working. On the door of one room was printed the following notice:
“If toilet does not flush use a pail of water—otherwise offender will
be discharged.” This is an extreme example of neglect on the part
of management that most certainly would result in dissatisfaction on
the part of the workers.
Clean conditions were found in about 60 per cent of the rooms
visited. The remaining 40 per cent were either unsatisfactory in
some particular, such as floors wet, seats or plumbing dirty, or, as in
30 cases, the entire room was pronounced filthy. Usually there was
a special person whose duty it was to sweep and scrub the toilets,
and plants with this system generally had cleaner and better-kept
rooms than where it was done in odd minutes by the workers or
where no one was responsible. In only 30 plants was the cleaning
left entirely to voluntary and haphazard service.
First-aid provision.
The importance of immediate attention for even slight burns and
cuts is very generally realized. It is apparent in this study by the
fact that all but 15 of the laundries visited had first-aid equipment
to care for small injuries. A few large plants had hospital rooms
with nurses in charge, but in most establishments the size of the laun­
dry and the small number of accidents make this unnecessary. In all
but 58 plants a special person was designated to administer first
aid—sometimes the forelady, sometimes a worker who had taken
lessons. In the 58 laundries with no special arrangement the service
was haphazard, done sometimes by one and sometimes by another.
Service facilities.
In every plant employing women there should be special places
where they may change from street to work clothes, may rest if
necessary, and may eat their midday meal if they wish to remain
indoors. The extent of such provision and its type depend on the
size and character of the establishment. Three separate places—a
cloakroom, a rest room, and a lunch room—may be supplied in a
large establishment, while a room combining the three services may
be all that a small plant can afford and, in fact, all that is needed.
If an industry is such that a change of clothing is necessary, as in the
laundry industry, a place in which to change clothing is little short
of essential. Where the work requires constant standing and where
high temperatures sometimes occur a rest room or a cot in a cloak­
room should be as much part of the equipment as drinking water
and washing facilities. In an establishment situated at a distance
from the workers’ homes, or where the noon period is too short to
allow for time going and coming, some place other than the workroom
should be provided for the eating of lunch.




WORKING CONDITIONS

29

Cloakrooms.—Special rooms in which wraps could be hung and
clothing changed were furnished in about one-half of the laundries
visited, while all but 33 of the remainder had cloak and rest services,
or cloak and lunch, or all three, combined in a single room. In
certain large establishments there were several cloakrooms, some
equipped only for this purpose and some used as rest and lunch room
also.
Where no cloakroom was supplied (in 33 laundries) wraps were
hung on hooks or nails around the workroom and dresses and shoes
were changed in either the workroom or the toilet room. The equip­
ment in most of the cloakrooms consisted of hooks or nails around
the walls, with a shelf above for hats. Lockers were provided in 67
establishments and racks in 88. The method last mentioned prob­
ably is the most desirable where the rooms are kept locked, because
oi the better circulation of air in an open space than in a locker.
Shoes almost invariably were changed before and after working,
and where there were no lockers they generally were strewn around
the room. In some cloakrooms there was a low shelf for shoes. The
difficulty of keeping a room clean when used by so many persons is
shown by the fact that the cloakrooms were reported clean in only
two-thirds of the laundries. Usually the cleaning was done by a
woman employed for the purpose, and where no one was made
responsible the conditions generally made this fact apparent.
Best rooms.—Rest-room provisions were not so general as cloak­
room, and only 27 of the laundries had special rooms for this pur­
pose. In an equal number of establishments rest-room provisions
were combined with those of cloak or lunch room. The furnishings
of the rest rooms showed wide variations, from a cot or comfortable
chairs in a cloakroom to a separate room with couch, chairs, table,
and magazines. A couch or cot, a necessary part of a rest-room
equipment, was supplied in all but three of the fifty odd establish­
ments. As a rule the rooms were clean and well kept, but in over a
fifth of the plants having rest rooms the places were reported as not
clean. The value to the worker of a rest room, not only as a place
in which to lie down if ill or exhausted but as a place for rest and
relaxation during the lunch period, should be easily understood.
This is especially true of a laundry, where the characteristics of the
industry are likely to make the workrooms hot and humid. In
spite of this, there was no rest room, either specially equipped or
combined with another room, in 234 of the establishments.
_ Lunch rooms.—The same considerations that make a rest room
important to the laundry worker make a lunch room desirable.
During the lunch period workroom windows should be opened and
fresh air introduced, and that can best be done when the workers
are absent. Furthermore, it is undersirable to have lunches eaten
at the tables where clean clothes are handled. In 55 laundries there
were special lunch rooms and in others a place for eating lunch was
furnished in either the cloak or the rest room. When a laundry is
in the business section of the town there are numerous lunch places
and some women prefer to go out at noon. This is more expensive,
though, than bringing food with them or buying it in the plant if
there is a cafeteria, so from the viewpoint of the worker as well as
the customer special provision for the lunch hour is important.




30

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Hot meals were provided at reasonable prices in 7 of the laundries
and in 68 a hot drink was furnished either without charge or at a
nominal price. In 99 establishments a gas or electric plate was sup­
plied where lunches could be heated or a hot drink made by the em­
ployees. In some plants one or two women made coffee for the others
and sold it at a few cents a cup. The size of the laundry and its
location, whether near the workers’ homes or at a considerable dis­
tance, would determine which of these different systems was the most
desirable. The large majority—all but three—of the lunch places
furnished were adequately lighted and 85 per cent were clean.
Uniforms.
There is no question that women in fresh white uniforms present a
much better appearance in a work place than do women in cotton,
wool, or silk dresses of various colors. It is not merely a matter of
show, though white uniforms probably have a good effect when cus­
tomers visit a plant, but from the workers’ standpoint it is important.
Probably no normal woman is indifferent to her personal appearance,
and the good or bad effect increases or decreases her self-respect.
This is true, of course, in all industries, but especially in laundry
operations, where the worker may become much overheated, the
effect on her and on her fellow employees of fresh white clothing is
decidedly important. However, if the workers must buy and launder
the uniforms themselves there is likely to be a feeling of protest that
may react unfavorably on their attitude toward the management.
Some firms, having tried both the method of supplying uniforms
and that of having the worker supply her own, had compromised on
furnishing them at cost and laundering them without charge. Some
firms carried the entire cost. Of 116 laundries that required uni­
forms 33 gave them to the workers. In the others the workers sup­
plied their own. The custom of laundering the uniforms and not
charging for the service was practiced in all but two laundries where
uniforms were worn. In short, less than half the laundries visited
required workers to wear uniforms, but where uniforms were worn the
general custom was to launder them free of charge.
Employment machinery.
The value of a careful selection of workers and the increased steadi­
ness resulting has been demonstrated by employment departments in
many plants. The overhead cost of maintaining such a department,
however, is considerable, and for the establishment with comparatively
few workers the expense xnay be prohibitive. In the present study of
laundries the average size of the establishment was about 68 women.
In most cases, therefore, a special employment organization was out
of the question, as it could be afforded only by the larger laundries.
Only five laundries employed their workers through a special depart­
ment. In 198 plants one person, usually the owner or superintendent,
had charge of taking on and laying off help. This probably is the
best plan in the smaller places, where employees may be transferred
from one department to another without conflict of authority or
methods. In 86 laundries the employing of the workers was done
by each foreman for his own department, sometimes with the coopera­
tion of the superintendent and sometimes without.




WORKING CONDITIONS

31

Welfare provision.
In a little over one-half of the laundries visited the workers received
some perquisite aside from the established business arrangement of
wage payment. The most common “extra” was a lower rate to the
employee than to the public for laundry work done. Sometimes the
work was done for 10 per cent less and from that the reduction varied
to as much as 50 per cent of the regular price. This was popular
with the workers, and in many cases they brought not only their own
but their family’s wash.
Insurance for the employee in case of death was carried by 36
laundries. Sometimes this was a definite sum and sometimes it
varied with the length of service of the deceased. Free medical
service was provided in some cases and in a few laundries the manage­
ment set aside a certain amount each year to care for special cases of
need. Ten laundries had employees’ benefit associations, the fund,
as a rule, being carried by the employees themselves with a contribu­
tion from the management. A vacation with pay was given in two
laundries, and in another a woman who was ill and unable to work
received her full week’s pay. The importance of building up a good
morale as well as a good physical condition had been recognized in
11 laundries by the establishment of an organization or club to con­
tribute to the social life of the employees. A number of these clubs,
though inaugurated by the management, were managed by committees
of the workers.
On the whole, welfare work seems to be carried on to a less extent
in laundries than in some other industries. This may be due partly
to the smaller size of the average plant, where all workers naturally
come into fairly close touch with the management. In the English
report previously quoted 19 a statement is made that appears to be
as true of laundries in this country as of those in England, that there
exists “very good relationship between the proprietor and worker.”
The proprietor frequently works with his employees and he is almost
invariably known personally by them. With the new organization
of many plants under one central management that is developing
in the industry, referred to in the introduction, the personal contact
is bound to be less. Whether employment relations will be the
charge of paid subordinates or whether clubs and organizations
among the workers will take a more important place, it is too early to
determine.
Hazards.
In all walks of life there is danger of accident. The housewife
crossing the street on her way to market, going down her own stairs,
or cooking in her own kitchen may be run over, may fall, or may be
burned, as the case may be. In most industries the risk is probably
greater than that of the housewife, and this is certainly true where
power machinery is used. In a Women’s Bureau study of accidents
to women several years ago it was found from records in three indus­
trial States that power-working machines caused 42.3 per cent of all
the accidents reported in the period taken. The next most important
cause of accident was falls of persons.
16 Smith, May. Some Studies in the Laundry Trade. In Bui. 22, Reports of the Industrial Fatigue
Research Board, London, 1922.




32

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

The figures for laundries in the report referred to include cleaning
and dyeing establishments, but as the entire report deals only with
women’s accidents and the number of women in cleaning and dyeing
plants is small compared to the number in laundries, the figures may
be considered to give a fair picture of the accident situation in
laundries.
The main cause of accidents in laundries, as in all industries, was
power-working machines, responsible for 50.6 per cent of all the
laundry accidents reported. The other two principal causes were the
falls of persons and explosions, electricity, and hot substances. Falls
of persons occasioned one-fourth of all the accidents to women in
laundries, and explosions, electricity, and hot substances caused
something over a tenth (11.5 per cent).20 In the present study it
was not possible to obtain definite data on accidents, either cause or
number, but the possible causes, such as unguarded machines, slip­
pery floors, stairs in bad condition or without handrail, and elevators
operated by inexperienced persons or not properly guarded, were
noted.
When a single study covers a number of subjects and especially
when the investigators are not engineers, comments on guarding
necessarily are superficial. During the inspection of the plant, how­
ever, the fact of absence or presence of guards on certain machines
was carefully noted. The machines selected for observation were
those on or around which women work and on which an accident
might occur. The guarding on the following machines was observed:
Extractors.
Elat-work ironers.
Tumblers.
Presses.

Handkerchief ironers.
Collar ironers.
Cuff and neckband ironers.

The liability to accident and its severity would vary greatly on
these different machines and would decline in approximately the order
in which they are listed. The number of women exposed or operating
the various machines does not in the least follow the same order.
This fact probably accounts for the finding of only 7 laundries of
the 290 visited with no guards on flat-work ironers, where many
women are employed, and 92 extractors with no guards, comparatively
few women working on these machines. Women operating extractors
usually were on the small starch extractors and not on the larger ones
used for general washing.21
The extractors, which dry the clothes by forcing the water out of
them in a rapidly revolving metal basket, usually were equipped with
covers, and on well-guarded machines these covers could not be raised
while the basket was revolving. Skill is required in the proper pack­
ing of the clothes in the baskets, and if an end is loose it may catch
in the cover or between the basket and its container and the article
be badly torn. For this reason the operator likes to see the inside
of the basket as she starts up the machine, and she is tempted to
throw off the guard in order to keep the cover up until the extractor
is running satisfactorily. In 45 plants extractors were seen running
with their covers up, which as far as risk to the operator is concerned
would place them in the group of extractors with no guards.
20 U. S. Department of Labor. Women’s Bureau. Industrial Accidents to Women in New Jersey,
Ohio, and Wisconsin. Bui. 60, 1927, p. 6.
The washing machines were almost universally operated by men. Only 27 women operators were
found, and for this reason guards on these machines have not been recorded.







jppB1 ■ ■ '

" “it

|Mt

EAOLfc BUSS S

a-lmilKi1

1 «j

■:

PLATE 6— PRESSES OPERATED BY HAND, MAKING THEM EASY AND SAFE

'"W

WORKING CONDITIONS

33

The Laundryowners’ National Association has drawn up certain
rules on various laundry machinery into a general safety code for the
industry. Among its rules are the two following:22
Each extractor shall be equipped with a metal cover.
Each extractor shall be equipped with an interlocking device that will prevent
the cover being opened while basket is in motion and also the powder operation
of the basket while cover is open.

That this standard may become a general practice there appears to
be a need of further education among laundry owners and further
legislation along safety lines.
.
The necessity of guarding the large flat-work ironers was much
more generally realized. Only seven plants were reported with no
guards and the great majority of the machines were equipped with an
excellent type of guard that throws off the power and causes the rolls
to stop revolving when a hand pushes against the guard. In the days
before these guards were in general use the danger of a worker’s hand
being caught and crushed was always present. The following are the
rules of the laundry owners’ “safety first” covering the flat-work
ironers:
Each flat-work or collar ironer shall be equipped with a bar or other approved
guard across the entire front of the feed or first pressure rolls, so arranged that
the striking of the bar or guard by the hand of the operator or other person will
stop the machine.
The pressure rolls shall be covered or guarded so that the operator or other
person can not reach into the rolls without removing the guards. This may be
either a vertical guard on all sides or a complete cover. If a vertical guard is used,
the distance from the floor or working platform to the top of guard shall be not
less than six (6) feet.28

Approximately half the establishments had no guards on drying
tumblers operated by women. The danger of the hand of the operator
being caught on these machines was not great, in the opinion of super­
intendents and women operators. Nevertheless, the newer type of
tumbler is equipped with an interlocking device that prevents the
starting of the machine until the doors of the outside case are shut.
The code of safety of the laundry owners also has a rule covering
drying tumblers. It reads as follows:
Each drying tumbler shall be equipped with an interlocking device that wrill
prevent the inside cylinder moving when the outer door on the case or shell is
open and also prevent the door being opened while inside cylinder is in motion.
Note: This should not prevent the movement of the inner cylinder under the
action of a hand-operated mechanism or under the operation of an “inching
device.”
Each drying tumbler shall be provided with approved means for holding open
the doors or covers of inner and outer cylinders or shells while being loaded or
unloaded.24

The large number of women working on presses and the fact that,
as a rule, the presses are power driven make their proper guarding a
matter of importance although the accidents that may happen on
them generally are not so serious as those on either the extractors or the
flat-work ironers. The new hand-operated press has an automatic
guard whereby both hands must press buttons or levers in order to
bring down the ironing head over the buck or ironing pad. The older
presses, operated by foot treadle, in many cases were equipped with a
22 American Laundry Machinery Co. The “Safety First” Features of “American” Laundry Equip­
ment, p. 6.
23 Ibid., p. 15.
2* Ibid., p. 10.




34

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

wirc-mesh fence, attached to the ironing head. This projected below
the head and therefore would hit the hand before the head descended
on it. Evidently this form of guard was only fairly satisfactory, as
several girls reported accidents where the hand was caught under the
fence and between the hot pad and the head.
The code of the laundry owners does not advocate any special type
of guard, but merely specifies that “Each ironing press (excluding
hand or foot power) shall be equipped with an approved guard or
means that will prevent the fingers of the operator or other person
being caught between the ironing surfaces.” 25
Of the establishments visited, 116 had all their presses guarded,
115 had some with guards and some without, and 44 were reported as
having no presses guarded.
Handkerchief and collar presses, in the largo majority of establish­
ments, were guarded either with a stationary bar or fence or with one
that, as on the larger flat-work ironers, stopped automatically and
threw off the power when struck. On some types of machines, such
as a slow-moving drum type, a special guard was not necessary. Cuff
and neckband presses were not guarded, as a rule, and on the footoperated machines it is difficult to see how a guard could be con­
structed.
Aside from the question of unguarded machines, certain attendant
hazards were noted. In two laundries where flat-work ironers were
not equipped with automatic stop guards, the lever for throwing off
the power and stopping the large machine was at some distance; in
several others the lever was so high as to necessitate climbing to reach
it. The probability of increased seriousness in case of accident, due
to the delay in stopping the machine, is apparent.
Especial danger of being burned was noted where stocking forms
were very close together, and also from a gas collar ironer and a gas
body ironer where the flame was not screened.
Where many workers use the stairways, and especially when a
quick exit may be necessary, as in case of fire, the importance of the
proper construction and maintenance of stairs can not be overesti­
mated. In 62 laundries there was no problem of stairs, the entire
work being done on the ground floor. In the other 228 laundries, the
majority, whether of two or five stories in height, showed good con­
struction and upkeep of their stairways. The most common failure
was in construction, with 54 laundries having narrow stairways or
high risers and 22 having one or more winding stairways—that is,
with triangular treads. In case of a hurried exit either of these con­
ditions might occasion accidents. Another possible cause of falling,
even where there is no crowding, is the absence of a handrail, recorded
in 21 establishments. The maintenance or upkeep was bad in 30
plants, where the treads were badly worn or, as in some instances, even
broken in half. The condition last mentioned and the providing of a
handrail could be attended to with very little trouble and expense.
In most laundries elevators are used principally for the carrying of
trucks, rolled on and off by men. However, where work is done on a
number of floors, some establishments allow women to use the
elevators. This was the case with 35 establishments in the present
study. Usually there is no regular operator, so the women either
must run the elevator themselves or must depend on some man who26
26 Ibid., p. 19.




WORKING CONDITIONS

35

may or may not be experienced. Though elevator accidents are not
common, they are likely to be very serious, and probably it would be
wiser for women to use the stairs unless there is a regular elevator
operator.
. .
A few laundries were found with elevators running m an open well
or with safety doors tied up. This is a hazard for everyone in the
plant and constitutes a risk that no employer can afford to take.
In the laundry industry the danger of wet and slippery floors would
appear to be considerable. This is true of certain departments, but
in others there is no more danger of slipping than in a clothing or
metal factory. The places where there is danger, unless special care
is taken, are the wash room, around the starch machines, and near
the hand tubs. Aside from these the floors are dry, and usually they
are kept clean and free from grease because of the clean clothes being
handled.
According to figures previously quoted, from another survey, tails
constitute the second most important cause of accident. It is im­
portant, therefore, that 24 plants in the laundry study were reported
as having slippery floors in rooms used by women. In some cases the
description merely states, “Wood floor wet and slippery, and in
others, “Floors dirty and with a coating of starch.'1 That these con­
ditions were reported in only 24 of the 290 laundries shows that the
laundry manager in most cases realizes the danger of slipping and
takes special pains to guard against it. In some plants the floor
around the starcher was cleaned three or four times a day and m
many the rule was to wash and wipe up the floor twice a day.
In a number of laundries pipes were run along the surface of the
floor and girls had to step over them as they went about their work.
These constituted a distinct hazard.
Strain.
It is very difficult to judge, merely by going through a laundry,
whether or not there is strain in any given operation. Frequently
it was possible for the investigator to operate a machine to ascertain
the amount of strength required, but even in these cases it must be
remembered that there is a knack acquired by practice that helps
tremendously and, on the other hand, a motion performed continu­
ously is more fatiguing than when tried for a few times. Some in­
formation as to the difficulty or ease of laundry jobs was expressed by
the workers themselves. Considering the different factors, it would
appear that in practically all the body ironers of the old gas-heated
construction there was considerable strain and resulting fatigue ot
the operators. It is necessary to use two treadles, one to bring down
the shoe and one to revolve the rolls, so there is considerable exercise
with the same set of muscles all day. In some laundries an operator
was not allowed to work all day on a body ironer but was shifted tor
part of her time to other work. The body ironer of the type described
is, however, fast becoming obsolete. This is true also of the press
where the power releasing the head covering is applied by toot
pressure. The ease or difficulty of operating this type of machine
depends to a great extent on its balance or adjustment. Some ma­
chines need but a touch of the foot and others require considerable
pressure The necessity of standing on one foot while stepping on
the treadle would seem to be a strain on the worker, and presses re-




A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

quiring this were found in 166 plants. The newer presses, that are
being ” v.
,button widely, introduced, are require little strength or effort. (See
& or raising a handle—and operated by me nanas—pressing a
uy the hands—pressing a
The old-fashioned types of bosom press and of cuff and neck press
were very generally in use. They, too, require foot pressure to
release the power, and therefore are a greater strain on the operator
iu
?e7er,
,°Perated by pushing a button. In about
three-tilths ol the laundries the foot-pressure type of machine was in
use.
In a pamphlet on certain aspects of the laundry industry in England
it is stated that the best relief in monotonous processes is a change
of work bringing into action another set of muscles.26 Such change of
work is not uncommon with women working on the large flat-work
ironers. Three groups of women work on these ironers: The first
shake out the flat pieces, sheets, towels, pillow slips, etc., and lay
them on a bar ready for the next group, the feeders, to place on the
moving canvas that carries the pieces under the rolls. The third
group of women take off the ironed pieces and fold them ready for
the finished bundle.
The shakers and folders probablv have the more fetio-nino- !r,h0 OD

tion of this method of work.
EesS^LonTon “ ta the




Trade' In Bul- 22-

of the Industrial Fatigue

HOURS
The development of modern machinery has made both necessary
and practicable a shortening of the working day. The factors of
speed, noise, and generally complex conditions under machine produc­
tion tend to the accumulation of fatigue on the part of the worker,

SCHEDULED WEEKLY HOURS
19,481
East
48 and under

Per cc-n>
r

Over 48, Including 50

20

Women
40

60

80.2
8.7

Over 50, including 54 il.l

Middle West
48 and under

2 0.3

OveT 48, Including 50 44.9
Over 50, including 54 30.8
4.0

Over 54

West
48 and under
Over 48, including 50

97.2
2.8

South
48 and

under

Over 48, including 50

6.7
5.2

Over 50, including 54 46.1
Over 54

4 1.9

(i. S. Dadti of L ahot-WevnOitd Bureau.

and at the same time the output per employee has been so con­
siderably increased that a given amount can be produced in a shorter
day than was possible under old conditions.
_
An excessively long day is a social and industrial menace, and for
years the principles of good management have been directed toward
an 8-hour day. When the employees of an industry are largely
women and the majority of them are or have been married, as is true




37

38

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

of the laundries included in this survey, the problem of working
hours is of concern both to the community and to the industry.
Most of the home makers who also work outside the home for wages
have a full schedule of household duties and family responsibilities
to face before and after working hours, and they can not carry out
the tasks of either of their jobs successfully if they are forced to
work unduly long hours. As a practical goal for a working schedule
of hours, the Women’s Bureau has advocated an 8-hour day, one day
of rest each week, a half holiday on Saturday, and no night work.
HOUR LAWS

To protect women against unreasonably long hours, all but a few
of the States have set a legal maximum regulating daily and weekly
hours. The standard of an 8-hour day in laundries has been given
statutory backing in nine States—Arizona, California, Colorado,
Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Utah, and Washington.
On theother hand, Alabama, Florida, Iowa, West Virginia, and Indiana
have not regulated the daily or weekly hours of women workers in any
way, and Georgia has done it only in certain industries.
The scope and nature of hour laws vary in their application and
detailed provisions, and in this study are considered only the basic
regulations affecting the laundries in the cities visited, and these
only briefly. The longest hours that it was legal to work daily,
emergencies excepted, and the maximum set for the week were as
follows:1
Maximum legal hours
State

City surveyed

(3)
(3)

(3)
(4)
(3)
(3)

California_
_
_ __ _
_
Washington.
_
Massachusetts ...
__
Oregon
__ _____
Ohio_________
Wisconsin ... ..
Michigan 2_
Minnesota 2 _
New Jersey__
__
Rhode Island..
Illinois.. . _
.
Virginia.._
_
_
Alabama _ _ __
Florida.
__
_. ..

(3)
(3)
(3)

(3)
(3)
(3)

Georgia ________
Indiana. _
_
Iowa. _. _____ __

San Francisco; Los Angeles.
Seattle.
Boston.
Portland.
Cleveland; Cincinnati.
Milwaukee.
Detroit.
Minneapolis; St. Paul.
Jersey City; Newark.
Providence.
Chicago.
Richmond.
Birmingham.
Jacksonville; St. Petersburg;
Tampa.
Atlanta.
Indianapolis.
Des Moines.

Daily

8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
10

\ Weekly
48
(')
48
48
50
50
54
54
54
54

1 No specific regulation, but week might not exceed 6 days.
2 9 hours was the basic daily standard, but 1 hour of overtime daily was allowed if the weekly limit of
54 hours was not exceeded.
3 No regulation.
4 No specific regulation, but Sunday work was prohibited.

_ Summarizing the foregoing, it is apparent that for three of the
cities included in the study the maximum legal day was 8 hours; for
1 U. S. Department of Labor. Women’s Bureau. State Laws Affecting Working Women. Bui. 63,
1927, p. 13 et seq.




HOURS

39

five cities it was 9 hours; for eight it was 10 hours; and for seven there
was no maximum. In addition to the limitations placed on daily
hours, most of these States had set weekly limitations. Illinois,
Virginia, and Washington had set a daily maximum but had not
stipulated a weekly limit. In the case of Washington, however, one
day of rest in seven was required, which in effect gave the women of
the State a 48-hour week; and in Virginia Sunday work was prohibited.
Where the State regulation set a high standard for daily or weekly
hours, as an 8-hour day or a 48-hour week, the scheduled hours of the
laundries reported tended to coincide with the legal limit; but in
the cities where the statutory standard was less stringent, the pro­
gressive laundry managers frequently had adopted schedules below
the legal boundaries for hours. Thus the effect of good legal regula­
tion in reducing the general level of hours is apparent, and it should
be remembered in the following discussion of scheduled hours. For
the progressive laundry manager a high legal standard means stabi­
lized competition as far as hours are concerned, while in a State with
no regulation he must compete with the unscrupulous who make no
effort voluntarily to stabilize and limit their employees’ hours of
work.
SCHEDULED HOURS

Scheduled hours represent the standard that has been set by. the
management as a normal day or week. They do not take into
account overtime and undertime, and for this reason they vary to a
considerable degree from the hours actually worked. However, they
represent the most usual conditions and are the most satisfactory
basis of comparison for the daily and weekly hours of the many
plants visited. In addition to scheduled daily and weekly hours., the
policies of the laundries with reference to lunch periods, rest periods,
half holidays, and special arrangements of work in holiday weeks
were recorded.
Occasionally a laundry was found whose hours, both daily and
weekly, varied so from day to day and week to week that it was
impracticable to consider it as having any semblance of scheduled
hours; but these were so few (only three) and employed such an
inappreciable per cent of the women that it has been possible to
record scheduled hours for more than 99 per cent of the women
surveyed.
Scheduled weekly hours.
Taking the entire group of women for whom hours were reported,
the most common schedule of weekly hours was 48. This was not
typical of the country as a whole but was the prevailing schedule m
the eastern and western sections, in which 44 and 96.5 per cent of
the women, respectively, were reported as having such a schedule.
The influence of 48-hour legislation in the western cities and in Boston
is apparent here, but that many laundries voluntarily were operating




40

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

on an hour schedule less than the maximum allowed by law is equally
apparent in the list following:
y
Per cent of women
whose scheduled
weekly hours were—

Maximum
egal weekly
hours

City
Same as
Less than
State regu­ State regu­
lation
lation

48

50
54

Boston____ _
Los Angeles .
San Francisco1
Portland _ _
Seattle___
Cincinnati
Cleveland.
Milwaukee_
_
Detroit
Minneapolis and St. Paul
Jersey City and Newark
Providence-

1 See footnote 3, Table 2, p, 42.




100. 0

37.
.
1.
.

6
5
7
1

41. 7

bo. 5
4. 9
21. 6

©7. 1

Table 2.—Scheduled

103127
o

weekly hours, by section and city

Number of establishments and number and per cent of women whose scheduled weekly hours were—
Total number
reported
Under 44

44 and under 48

1

48

Over 48 and under 50

50

Section and city
Women
Women
Estab­
Estab
Estab
lish­ Women lishlishments
ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per
ber
cent
ber
cent

o

All places____________

Women
Estab
lishments Num­ Per
ber
cent

Women
lishments Num­
ber

Per
cent

19, 481

23

673

3.5

60

1,974

10.1

92

6,779

34.8

34

1,722

8.8

40

2,321

11.9

» 51

2, 738

5

132

4.8

18

858

31.3

21

1,206

44.0

3

146

5.3

2

91

3.3

Boston________________
Jersey City and Newark..
Providence.........................

130
11
10

1,546
645
547

4
1

2105
27

6.8
4.2

11
3
4

476
87
295

30.8
13.5
53.9

17
2­
2

965
138
103

62.4
21.4
18.8

3

146

22.6

2

91

16.6

Middle western..... ..................

i 125

7, 738

17

515

6.7

32

872

11.3

9

184

2.4

26

1,284

16.6

36

2,190

28.3

Chicago______ ________
Cincinnati....... ............. .
Cleveland_____________
Des Moines___________
Detroit________________
Indianapolis___________
Milwaukee_____________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.

121
l 14
1 16
i6
i 20
12
i 13
123

1,742
587
1,074
238
1,665
959
536
937

4
2
4

41
22
213

3
3
5

76
39
68

4.4
6.6
6.3

1

21

3.6

347
10
147
185

20.8
1.0
27.4
19.7

2

60

3.6

2
4

20
83

3.7
8.9

8.8
27.8
25.3
4.2
7.8
21.5
32.3
18.9

21.6
58.3
48.5

8
1
5
7

153
163
272
10
130
206
173
177

376
342
521

217
11
11

4
3
2
1
5
2
5
4

4
8
8

5
1
1

2.4
3.7
19.8
13.6
1.1
2.1

1
4
5
6

53
401
185
312

3.2
41.8
34.5
33.3

Western................................... .
Los Angeles____________
Portland..... .................. ......
San Francisco__________
Seattle..... ............ ..............

i 65
21
i 12
117
15

5,583
2,629
770
1,434
750

4
1
1
2

40
14
1
25

.7
.5
.1
1.7

62
20
12
15
15

5.389
2, 615
769
1,255
750

96.5
99.5
99.9
87.5
100.0

1

154

2.8

31

154

10.7

Southern.............................. .
Atlanta......... .......................
Birmingham____________
Jacksonville.......................
Richmond___ __________
St. Petersburg and Tampa.

147
i 12
i 11
i6
i6
i 12

3,422
1,106
862
403
500
551

6
3

204
< 110

6.0
9.9

4
1
1

138
5 50
5

4.0
4.5
.6

2
1
1

40
38
2

1.2
3.4
.2

3

94

17.1

2

83

16.6




1
1

26
26

i ....... - >

.8
2.4

HOURS

1288

Eastern.............................. ......

Footnotes at end of table.

.

Women
Estab
lishments Num­ Per
ber
cent

Table 2.

—Scheduled weekly hours, by section and city—Continued

to

Number of establishments and number and per cent of women whose scheduled weekly hours were—
54

Over 54 and under 60

60 and over

Women
Estab­
lishNum­
Per
ber
cent

Women
Estab­
lish­
Per
ments Num­ cent
ber

Women
Estab­
lish­ NupiPer
ments
ber
cent

Women
Estab­
lish­ NumPer
ments
ber
cent

All places..

52

3,334

935

Eastern...............

3

166

139

Boston........... ....................
Jersey City and Newark..
Providence____________
Middle western........................

649

23.4

575

7.4

32.1

351

142
644
331

59.7
38.7
34.5

48
130

1,358
6 684
360
37
166
111

39.7
61.8
41.8
9.2
33.2
20.1

46

221

218

2.8

90 I

1.2

90

5.2

16.0
5.0

7.8

6.5
5.8

41

”IO'

116

~21.T

25.6
134
326
112

251
53

559

16.3

169
213

19.6
52.9

12.1

37.8
27.8
50.2
9.6

73

177

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some establishments appear in more than 1 hour group.
2 A few women in 1 establishment were part-time employees, working 28 hours, but their number was not reported.
3 Thrown into the group of over 48 hours by counting the rest period as part of the working day, the rule in Women’s Bureau tabulations.
4 96 women in 1 establishment worked alternate weeks of 46J4 and. 48J4 hours.
8 Alternate weeks of 4814 and 50J4 hours.
fl 10 women in 1 establishment took turns at a shorter week (3814 hours).
2 Some women, of 51 in 1 establishment, had a week of 58 hours instead of 61J4 hours.




Per
cent

10,055

51.6

542

19.8

1, 546
252
398
1, 571

100.0

39.1
72.8
20.3

393
149
6,167

60.9
27.2
79.7

117
82
281

6.7
14.0
26.2

93.3

37.5

33.2
28.6
97.2

1,625
505
793
238
1,041
938
358

2, 629
770
1, 280
750
230

100.0
100.0

21

4.9

64

48.4

Num­
ber

624

10.6

14.3

9, 426

Per
cent

Over 48

178
268
5,429

20.2

16.7

Num­
ber

2,196

20.1

134

3.3

21.6

559

21

5.6

5.1 !.

108
58
1,810

Chicago.......... ...................
Cincinnati______________
Cleveland______________
Des Moines..........................
Detroit............................ .
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee.____ _______
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Western............................... ......
Los Angeles__
Portland..........
San Francisco.
Seattle..............
Southern___ _______________
Atlanta..............................
Birmingham_____________
Jacksonville_____________
Richmond.............. ............
St. Petersburg and Tampa.

1, 094

48 and under

2.2

86.0

73.8

100.0

62.5
97.8
66.8

71.4
2.8

89.3

154

10.7

6.7

, 192
970
862
403
500
457

93.3
87.7

100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

82.9

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Over 50 and under 54
Section and city

Women whose hours were—

43

HOURS

The solid massing of the western cities and of Boston and Provi­
dence on a schedule of 48 hours or less (see Table 2) is most signifi­
cant and tends to color the tabulations concerned with hours wherever
the findings for the group as a whole are discussed. In the middlewestern cities more than half the women were reported as having a
schedule of 50 and under 54 hours; and in the southern cities almost
nine-tenths had a schedule in excess of 50 hours and more than fourtenths had a schedule in excess of 54 hours.
Listing the cities in descending order in groups based on the
scheduled week most frequently reported gives the following line-up:

Prevailing scheduled weekly hours

Over 44 and under 48.
48___________________

Over 48 and under 50
50___________________

Over 50 and under 52.

52....................... ..............
Over 56 and under 58
60__________________

City

Providence_______________
Seattle___________________
Portland_________________
Los Angeles______________
San Francisco____________
Boston_____________ _____
Jersey City and Newark,..
Cincinnati________________
Cleveland________________
Indianapolis______________
Milwaukee.______________
Minneapolis and St. Paul..
Atlanta__________________
Detroit___________________
Chicago__________________
Birmingham______________
Des Moines______________
Richmond________________
Jacksonville______________
St. Petersburg and Tampa

Per cent
of women
reported
as having
such hours

53.
100.
99.
99.
87.
62.
22.
58.
48.
41.
34.
33.
36.
25.
22.
20.
45.
45.
52.
22.

9

0
9
5
5
4
6
3
5
8
5
3
3
2
3
2

0
0
9
9

The foregoing list shows the most commonly reported schedule in
each city, and in most of the cases the group has less than a majority
of the women. In some cities there was a fairly wide range of reported
hours, while in others the similarity of scheduled hours from plant to
plant was marked.
The most characteristic week, by section, was as follows:
Per cent of
the women

Western48 hours and under______________97. 2
Eastern. ________ ______ do 80.2
Middle western.. 50 and under 54 hours 51. 7
Southern54 hours and over 48. 4

Considering 48 hours as a practical goal for a reasonable week, the
list following, that shows the per cent of women in each city who were
on a schedule of 48 hours or less, indicates the ranking of the cities in
the survey from such a standpoint. The western cities are at the
top, the eastern and middle western make up the middle, and the
southern fall at the foot.




44

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Per cent
of women
with sched­
uled hours
of 48 or less

City

Boston.

_

100.
100.

_ _

100.
100.
89.
72.
39.
37.

Seattle
Providence. .
Jersey City and Newark____
Detroit

0
0
0
0
3
8
1
5

Per cent
of women
with sched­
uled hours
of 48 or less

City

Milwaukee________ ______
Minneapolis and St. Paul____
Cleveland ______
St. Petersburg and Tampa. _
Cincinnati...
Atlanta_______ ____ _ _ _
Indianapolis

_ __

33.
28.
26.
17.
14.
12.
6.
2.

2
6
2
1
0
3
7
2

A weekly schedule of more than 54 hours—of 55, 56, 58, or even
60 hours—is excessively long in the light of present-day standards,
and although less than 10 per cent (8.9 per cent) of all the women were
reported as having hours in excess of 54, when such schedules are
traced to the cities of their source significant proportions of women
have very long hours in at least four localities. The places reporting
scheduled weekly hours in excess of 54 were as follows:
Per cent
of women
with sched­
uled hours
of more
than 54

City

Jacksonville__ ________ ____
Birmingham
_
Richmond
.
_ _
St. Petersburg and Tampa_ _

80.
57.
50.
41.

6
4
2
7

Per cent
of women
with sched­
uled hours
of more
than 54

City

Des Moines
Atlanta_______ _______
Chicago
.
Detroit_______ _______ _

16.
12.
10.
5.

0
1
7
0

Weekly hours of laundries in State studies of the Women’s Bureau.
Additional and supplementing data on scheduled hours in laundries
are available from the State studies made by the Women’s Bureau in
the past 10 years. In 15 such studies scheduled weekly hours are
reported for 266 laundries, employing almost 9,000 women. Appendix
Table VI summarizes the findings on scheduled hours under three
captions—48 hours and under, over 48 and under 54 hours, and 54
hours and over. Comparing the proportions of women in the various
groups in these studies and the present one gives results as follows:
Per cent of women with
scheduled hours as
reported in—
Scheduled hours
Present
study

48 and under _ ___ _____
_
Over 48 and under 54




_________ ____

_
_

____

48. 4
37. 9
13. 7

State
studies

15. 6
43. 9
40. 5

45

HOURS

The higher proportion of women working 48 hours and under in
the present survey is due primarily to the Pacific coast cities, no
Western State having been included” in the State studies. The large
proportion of women in laundries with scheduled hours of 48 or less
in Alabama probably was a temporary condition. It is explained by
economic factors at the time of that study (1922), when Alabama
was experiencing a depression in her mill industry and its effects
were echoed in all public service and purely commercial industries.
The laundry industry depends somewhat upon others for its pros­
perity and readily reflects general conditions. The only other State
with a relatively significant proportion of its women on a schedule of
48 hours and under was Rhode Island, with few women reported.
Forty per cent of the women in laundries in the State studies worked
at least 54 hours a week, and in a number of the States the propor­
tion was much higher than this—in Arkansas with 88.7 per cent of
the women in this group, in Tennessee with 84.3 per cent, in Missis­
sippi with 70 per cent, in Delaware with 62.8 per cent, in Oklahoma
with 59.7 per cent, in Georgia with 54.9 per cent, and in Missouri
with 51.6 per cent. In every State but Ohio, of those covered by the
State studies, one or more laundries were operating on a schedule of
54 hours or more.
Cities in several of the States surveyed earlier by the Women’s
Bureau were visited for the present laundry study, and correlating
the findings for laundries in the State as a whole with those of the
present study of cities shows some quite marked differences. Again
the reader is reminded that in the later study only the larger cities
were visited. Furthermore, the State studies were all made from
three to eight years before, and laundries as well as other industries
have shortened their hours in recent years. The percentages of
women having specified weekly schedules in the various cities in
the present study and in their respective States in the earlier surveys
were as follows:
Per cent of women with scheduled
hours of—
State and city
Over 48
and under
54

48 and
under

New Jersey _
____
Jersey City and Newark
Rhode Island
_
Providence
__
Ohio.________
Cleveland_
_
.
Cincinnati.Illinois. _
.
.
Chicago__ ____
______
Alabama ■_
_____
Birmingham____ .
.
Georgia2 . _ _
Atlanta __
___
1 See statement in text, p. 45.
> Excludes Atlanta.




7.
39.
30.
72.
21.
26.
14.
20.
6.
46.

8
1
1
8
7
2
0
0
7
9

8. 3
3. 9

43.
39.
40.
27.
78.
73.
86.
56.
62.
32.
42.
36.
78.

9
4
4
2
3
8
0
9
5
3
6
9
2

54 and
over

48. 3
21. 6
29. 5

23.
30.
20.
57.
54.
17.

2
8
8
4
9
9

46

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Scheduled weekly hours of laundries in New York.
The following quotation from a survey of New York laundries
made in 1926 summarizes the findings on scheduled hours in that
State:2
Seventy-five per cent of the women employed in the laundries studied were
scheduled to work more than 48 hours a week.
Scheduled hours were longer in New York City than up State. They exceeded
48 hours a week for 79 per cent of the women studied in New York City, for 65
per cent of the worrwn up State. A schedule of 54 hours, the maximum permitted
by law at the time of the investigation, was in effect for 11 per cent of New
York City workers, for 3 per cent of the workers up State.

Scheduled daily hours.
To the employed woman the length of the working day is as impor­
tant as her weekly hours, and since there is a tendency for the work
of the laundry industry to pile up on the first days of the week, because
of the traditional “Monday wash,” stabilizing daily hours is one of
the problems of the industry. Commercial laundries that derive
their custom from hotels, restaurants, offices, or barber shops are
not affected so much as are the general-family-service laundries.
Many laundry owners have endeavored to spread the work more
uniformly over the week by charging lower rates in the latter part
of the week. Regular schedules and zoning for collection and delivery
have done much to stabilize the flow of work in some sections.
Probably there was considerable irregularity in actual daily hours,
and over one-third of the laundries reported variations in the daily
schedules of some or all of the women employed. Nevertheless, the
majority of the plants had adjusted the volume of work by days and
some had arranged different hours for different operations. In some
instances the hours reported as the daily schedule were longer than
the day customarily worked. This was done purposely, to provide
for the irregularities in daily volume of work. In the tables showing
scheduled daily hours the most common day has been taken as a
basis. For some laundries more than one schedule of daily hours has
been recorded because of the different hours on different jobs.
Only three of the cities were limited by law to a day of not more
than 8 hours, but slightly more than 30 per cent of the women
worked for firms having a scheduled 8-hour day. The accompanying
table of scheduled daily hours gives the details for the cities and sec­
tions included in the study, and the chart on page 47 is indicative of
the days most common in the various sections.
s New York. Department of Labor. Hours and Earnings of Women Employed in Power Laundries
in New York State. Special Bui. 153, p. 13.




47

HOURS

SCHEDULED DAILY HOURS
19,478
East
8

Per cevi>

20

Women
'4 0

60

1 1.7 1

and under

Over 8, under 9

5 8.9

9

2 2.2
7.2 |

Over 9, under 10
Middle West
e

1.7 j

and under

Over 8, under 9

15.1

9

67.9

Over 9, under

10

10

13.9
1.9

1

West
8

and

under

Over 8, under 9

9 7.2 1
2.8 |

South
8

and under

Over 9, under 10

4 2.0

10

4 0.0

Over 10, under II

6.6

U. 5. Dept- of Labor - Wo marT-S Bureau




4

Table 3.—Scheduled daily hours, by section and city

00

Under 8

Over 8 and under
9

8

Over 9 and under
10

9

Over 10 and under
11

10

Section and city
Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Estab­
Estab­
EstabEstab­
lish­ Women lish­
lish­
lishlishlishlishlishments
ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
All places...................

1 288

19,478

50 2,938 15.1

101 6, 234 32.0

51

2,738

6

320 11.7

27 1,613 58.9

607 22.2

Boston_____________
Jersey City and New*
ark _ _ _____
__
Providence...................

30

1,546

2

2 87

22 1,271

11
10

645
547

3
1

186 28.8
47 8.6

Middle western_____ ____

125

7,737

5

130

Chicago. ................ ......
Cincinnati _
Cleveland____
__
Des Moines........... ......
Detroit _
___
Indianapolis_________
Milwaukee_____ ____
M inneapolis and St.
Paul__________
_

121
i 14
116
6
120
12
i 13

1,741
587
1,074
238
1,665
959
536

23

937

Western. _____ __________

65

Los Angeles..................
Portland
San Francisco
Seattle...........................

21
12
17
15

Eastern




i

14

0.1

75 5,877 30.2

5.6

1.7

3
2

6

107 16.6
235

22 1,171 15.1

i

5
49

.9

i

28

1.7

1
1
5
1
3

i

19

3.5

2

i

2£

3.1

S

398 42.5

5,581

64 5,427 97.2

1

154

2,629
769
1,433
750

21 2, 629 100.0
12
769 100.0
16 1,279 89.3
750 100.0
15

«1

i

14

10
19 3 2
419 39 0
57 23 9
188 11 3
80

2 8

154 10.7

244 37 8

4

198

1

19 1,480

108 16. 7
90

7.2

188

4

44 2,709 13.9

81 5,252 67.9
3 1,478
548
12
11
606
4
143
9 4 872
9
799
437
10

20 *1,074 13.9

93 4

1

143
15

8 2
2.6

52.4
83.3
81.5

8
3

38
577 34.7
160 16.7

369 39.4

3

141 15.0

110

7.6

3

226

1.2

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND T H E IR WOMEN W ORKERS

Number of establishments and number and per cent of women whose scheduled daily hours were—
Total number
reported

St. P etersburg and

47

3,422

12
11

Southern..........................

6
12

551

14

.4

1

14

2.5

C

375 11.0

1
1
1
1

1

1,106
862
403
500

161 14.6
49 5.7
37 9.2
86 17.2

2

42

7.6

20 1,437 42.0

17 1,370 40.0

3

226

12.7
31.4
76.9
79.4

1

112 13.0

9
6
1
1

805 72.8
430 49.9
56 13.9
17 3.4

2
3
4
4

140
271
310
397

3

129 23.4

4 i 252 45.7

6.6

2 6 114 20.7
1

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some establishments appeal* in more than 1 hour group.
2 A few women in 1 establishment were part-time employees (28 hours a week), but their number was not reported.
3 In 2 establishments many employees began work at noon on Monday. In 1 a number of these sometimes worked overtime.
* In 1 establishment a number of employees began work at noon on Monday.
s Thrown into the group of over 8 hours by counting the rest period as part of the working day, the rule in Women’s Bureau tabulations.
6 In 1 establishment a number of employees worked 7 hours on Monday.

HOURS




CO

50

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Due to the practice in most industries of giving a half holiday at
the end of the week, Saturday hours have been treated separately.
About four-fifths of the women who had a scheduled day of 8
hours or less were in the three cities with 8-hour laws. Legally
Portland laundries could have been operated up to 9 hours, but
none had a schedule in excess of 8 and if these laundries are
added to the group of those with an 8-hour law, over nine-tenths of
all the laundries with an 8-hour day were in the western cities.
Selecting for each city the day most commonly reported, the one that
appears most frequently is 9 hours, the schedule for 32 per cent
of all the women. The prevailing days and the per cents of the
women reported on these schedules in the various cities were as
follows:

Prevailing scheduled daily hours

8
Over 8 and under 9

Over 9 and under 10.

10

City

Los Angeles_____________
Portland_____________._
_
Seattle__________________
San Francisco 1__________
Boston__________________
Providence______________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Cincinnati______________
Chicago_________________
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee______________
Des Moines_____________
Cleveland_______________
Detroit_________________
Jersey City and Newark..
Atlanta______ :__________
Birmingham_____________
Richmond________________
Jacksonville______________
St. Petersburg and Tampa

Per cent
of women
reported
as having
such hours

100.
100.
100.
89.
82.
43.
42.
93.
84.
83.
81.
60.
56.
52.
37.
72.
49.
79.
76.
45.

0
0
0
3
2
0
5
4
9
3
5
1
4
4
8
8
9
4
9
7

1 See footnote 5, Table 3, p. 49.

By section, the prevailing day was as follows:
Per cent of
the women

Western8 hours______________ ______________ _97.2
Easternover 8 and under 9 hours 58. 9
Middle western. _ 9 hours 67. 9
Southernover 9 and including 10 hours 82. 0

Of the women who were reported as on a schedule of 10 hours a day
or more, 90 per cent (1,596) were in the southern cities. Compiling
and arranging the figures in a somewhat different way shows the daily
hours of all women to have been these:




51

HOURS
Per cent of women whose scheduled dally
hours were—
Section and city

More than More than
10
9

9 or less

8 or less

________

-

--

Providence___
_
_
____ Jersey City and Newark___ —
Middle western.

______

_

______ -- —

Cincinnati_______________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Milwaukee.. . .. —

____ -------------------

30. 2

77. 3

22. 7

11. 7

All places.

92. 8

7. 2

5. 6
8. 6
28. 8

100. 0
83. 5
83. 3

16. 5
16. 7

1. 7

84. 7

15. 3

1.
4.
.
3.
3.

7
6
9
1
5

97. 2
San Francisco 1 . ..

—

100.
89.
100.
100.

0
3
0
0

0. 4

St. Petersburg and Tampa.

.

2. 5

85.
65.
100.
97.
85.
100.
83.
84.

5
3
0
4
0
0
3
0

1. 2

14. 5
34. 7
2. 6
15. 0
16. 7
16. 0

100. 0
100.
100.
100.
100.

0
0
0
0

11. 4

88. 6

14.
5.
17.
10.
9.

85.
94.
82.
89.
90.

6
7
2
2
2

4
3
8
8
8

6. 6
13. 0
20. 7
.

i See footnote 5, Table 3, p. 49.

The short scheduled day of the western cities contrasted to the
long day of the southern cities is the most striking feature of this
tabulation. In the eastern and middle-western cities, the day of
9 hours or less was almost universal.
Daily hours of laundries in State studies of the Women’s Bureau.
Scheduled daily hours for the laundries included in 15 State studies
are given in detail in Table VII in the appendix. The large proportion
of Southern States (7 of the 15) among those surveyed tends to color
the findings when considered together. As a group, only about 6
per cent (5.9) of the women had a scheduled day of 8 hours or less,
and about a third (34.2 per cent) had a day of more than 9 hours.
About two-thirds of the 111 laundries in the Southern States had a
day of more than 9 hours, and in Mississippi 62.7 per cent, in Delaware
62.8 per cent, in Tennessee 55.3 per cent, in Kentucky 43.1 per cent,
and in Georgia 41.8 per cent had a normal working day of 10 hours
or In the Middle Western States (Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma,
more.
Ohio, and Illinois) and in the Eastern States except Delaware (Rhode




52

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Island and New Jersey), the 9-hour day was the prevailing schedule.
Where a State study had been made that included a city covered
by the present study, it was possible to compare the daily hours of
the city with its respective State as a whole. The following sets
forth the findings in this respect.
Per cent of women with scheduled hours of—
State and city
8 and
under

New Jersey________________
Jersey City and Newark
Rhode Island_______________
Providence_____________
Ohio_______________________
Cleveland______________
Cincinnati_____________
Illinois_____________________
Chicago-...___________
Alabama 1__________________
Birmingham____________
Georgia 2___________________
Atlanta________________
1 See statement on p. 45.

28.
14.
8.
10.
4.
.
11.

8
5
6
5
6
9
3

Over 8
and
under 9

1. 1

16. 6
0
1
0
2
0

.

4. 6

43.
12.
39.
3.
13.

6

38. 1

3. 3

Over 9
and
under 10

9

58.
37.
56.
32.
77.
56.
93.
49.
84.
16.
5.
27.
14.

1
8
0
0
5
4
4
2
9
1
7
2
6

38. 1
16. 7

10

Over 10

2. 7
29. 5

16. 5
2.
20.
8.
37.
49.
27.
72.

6
1
2
7
9
7
8

6.
6.
3.
31.
38.
12.

3
3
4
4
7
7

13. 0
3. 1

2 Excludes Atlanta.

Jersey City and Newark, Cleveland, and Providence had larger
proportions in the shorter-hour groupings than had their States as a
whole. The women in Chicago massed more solidly at 9 hours than
did the women in the State generally. The shorter hours indicated
for Alabama laundries than for those in the city of Birmingham were
due to the depressed condition of industry and trade in the State at
the time of the earlier study.
Scheduled daily hours of laundries in New York.
A summary of the daily hours in the New York laundry study
includes the following statement:
Inasmuch as scheduled hours in laundries tended to vary on the different days
of the week, the length of workday can not be shown as clearly as if daily hours
were uniform. However, for a large group who had the same schedule on four
or five days of the week the 9-hour day was most usual, in effect for more than
two-thirds of the workers. Only 2 per cent had an 8-hour day; an additional
22 per cent an 8)4 or an 8)4 hour day; 4 per cent were scheduled to work for
9)4 or 9)4 hours, while the same proportion had a 10-hour day.3

Saturday hours.
A half day on Saturday is practically an institution in the manu­
facturing industry, but it is not quite so general in the laundry indus­
try. Data on Saturday hours were recorded separately, and the
compilations show that more than 66 per cent of the establishments
and almost 60 per cent of the women had shorter hours on the last
day of the week. (See Appendix Table VIII.)
A free Saturday is a godsend to the married working woman who
has an accumulation of household duties awaiting her week end. Of
. 3 New York. Department of Labor. Hours and Earnings of Women Employed in Power Laundries
m New York State. Special Bui. 153, p. 25.




HOURS

53

the 288 laundries for which data on hours were available, one in eight
gave the majority of their women employees an entirely free Saturday.
However, this total is heavily weighted by the figure for Detroit,
where conditions were somewhat abnormal on account of unemploy­
ment, caused by the temporary closing of one of the largest automo­
bile plants, resulting in decreased patronage of laundries at the time
of the survey. Family laundries, in which much of the work is wet
wash or rough dry in type, in many cases do not work on Saturdays,
and most of the laundries with a free Saturday are in this class.
In many plants there was considerable irregularity as to Saturday
hours and statements such as the following were common: “If work
is slack, do not run on Saturdays and close early Fridays;” “Do
not work on Saturday in summer and not more than two hours the
rest of the year;” “Saturday hours depend on the amount of work
on hand.”
Of all the women reported who worked on Saturday, fewer than 38
per cent had scheduled hours of less than 6. As many as 10 per cent
had a Saturday of at least 9 hours. In the western cities, with
their shorter daily hours, the scheduled day tended to be the same
throughout the week, more than 95 per cent of the women having
an 8-hour Saturday. In the eastern and middle-western sections
more than half the women had a short Saturday, but in the South
only a small proportion had a half holiday at the end of the week.
Lunch period.
Closely related to the scheduled daily hours are the policies with
reference to lunch periods. A satisfactory time allowance for lunch
varies with the location of the laundry and the habits of the workers.
When the laundry is so situated that the majority of the employees
live near by, the workers generally prefer to go home for the noon
meal, and this can hardly be accomplished in less than an hour.
However, when most of the employees carry lunch boxes or patronize
restaurants, a shorter interval is preferred if it means a corresponding
reduction in the working day. A half hour was the most common
lunch period, being reported for more than 60 per cent of the women.
(See Appendix Table IX.)
Lunch-period legislation.
A few States have legislation covering lunch and rest periods. Of
the Eastern States, Massachusetts requires, except on a short day, an
interval of three-quarters of an hour after six hours of work. In
Boston, 18 of the 30 laundries reported had an hour off at noon, and even
in the two eastern localities not affected by special legislation the noon
interval generally was one hour. Milwaukee and San Francisco were
the only other cities in which the most characteristic lunch period
was an hour. Of the Middle Western States, Minnesota, Ohio, and
Wisconsin have designated 60 minutes as the basic lunch period for
women employees, but in each case there is a qualification of the
provision allowing a shorter period. In Minnesota and Wisconsin
special permission for a shorter time may be obtained from the labor
commission; and in Ohio 30 minutes is allowed if a lunch room is
provided in the plant. None of the other Middle Western States had
legal regulation of the noon hour, and a half-hour was the rule. All
the western laundries had legislation or industrial commission orders
with reference to meal periods. In California the meal period for



54

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

women must not be less than 30 minutes. In Los Angeles 17 of 21
laundries had 30 minutes for their noon relief, and in San Francisco
all but 1 of the 17 laundries had one hour. Oregon hour legislation
requires at least three-quarters of an hour’s rest in any 6-hour period,
and all but one of the laundries in Portland reported a lunch period
of this length. The other had an hour’s recess at noon. The Wash­
ington law prohibits the employment of women in laundries more
than six hours without a period of 15 minutes’ rest, and all lunch
periods in Seattle were reported as half an hour. None of the South­
ern States visited had any legislation regulating lunch periods, and
the most common time allowance was 30 minutes.
The prevailing allowance, by city, was as follows:
30 minutes

Chicago.
Detroit.
Cleveland.
Cincinnati,
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Indianapolis.
Des Moines.'
Los Angeles.
Seattle.
Atlanta.
Birmingham.
Richmond.
Jacksonville.
St. Petersburg and Tampa.

45 minutes

Portland.

1 hour
Boston.
Providence.
Jersey City and Newark.
Milwaukee.
San Francisco.

Rest periods.
The knowledge that about halfway through a work period there will
be a short interval for rest tends to create a better attitude toward the
work and by lessening fatigue may increase production to an extent
more than commensurate with the time taken from the job. Where
the worker is required to stand continuously, a rest period is especially
welcome and beneficial. A common objection to definite rest periods
on the part of management is that many occur unavoidably during
the normal course of the work. However, the organization of the
work so as to reduce to a minimum all such pauses and to allow
definite intervals for rest had been found satisfactoiy in the few
plants where it had been tried':
In this study very little material concerning regular rest periods
was gathered. Of all the laundries surveyed, 32, or slightly more
than 10 per cent, reported definite rest periods. (See Appendix
Table X.) Of these, one-half were in two cities, Boston with nine
laundries having rest pauses and Milwaukee with seven. No other
city reported more than two laundries with rest periods. Ten or
fifteen minutes was the most common interval reported. Of the 32
laundries reporting rest periods, 4 reported 2 such intervals daily, 1
in the afternoon as well as 1 in the morning. When the workday is as
long as 9 or 10 hours, a definite period of 10 or 15 minutes in the
morning at least, when the women can relax and perhaps have a
sandwich, in most instances has a beneficial effect on the worker
and on her work.




HOURS

55

Hours worked in holiday week.
Since the laundry industry sells a service and not a concrete
product, a holiday presents a special problem in the distribution of the
work so as not to interfere with regular deliveries to customers. If a
laundry closes for a holiday, the quantity of work to be done over the
week remains the same and arrangements must be m ade to keep the
delivery schedule as normal as possible. Thus holidays are not an
unmixed blessing, and they are not observed so generally as in the
manufacturing industries.
About 10 per cent of the laundries reporting stated that they
occasionally worked on holidays, and one reported that some of its
force worked on all holidays. The most common arrangement—that
of 60 per cent or more of the laundries reporting in the eastern,
middle-western, and southern sections—was to increase the hours
on other days, wherever there was a margin between scheduled hours
and State regulation, and usually the shorter hours on Saturday were
forfeited.
ACTUAL HOURS WORKED

The discussion of scheduled hours is concerned with the normal
working hours in the laundries covered, and to supplement such
information it was possible to record the actual hours worked by
10,680 white and 2,144 negro women. (See Appendix Table XI.)
Almost always there are marked discrepancies between scheduled
hours and actual hours because of the factors of undertime and
overtime. Employees occasionally must remain at home because of
illness, home duties, or other emergencies, or because the plant is not
able to supply enough work to keep all busy, and at times, due to
special conditions some or all employees are required to work over­
time.
In accordance with the bureau’s custom, an effort was made in
securing the hour and wage data for the laundry survey to select a
week in which, from the standpoint of the plant, hours and earnings
were normal. Sometimes this was almost impossible; for example, in
Detroit, where many of the laundries were at a low ebb of business
because of depressed conditions of trade. Occasionally pressure of
work brought the hours above the regular schedule.
As far as such records were available, data on hours actually
worked were copied, but in a considerable number of laundries the
time worked was recorded only in days or, as was sometimes the case
with pieceworkers, was not recorded at all.
Full time, lost time, and overtime.
Comparing the week’s hours actually worked with the scheduled
hours of the plants readily divided the workers into three groups—
those who had worked the scheduled hours, those who had lost time,
and those who had worked overtime. Table XIV in the appendix
gives the numbers and proportions in each group, by city. Arranged




56

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

in descending order according to the proportion of women reported as
working full time, the cities rank as follows:
Per cent
of white
women
who
worked
scheduled
hours

City

All places _ __ __

_

Des Moines
_ __
_
Boston _ _
_____ _
Los Angeles. _
_ ____
_
Providence____ ______ __
Seattle _ _ _ _____
_
_
San Francisco _ ______
_
Birmingham. __ ______
_
Cincinnati.
____ _ _ _ _
Chicago
__ __
_
Atlanta._ _ __
_
__
Jersey City and Newark _
Cleveland _ _
_
_
Minneapolis and St. Paul___
Indianapolis
St. Petersburg and Tampa___
Milwaukee__ __
Detroit
__
_ __
_
Portland . ________ _____
Richmond
_
_____ ____
Jacksonville _ _ _____ ______

50. 2
83.
75.
75.
71.
70.
69.
66.
41.
41.
30.
27.
24.
18.
16.
16.
14.
9.
9.
.
.

1
1
0
3
0
8
7
3
0
8

City

All places_______

Richmond _
Atlanta _
Indianapolis
Detroit.________
St. Petersburg and Tampa___

Per cent
of negro
women
who
worked
scheduled
hours
29. 0
Sfi
fifi
fi3
29
24
9
9
8
6.
2.

4
1
2
1
7
4
0
3
9
7

i
5
6
1
0
0
6
5
0
0

A glance at the figures for white women shows that the cities with
scheduled hours of over 56—Richmond, Jacksonville, and St. Peters­
burg and Tampa—all are at the foot of the list, and five with hours of
48 and under—Boston, Los Angeles, Providence, Seattle, and San
Francisco—are in the first six of the list. It is apparent further that
negro women worked full time less generally than did white women.
Lost time was much greater in extent than was overtime. Arrang­
ing the cities in descending order by the proportion of women who
lost some time gives the following result:




57

HOURS

City

All places
Portland_____ ______________
Milwaukee
Detroit
Cleveland
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Jersey City and Newark____
St. Petersburg and Tampa_
_
Minneapolis and St. Paul____
Atlanta
San Francisco
Seattle
Los Angeles
Boston
Chicago
Providence
Des Moines
Birmingham

Per cent
of white
women who
worked
less than
scheduled
hours
39. 6
85.
82.
73.
64.
54.
51.
49.
49.
38.
30.
29.
27.
25.
22.
20.
18.
14.
7.

5
1
0
8
5
4
2
1
9
8
1
5
0
4
3
8
6
6

Per cent
of negro
women who
worked
less than
scheduled
hours

City

All places __ __ _
Jersey City and Newark
Richmond
Detroit _______
St. Petersburg and Tampa...
Cleveland
_
_
Chicago
____
Indianapolis.
_
_
Atlanta
Jacksonville. ____
Birmingham____
Boston. ______ __

52. 1
93.
89.
87.
69.
53.
52.
45.
42.
35.
16.
13.

3
1
5
2
8
3
8
4
6
3
6

On a sectional basis, the most lost time was reported in the middlewestern cities, with 54.3 per cent of the white women and 61.1 per cent
of the negro women losing time. Full time was most prevalent in the
eastern and western cities for the white women and in the eastern cities
for the negro women, the per cents being respectively 68.9, 65.8, and
45.6 of the women.
The per cents of the total working overtime were 10.2 of the white
women and 18.9 of the negroes. By overtime is meant the time
worked in excess of the scheduled hours.
In certain cities considerable proportions of the women worked
overtime, five having from a quarter to practically half of their women
so reported. The cities in which overtime was recorded for more
than 10 per cent of the women are these:

City

All places.. _
Minneapolis and St. Paul___
Chicago____________
Atlanta _
_
.
St. Petersburg and Tampa_
_
Indianapolis
__
Birmingham
_______
Jersey City and Newark
.
Cleveland___ _____
103127°—30——5




Per cent
of white
women who
worked
more than
scheduled
hours
10. 2
42.
38.
38.
34.
29.
25.
23.
10.

5
7
5
9
3
8
8
6

City

Per cent
of negro
women who
worked
more than
scheduled
hours

All places

IS Q

Atlanta

_.

_

St. Petersburg and Tampa
Chicago
____
Birmingham
Cleveland

48.
45
28.
23.
17
17.

6
8
0
0
ft
0

58

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Selecting for each section the city that reported the largest propor­
tion of women working full time, undertime, and overtime gives results
as follows:
WHITE WOMEN

Section
City

Overtime

Undertime

Full time
Per
cent of
women
75.1
Middle western__ Des Moines..

83.1

Los Angeles. _
Birmingham.

75.0
66. 7

City

Jersey City and New­
ark.
St. Petersburg and
Tampa.

Per
cent of
women
49.2
82.1

City

Jersey City and New­
ark.
Minneapolis and St.
Paul.

85.5
49.1

Per
cent of
women
23.8
42.5
4.9
38.5

NEGRO WOMEN
86. 4
29.1
66.1

ark.

93.3
87.5
89.1

Jersey City and Newark.

6.7
45.8
48.6

Full time, undertime, and overtime each was calculated on the
basis of its relation to the plants’ scheduled hours. Considering hours
worked irrespective of relation to scheduled hours shows that the
largest group of white women (37 per cent) had worked 48 hours—
the large number in the western cities who worked exactly 48 hours
was the determining factor for the group as a whole—and the largest
group of negro women (13.9 per cent) had worked over 50 and under
52 hours. Table XI in the appendix sets forth the per cents of women
in each of the hour groups. More than three-fourths (78 per cent) of
the white women and almost three-fourths (73.2 per cent) of the
negro women had worked at least 44 hours in the week reported.
The following table shows the per cents of women, white and negro
separate, in certain groups of hours actually worked.




V*

59

HOURS

Table 4.—Per cent of women who worked, during the week reported, under 44
hours, 44 hours and over, 48 hours and over, and 54 hours and over, by section and
city
■

WHITE WOMEN
Per cent of women who worked—

Section and city

Under 44
hours

All places____ ______ __

__

Eastern. ____________
___________
Boston .
. ________
________
Providence_____ ..
___________
Jersey City and Newark ________ __
Middle western _____ .
________
Chicago ___________ _____ ____ __
Detroit_____ _
_ . _ ______ _____
Cleveland __ .. _ _______ ____
Cincinnati _ _______
.
____
Minneapolis and St. Paul_
_
Milwaukee___ _____ __ . _______
Indianapolis_______________ ____ _
Des Moines____ _________
____
Western . .
______ ______________ _
Los Angeles. _
_
_
______
.
San Francisco
_ _______ ____ ____
Seattle____ __ ________
Portland____ ______ ____
.
Southern1 . _
__ _ ______ __
Atlanta___
_ ______
_
_ _
Birmingham____ _
__
St. Petersburg and Tampa ________

44 hours
and over

48 hours
and over

22. 0

78. 0

59. 8

3.1

25.
25.
14.
42.
26.
14.
36.
41.
17.
14.
34.
22.
10.
17.
17.
15.
19.
22.
20.
19.
6.
28.

75.
74.
85.
57.
73.
86.
63.
58.
82.
85.
65.
77.
89.
82.
83.
84.
80.
77.
79.
80.
93.
71.

48
47.
51.
51.
55.
76.
46.
32.
55.
74.
25.
65.
87.
66.
74.
70.
72.
14.
72.
69.
93.
62.

3
. i
1. 3

0
2
3
5
5
0
7
5
6
6
7
7
1
6
0
8
8
7
9
2
1
3

0
8
7
5
5
0
3
5
4
4
3
3
9
4
0
2
2
3
1
8
9
7

5
2
3
4
0
7
1
1
7
6
9
7
6
7
6
9
5
5
6
2
9
3

54 hours
and over

5.
15.
1.
3.
1.
6.
.
4.
34

4
9
1
1
1
3
3
3
8

58.
57.
72.
50.

2
7
7
9

NEGRO WOMEN

All places.. ......

_

Eastern___ __
_
....____
Boston ....
_
_
_
_____
Jersey City and Newark____________
Middle western ________ __ _ _ _ _
Chicago _____ ____ _______
. .
Detroit_ __ _ ________________ _
_
Cleveland___
_ _ ___________ _
Indianapolis___ ____ _____ _______ _
Southern ______________ ____ ____
_ .
Atlanta__ _____
_____
_ ____ __
_
Birmingham
Richmond.. ______
..
.
St. Petersburg and Tampa _
_ _
Jacksonville..______________
_ ._

26. 8

73. 2

63. 8

48.
29.
82.
29.
15.
42.
56.
8.
19.
47.
5.
65.
17.
7.

51.
70.
17.
70.
84.
57.
43.
91.
80.
52.
94.
34.
83.
92.

40. 8
70. 5

5
5
2
9
6
9
5
3
9
3
5
6
0
8

5
5
8
1
4
1
5
7
1
8
5
4
0
2

57.
76.
34.
31.
79.
75.
50.
91.
20.
72.
92.

9
5
9
8
2
1
0
7
3
5
2

26. 8

12.
21.
.
.
25.
50.
20.
58.
10.
65.
67.

4
5

3
4
0
7
1
1
9
4
8

1 White women in Richmond and Jacksonville too few for the calculation of percentages.

Only the southern section and one or two of the middle-western
cities had any appreciable group working 54 hours or more. A higher
proportion of negro women than of white women worked under 44




60

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

hours. Certain cities had especially high per cents of negro women
working less than 44 hours a week.
_
Where the only obtainable statement as to time worked was in
terms of days nothing definite can be learned of overtime or under­
time. Of something over 5,000 women for whom there were no
records as to hours worked during the week, 80 per cent had worked
or were paid for 5% or 6 days. About 90 per cent were reported as
working on 5 days or more.
Comments on hours worked in home visits.
During the home interviews about 1,500 women commented in
some way on the hours worked. The most frequent comment was
with reference to overtime. No effort was made to get statements on
the extent of overtime and the comments were only suggestive of the
worker’s reactions to hours. Of 843 women who reported on the
subject of overtime, the statements have been classified as follows:
Women reporting
Extent of overtime

Overtime around holidays only

— —

Number

__

Some overtime—degree not indicated. _ ------

..

Per cent

403
223
175
42

47.
26.
20.
5.

8
5
8
0

A number of the women interviewed made the statement that in
many cases they would rather give up a holiday than work the long
hours that precede and follow it. All the joy of participation in a
holiday is lost when the time must be made up.
NIGHT WORK

Night work for women laundry workers was prohibited in Cali­
fornia, Oregon, and Wisconsin. In California an order of the indus­
trial welfare commission prohibited night work between 10 p. m. and
6 a. m.; in Wisconsin a similar order prohibited work between 6 p. m.
and 6 a. m.; and in Oregon the laundries were prohibited from
employing women after 8.30 p. m.
In this study little night work was found. Only four laundries
visited—three in Chicago and one in Tampa—were employing women
at night, and only 72 white and 16 negro women were so employed.
The hours worked each night were scheduled as 9 to 10 or more.
The total weekly hours differed for three of the four firms. The three
Chicago laundries worked five nights a week, the Tampa laundry four
nights. Another Chicago plant had an evening shift—a group of
women who came on for flat work each day at 12.30 and worked till
11 p. m. This laundry also had women who worked Sunday after­
noons, and it was stated that the plant was in operation 365 days a
year.
Night work was encountered so seldom in this study that its extent
was inappreciable. However, to work at night is considered bad for
all persons, and it is especially dangerous for married women who,
forced by economic necessity to become wage earners, must care for
their families during the day with only a little rest sandwiched in
before they go to their night jobs.




WAGES

Wages are a significant item in the cost sheet of the employer, but
to the employee they are even more important, since in most in­
stances a worker’s earnings determine her economic well-being and
her standard of living.
A variety of factors, industrial, social, and personal, complicate
the findings of a statistical study of wages. A few of the variables
that influence and lead to fluctuations of the wages of any group are
the nature and stability of the industry, the practices and policies of
the trade with reference to wages, employees’ organizations, statutory
regulations, cost of living in the community, requirements as to skill
and experience on the part of the workers, tradition, and, in some
instances, race. In this laundry survey no effort has been made to
interpret or attach special significance to the underlying trends, the
purpose being to present only the findings brought out by compila­
tions and correlations of the wage and other data secured in the
various laundries. The information on earnings is based on the
actual earnings, rates, and time worked, for one week and by depart­
ment or occupation, of all the women wage earners in 286 laundries
visited. Usually a week in the fall of 1927 was chosen, one typical
of the plant, without a holiday or other disturbing factor, and selected
with the advice and approval of a member of the firm or official of
the plant. In some instances data for the fall of 1927 could not be
secured, but all records were taken in the late fall or the winter of
1927 or the early spring of 1928.
WEEK’S EARNINGS

Earnings of all women.
Actual week’s earnings irrespective of the time worked represent
the wage payments of the week under consideration and are signifi­
cant as a general showing of wages in the industry as a whole. They
suggest the amounts on which the woman laundry worker must base
her budget. Earnings records were copied for 19,180 women, 5,076
of whom were negroes. (See Appendix Table XII.) The earnings
of the white and negro women are shown separately in this report,
because of the marked differences in their wages, especially in the
South. In a few tables they have been combined to give a summary
view of the wage level for all the women in the industry in the various
sections and cities.
The statement first presented shows by section the distribution of
the women in four groupings according to earnings: Under $10,
$10 and under $15, $15 and under $20, and $20 or more. The massing
of the women in the South in the group under $10 is due, of course,
to the numbers and lower earnings of negro women. In general, the
trend of earnings in the East and Middle West is similar, with the
West decidedly higher and the South lower. Of the total number of
women, slightly more than two-thirds fell in the midgroups of $10




61

62

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

DISTRIBUTION OF EARNINGS
m,104

MM White

women

-

5,07 6 EZZ2 Negro women

All Sections'
UNDER 10 DOLLARS

59.2

WZZ7/////////////7A

10 AND UNDER
15 DOLLARS
15 AND UNDER
20 DOLLARS
20 DOLLARS
AND OVER
r
A/V.2,306^
LAST^N - 246/

UNDER .10 DOLLARS
10 AND UNDER
15 DOLLARS
15 AND UNDER
20 DOLLARS
20 DOLLARS
AND OVER

Tzzzzm

Middle WestCn.JJus)
UNDER 10 DOLLARS
10 AND UNDER
15 DOLLARS
15 AND UNDER
20 DOLLARS
20 DOLLARS
AND OVER

233

7ZZZZA
ZZZZZa

West1 (».'.“«)
UNDER 10 DOLLARS
10 AND UNDER
15 DOLLARS
15 AND UNDER
20 DOLLARS
20 DOLLARS
AND OVER
c
fW- 542^
OOUTH \_N— 2,876j

UNDER 10 DOLLARS

V//////////////'//Z777"/r/77l

10 AND UNDER
15 DOLLARS
15 AND UNDER
20 DOLLARS
20 DOLLARS
AND OVER
*Neqro women in We»r not shown (onl^ lb reported) but Included in foral of all secfion*.




U S. Dept of Labor
Wornen\s Bureau

WAGES

63

and. tinder $20, with 33 per cent at $10 and under $15, and 34.1 per
cent at $15 and under $20.
The accompanying chart shows the earnings distribution in the
same groups but by race of woman.
Per cent of all women whose earnings were—
Number
of women
reported

Section

All places

_

_______

Under $10 $10 and un­ $15 and un­ $20 and over
der $15
der $20

19, 180

Eastern _ _ _______ __ _
_
_
Middle western. _ _ _ _ _
_
Western.. .....
_ _
_
Southern .. _ __ _ _. _ .
_

2,
7,
5,
3,

20. 0

34. 1

12. 9

7.
11.
3.
75.

552
630
580
418

33. 0
51.
49.
11.
16.

31.
30.
57.
6.

9.
8.
27.
2.

6
2
5
8

3
9
9
0

7
4
3
1

4
5
2
1

Between 8 and 9 women of every 10 in the West, in contrast to
between 8 and 9 of every 100 in the South, received as much as $15
for the week’s work. From the details by city in Table XII in the
appendix it appears that women in San Francisco had the highest
earnings, almost 60 per cent receiving at least $20 and practically 1
in 6 receiving as much as $25.
The following table summarizes the earnings of white and negro
women separately and presents the figures by city:
Table 5.—Week’s earnings, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN
Number and per cent of women whose week’s earn­
ings were—
Section and city

All women
reported

Under $10

$10 and un­ $15 and un­
$20 and over
der $15
der $20

Num­ Median Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per
ber
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
All places_________

14,104

$16.10

831

5.9 4,672

33.1 6,168

43.7 2,433

17.3

Eastern__________ _____________

2, 306

14.50

166

7.2 1,135

49.2

771

33.4

234

10.1

Boston
Jersey City and Newark
Providence.......___..............._ ..
Middle western____________ ____

1,423
365
518
5, 692

14.60
14. 80
13.65
14. 75

90
32
44
404

6.3
693
8.8
162
8.5
280
7.1 2, 624

48.7
492
44.4
132
54.1
147
46.1 2,046

34.6
36.2
28.4
35.9

148
39
47
618

10.4
10.7
9.1
10.9

Chicago- ..............
......... _
Cincinnati____________ ____
Cleveland
Des Moines
Detroit.
__.............. . ___
Indianapolis
Milwaukee_
_
...
Minneapolis and St. Paul
Western. _______ ______________

746
539
608
238
1,245
900
529
887
5,564

16.65
14. 05
15. 25
14. 00
15. 35
13.45
14. 65
14.10
17.90

57
39
32
19
58
110
38
51
196

7.6
7.2
5.3
8.0
4.7
12.2
7.2
5.7
3.5

170
304
251
133
498
485
257
526
666

22.8
326
56.4
151
41.3
253
55.9
80
40.0
547
53.9
231
48.6
186
59.3
272
12.0 3,186

43.7
193
28.0
45
41.6
72
33.6
6
43.9
142
25.7
74
35.2
48
30.7
38
57.3 1,516

25.9
8. 3
11.8
2. 5
11.4
8. 2
9. 1
4.3
27.2

Los Angeles___ ___________
Portland____ _______________
San Francisco.. _
..
Seattle_________ _________ _
Southern ...

2, 613
768
1,434
749
542

17.00
15. 35
20. 70
18. 05
13.95

98
34
28
36
65

3.8
4.4
2.0
4.8
12.0

282
288
40
56
247

10.8 1, 749
37.5
401
2.8
537
7.5
499
45.6
165

66.9
52.2
37.4
66.6
30.4

484
45
829
158
65

18. 5
5.9
57.8
21.1
12.0

Atlanta______ _________
Birmingham_ .......
_
Jacksonville
Richmond___________
St. Petersburg and Tampa....... _

180
118
47
11
186

14.40
15. 80
15.40
<‘)
11. 95

8
9
2
1
45

4.4
7.6
4.3
0)
24.2

92
31
19
5
100

51.1
26.3
40.4
(i)
53.8

37. 2
44. 1
40.4
0)
13.4

13
26
7
3
16

7.2
22.0
14. 9
(!)
8.6

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




67
52
19
2
25

64

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table 5.—Week’s earnings, by section and city—Continued
NEGRO WOMEN
Number and per cent of women whose week’s earn­
ings were—
All women
reported
Section and city

Under $10

$10 and un­ $15 and un­ $20 and over
der $15
der $20

Num­ Median Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per
ber
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
All places______________—

$8. 85 3,005

59.2 1,656

32.6

366

7. 2

49

1.0

Eastern.- _____ ________________

246

12. 50

29

11.8

173

70.3

39

15.9

5

2.0

Boston_____________________
Jersey City and Newark_____

67
160
19

13. 35
11.90
14.15

6
23

9.0
14.4

43
117
13

64.2
73. 1
68.4

16
17
6

23.9
10.6
31. 6

2
3

3.0
1.9

Middle western_________ ______ _

1,938

12. 25

451

23.3 1,183

61.0

270

13.9

34

1.8

989
50
448
399
50
2

12.45
12. 10
10. 85
12. 55
12. 50
(i)

205
8
170
60
8

20.7
16.0
37.9
15.0
16. 0

64.7
68.0
50.0
62.2
74. 0

119
7
50
88
5
1

12.0
14.0
11.2
22. 1
10. 0
0

25
1
4
3

2.5
2.0
.9
.8

1

0

16

17. 50

13

81. 3

3

18.8

Chicago________ __________
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Detroit-- - _________ ____

Southern

St. Petersburg and Tampa-------

5, 076

2,876
940
742
352
477
365

640
34
224
248
37

7.15 2, 525

87.8

300

10.4

44

1.5

7

.2

6.45
7. 00
6. 80
8. 20
9. 80

97.0
94. 5
97.4
79.0
52.6

26
40
8
86
140

2.8
5.4
2. 3
18.0
38.4

2
1
1
14
26

.2
.1
.3
2.9
7. 1

7

1.9

912
701
343
377
192

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

The proportion of white women receiving $20 or more was greater
in the South than in the eastern and middle-western sections, due to
the fact that the white women in the South were employed chiefly
on the better-paid jobs of marking and sorting. The proportion of
white women earning less than $10 is not especially significant and
is accounted for by undertime, as a very insignificant proportion of
white women had rates of less than $10 a week. For the negro women,
however, weekly rates as low as $5.50, $6, and $7 were not at all
uncommon.
Median of the earnings.
For all the women for whom earnings were reported the median
was $14.65; for the white women it was $16.10 and for the negro
women it was $8.85. The median serves as a simple and satisfactory
measuring stick for evaluation of the earnings in the various cities
covered. It represents the midpoint in a distribution from the lowest
to the highest, half the women earning more than the median and
half earning less. The medians for the four geographic sections were
as follows:




65

WAGES

Section

Eastern __
_____ ________
Middle western. .
_
___
Western. _ __ ______
_
Southern
_
_ _
_

All women

$14.
14.
17.
7.

30
05
90
55

White
women

$14.
14.
17.
13.

50
75
90
95

Negro
women

$12. 50
12. 25
0
7. 15

Per cent
negro
women
were of total

9.
25.
.
84.

6
4
3
1

■-Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

Naturally, the group with the largest proportion of negro women
shows the greatest discrepancy between the earnings of negro women
and those of white women.
When the cities are arranged in descending order according to the
median for all women, the western cities are all at the top of the list
and the southern cities are together at the foot.
Median of the earnings of—
City
All women

San Francisco ______ _____ __ _
_
Seattle.. ______ __
_
..
Los Angeles.
_
Portland
_
_
.
Detroit__________
_ _________
_
Milwaukee .
_ _
_
_
Boston _ _
__
Minneapolis and St. Paul
___ _____
Des Moines. _
_
•Jersey City and Newark
Cincinnati
_
Providence
_
_
.
Chicago
Indianapolis.. _ _
Cleveland.
...
St. Petersburg and Tampa
Richmond
.
__
Birmingham
______ _
Jacksonville-______ ____ _____
.
Atlanta
__________________ _

$20.
18.
17.
15.
14.
14.
14.
14.
14.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
10.
8.
7.
7.
6.

70
05
00
35
85
65
55
10
00
95
90
70
65
30
25
40
25
30
00
75

White
women

$20. 70
18. 05
17. 00
15. 35
15. 35
14. 65
14. 60
14. 10
14. 00
14. 80
14. 05
13. 65
16. 65
13. 45
15. 25
11. 95
0
15. 80
15. 40
14. 40

Negro
women

Per cent
negro
women
were of total

$17. 50

0. 6

12. 55

24. 3

13. 35
0

4. 5

11.
12.
14.
12.
12.
10.
9.
8.
7.
6.
6.

90
10
15
45
50
85
80
20
00
80
45

30.
8.
3.
57.
5.
42.
66.
97.
86.
88.
83.

5
5
5
0
3
4
2
7
3
2
9

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

The charts on pages 66 and 67 show in descending order the
median earnings of white and of negro women as reported in this
summary. The range of the medians of all women from $20.70 to
$6.75 in a single industry is striking, and the range of white women’s
earnings from $20.70 to $11.95 and of those of negro women from
$17.50 to $6.45 seems worthy of note.
Full-time earnings.
The effect of lost time in reducing earnings is illustrated in the fact
that the median of the earnings of the white women who worked full
time was $17.80 in contrast to $16.30 for all the white women whose




66

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

MEDIAN OF THE WEEK’S EARNINGS
14,104

White Women
dollars

5
San Francisco

820.70

Seattle

18.05

Los

17.00

Angeles

Chicago

16.65

Birmingham

15.80

Jacksonville

15.40

Portland (OregJ

15.35

Detroit

15.35

Cleveland

i 5.25

Jersey City and Newark 14.80
Milwaukee

14.65

Boston

14.60

Atlanta

14.40

Minneapolis

StPaul

14.10

Cincinnati

14.05

Des Moines

14.00

Providence

13.65

Indianapolis

13.45

St Petersburg o^Tampa

11.95

U.s. Dept, of Lat>Qr~ Womerfs 5ureoo




10

67

WAGES

hours were reported. (See Appendix Table XIII.) For the negro
women a different condition was found to exist, but the lower amount
for full-time workers ($10.25) than for all the negro women for whom
hours worked were reported ($10.45) is not representative. The
largest numbers of full-time negro workers were in the southern cities

MEDIAN OF THE WEEK’S EARNINGS
5,076

Negro Women
dollars

10

Los

Angeles

617.50

Providence

14.15

Boston

13.35

Detroit

12.55

Indianapolis

12.50

Chicago

12.45

Cincinnati •

12.10

Jersey City ,„jNewark

11.90

Cleveland

10.85

St Petersburg

Tampa

9.80

Richmond

8.20

Birmingham

7;0 0

Jacksonville

6.80

Atlanta

6.45

U.S. Dept, of Labor- Wonmi’j Bu

and this tended to pull down the general figure for the total because
of the lower wage scale prevailing there­
in Table 9 are the full-time earnings by city and section and the
per cent of women receiving such earnings. ' (See also Appendix Table
XV.) The general median for all women whose hours were re­
ported is entered in a third column as a basis of comparison.




68

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Table 6.—Median

of the week’s earnings of full-time workers and of all workers for
whom hours worked were reported, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN

Median of the
Per cent of
Median of the women who earnings of all
women for
full-time
worked full whom hours
earnings
worked were
time
reported

Section and city

All places.

___

_

___

-

_ _

$17. 80

50. 2

$16. 30

_
__

15.
15.
19.
15.

05
90
05
55

68.
23.
65.
34.

9
5
8
3

14.
14.
17.
13.

50
70
95
55

San Francisco
_
___ __
_
_
_
Seattle__
_
_
Portland
_ __
____ _ ________
Los Angeles _ __ _ ____
_
_
Chicago. _
_____
_
Detroit
_
Jersey City and Newark __
_ _
Milwaukee
_
_.
_ _
Cleveland _ _
_ _
_
Birmingham _
______
_ _ _
Indianapolis__ ____
__ _
_
..._ __
_
Boston
_ _ _
_
_ _________
Cincinnati__
_
_______
____
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Des Moines_______ _
______
_
—
St. Petersburg and Tampa
_
_
Providence, _____ __
______ __________
Atlanta, _ ______ _ ___ _ _____
_
__

21.
18.
18.
17.
17.
17.
17.
16.
16.
15.
15.
15.
14.
14.
14.
14.
13.
0)

10
45
00
60
60
25
05
65
00
85
45
15
85
60
30
25
90

69.
70.
9.
75.
41.
9.
27.
14.
24.
66.
16.
75.
41.
18.
83.
16.
71.
30.

8
0
5
0
0
6
1
0
5
7
1
1
3
6
1
0
3
8

20.
17.
15.
16.
16.
15.
15.
14.
15.
16.
12.
14.
14.
14.
13.
11.
12.
13.

70
95
15
95
95
00
00
55
25
20
55
65
20
00
80
55
95
50

Eastern _
- _
_
_
_____
Middle western
_
_
_ _
Western
_
_
___
Southern _ _______ __ _______ __

_

NEGRO WOMEN

$10. 25

29. 0

$10. 45

Eastern__________
_
_
_
_
Middle western_
_
________
_
_
_
Southern. _ _
_
_________ __
_

13. 80
12. 75
7. 25

45. 6
20. 8
38. 1

12. 85
12. 25
7. 25

Detroit
_
_
_
______
— --------Boston.
_
_
_
Cleveland
__ __
—
_
Chicago___
_
Birmingham_______ _
______
-_
Jacksonville______________ _
_ _
Atlanta
_
------Richmond..
_
____
St. Petersburg and Tampa ----------- _ _
Indianapolis.---------------

15.
13.
12.
12.
7.
6.
(*)
(>)
C)
(')

6.
86.
29.
24.
66.
63.
9.
9.
2.
8.

12.
13.
11.
12.
7.
6.
5.
6.
10.
12.

All places - -

_ __
_

55
60
75
55
40
65

9
4
1
7
1
3
0
4
7
3

55
45
80
20
40
35
90
45
55
40

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

In general, the figures for white women show no marked differences
between the general median and that of the full-time workers except
in a few cities where the percentage of full-time workers was low,
indicating considerable undertime, Portland and Detroit being the




69

WAGES

most striking examples of this. For white women, Indianapolis,
Portland, and St. Petersburg and Tampa show the greatest differences
between the general medians and those of full-time workers. In 7
of the cities and in the eastern and western sections, more than 65 per
cent of the white women had worked, or at least had been paid for,
the full scheduled time. (See Appendix Table XV.)
In general, the trend of full-time earnings for negro women was
much the same as for white women, although smaller proportions
were reported working full time. In St. Petersburg and Tampa over
two-thirds of the women worked undertime, while practically all the
others were employed overtime.
Including as full-time workers the 2,125 white and 2,064 negro
women who, though their hours worked were not reported, had worked
the required number of days, the medians (from unpublished tables)
are as follows:
White women Negro women

_

_

_

$16. 10

$8. 80

17. 30
14. 00
15. 75

All women _

8. 45
8. 80
11. 35

The less earnings of white women working overtime than of those
working full time are due to the overtime workers being preponder­
antly (76 per cent) in the Middle West where the earnings of all
women—regardless of time worked—had a median of $14.75, and
the full-time workers having much their largest proportion (49 per
cent) in the West, where the median was $17.90.
Similarly for the negro workers, the fact that 67 per cent of the
full-time workers were in the South, where the median of the earnings
of all workers was $7.15, makes their median fall below even that of
the women working undertime, half of whom were in the Middle West,
where the median for all women was $12.25.
On the whole, the laundry industry offers its employees fairly full­
time work unless there are unusual conditions in the community or an
individual plant. The steadiness of the work was one of the reasons
frequently given by the women interviewed in their homes for pre­
ferring laundry work to other jobs.
Median earnings for full-time laundry workers in other Women’s
Bureau studies.
From State-vide studies of employed women made by the Women’s
Bureau in the past 10 years supplementary data on the full-time
earnings of women laundry employees in 13 States are available.
(See Appendix Table XVIII.) In these studies full-time earnings are
reported for 4,214 women in 221 laundries, 2,629 of the women (62.4




70

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

per cent) being white and 1.585 (37.6 per cent) being negroes.
median earnings of the full-time workers were as follows:
State and date of survey

Number of
establishments

*

Median of the earnings of—

All women
Ohio, 1922_____ _______
New Jersey, 1922____ _
____
Rhode Island, 1920____
Oklahoma, 1924. _ _
__
_
Missouri, 1922___ ____ ____
__
Kentucky, 1921
Arkansas, 1922. _ __ . __
Delaware, 1924
_
Tennessee, 1925____
Georgia, 1920 and 1921 . __
Mississippi, 1925-.Alabama, 1922 _ _
_
South Carolina, 1921-1922

26
10
4
32
26
14
23
5
18
18
14
19
12

The

$13.
12.
12.
12.
11.
10.
10.
9.
7.
7.
6.
6.
6.

40
95
30
15
95
80
10
95
60
15
75
55
20

White women Negro women

$13.
13.
12.
12.
12.
11.
10.
9
10.
14.
10.
12.
12.

50
35
30
25
80
10
55
95
10
45
20
80
50

$11. 65
10. 75
9.
10.
9.
9.

25
35
45
45

6.
6.
6.
6.
5.

85
85
45
45
95

The rates paid in the western cities, the inclusion of more northern
cities and of larger cities in general, and probably the factor of date
tend to make the medians of the present study on a level higher than
appears for the States surveyed. About two-thirds of the States
listed could be classed as southern. Cities in Ohio, New Jersey,
Rhode Island, Georgia, and Alabama were revisited in the present
study of laundries only, and for four of these it is possible to compare
the earnings in the State as a unit—including both large and small
cities—with the laundries of the largest places in the State. It is
apparent that all the medians of the present study are higher than the
medians for the respective States.
Median of the full-time earn­
ings of—

State and city

White women Negro women

Ohio--_ ____ ____
_
Cincinnati___
_
.
Cleveland ________
_
New Jersey.. _
.
Jersey City and Newark...
Rhode Island.
.
.
Providence _. .
Alabama . ..
Birmingham . _
_
..

"
.

$13.
14.
16.
13.
17.
12.
13.
12.
15.

50
85
00
35
05
30
90
80
85

$11. 65
12. 75

6. 45
7. 40

Summary of findings of earnings in New York power-laundry study.
Data on a week’s earnings of women employed in the power
laundries in New York are summarized in the following sentences
from the report previously quoted:
Median earnings of all workers in the week studied were $14.67—$14 88 in
New York City, $14.20 upstate.
Excluding foreladics, median earnings ranged from $14.14 for flat-work oper­
ators to $16.40 for press operators.1
in N?w York State^sScTal Buhl^ pi^lMo"88 °f W°men EmpI°yed in Poww L“6S




71

WAGES

Methods of payment.
Payment of wages in the laundry industry was almost entirely on a
simple time basis and calculated on hourly, daily, or weekly rates.
Piecework had been adopted to only a small extent. However,
many of the laundry managers evidenced considerable interest in
telling of their own experience in paying on a pound or piece basis
and frequently they inquired about the experience of others with
special systems of payment. The industry seemed to be tending
toward an increased use of the output system, but of the more than
18,000 women for whom method of payment was recorded only about
10 per cent were paid entirely by output. A small additional group,
2.3 per cent of the white women and 0.1 per cent of the negro, worked
partly on piece and partly on time in the week taken. Weekly rates
were most common.
Earnings of timeworkers and pieceworkers.
. The distribution of timeworkers and pieceworkers and those who
worked on both time and piece was as follows:
White women

Negro women

Per cent paid by—

Section
Number
reported

All places___ 13, 477
Eastern_________
2, 282
Middle western____ 5, 185
Western_____
5, 478
Southern___
____ ' 532

Time

Piece

Both

87. 8

10. 0

2. 3

83.
88.
88.
97.

11.
9.
10.
3.

5. 0
1. 7
2. 0

7
4
0
0

3
9
1
0

Per cent paid by—
Number
reported

Time

Piece

4, 836

89. 5

10. 4

246
1, 730
16
2, 844

87.
88.
62.
90.

12.
11.
37.
9.

4
7
5
3

6
2
5
6

Both

0. 1
. l
. i

For white women piecework was much more general than elsewhere
in Providence, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, and Los Angeles.
Omitting the western section, with only 16 negro women, piecework
was more common for this race in Boston, Cleveland, Birmingham,
and St. Petersburg and Tampa. The per cents of white and negro
women on piecework in the various cities were as follows:
City

Boston
Providence
Jersey City and Newark
Chicago
Detroit
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Minneapolis and St.
Paul
Milwaukee
Indianapolis
1
1 Only 6 women,




Per cent on piece­
work
White
women
10.
21.
2.
4.
2.
11.
23.

0
2
5
5
5
4
5

1. 7
18. 5
19. 4

Negro
women
17.
15.
10.
11.
2.
17.
16.

9
8
0
4
0
2
3

.0
13. 5

Per cent on piece­
work
City

»

White Negro
women women

Des Moines______ _ __
5. 2
Los Angeles_ _____
_ 19. 4
San Francisco _ _ _ _ _
.0
Seattle_____________
2. 5
Portland _ __________
3. 9
Atlanta____
_____ _
7. 2
Birmingham . _
2. 6
Richmond .
_ _
. 0
St.
Petersburg and
Tampa
. 0
Jacksonville ____
__
. 0

1 37. 5

6. 3
17. 7
1. 7
17. 4
4. 0

72

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Comparison of the median earnings of timeworkers and piece­
workers.
In most industries the earnings of pieceworkers are higher than those
of timeworkers. The extent of this condition in the laundries sur­
veyed may be seen from the list following, which shows the median
earnings of timeworkers and pieceworkers in the cities where the
numbers of pieceworkers were large enough to justify the calculation
of median earnings. The table is based on data as to piecework earn­
ings where 50 or more women were paid by output,
WHITE WOMEN

Number of
women on
piecework

City

Boston____
Providence__ __
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Milwaukee _
Indianapolis___ _
Los Angeles __ _ .

141
109
69
126
97
140
506

__

Median earnings for— Per cent by
which
piecework
median ex­
ceeds time­
Piecework Timework work me­
dian

$19.
16.
18.
15.
14.
18.
18.

25
50
30
65
65
60
05

$14.
13.
14.
13.
14.
12.
16.

35
40
95
50
60
85
85

34.
23.
22.
15.
.
44.
7.

2
1
5
9
3
7
2

$14.
13.
8.
7.
7.

05
35
30
60
10

$12.
10.
6.
6.
10.

45
30
40
95
25

12.
29.
29.
9.
1 30.

8
4
5
1
7

NEGRO WOMEN

Chicago
Cleveland
Atlanta
__
Birmingham
St. Petersburg and Tampa

97
77
59
129
62

1 In this case the timework median is the higher.

In all but one of the localities listed the median for piecework
exceeds that for timework. The lower earnings of the pieceworkers
in St. Petersburg and Tampa were due to the fact that 58 of the 62
were hand ironers averaging only $7. Since their time worked was
not reported, there may have been considerable undertime. In the
same locality 90 negro hand ironers who were paid by the week and a
number of whom worked overtime had a median of $10.25.
Piecework and timework earnings in New York laundry study.
In the New York study of power laundries it was found that 93 per
cent of the workers were paid on a time basis and only 7 per cent on
output. Press operators in New York City were most commonly
found on piecework. This was'the method of payment of hand
ironers to a less extent, and only occasionally were flat workers paid
by the piece. In other cities and towns the classifiers and starchers
were on a piece rate. “Earnings of piece workers, who were 7 per cent
of all workers and were concentrated largely among press operators
and hand ironers, were much higher than earnings of time workers.




73

WAGES

In fact, there was a difference of almost $5 between the median
earnings of piece and time workers.” 2
Earnings by occupation.
The figures on wages thus far presented have been concerned with
the prevailing earnings for women in the industry without reference
to the occupation or department in which they were engaged. The
wage scale shifts about, rises and falls considerably, when the range of
earnings in each department or occupation is considered separately.
In some plants there was difficulty in correlating earnings and occu­
pation, as in the smaller laundries especially the women shifted, about
on a variety of jobs and it was not possible to attribute their earnings
to any one occupation. It was found impossible to divide up the
flat-work department into the various jobs, as shaking, feeding, taking
off, since the women usually shifted about on these jobs. The same
was true of the marking and sorting departments. In large plants the
shirt work usually was a distinct unit, but in some of the smaller
plants pressing and hand ironing on shirts was part of the general run
of hand ironing and pressing and could not be separated. For this
reason, all work of this nature has been thrown together into the two
respective groupings of hand ironing and press operating. Altogether
earnings were correlated with department or occupation for 18,748
women, 5,000 of whom were negroes. (See Appendix Tables XVI
and XVII.) Below are listed the groups in which fell 1 per cent or
more of the women and the median earnings for each group.
White women
Department or occupation

Flat work
_
Mark and sort
Hand iron
_ __ _
Press operate
__ _______ _
Mend, seamstress______ _ __
Starch and dampen
_______
Collar or collar starch
_ _
_
Foreladies ^____
__ ____
Bundle, wrap, pack _ _
___
General
____ _
___
Hand wash
_____ _
_
Press and hand iron

Negro women

Median of Per cent in
the earn­
this job
ings

Median of Per cent in
the earn­
this job
ings

$14.
17.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
23.
15.
16.

55
35
60
70
35
55
30
70
20
20

14. 65

38.
21.
13.
12.
2.
2.
2.
1.
1.
1.

5
2
7
4
6
3
1
6
3
3

.5

$8.
11.
7.
9.
12.
8.
8.

65
90
95
50
00
90
80

47.
4.
20.
16.
1.
2.
1.

3
8
5
8
1
3
2

7. 95

1. 0

9. 85
7. 85

1. 0
1. 2

The first four of these groups comprise about seven-eighths of the
women for whom department or occupation and earnings were cor­
related. Flat workers constitute the largest group, and they were the
lowest paid of the white women and one of the lowest of the negro
women. Of the four large groups the markers and sorters were the
most highly paid, and this group had the lowest proportion.of negro
2 New York. Department of Labor. Honrs and Earnings of Women Employed in Power Laundries
in New York State. Special Bui. 153, pp. 26 and 30.

103127°—30-




-6

74

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

women. The table following summarizes the median earnings of the
four chief occupation groups by section and city:
Median of the earnings, by occupation
WHITE WOMEN
Mark and
sort %

Section and city

All places________

________ __

- $17. 35

Press op­
erate

Hand iron

$16. 70

$16. 60

$14. 55

Flat work

Eastern__ ________ ____ ______ __ _ _ __

16. 20

16. 35

15. 80

13. 10

Boston
_
__
_
__
Providence-.
_ _ _ __ ____
Jersey City and Newark.
Middle western _ _ . __________ .

15.
16.
17.
16.

85
55
60
45

16.
15.
16.
15.

55
30
25
70

15.
16.
15.
15.

85
00
40
30

13.
12.
13.
13.

30
35
85
15

Chicago_____ _________________ ____
Detroit
_
.
_ _ _ _
Cleveland __
_.
. _
Cincinnati
______
_ ..
Minneapolis and St. Paul__________
Milwaukee.. _________
. ..
Indianapolis___ _____ ____ _____
.
Des Moines _. ________ ____ ______
Western..
___ _ _ _...

20.
16.
16.
15.
15.
18.
15.
15.
20.

45
90
65
15
95
50
40
45'
15

18.
16.
16.
15.
14.
14.
15.
14.
18.

10
15
00
80
50
90
30
60
45

18.
15.
15.
14.
14.
15.
14,
14.
18.

95
30
40
75
85
45
60
40
40

15.
14.
13.
13.
12.
13.
11.
12.
16.

00
20
40
10
95
60
85
45
90

Los Angeles _ _ __________ ____ .
San Francisco. _
...
___ .
Seattle _ _
____
...
Portland__ ...
_
_
.
.
Southern1 __ ____ __ . _ _ _____
_
.

19.
25.
20.
16.
15.

00
25
70
85
10

17. 35
21. 55
18. 35
15.55
(2)

17. 50
22. 45
18. 35
15. 15
(2)

16.
19.
17.
14.
11.

65
40
45
75
05

14.
15.
13.
16.

15
90
50
00

(2)
(2)

(2)

(2)
11. 20
(2)

St. Petersburg and Tampa

NEGRO WOMEN

All places 3____ ________

$11. 90

$9. 50

$7. 95

$8. 65

Eastern_______________________
Boston___________________
Jersey City and Newark.._
Middle western_______________

(2)
(2)
(2)
14. 55
15. 15
16. 15
12. 50
(2)
10. 15
7. 30
7. 70
11. 65
(2)
(2)

13. 85
14. 15
13. 65
13. 95
14. 65
12. 95
13. 65
(2)
7. 85
7. 30
7. 35
9. 25
9. 85
7. 60

13. 30
13. 75
12. 65
12. 95
13. 55
12. 75
12. 95
(2)
7. 30
6. 40
7. 00
8. 85
8. 95
7. 15

11. 90
12. 75
11. 65
11. 35
12. 15
11. 90
9. 85
10. 30
6. 50
6. 00
6. 50
7. 40
10. 25
6. 35

Chicago__________________
Detroit___________________
Cleveland________________
Cincinnati________________
Southern______________________
Atlanta__________________
Birmingham______________
Richmond_______ ,_______
St. Petersburg and Tampa.
Jacksonville______________

1 Includes 10 women in Richmond, not shown separately.
a Not computed, owing to the small number involved.
3 Includes 16 negro women in the western section, not shown separately.




75

WAGES

Among the white workers, markers and sorters were the most
highly paid group in nearly all cases. In the southern group this
was the only job in which the numbers and earnings of white women
were significant.
In the East most of the negro women were employed on flat work
and their median was lower than the corresponding figure for the
white women. The earnings of the negro markers and sorters in
Richmond were higher than those in other southern cities.
For both white and negro women flat work constitutes the largest
group, having about 40 per cent of the women. Generally it was the
lowest paid of all the types of work.
The earnings of press operators were next in rank to those of
markers and sorters. A considerable number of pieceworkers on press
jobs—especially on the pressing of coats and uniforms in strictly
wholesale or commercial laundries—tended to raise the earnings. The
range of the medians for press jobs was from $7.30 for negro women
in Atlanta to $21.55 for white women in San Francisco. The highest
earnings for negro press operators were in Chicago, with a median of
$14.65.
Almost every woman who seeks employment in a laundry has had
some experience in hand ironing. The proportions of press operators
and hand ironers varied decidedly from city to city with the customs
and practices of the trade. In general, the proportion of hand
ironers was highest in the South, where over 25 per cent of all
the negro women were employed on this job. Work that is hand
ironed or at least hand finished is demanded by southern trade, and
if it is not offered by the laundry it can be obtained easily from the
home laundress. The large potential supply of negro hand ironers
undoubtedly is an element in tending to keep the wages of hand
ironers in the South only a slight degree above those of flat workers.
Range of earnings by occupation.
The following summary shows the range of earnings in the four
principal occupations or departments for white and negro women
separately:
WHITE WOMEN
High me­
dian

City

Low me­
dian

San Francisco___

$13. 50

Press operate____

21. 55 _____do.....................

14. 50

Hand iron _____
Flat work _
_

22. 45 _____do__________
19. 40 _____ do__________

14. 40
11. 20

Occupation

Mark and sort___ $25. 25

City

St. Petersburg and
Tampa.
Minneapolis and St.
Paul.
Des Moines.
St. Petersburg and
Tampa.

NEGRO WOMEN

Mark and sort___ $16. 15 Detroit__ __
Press operate____
14. 65 Chicago, _ _ _
Hand iron
13. 75 Boston______
Flat work. _
12. 75 _____do__________




$7.
7.
6.
6.

30
30
40
00

Atlanta.
Do.
Do.
Do.

76

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Earnings of timeworkers and pieceworkers by occupational group.
Comparing the earnings of timeworkers and of pieceworkers in the
chief occupations reveals that the greatest differences were in the
earnings of press operators. Table XIX in the appendix sets forth
the details by city, and in the following summary is given, for each
section, the per cent by which pieceworkers’ earnings exceeded
those of timeworkers:
Per cent by which -piecework median exceeds timework median
White women

Negro women

Section
Mark
and sort

Flat
work

Hand
iron

Press
operate

Flat
work

Hand
iron

13. 0

14. 8

8. 2

15. 9

36. 1

9. 6

53. 4

Eastern _
_
21. 1
Middle western.__________
10. 9
Western __
____
2. 7
Southern
.
_
_
8. 3

17. 2
9. 9
2. 4

12. 4
14. 6
‘2. 1

23. 8
21. 9
3. 5

19. 6

!13. 9
4. 7

11. 4

16. 2

2. 1

20. 6

All places

_

_

Press
operate

1 In this case the timework median is the higher.

Somewhat along the same line is the following, which points out
the city in each section that had the largest number of pieceworkers
reported and compares the earnings of timeworkers and of piece­
workers in the main occupational groups:
—---------- Per cent
piecework
median
exceeds
Timework Piecework timework
median
Median of the earnings

City and occupation

Eastern—Boston (white women):
Mark and sort
_ ________
Hand iron___
__________________
_
Flat work
_ ________
_ _
.
Press operate_
_
_
Middle western—Indianapolis (white women):
Mark and sort .
Hand iron
_____
Flat work._ ____ ________________ __
_
_
_
Press operate.
._
_ _
Western—Los Angeles (white women):
Mark and sort
.
Hand iron__
_.
_
..
_
_
Flat work
Press operate _ _______ _
_
...
Southern—Birmingham (negro women):
Mark and sort _____
_
_
__
_
Hand iron__ __
Flat work______
_
Press operate_
_
_
______
i Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




$15.
15.
13.
15.

60
75
20
75

$19. 60
19. 50
(!)
19. 90

25. 6
23. 8

15.
13.
12.
14.

00
10
05
65

20 30
18. 55
0
18. 30

35. 3
41. 6

18.
17.
16.
16.

65
45
55
80

20.
18.
17.
18.

10
6
4
11.

7.
6.
6.
7.

95
90
40
30

65
50
30
70

0
7. 85
7. 55
(')

26. 3

24. 9
7
0
5
3

13. 8
18. 0

77

WAGES

With the higher wage scale of the western cities it is not surprising
that Los Angeles shows the least difference in the earnings of timeworkers and of pieceworkers. Of the four cities having the largest
numbers of pieceworkers, Indianapolis shows the greatest degree of
difference. Only one flat worker, however, was reported on piece­
work in the Indianapolis laundries visited, but Cincinnati, another
central city, had 35 women doing flat work on a piece basis and their
median earnings were 15 per cent in excess of those of the timeworkers.

Earnings and scheduled hours.
That plants with long hours pay no more than do plants with
short hours is an industrial truism. High wages and long hours
seldom are partners. Selecting the scheduled-hour groups in which
the largest number of women appeared in the reports for each city
and correlating them with the median earnings for their respective
classifications brings out something of the relationship of hours and
wages in the present study. The first of the summary tables that
follow is based on the earnings of all women, without regard to race,
while the next two are supplementary for the cities in which negro
women represented more than 1 per cent of the number of women
employed.
Median earnings and prevailing scheduled hours, all women

Prevailing scheduled hours

44 and under 48 _
_
48- _ .. ______

Per cent
Median
negro
earnings, Number of
women in
women
all women
the group

City

Providence ..

_ __
_

Seattle.
...
_ ____
Los Angeles. _
_
Portland___
_
Boston
__
_
_
Jersey City and Newark___
Over 48 and under 50.
Milwaukee
_
_
50„ _
Chicago
_ _ _.
Indianapolis
.. _
Cleveland.. .
...
Minneapolis and St. Paul__
Cincinnati.. _____ ______ __
Over 50 and under 52. Detroit. ___
...
.
Birmingham
__ _ ._
Atlanta _ . ______ ____
52
Des Moines______ ______
Over 56 and under 58. Richmond . .
. _ _.
St. Petersburg and Tampa. _
60
Jacksonville
. _

$13.
21.
18.
16.
15.
14.
15.
15.
15.
14.
14.
14.
13.
15.
7.
6.
14.
8.
10.
7.

60
05
05
95
35
25
55
70
25
80
75
70
95
55
40
35
70
85
65
20

290
1, 255
749
2, 615
767
935
146
182
376
396
512
214
341
414
174
397
107

0. 0
.0

.0
.5
.0
6. 0

7. 5
.0
31. 1
2. 8
20. 3
.5
14. 7
1. 2
92. 5
85. 6
.0

220

100. 0

126
209

83. 3
90. 4

From these figures it is evident that there is little or no relation
between hours and earnings, the factors influencing the medians being
locality and race. The negro and white women’s prevailing hour
groups are correlated with earnings in the lists next presented.




78

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Median earnings and prevailing scheduled hours, by race
NEGRO WOMEN

Prevailing scheduled hours

City

Median of Number of
the earn­
women
ings

48_______________ _______
Over 48 and under 50__
50
Over 50 and under 52

.
$13. 20
_ Cleveland .
_ _____ _____
_
9. 75
Cincinnati _
12. 10
Atlanta_________
__
6. 05
Birmingham
_ _ ____ _ _
7. 25
52_______
_
12. 45
Over 52 and under 54
_ Detroit____________ _____ ____
12. 50
Chicago
_
54
10. 30
Jersey City and Newark __ _
12. 50
Over 56 and under 58___ __ _ Richmond
8. 85
60.................. .. ............ . _
7. 05
St. Petersburg and Tampa___
10. 50

56
198
50
340
161
20
168
240
74
220
189
105

WHITE WOMEN (IN THE SAME CITIES)

48___________________
Over 48 and under 50
50........... ................. ........

Over 50 and under 52
54___________________
60___________________

Boston..
____ _
...
$14. 35
Jersey City and Newark _
15. 70
Richmond . .
..
_
(>)
Chicago
.
16. 90
Cleveland _______ _ . .
15. 45
Cincinnati.. . .. ________
14. 20
Indianapolis _____ ___________
15. 00
Atlanta___ _____ _____ _____
14. 40
Detroit .
_
__
15. 60
St. Petersburg and Tampa.,..
11. 00
Birmingham.______ _____ __
16. 50
Jacksonville _ _ ....
14. 50

879
135
5
259
408
291
385
57
409
50
31
20

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

In Jersey City and Newark and in Chicago, northern cities, the
prevailing scheduled hours were decidedly longer and the earnings
quite decidedly less for negro women than for white women. The
same was true, but to a much less degree, of Detroit and Indianapolis.
It was true of hours in St. Petersburg and Tampa, but here the differ­
ence in earnings was slight. Cleveland and Birmingham laundries
reported shorter prevailing hours for negro women, and here the
difference in earnings was very great. In the other cities—Boston,
Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Jacksonville—prevailing scheduled hours
were the same but earnings were lower for the negro workers. (See
Appendix Table XX.)
Earnings and time in the trade.
How much is experience in the laundry industry worth in monetary
terms to the employee? A normal supposition is that experience in
a trade should make workers more efficient and of greater service to
their employers and that the employees should be rewarded for their
continuance in an industry by increased earnings. In the home
visiting, data on time in the laundry industry were secured, and corre­
lating this with the median of the week’s earnings for the women
supplying this information gives the following tabulation of earnings:




79

WAGES
Median of the earnings of White women
Years in the laundry industry
Amount

1 and under 2_ _____ __
_
_
3 and under 4
4 and under 5_ _ _ _ _
5 and under 10 _ _ _

$12.
13.
14.
15.
15.
15.
17.
18.

_
__
_

85
85
60
80
10
50
10
85

Negro women

Per cent of
increase
over me­
dian for
under
1 year

7.
13.
23.
17.
20.
33.
46.

8
6
0
5
6
1
7

Amount

Per cent of
increase
over me­
dian for
under
1 year

$7. 25
8. 50
8. 90
9. 85
11. 30
10. 80
9. 15
(2)

17.
22.
35.
55.
49.
26.

2
8
9
9
0
2

1 Earnings are based on the reports of 1,076 white and 442 negro workers.
2 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

The median of the earnings of the white women who had worked
from 5 to 10 years in the industry was slightly more than 20 per cent
higher than the median of those who had been in the trade less than a
year, while for the negro women, with a much lower beginning rate,
the median of those who had worked from 5 to 10 year's was about
50 per cent above the figure for beginners. Considering the major
occupations on which the white women 3 were employed at the time
of the interviews gives the following result:
Median of the earnings of white women who were—
Markers and
sorters
Years in the laundry
industry

1 and under 2___
2 and under 3___
3 and under 4___
4 and under 5___
5 and under 10__
10 and under 15-_

Press operators

Flat workers

Ironers

Per cent
Per cent
Per cent
of in­
of in­
of in­
crease
crease
crease
over
over
over
Amount median Amount median Amount median Amount
for un­
for un­
for un­
der 1
der 1
der 1
year
year
year

$13.
14.
15.
16.
14.
17.
17.
20.

50
40
75
40
50
50
50
10

6.
16.
21.
7.
29.
29.
48.

7
7
5
4
6
6
9

$13. 50
14. 25
15. 75
16. 50
16. 50
18. 15
(*)
(“)

5.
16.
22.
22.
34.

6
7
2
2
4

$12. 50
13. 30
13. 80
13. 65
14. 50
14. 30
14. 50
(“)

6.
10.
9.
16.
14.
16.

“Not computed, owing to the small number involved.
3 Number of negro women reporting is too small to justify similar tabulation.




4
4
2
0
4
0

$14. 05
(“)
«
C)
(»)
16. 10
C)
18. 50

Per cent
of in­
crease
over
median
for un­
der 1
year

—

14. 6
31. 7

80

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

The groups are quite small when separated by occupation and such
figures as the foregoing must be considered only indicative. For the
markers and sorters and the press operators the progression was
somewhat similar, but the increase for flat work, the least skilled job,
with experience of little value, was small.
Earnings and time with the firm.
Information in regard to time with the firm is available for a larger
group, and it has been correlated with earnings for 9,707 white women
and 3,309 negro women. Is it worth more to stay on with the same
employer year after year than to shift around in the industry? Expe­
rience not only adds to a worker’s skill and efficiency in performing
her job but makes her familiar with the standards, policies, and
practices of the management, thus increasing her value to the em­
ployer. This should be recognized by an increased wage as an in­
centive to remain. Table XXI in the appendix shows, by section
and city, the per cent of women in each length-of-service group and
the median of their earnings. The table following is a summary of
these figures by section only.




Table 7.—Median of the week’s earnings according to time with the firm, by section
WHITE WOMEN
All places

Time with the firm

Total._______ __________

Median earnings
Number
of
Per cent
women
of in­
report­
ing time Amount crease
over
with the
median
firm
for under
1 year
9, 707

$16.15

2,972
1,80R
1,308
795
694
1, 439
418
273

14. 55
15.65
16. 40
17.00
17. 35
17. 90
18. 30
19.30

Middle western

Median earnings
Of
Per cent
women
of in­
report­
ing time Amount crease
over
with the
median
firm
for under
1 year

11.0

1, 336

$14.70

7.6
12.7
16.8
19.2
23.0
25.8
32.6

261
216
188
106
91
278
112
84

12.95
13.95
14.00
15.15
15. 55
15. 75
17. 40
18. 35

Western

Median earnings
of
Per cent
women
of in­
report­
ing time Amount crease
over
with the
median
firm
for under
1 year

Southern

Median earnings

of
women
report­
ing time
with the
firm

Median earnings
Number
of
Per cent
Per cent
of in­ women
of in­
report­
crease ing time
crease
Amount over with the Amount over
median
median
for under firm
for under
1 year
1 year

13.5

4,455

$14.95

8.7

3, 528

$18. 25

8.6

388

$14. 05

15.6

7.7
8.1
17.0
20.1
21.6
34.4
41.7

1, 637
’845
532
348
282
530
165
116

13. 75
14. 75
15. 30
15.95
15.95
16. 95
17.15
18.60

7.3
11.3
16.0
16.0
23.3
24. 7
35.3

937
658
534
305
299
597
130
68

17. 80
18. 50
18. 60
19. 35
19. 35

6.0
10.1
10.7
15.2
15.2

89
54
36
22
34

13. 50
14. 55
16. 70
16. 40
18.00

11.1
19.8
37.4
35.0
48.1

22. 25

32.4

5

4.1

16

$17.50

WAGES

Under 1 year........... ............... .............
1 and under 2 years____ ____
2 and under 3 years ...
3 and under 4 years____________
4 and under 5 years______ ... _
5 and under 10 years___ ...
10 and under 15 years.................. ......
15 years and over________

Eastern

0

NEGRO WOMEN
Total_____________________
Under 1 year........................................
1 and under 2 years. __ _______ .
2 and under 3 years
3 and under 4 years______________
4 and under 5 years______
_ ___
5 and under 10 years..___ ____ ___
10 and under 15 years ____ _____
15 years and over

3, 309

$9.10

1,176
551
450
298
233
462
110
29

7.90
8.70
9.20
9. 30
10. 55
10. 50
10. 65
10. 40

15.2

66

$13. 70

1, 262

$12. 60

10.1
16.5
17.7
33.5
32.9
34.8
31.6

11
10
4
7
9
18
5
2

(i)
(!)
(!)
(!)
(')
14.00
0)
c)

458
230
170
92
106
185
21

12.10
12. 50
12. 65
13. 45
13. 55
14.20
13.70

1, 965

$7.30

11.5

27

lo! 15

55.0

(l)
4. 5
11 2

3

(I)
0)

17.4
13.2

5
1

(1)
(■)

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




oo

82

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

The beginners' earnings in this table are at a higher level then are
those in the tables on general experience in the industry, probably
due to the fact that many women already were experienced when
they began employment with the present firm.
A progression in earnings is apparent, but it is quite gradual, the
median of all white women who had been with the firm 5 and under
10 years being only $3.35 more than the median of less than a year’s
employment. More than 60 per cent of all the women were in the
groups who had been less than three years with the firm. The in­
crease was a bit faster in the East than in the middle-western and
western sections, and there was a larger per cent of women with
service of five years and over, more than a third of the women having
this record. In the middle-western section less than one-fifth of the
women, 18.2 per cent, had been with the firm five years and over.
The higher initial earnings in the West probably are the reason for a
slower progression. The western median is the highest in each
experience group.
Sufficient numbers of negro women to allow for a calculation of
medians by time with the firm were found only in the middle-western
and southern sections. A slightly smaller per cent of negro than of
white women had been with the firm as much as five years. The
progression of increase for the negro women was greater in the
southern than in the middle-western cities, but their basic earnings
were so low that a small increase had more significance than where
wages were higher.
RATES

What does the laundry industry offer the woman who works full
time? Rates show what the industry expects to pay and they are
the bases of anticipated earnings, although, because of undertime and
overtime, they do not always coincide with actual earnings. Any
marked deviation of earnings below rates usually entails hardship,
especially when the compensation can at best provide only the neces­
sities. On the whole, weekly rates and earnings in the laundry industry
show less variation than is found in industry generally, and many of
the women interviewed said that they preferred a laundry to a manu­
facturing plant because of the steady work and the probability of
looking forward to a definite wage each week. Rates of payment
may be based on time worked, output, or some special system, but it
is not feasible to estimate rates for persons paid by output, and the
rate figures in this report refer only to data for timeworkers. Rates
for 11,670 white women and 4,203 negro women are included in the
compilations in this section.
Similarly to the general tabulation of earnings, the dispersion of
rates has been grouped by city in four classes: First, under $10;
second, $10 and under $15; third, $15 and under $20; and fourth,
$20 and over. The distribution of rates by section and city, white
and negro women separately, appears in the table following;




83

WAGES
Table 8.—Weekly rates, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN

Section and city

All women for
whom rates
were reported

Number and per cent of women whose weekly rate
was—
Under $10

$10 and
under $15

$15 and
under $20

$20 and over

Num- Median Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per
ber
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
$1S. 60

63

0.6

3,500

30.0

5,997

51.4

2,110

18.1

Eastern..........................................

All places.............................. 11,670
1,935

14.70

11

.6

1,037

53.6

754

39.0

133

6.9

Boston.............. .......................
Jersey City and Newark____
Providence

1, 251
357
327

14.70
15.45
13. 50

3
1
7

.2
.3
2.1

680
148
209

54.4
41.5
63.9

487
172
95

38.9
48.2
29.1

81
36
16

6.5
10.1
4.9

Middle western.............................

4,442

15.20

19

.4

2,064

46.5

1,933

43.5

426

9.6

Chicago.................................. .
Cincinnati..............................
Cleveland___________ _____
Des Moines...
Detroit—____ ___________
Indianapolis...
Milwaukee...............................:
Minneapolis and St. Paul___

560
396
532
218
1,141
'535
316
744

16.45
13.80
15.60
14.05
15.80
13.55
15. 85
14. 40

1

.2

5

.9

12
1

2.2
.3

152
261
190
143
398
359
98
463

27.1
65.9
35.7
65.6
34.9
67.1
31.0
62.2

282
115
281
70
599
146
187
253

50.4
29.0
52.8
32.1
52.5
27.3
59.2
34.0

125
20
56
5
144
18
30
28

22.3
5.1
10.5
2.3
12.6
3.4
9.5
3.8

Western..........................................

4, 809

18. 55

159

3.3

3,151

65.5

1,499

31.2

Los Angeles....... ......................
Portland___________ ______
San Francisco..........................
Seattle.....................................

2,002
657
1,425
' 725

17.20
16.00
21.20
18.30

25
134

1.2
20.4

1,623
480
494
554

81.1
73.1
34.7
76.4

354
43
931
171

17.7
6.5
65.3
23.6

484

14.05

33

6.8

240

49.6

159

32.9

52

10.7

167
97
47
12
161

14.85
15. 65
15. 65
0)
12.20

2
5

1.2
5.2

84
26
19
4
107

50.3
26.8
40.4
0)
66.5

68
49
20
3
19

40.7
50.5
42.6
0)
11.8

13
17
8
4
10

7.8
17.5
17.0
<')
6.2

0.4

Southern
Atlanta
Birmingham...........................
Jacksonville.......... ..................
Richmond
St. Petersburg and Tampa...

1 ■ 0)
25 15.5

NEGRO WOMEN

Southern__________ ________ _

St. Petersburg and Tampa...

1,535

36.6

345

8.2

16

13. 30

176

79. 6

41

18.6

4

1.8

13.50
13.10
14.50

46
119
11

75.4
82.6
68.8

13
23
5

21.3
16.0
31.3

2
2

3.3
1.4

1,498

12. 75

8.8

1,087

72.6

270

18.0

9

.6

725
42
378
324
28
1

12.75
12. 30
10.95
14. 55
12. 70
0)

9.5
33.9

594
31
219
217
26

81.9
73.8
57.9
67.0
92.9

126
7
29
105
2
1

17.4
16.7
7.7
32.4
7.1
(!)

5

.7

2
2

.5
.6

10

Cleveland____ ___________

$9.25

61
144
16
Middle western........................... .

4,203
221

All places.........................

0)

8

(l)

2

(i)

26

1.1

1

(!)

2

.2

1
21
2

.3
4.4
.8

2,474
881
515
340
477
261

2, 307 54.9

132
4
128

7.35 2,175

87.9

272

11.0

861
493
330
364
127

97.7
95.7
97.1
76.3
48.7

18
22
9
92
131

2.0
4.3
2.6
19.3
50.2

6.70
7. 05
6. 90
8.55
10.05

i Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




1

2 Less than 0.05 per cent.

.4

84

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

At first glance the most striking thing in this table appears to be
the influence of race, almost 70 per cent of the white women having a
rate of $15 and over and well over half of the negro women having a
rate of under $10. A second glance shows, however, that the influ­
ence of locality is even stronger. The omission of the far West leaves
only 50.4 per cent of the white women with a rate of as much as $15
and the omission of the South leaves only 7.6 per cent of the negro
women with a rate below $10. In Detroit 1 in 3 of the negro women
had a rate of $15 or more, while in Providence, Cincinnati, Indianapo­
lis, and Des Moines the proportion of white women with such a rate
also was about 1 in 3.
Minimum-wage legislation.
Minimum-wage legislation has been advocated as a means of keep­
ing wages from falling below a decent subsistence level. In four of
the States in the present laundry study minimum-wage standards had
been set. In Massachusetts the rates specified were $13.50 a week
for experienced women and $11 a week for those inexperienced. In
California there were required rates of $16 a week for experienced
and $14 a week for inexperienced women. In Oregon the compulsory
rates were $13.20 for all experienced females of 18 years and over and
$9 for the inexperienced, and in the State of Washington $13.20 was
required for women in laundries.4 In considering the distribution and
median of the rates in the present study it is interesting to bear in
mind the minimum standards and their possible relation and effects.
It is plain that considerable proportions of women are paid at rates
higher than those required by law.
Rates and occupations.
Of the white women whose rates were under $10 about two-thirds
were flat workers; and of those whose rates were $20 and over, more
than 40 per cent were markers and sorters. These jobs represent the
extremes in the range of rates of the chief occupations of the women
in laundry work. (See Appendix Table XXII.) The medians of the
rates in the occupations having 1 per cent or more of the women were
these:
Median of the rates, by occupation and section
WHITE WOMEN

All places

Eastern

Middle
western

Western

Mark and sort _
__
$18. 00
Flat work __
_
_ __
15. 45
Starch and dampen _
16. 85
Collar or collar starch
.
16. 65
Press operate __ _ _ _______
16. 80
Hand iron _
________
16. 80
Mend, seamstress
_
16. 75
Bundle, wrap, pack__
____ _
15. 35
Forelady
_ _____ _
23. 70
General
_ _
16. 85

$16. 30
13. 50
15. 85
15. 30
16. 00
15. 95
15. 25
15. 40
22. 80
(°)

$17.
13.
15.
16.
15.
15.
15.
14.
22.
16.

$20.
17.
18.
19.
18.
19.
19.
18.
25.
17.

Occupation

10
85
80
10
65
50
85
95
65
60

65
35
75
90
70
25
70
00
15
00

Southern

$15.
10.
(*)
14.
(«)
(“)
14.
«
21.

25
85
15
15
00

° Not computed, owing to the small number involved.
* U. S. Department of Labor. Women’s Bureau. The Development of Minimum-Wage Laws in the
United States, 1912 to 1927. Bui. 61, 1928.




85

WAGES
Median af the rates, hy occupation and section—Continued
NEGRO WOMEN
Occupation

Eastern

Mark and sort_______
Flat work___________
Starch and dampen _
Collar or collar starch
Press operate________
Hand iron_______ ____
Mend, seamstress____
Bundle, wrap, pack__.
Forelady____________
General_____________

$12. 90
9. 55
8. 80
8. 60
8. 70
7. 90
12. 85
8. 45
0
7. 15

Middle
western

Western

0

All places

$14. 90
12. 20
13. 85
(!)
14. 55
14. 40
13. 95
0
(!)
0

0

$12. 80
0
0
14. 15
14. 15
(>)
0

Southern
$10. 75
6. 85
7. 70

8. 00
7.
7.
8.
7.

70
40
40
70

06.
)

65

0)

0

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

Rates and time with the firm.
Correlating the rate with length of service in the laundry shows
what, the industry offers in the way of expectancy of increased earnings
to its women workers.
Table 9.—Median of the rates according to time with the firm, by section
WHITE WOMEN
All places

Years with the firm

1 and under 2_____
2 and under 3
3 and under 4 .. .. _
4 and under 5
5 and under 10
10 and under 15
15 and over____ _

Eastern

Middle western

Per
Per
cent of
cent of
increase
increase
over
over
Median median Median median Median
for
for
under
under
1 year
1 year
$15. 30
16. 00
16.70
17. 05
17. 50
18.05
18.40
20.05

4.6
9.2
11.4
14.4
18.0
20.3
31.0

$13. 05
14. 15
14. 20
14. 75
15. 30
15. 65
17.55
18. 40

8.4
8.8
13.0
17. 2
19.9
34.5
41.0

$14. 30
14.90
15.60
15.90
16. 20
17.00
17. 30
19.40

Western

Per
cent of
increase
over
median Median
for
under
1 year

4.2
9. 1
11.2
13.3
18.9
21.0
35.7

$17.50
18.40
19. 10
19. 30
19. 60
19. 80
21. 45
22.85

Southern

Per
Per
cent of
cent of
increase
increase
over
over
median Median median
for
for
under
under
1 year
1 year

5.1
9.1
10.3
12.0
13.1
22.6
30.6

$12. 30
13. 85
14. 85
16.20
16. 85
17. 65

12.6
20.7
31.7
37.0
43.5

$6.85
7.25
7.65
7.60
7.75
8.00
9.50
10.15

5.8
11.7
10.9
13.1
16.8
38.7
48.2

NEGRO WOMEN
$7.95
8. 55
9.45
8.65
10.90
11. 00
10. 55
10. 50

7.5
18.9
8.8
37.1
38.4
32.7
32.1

$12. 40
12. 70
13. 50
13.65
14. 10
14. 70
14. 50

2.4
8.9
10.1
13.7
18.5
16.9

The foregoing summary of rates and time with the firm is based on
the earnings of 7,950 -white women and 2,719 negro women. (See
Appendix Table XXIII.) The progression of rates is, of course,
much the same as that shown in earnings and time with the firm,
the rates rising steadily though not rapidly.




86

A SURVEY OE LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Changes in rates during the year preceding the survey.
A week’s pay roll, one year before the survey, was examined wherever
such record was available and the women’s rates of pay were noted.
Of the women for whom rates at dates a year apart were obtainable,
the vast majority, almost 73 per cent, had the same rate on the current
pay roll as at the earlier date; about 23 per cent had an increase in
their weekly rates and somewhat less than 5 per cent were on a lower
rate. The tendency for negro and white women was the same and
the condition was much the same in all sections except that in the
South a relatively larger number of white women than elsewhere
had received an increase in rates.
Rates and scheduled hours.
As was found to be true of actual earnings, there was little relation
between the compensation and the hours of work required.
Table 10.—Median of the rates according to scheduled hours, by section
WHITE WOMEN

Section

All places
Middle western___________
Southern........... ........... ..........

Over 50
Over 52
Over 48
Under
and
and
and
Over 54
48 hours 48 hours under 50 hours under 52 hours under 54 hours hours
50 hours
52 hours
54 hours
$15. 05

$17. 85

$15.80

$15. 20

$15. 40

$14.30

$15.30

$14. 20

$13.65

15.15
14. 95
21.70
12. 90

14.30
15.40
18. 40

16.15
15. 25
18.65
w

12. 55
15.35

13. 55
15.65

15. 75
14.10

15.55

14. 55
14. 45

13.00

w

14.80

15.15

14.45

12.25

14.30

NEGRO WOMEN
$12. 60

$13. 95

$9.50

$12. 65

$7.50

$8. 25

$9.90

$11.00

$7.80

13.00
13. 50
0
5.90

13.35
w
«

W
10.10

12.90

11.85
13.95

0
12.60

14.10

13.70
11.70

12.50

7.60

7.25

6.60

8.00

7.30

7.80

7.40

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

Policies with reference to overtime payments varied greatly.
Most overtime payments where the unit was an hourly rate were on
straight time, with only a few cases of an extra rate such as time and
a half. Many employers who based their wage payments on a daily
or weekly rate reported the absence of any policy with reference to
payment for overtime, but implied that if deductions were not made
when time was lost because of plant conditions the worker could
hardly expect to be paid extra for an occasional hour beyond the
regular schedule. In a few laundries a special attendance bonus was
paid if a worker had 100 per cent attendance and no tardiness during
the week. In a number of plants penalties in the form of a deduction
equivalent to the earnings for 15 or 30 minutes or even an hour were
exacted for tardiness.
The earnings of all women reported are compared with (1) the earn­
ings of those who were timeworkers and (2) the rates of the timeworkers for whom this information was obtainable in Appendix
Table XXIV.







r, |_

.9m-m

PLATE 6.—A WELL-PLANNED IRONING DEPARTMENT

THE WORKERS

The value of knowing one’s employees has been increasingly
realized during the past 10 years. In 1918 a well-known economist
wrote that management, though constantly improving its nonliving
machines and its processes, was in the grip of tradition in its utiliza­
tion of its living machines.1 This “grip of tradition” is weakening
and more and more are employers anxious to know not only what
work is produced but by whom it is done. They have learned that
it does matter whether a worker is native born and speaks English or
is foreign born and does not. One superintendent who was asked
whether he had any preferences as to native or foreign workers replied,
“Well, on a single machine it doesn’t matter much, but if you have to
shift them around to different kinds of work you can explain a lot
better in the English language than in dumb show.” On some work
there is a marked preference for women of a certain age group,
“because they learn faster.”
Not only the employer but the community is interested in learning
about the woman who leaves home each morning and goes out to
work. Is she young? Is she married? Has she children? Why
is she working? These and many other questions are asked because
the public, like the employer, has awakened to the fact that the
worker is a neighbor and fellow citizen and that the old words are
true, “For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.”
Therefore, in any study of an industry facts must be given not only
about the plants and their processes but about the workers themselves.
Nativity and race.
In the present laundry survey the large majority of the women
workers were found to be native born. Over four-fifths of the 18,369
women who reported the country of their birth had been born in the
United States. (See Appendix Table XXVI.)
Per cent of the women—
Section

Native bom
White

Foreign
bora

Negro

48. 8
Eastern.

________ ______________________________

32. 4

18. 7

55.
55.
64.
13.

14.
29.
.
86.

30.
14.
35.
.

1
7
4
2

4
9
4
3

5
4
2
5

i Lee, Frederick S. The Human Machine in Industry. In Columbia University Quarterly, January,
1918, Vol. XX, No. 1, pp. 3-4.




87

88

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Among the native-born women the number of negroes was con­
siderable—two in every five women. Taking the country as a whole,
the negro woman plays a far more important part in the laundry
industry than does the foreign-born. This is evident from the
figures of the last occupational census, which showed that more than
a fourth (26.1 per cent) of the women laundry operatives were negro
and 15.7 per cent were foreign born.2 In the present study both
negro and foreign women constituted per cents greater than those of
the census figures. It must be remembered, however, that large
cities only were surveyed in the Women’s Bureau study, and besides
having more foreign-born women than have the smaller cities and
towns included in the census figures they have more avenues of
employment for the white women of native birth.
In the different sections of the country there was considerable
variation in nativity and race. The States on the Pacific coast had
the highest proportion of native white women and of foreign-born
white; the Southern States had the lowest per cent in each of these
groups, with negro women forming more than four-fifths (86.3 per­
cent) of the total.
The largest numbers of foreign-born women had come from Mexico
and Canada, the countries of origin of nearly 30 per cent (28.2) of all
reporting. The Mexicans were found almost exclusively in the
Western States and the Canadians in the Eastern and, to a much less
degree, the middle-western groups. After Mexico and Canada, Italy
supplied the most foreign bom, and w-omen from Germany, Ireland,
and Poland comprised groups of between 200 and 300 each. The
two cities with the highest per cents of foreign born were both coast
cities—San Francisco with 44.9 per cent and Boston with 35.8 per­
cent.
Outside of the southern cities, where negro women naturally were
in a large majority, Chicago and Cleveland had the greatest propor­
tions of negro women. In Chicago negroes comprised more than
three-fifths (62.9 per cent) of all the women workers and in Cleveland
nearly one-half (49 per cent). It is of interest to note that the cities
of Jersey City and Newark, combined, although north and near the
seaboard, employed a much larger number of negro than of foreignborn women workers. "
Age.
The laundry industry has never been considered a young girl’s field
of employment. The older woman, experienced in housework or for
some time out of industry, is more likely to be found in a laundry than
is the young girl beginning work. In the 1920 census of occupations,
girls under 20 comprised a fifth (20.2 per cent) of the women laundry
operatives, while in manufacturing and mechanical industries they
comprised more than a fourth (26.8 per cent) of the women.3 The
contrast is even more striking in the case of the women under 25,
who constituted 36.7 per cent of the women in laundries and46.6 per
cent of the women in manufacturing and mechanical industries.4
In the Women’s Bureau study the largest group of the white women
reported, 27.8 per cent, were 30 and under 40 years of age, and there
was also a large per cent 40 years and over. The extent to which
3 U. S. Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census: 1920, vol. 4, Population, Occupations, pp. 358-359.
3 Ibid., pp. 378-379 and 394-395,
* Ibid., pp. 394-395,




THE WORKERS

89

older women are in the industry is illustrated further by the fact that
1,090 women (8.9 per cent) were 50 years and over and 235 women
(1.9 per cent) were as much as 60 years of age. (See Appendix
Table XXVII.)
The age distribution of white women in laundries is in marked
contrast to that in cotton mills as shown in a Women’s Bureau study
a few years ago. There nearly one-half (48 per cent) of the women
were under 25 years of age and about a fifth (19.3 per cent) were 40
years and over.5
In different sections of the country the age groupings of the white
women show some variation. The South had the largest per cent of
workers under 20 years of age and the East the largest per cent of
women 40 years and over. The negro women were, on the whole,
younger than the white women. A larger proportion were in the
groups under 20 years and a considerable smaller proportion were
in the groups 40 years and over.
Per cent of women—
Section

Under 20 years
White

All places___
Eastern______
Middle western
Western
Southern

Negro

40 years and over
White

Negro

13. 4

15. 1

27. 7

12. 0

18.
15.
8.
18.

16. 5
11. 5

32.
27.
27.
16.

16.
13.
35.
10.

1
2
5
8

17. 3

3
2
8
2

0
2
0
8

The relatively higher proportion of white workers than of negroes
40 years of age or more was found in each section except the West
where very few negro women were reported.
Marital status.
The knowledge of a woman’s maritai status is becoming of more
and more interest to the employer and to all persons concerned with
economic and social problems. For many years the single woman
has had her place in the'economic world. It has been understood
also that if a woman married and her husband died or left her,
naturally she would go to work, wherever she could find a job. But
that a woman with a husband should seek work outside her home is a
more recent and less readily accepted condition. Nevertheless,
married women in increasing numbers have had to go to work to
help in the support of their families. In 1890, according to census
figures, the per cent of gainfully employed women who were married
was 13.9; in 1900, 15.4; in 1910, 24.7; and in 1920, 23.6 In a study
made by the Women’s Bureau several years ago it was found that
practically all the women who had husbands working contributed
all their earnings to the family.7 That there is, as a rule, very real
5 U. S. Department of Labor. Women’s Bureau. Lost Time and Labor Turnover in Cotton Mills.
Bui. 52, 1926, p. 26.
6 U. S. Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census: 1920, vol. 4, Population, Occupations, p. 693.
7 U. S. Department of Labor, Women s Bureau. The Share of Wage-Earning Women in Family Support. Bui. 30, 1923, p. 12.

103127°—30-----7




90

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

necessity that forces the women to work, whether they are married
or single, is shown by the agents’ interviews with the workers in their
homes and the reasons for working they reported. (See p. 92.)
In the present survey married women were the largest group.
(See Appendix Table XXV.) A summary of the figures by sections
follows.
Per cent of women—
Section

Single
White

All places____
Eastern
._ _
Middle western_ _
Western
Southern__
____

Widowed, separated, or
divorced

Married
White

Negro

White

Negro

Negro

33. 6

28. 9

43. 1

41. 1

23. 3

30. 0

49.
35.
24.
38.

43.
26.
5.
29.

32.
43.
49.
33.

40.
43.
57.
39.

18.
21.
26.
28.

16.
29.
36.
31.

5
1
5
3

4
7
3
3

2
0
0
8

4
9
9
4

3
9
5
9

2
5
8
3

It is probable that this is a slightly lower proportion of married
women than was actually the case, as in the home visits several women
who had reported themselves single on their factory cards admitted
to the investigators that they were married. They were afraid to
let it be known that they were married because there was so much
talk about married women losing their jobs and employment was
necessary.
The census figures of 1920 show a smaller proportion of laundry
operatives who were married women (32.8 per cent) 8 than do the
Women’s Bureau figures (42.7 per cent). There may have been such
a change since 1920 but it is much more probable that the census
inclusion of small cities and towns, with fewer opportunities of em­
ployment for women, results in a higher proportion of single women
in laundries.
The largest proportions of married women were in the West and
the lowest in the East and South, while larger proportions of widowed
and separated women were found in the West and South.
Time with the firm.
There appears to be a fairly uniform opinion among employers
that a changing labor force is not an efficient one. Not only is it
expensive to train new workers but the amount of work produced is
less. Among manufacturing plants in one large city it was found
that every establishment that had decreased its labor turnover
during a year’s time had increased its output.9 An analyst of labor
problems says “separations are significant because indicative of causes
of discontent, of low industrial morale, and of defects in managerial
policies.” 10
One laundry manager went so far as to say that he assumed all
labor turnover to be the fault of management, or at least its concern,
s U. S. Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census: 1920, vol. 4, Population, Occupations, p. 693.
9 Fisher, Boyd. Industrial Loyalty. London, George Routledge & Sons (Ltd.). 1918, p. 24.
Slichter, Sumner H. The Scope and Nature of the Labor Turnover Problem. In Quarterly Journal
of Economics, February, 1920, p. 343.




91

THE WORKERS

and acted on that assumption. This is a good policy for action, but
without, doubt a certain amount of change is unavoidable and probably
it is beneficial. Nevertheless, any firm or industry in which many
of the workers remain over a period of years can feel that its condi­
tion is to that extent healthy.
According to plant records, about one-half of the white womeai had
been on the pay roll for at least a year at the time of the survey, and
as many as 39.7 per cent of the negro women had this record. From
cards filled out by the workers themselves more details were obtained
as to length of service in the present place of employment. (See
Appendix Table XXVIII.) From these cards it appears that the
proportion of white women was greatest in the group of workers who
had remained with the same laundry one and under five years, a little
more than two-fifths (43.1 per cent) of the women being in this group.
Almost as many women (37.2 per cent) were reported as having worked
less than a year. The majority of these had had less than six months’
experience, this group of beginners comprising 22.9 per cent of all the
white women reported. The long-time service group reported to
have been with the same firm 15 years and over contained less than
3 per cent of the women. This is a considerably smaller per cent
than was found in the Women’s Bureau cotton-mill study, where 9.7
per cent of the women workers reported service of 15 years or more
in the same mill.11
Per cent distribution of—
Years with the firm (all places)
White women Negro women

Under 1 __ ____
1 and under 5
5 and under
10 and under 15
15 and over____

__ ______ _
_______

_
_
_

_

_
__

_____
__

37
43
13
3.
2.

2
1
4
9
4

40
42
13
3.
.

2
K
1
1
9

The proportion of negro Women in each length-of-service group
followed very closely that of the white women. The greatest differ­
ence was in the period 15 years and over, with a smaller per cent of
negroes than whites; and a larger per cent of negroes were found with
experience of less than a year.
To see a plant in operation is to have a picture of the work and the
conditions under which it is done, but not of the extent to which
differences in the woman herself may determine the kind of work in
which she is successful. If young, does she do certain kinds of work?
If old, others? What are her reasons for working if married and if
single? Has she been doing tins kind of work long? Has she tried
other work and does she prefer some kinds of jobs to others? These
were the principal subjects on which information was sought through
talks with the women workers themselves. For this purpose 1,859
home visits were made, 1,322 on white women and 537 on negro.
Occasionally the women were willing to give information on some
subjects and not on all, but that these cases were the exception is
11 U. S. Department of Labor. Women’s Bureau. Lost Time and Labor Turnover in Cotton Mills.
Bui. 52, 1926, p. 99.




92

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

shown by the fact that to the question of age'—sometimes a sensitive
point—only 16 white and 3 negro women were unwilling to answer.
Age and occupation.
Four occupations included 86.9 per cent of all the women for whom
occupation was reported; these were flat-work ironing, marking and
sorting, pressing, and hand ironing. (See Appendix Tables XXIX
and XXX.) The largest proportion of young girls, those under 20
years of age, were on flat-work ironing—shaking, feeding, or folding.
This naturally would be the case, as an inexperienced worker usually
is started on this job.
In spite of the fact just mentioned, a rather high proportion of
white flat-work ironers, nearly a fourth (23.9 per cent), were at least
40 years of age. The women marking or sorting had the largest pro­
portion of workers in the middle group, 20 and under 40 years. This
work probably is the most popular of the four jobs, whether due to
the work itself or to the higher pay that generally accompanies it.
Hand ironing is an old occupation for women, so it was not surprising
to find that nearly one-half (46 per cent) of the white women in this
occupation were 40 years and over. Only 6.2 per cent of the girls
doing hand ironing were under 20. About three-fifths of the white
women on presses were 20 and under 40 years, with a considerably
larger group 40 years and over than under 20.
Per cent of womenOccupation

Number of
women reporting

Under 20 years

20 and under 40
years

40 years and over

White

Marking and sorting..
Flat-work ironing
Pressing
Hand ironing________

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

245
507
189
161

42
222
80
125

14. 7
21. 5
11. 1

16. 7
23. 9
10. 0

6. 2

8. 8

70.
54.
59.
47.

81.
68.
83.
69.

15.
23.
29.
46.

2
6
3
8

0
0
8
6

1
9
6
0

Negro

1 2.
8.
6.
21.

4
1
3
6

11 woman.

The negro women had about the same proportions as the white in
flat-work ironing and in pressing, but comparatively few were markers
and sorters and a larger proportion did hand ironing. The age dis­
tribution was quite different for the two races, the white women having
considerable proportions at least 40 years of age, while only among
hand ironers were any considerable number of negroes as much as 40.
The proportions under 20 years of age were fairly alike for the two
races, but only in one occupation—flat-work ironing—was the
number of negro girls significant. Of the middle group—20 and under
40 years of age—a much larger proportion of the negroes than of the
white women were under 30
Reason for working.
The question “Why are you working?” was answered in various
ways by 1,315 white women visited in their homes, but in 91.7 per
cent of the replies necessity was the reason. (See Appendix Table




THE WORKERS

93

XXXI.) Usually the response was brief—“Because I have to”—
and then more details would be given, such as “I have only myself
and I must live,” or “I have children and no husband and what else
can I do?” Even with the remainder of the reasons given, it is a
question whether some of them might not be classed as necessity
rather than choice. Such answers as “To pay doctor and hospital
bills,” “To educate the children,” “To save for the future” might
properly be classed under necessities and not luxuries. A very small
number of women—26, comprising only 2 per cent—were working
quite frankly for extras, including cars, and another 26 reported that
they worked because they wanted to and were “used to it.”
All the single women, with one exception, were working to support
themselves or to support themselves and help their families. A much
larger proportion, 72.4 per cent, were working solely for their own
support than were working for themselves and others, although the
latter group comprised more than a fourth—27.4 per cent—of the
single women. Most of the widowed, separated, and divorced women
also showed support of self and families to be the reason for their
working, but a smaller per cent than of the single women were working
for themselves only and a larger group had dependent families. Over
one-half were working for their own support, and 45.2 per cent had
family responsibilities.
dhe group of married women gave far more reasons why they
were working, but the pressure of actual need, as shown by the
reasons, was almost as great as among the single women or the group
without the husband. More than a third (36 per cent) of the married
women interviewed reported quite simply that they were working to
support themselves and their families, and another 10.1 per cent
were working for a temporary need, such as the high cost of living,
or to pay accumulated bills, to educate the children, or to keep up
payments on the house or furniture. The largest group, however,
stated that they were working because of failure on the part of the
husband. In the largest proportion of cases (18 per cent) the hus­
band s work was slack or not steady and the woman’s earnings were
the source of the steady family income. Another reason probably
connected with the industrial situation was that the husband was out
oi work. Slightly less than a tenth of the answers gave this as the
cause. A larger proportion of answers than those giving “out of
work,” as a reason, laid the necessity to the husband’s incapacity
through illness, accident, or old age. Of 495 women, 64 (12.9 per
cent) were supporting or assisting with the support of their families
with the husband unable to work. In a study made several years
ago of the woman worker and the disposition of her earnings, the
following sentence was one of the conclusions reached: “In general,
women are wage earners not only for their own entire support but to
meet a very definite responsibility as sharers in the support of others
or the maintenance of higher standards of living in their families.”12
The truth of this statement, as applied to laundries, is illustrated by
the fact that 9 of every 10 married women reported that they were
working to help in the support of their families.
The reasons for working given by the negro women were very similar
to those given by the white. No single women reported any other
ouppori.

of
Women’s Bureau. The Share of Wage-Earning Women in Family
15Ul. 30, 1923, pp. 21-22.




94

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

reasons than self-support or support of self and family, and the same
was the reply made by all the widowed, separated, and divorced
negro women with the single exception of a woman “working from
choice.” Married women comprised a rather larger proportion of
the negro women than they did of the white, but over three-fifths
(61.8 per cent) were working to support themselves and families. A
considerably smaller per cent of women referred to the husbands as
the cause of their working, whether incapacitated, out of work, or
working short time. A smaller proportion of negro women than of
white reported working for a definite object, such -as buying a home or
furniture or saving for the future, and none said they were working
to educate their children. With the negro woman, as with the white,
the need of support for herself or herself and family was the principal
reason for her working.
It would be reasonable to suppose that when a married woman, or
one that had been married, was working to help support her family,
that family would be composed of young children. It was surpris­
ing, therefore, to find that only a little more than two-fifths of the
white women who were married and less than a third of those living
apart from their husbands reported any children under 14 years of
age. (See Appendix Table XXXII.) More of the married women
than of the widowed, separated, or divorced had children under 14,
and a considerably larger proportion of the married women also had
more than one child (21.3 and 11.4 per cent, respectively). More
than 68 per cent of those who had been married and 58 per cent of
the married women had no children under 14.
The proportion of married negro women who had children under 14
was a little over one-third (34.1 per cent), and the per cent was about
the same for those women who at some time had been married. A
slightly smaller proportion of women had more than one child under
14 years in the married group than among the widowed, separated,
or divorced, and the proportion of such women was about a sixth of
all the negro women who were or had been married—somewhat above
the proportion of the white women with a similar marital status who
had more than one child under 14.
Time in the trade.
The laundry industry is one that requires considerable skill in
some of its occupations, but in others a few weeks will make a fairly
good operator. Even in work where skill is required, such as hand
ironing, in many cases a woman’s experience in the home makes her
already trained when she applies to the laundry for employment.
Because of this, women of all ages who have never worked outside
the home turn to the laundry for work. If a woman finds it neces­
sary to work only every now and then, the laundry is available even
though she moves from city to city, and its work continues year in
and year out.
The woman who has once done laundry work is reasonably sure of
a job if, after several years at home or engaged in other kinds of
work, she wishes to return to the laundry. It is not surprising, then,
to find a considerable number of women whose experience in the
industry extends over a good many years. (See Appendix Table
XXXIII.) Even the fact that 15.4 per cent of the 1,296 white women
reporting in the present study had worked off and on in laundries for




95

THE WORK EES

15 years or more does not give a fair picture of their length of service.
The laundry industry has grown rapidly in the past few years.
From 1925 to 1927, according to census figures, the number of laundry
employees increased by 19.7 per cent.13 Therefore, wdien the propor­
tion of employees with long years of service is figured on totals that
include large numbers of workers added recently because of industrial
expansion, the employees of long standing do not show the important
part that they actually play in the industry.
More than one-half of the white women interviewed had an over-all
period of less than five years, and this large number may indicate a
growth in the industry. If absences of three months and over are
considered as separations from the industry the proportion of women
actually at work for long periods naturally is less than when such
absences are counted as time lost. Only 7.8 per cent of the white
women reporting had actually put in 15 years or more of work, com­
pared to twice their number who had worked off and on during so
long a period. Nevertheless, it is interesting to find that half of the
women with an over-all of 15 years or more actually had worked for
15 or more years and that they constituted nearly a sixth of all the
workers.
Per cent for whom time specified was—
Years in laundry industry

Actually
worked (1,29(5
white women
reporting)

Over-all1

Under 1_
5 and under 10
10 and under 15
15 and over

16.
38.
21.
7.
15.

7
3
8
7
4

19.
45.
20.
6.
7.

3
3
8
9
8

Over-all1

15.
46.
25.
8.
4.

4
3
3
6
4

Actually
worked (525
negro women
reporting)

21.
52.
19.
4.
1.

7
6
4
8
5

i Period elapsed since entering laundry work.

The majority (55.1 per cent) of the white women had an over-all
of less than five years, but those who actually had worked less than
five years constituted nearly two-thirds (64.6 per cent). As before
suggested, this very large grouping of women with less than five
years’ experience probably indicates the growth of the industry,
though very much the same proportion of women in all the various
Women’s Bureau studies combined have reported less than five years
in their respective trades.14
Naturally, more women had begun laundry work as much as 10
years before than had worked continuously in the industry for as
much as 10 years, and the number of women who had actually
worked less than 5 years is greater than the number with so short an
over-all period.
Negro women have much smaller per cents than white in the group
with service of 15 years or more. Women who had worked off and
on during 15 years or more comprised but 4.4 per cent of the negro
13 U. S. Department of Commerce. Census of Commercial Power Laundries, 1927. News release.
Feh. 25, 1929.
i* Uniiublished data compiled from Women’s Bureau bulletins.




96

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

women compared to 15.4 per cent of the white women. Conversely,
the proportion of negro women with experience of less than five years
is greater than the proportion of white women.
Work experience.

It has already been seen that an over-all period in one industry of
a number of years may include months and even years not actually
employed at that work. During these periods of absence the worker
may be in her own home, busy with household duties, or she may
be employed in other industries. Two-thirds of the 1,322 white women
interviewed had, at some time since first going to work, done other
work than laundering, and about 1 in 5 had been employed in more
than one other industry. (See Appendix Table XXXIV.) The
largest number of white women (21 per cent) reported having worked
in manufacturing establishments and about a tenth (10.7 per cent)
had been in domestic service. Sixty-four women (4.8 per cent) had
worked in stores, and smaller numbers in hotels or restaurants and
offices or professional work.
The 536 negro women reporting showed a larger per cent than did
the white who had worked in other industries besides laundries. Four
of every five women had worked outside of laundries. The largest
group had been employed in domestic service, these comprising more
than two-fifths (43.5 per cent) of all the negro women reporting.
A third of the white women and a fifth of the negro had worked
solely in laundries, but many of these women had worked in more
than one establishment.
The reasons for shifting from one job to another may be grouped
under three general headings: Personal reasons, such as illness, mar­
riage, or home duties; industrial reasons, such as insufficient earn­
ings, too long hours, slack work, or discharge; and general reasons,
such as weather, or strike. (See Appendix Table XXXVI.) The fol­
lowing brief summary of the principal industries classifies the reasons
for leaving jobs given by the white women interviewed.
Separations of white women from—
Type of reason for leaving
Other laundry Domestic and Manufactur­
job
serv­
(1,157 sepa­ personalsepa­ ing (1524 sepa­
ice (358
rations)
rations)
rations)

Stores (151
separations)

Hotels and
restaurants
(204 sepa­
rations)

NUMBER

Personal-___ — Industrial__________
General..

781
302
74

208
147
3

256
362
6

75
74
2

101
101
2

49. 7
49. 0
1. 3

49. 5
49. 5

PER CENT

Personal_____
Industrial _
General_____




. _
_

67. 5
26. 1
6. 4

58. 1
41. 1
.8

41. 0
58. 0
1. 0

1. 0

THE WORKERS

97

The reasons given by white women for leaving other laundries
show that much the highest per cent had quit for personal reasons,
and this was the case, though to a less extent, of domestic and per­
sonal service. Of the other three groups, stores and hotels and
restaurants show that practically the same proportions of women
had left for industrial and personal reasons, but almost three-fifths
of the women who had been in manufacturing had left for reasons
connected with the industry.
Certain special reasons within these groups stand out prominently.
Among personal reasons for leaving work, marriage and change of
residence were very important in each industry group. Of the
women who had been in domestic and personal service, more than a
fourth had left because of marriage; of those in laundries, about a
fifth had left because of change of residence.
“Earnings insufficient” and “laid off” were the two principal
causes of change under industrial reasons. The former was most
prominent in laundries, and more women had been laid off in manu­
facturing establishments. Certain reasons that were not especially
important in all industries combined were important in a single in­
dustry; for example, “dispute” in laundries, “no work” in domestic
and personal service, and “work too hard” in hotels and restaurants.
Nearly one-third (31.9 per cent) of all the reasons given for leaving
work in hotels and restaurants were “work too hard,” “hours too
long,” or “dissatisfied with conditions.” Under domestic and per­
sonal service the two industrial conditions “hours too long” and “no
work” comprised nearly a fifth of the reasons given, while under
manufacturing “laid off” and “insufficient earnings” were more
than one-fourth of all the reasons given.
Type of work preferred.
“All work carries with it mental and physical reactions, and it
is the nature of these reactions which make work a pleasure or a
burden,” was said by a man experienced in handling thousands of
workers.15
16
The truth of this statement is apparent, and the question as to the
nature of the reactions is the first step in throwing light on the subject.
In order to do this, information must be obtained from the worker,
and this was one of the subjects taken up with the 1,859 women,
white and negro, in the home visits.
As has been shown, the majority of women had not confined them­
selves to one kind of work. They had gone from one industry to
another, and in many cases the same woman had had experience in
family, hotel, and factory work as well as in laundries. An effort
was made to find out, as a result of each woman’s experience, how
other work that she had done compared with what she was doing in
a laundry. (See Appendix Table XXXV.) A preference for laundry
work as contrasted with that in other industries was expressed by
587 of the 740 women, in 14 different cities, who stated their prefer­
ences for one kind of work or another. These 587 women not only
reported a greater liking for laundry work but, in all but 9 cases,
stated why they preferred it. Reasons for their preference were
15 Scheflel, Carl. The Mental Hygiene of Industrial Workers. In Journal of Industrial Hygiene,
September, 1920, p. 182.




98

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

given also by 121 of the 153 women who preferred other jobs to laundry
work.
About three-tenths (29.9 per cent) of the women preferring laundry
work gave as their major reason “better hours”—better, that is,
than those they had found in domestic and personal service, hotels
and restaurants, stores, factories, or cleaning office buildings. It is
especially interesting to find so large a group preferring laundry work
because of better hours. For years the laundry industry has struggled
to combine the service demanded by the housewife, which was to send
her work to the laundry on Monday and have it returned promptly,
with keeping an even flow of work for the employees each day through
the week. In a report made of laundries in a large city in 1916
the following general statement is made of conditions then existing:
An outstanding feature of the study of the laundry industry is that
both men and women work long hours for three or four days a week
and then there is a let-up for the remaining days of the week. The
physical examinations proved that these long days often strain the
health and vitality of the workers beyond the power of recovery
during the shorter days.” 10
From the emphasis by the workers in this study on the better
hours m laundries it would appear that excessively long daily hours
early in the week had been eliminated, to a considerable extent, and
a better distribution of the work had been accomplished.
Better pay was given as a reason for preferring laundry work in
something more than a quarter (26.8 per cent) of the answers.
About half these replies were from workers who had been in factories
and a little more, than a fifth were from those formerly in domestic
and personal service. Other comparisons were that laundry work was
easier, the comment of a good many women who had been in fac­
tories., restaurants and hotels, and domestic service; it was steadier,
especially so in comparison to factory work; it was cleaner than
factory and domestic work; and in the opinion of a considerable num­
ber it was likely to have better working conditions—including such
factors as constant standing, temperature, contact with the public,
’wcuking alone than other places where they had been employed.
.Explanations or additional details of the expressed preference
frequently were given. The question of “better pay” often was
coupled with that of shorter hours and no Sunday work when compared
with domestic service or restaurants and hotels, and the late Saturday
evenmg work was mentioned as against store work. Some rather
surprising reasons were given; for example, that of the woman who
preferred laundry work to domestic service because she did not like
working m water all the time” and of the women who preferred
a laundry to a cotton mill because “hours were shorter and it was
cooler.
Both restaurant work and stores had the disadvantage
to some and the advantage to others that clothes were important
and you had to meet the public.” In general, the women pre­
ferring laundry work seemed to believe that the hours were better
than in domestic work, in hotel and restaurant work, and in some
cases m stores; that the pay was better and steadier than in factories
and domestic service; the conditions of work were less hard than in
Dep?rtmentLoflHeaitaiin.d [my/f' p'^/ Th6 C°St °f Ctam Clothes in Terms of Health- New York City,




THE WORKERS

99

factories; and unpublished details show that it was less confining
than domestic service and hotels and restaurants.
Another side of the picture is given by the women—one in five—
wjio preferred other work to that of laundries. It must be remem­
bered that all women from whom answers were obtained were at
the time of the interview at work in laundries. Undoubtedly this
would weight their replies, to a certain extent, in favor of laundries,
and women disliking laundry work probably would be found hi
greater numbers in other industries. The largest number of those
stating reasons for preferring other work gave “better pay” as
their reason, and most of these comparisons were between factories
and laundries. Working conditions in other industries were pre­
ferred to those in laundries in a number of cases and most of these
were in favor of factory work. “Better hours,” the most important
point expressed in favor of laundries, was mentioned by very few
women as a reason for preferring other work to that in laundries.
Some of the women said that pay was better in restaurants than
in laundries, because meals were supplied, and the same reason, with
lodging sometimes mentioned, was given for preferring domestic service
to laundry work. Several women preferred factory work because
it was cooler and because they could sit at their work, and others
preferred store or restaurant work because they liked meeting the
public and could wear better clothes. Perhaps the oddest preference
was expressed by the woman who favored the position of attendant
in an insane asylum to work in a laundry because it was “less
monotonous and more restful.” On the whole, “better pay,” especi­
ally in factory work, was the most important reason given for pre­
ferring other work to that in laundries.










APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES
APPENDIX B—SCHEDULE FORMS

102

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

APPENDIX A.—GENERAL TABLES
Table I.—Dry-bulb reading near presses and flat-work ironerst by outside

temperature

Dry-bulb temperature out
of doors

Total.......................
5° and under 10°
____
10° and under 15°_._
15° and under 20°_. _ ___
25° and under 30°
30° and under 35°
45° and under 50°_ _
_

76° and under 80°..................

Number of dry-bulb readings near presses and flat-work ironers
Num­
that were—
ber of
drybulb
read­ 55° and 60° and 65° and 70° and 75° and 80° and 85° and 90° and
under under under under under under under
ings
over
60°
65°
70°
75°
80°
85°
90°
672

1

7

3
3

1

2

46

13
37
19
53
55
138
85
117
37
37
46
15

2
1

3
4

1
6
6
12
10

1

I

4
1

.........

256

1
1

2
12

196

2

9

3

2

19

10

16
23
56
25
28
1

3

2

128

33

5

1
6
11

2

4
23
18
48
39
54

4

4

16

5

8
10

26

1

4

22

10

15

2

15
25

3
7

11

8

1

6

Table II.—Wet-bulb reading near presses and flat-work ironers, by outside

temperature

Wet-bulb temperature out of doors

Number of wet-bulb readings near presses and flat-work
Num­
ironers that were—
ber of
wetbulb
read­ 50° and 55° and 60° and 65° and 70° and 75° and 85° and
under under under under under under
ings
over
55°
60°
65°
70°
75°
80°

Total.

ggg&ggggg

10° and under 15°.
15° and under 20°.
0 and under 25°
0 and under 30°.
° and under 35°.
° and under 40°.
° and under 45°.
° and under 50°.
0 and under 55°.
° and under 60°.
° and under 65°.
65° and under 70°.
70° and under 75°.
80° and over.........




78

........
1 __ .
11 ......
41
2
2

22

2

48
97
137
127
83
56
13
25
3

3
3
1
......... .
______
______
............
______
............

1
5
8

7
4
17
17
11
6
1

270

212

1

1

3
18
5
31
45
69
61
24

2
12

11

2

5
9
24
36
47
39
31
3
3

1
1

3
2

4
2

1

103

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

Table III.—Wet-bulb reading near presses and fiat-work ironers by dry-bulb

■

reading

.........wr----- --........... 1 '
Number of wet-bulb readings near presses and flat-work
ironers that were—
Num­
ber of
read­ 50° and 55° and 60° and 65° and 70° and 75° and 85° and
ings
under under under under under under under
65°
70°
80°
90°
55°
60°
75°

Dry-bulb reading

703

65° and under 70°_________

14

1
8

47
208
263
138
33
5

3

6

4

85

281

4
23
38
18

121

2

227

1

1

82

13

1

18

104
35

2

44
124
50
9

1

17
45
16
3

6

1

5

2

Table IV.—Relative humidity near presses and flat-work ironers, by dry-bulb

reading
Number of cases where relative humidity near presses and
flat-work ironers was—
Total
num­
ber of
cases

Dry-bulb reading

Total_____ ____
55° and under 60°. _
60° and under 65°.

___

702

____

15 and 20 and 25 and 30 and 35 and 40 and 45 and 50 and
under under under under under under under under
20 per 25 per 30 per 35 per 40 per 45 per 50 per 55 per
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent

1
8

70° and under 75°
75° and under 80° ________
80° and under 85°
____
85° and under 90°__ __ __ _
90° and over .

47
208
203
137
33
5

2

5

2

1
1
2 .
1

17

4

6
6
1

37

53

83

94

3
9
13
7
3

2
6
22
20

23
29
23

' 29
44

2

3

90
2

'

29

1

Number of eases where relative humidity near presses and flat-work
ironers was—Continued
Dry-bulb reading

Total
55°
60°
65°
70°
75°
80°
85°

and under 60°_________
and under 65°
and under 70° _ _ _ _ .
and under 75°_____ _
and under 80°
and under 85°--- ___
and under 90°..




55 and 60 and 65 and 70 and 75 and 80 and 85 and 90 and 95 per
under under under under under under under under
cent
60 per 65 per 70 per 75 per 80 per 85 per 90 per 95 per
and
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
cent
over
110

83

2

1
1
6

9
27
51
18
3

28
33

12
2

58

39

18

7

3
17

3

3

5
4

2

2

5

21
21
8
1

4

1

1

3

1

1

1
12

5

2

6

1

1

104
Table

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

V.—Impression of agent as to temperature near presses and flat-work ironers,
by dry-bulb reading
.

Total
number
of cases

Dry-bulb reading

Total............. ...

..............

Number of cases with dry-bulb reading as specified
where temperature seemed—
Comfort­
able

Cool

604

42

1
8

55° and under 60°_______________
00° and under 65° ________
65° and under 70®__ ________ _ _
70° and under 75°_________________
75° and under 80°______________ _
80° and under 85°_
_________
85° and under 90°. ___________
90° and under 95°____________

Warm

Very
warm

Hot

1

282

7
15

109

37

65

24

2

42
185
230
109
26
3

178

1
100

Table \I.—Scheduled weekly hours of laundries in other Women’s Bureau surveys,
by section. State, and date of survey

f
Number of establishments and number and per cent of
women whose scheduled weekly hours were—
Total number
reported
48 and under
Section, State, and date of
survey

Over 48 and
under 54

54 and over

Women
Women
Women
Estab­
Estab­
Estab­
Establish­ Women lish­
lish­
lishments
ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
All places
Eastern.

_____________

Rhode Island, 1920__
New Jersey, 1922
Delaware, 1924
North Central.__ ... _ _
Ohio, 1922__ .............
Illinois, 1921____ ____
South Central
Arkansas, 1922.........
Missouri, 1922_
_
Oklahoma, 1924___
Southern_________ _____
Georgia, 1921 *
Kentucky, 1921__
Maryland, 1921. .
South Carolina, 1921-22.
Alabama, 1922____
Mississippi, 1925_
_
Tennessee, 1925 . _

i 266

8,959

119

1,107

5

108

9.8

10

467

42.2

6

532

48.1

4
i 10
5

166
745
196

2

50
58

30.1
7.8

1
6

67
327
73

40. 4
43.9
37.2

1

3

2

49
3fi0
123

62.8

i 66

2,312

23

480

20.8

MO 1, 542

66.7

9

290

12.5

i 24
i 42

1,060
1, 252

9
14

230
250

21.7

9

i 73

2,035

10

286

i 19

2

i 32

363
965
707

1 108

14
17
i 17
13
17
i 12
18

22

67 1,401

3

15.6

112 3,933

3

43.9

108 3, 625

40.5

20.0

19

2 21

830
712

78.3
56.9

290

23.2

14.1

21

507

24.9

53 1,242

61.0

3
5

30
175
81

8.3
18. 1
11.5

1
6

11

14

292
204

3.0
30.3
28.9

17
13

20

322
498
422

59.7

3, 505

29

527

15.0

41 1,417

40.4

43 1, 561

44.5

350
522
693
233
467
263
977

3
3
9

29
91
103
26
219
30
29

8.3
17.4
14.9

1
8

3

2

11.2

46.9
11.4
3.0

5
9
9
5
6

3
4

129
283
578
103
151
49
124

36.9
54.2
83.4
44.2
32.3
18. 6
12.7

6

5

192
148

7
3
9

104
97

12

824

84.3

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some establishments appear in more than 1-hour group.
’ Includes 1 establishment (32 women) that worked every other Sunday, alternating weeks of 51 hours and
72 uuui a.

3 Exclusive of Atlanta.




Table

VII.—Scheduled daily hours of laundries in other Women’s Bureau surveys, by section, State, and date of survey

103127° — 30

Number of establishments and number and per cent of women whose scheduled daily hours were—
number
reported

Under 8

Over 8 and
under 9

8

Section, State, and
date of survey

Over 9 and
under 10

9

Over 10 and
under 11

10

oo

7

i 273

9,247

14

481

5.2

25

678

7.3

Eastern.,

19

1,107

1

24

2.2

1

8

.7

New Jersey, 1922. _
Delaware, 1924___
North Central_____

4

166
745
196
2, 386

1

10

24 n. 5

1

8

1.1

Ohio, 1922_______
Illinois, 1924_____
South Central...........
Arkansas, 1922___
Missouri, 1922____
Oklahoma, 1924_
_
Southern....................
Georgia, 1920 and
1921 .........................
Kentucky, 1921
Maryland, 1921
South Carolina,
1921-22
Alabama, 1922. .........
Mississippi, 1925___
Tennessee, 1925

5
167
24
143
76
19
25
32
111

15
17

20

13
16
12

18 1

4

1, 060

67

27

1,326
2,208
363
1,138
707
3, 546

3

40

390
522
752

2
1

233
409
263
977

4

27

0.7

1.1

8

234

9.8

11

301

12.6

2.0

3
5
3

111 10.5

4
7
3

128
173

12.1

68

13.0
3.1

141 4,862
10

52.6

599

54.1

93
2
5
433
73
3
35 1,474

56. 0
58.1
37.2
61.8

17
821
18
653
70 1,979
18
346
23
995
29
638
810
26

77.5
49.2
89. 6
95.3
87.4
90.2

9.3
7 3
4.7

1.1

1
1
1
2

123
161
17
92
52
62

7.4
1.7

1
2
10

51
17
301

4. 5
2.4
8.5

2.8

2

62

8.2

1
1
2

13
30
40

3.3
5. 7
5.3

4

21

5

106
233
254

27. 2
44. 6
33.8

4.6

... 1
4

26
156
36

11.2

19

38.1
13. 7

4
3
4

66
2 62

89

38. 2
16.1
23. 6

8.1

1

44 1, 709

6

1

22.8

18.5

43 1,438

15.6

192
49

4

123
83
83

32.8

284

25.7

4

3

284

38.1

1
1
2

7

267

11.2

267

20.1

34 1,158

32.7

108
34
352

27. 7
6.5
46.8

5
9

5
6

73
154

31.3
37. 7

3

4 11

437

1

7

0.1

1

12

0.3

12

3.1

6.3

35 1,163

12

29. 5
2. 7
62. 8
3.5

4

1

17.3

3

20

151
225
23

38. 7
43.1
3.1

45
14
7 3 165
7
540

19.3
3.4
62. 7
55.3

2
2

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some establishments appear in more than 1 hour group
2 Includes 9 women in 1 establishment having a 5-hour day on Monday.
3 Includes 11 women in 1 establishment having a 5-hour day on Monday, 18 in 1 establishment having a 7-hour day on Friday, and 22 in 1 establishment having an 8-hour day

on Friday.
* Includes 5 establishments working 8 to 9 hours on Monday and 1 establishment working 9 hours on Monday and Tuesday




APPENDIX A— GENERAL TABLES

Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Women
Estab
EstabEstabEstabEstabEstabEstabEstablish- W omen lishlishlishlishlishlishlishments
ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Peiber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent

123

O
Or

106

A survey of laundries and their women workers
Table

Total number
reported

VIII.—Scheduled Saturday

Number of establishments and number and per cent of
women whose scheduled Saturday hours were—
None

Under 5

5 and under 6

Section and city
Women
Women
Women
Estab­
Estab­
EstabEstablish­ Women lish­
lishlishments
ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per ments Num­ Per
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
All places.

i 288

19, 461

5.6

50 2,111

10.8

80 5,159

26.5

Eastern._ _ ................ ........

151

2,738

7

143

5.2

20 1,055

38.5

15

867

31.7

Boston_____________

i 30
11
10

1,546
645
547

6

134

8.7

1

10
6

9

1.6

4

2 212

342

32.4
32. 9
62.5

9
3
3

572
176
119

37.0
27.3

_____ .

i 125

7,720

26

833

10.8

25

962

12.5

57 3,884

50.3

Chicago................ ..........
Cincinnati
Cleveland_
_ _______
Des Moines. __ _______
Detroit........ ..........
......
Indianapolis______ ____
Milwaukee___________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.

i 21
1 14
16
i6
i 20

2

35
37
219

2.0

2

3
4

6.3
20.4

3

867
440
821

49.8
75.0
76.4

13

470

28.5

6

32.0
40.5

5
5

429
512

30

5
3
5
5 s 101

8.1

3.9
3.2

115
45
34
10
1331
307
217

10
8
11

i 13
i 23

1, 741
587
1,074
238
1, 648
959
536
937

65

5, 581

21
12

17
15

2,629
769
1,433
750

147

3,422

3

108

3.2

5

94

2.7

7

384

11.2

i 12
i 11

1

28

2.5

1
2

12

1.1

15

1.7

3

6
6

1,106
862
403
500

« 304
23

27.5
2.7

1

53

10.6

55

11.0

l 12

551

2

1

14

2.5

2

.4

Providence ..
Middle western

Western
Los Angeles.._
Portland__ ...
San Francisco.
Seattle___ _ _

... ...
______

Southern
Atlanta_____
______
Birmingham__________
Jacksonville____ ______
.Richmond
St. Petersburg and Tampa________ _________

12

36 1,084

1
1

501

6.6

7.7
3.2
4 2

21.8

21
21

80

2.2

14.5

10.8

12

614

26.0
53.4
37.5
65.5

1

2
1
1

24

1.7

1

201

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some establishments appear in more than 1 hour group.
2 9 women in 1 establishment had a Saturday never exceeding 2 hours and no work on Saturday in summer.




107

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

hours, by section and city
Number of establishments and number and per cent of women whose scheduled Saturday
hours were—-Continued
6 and under 7

7 and under 8

8 and under 9

9 and under 10

10

Women
Women
Women
Women
EstabEstabEstabEstabli6hlishlishlishlishmenfcs Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments Num- Per ments
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
ber cent
26

1,568

8.1

19

1,440

7.4

72

6,135

31.5

5

279

10.2

3

137

5.0

1

118

4.3

1

139

202

13.1

3

137

77

14.1

1

118

18.3

1

139

21.6

12

636

8.2

5

319

4.1

3

89

1.2

12

907

1
1

20

1.1
11.1

1

167

9.6

5

447

3

289
48

1
1
1
1

50

21.0

21

3
3

108
306

45. 4
18.6

1

46

cent

8.9

2

ber

5.1

3

Women

4.9

65

2

70

29.4

1

19

21 1,383

7.1

7■

581

11.7

1

90

1.2

25.7

1

90

5.2

3.5
99.3

5

146

17.5
5.0
12.7
15.6

1

14

.3

63

5, 543

1

14

.5

20
12

2,615 99.5
769 100.0
1,409 98.3
750 100.0

1
1

68

71

10

1.3
7.4
1.9

16
15
8

639

18.7

11

984

28.8

5

385

11.3

3

356
42
37

4
3

1
2

330
276
57
289

29.8
32.0
14. 1
57.8

1

3

76
217

6.9
25.2

86

32.2
4.9
9.2
17.2

118

21.4

1

32

5.8

1

1
1
1

2

92

16.7

—

8

337

9.8

2
1
1

120

13.9

17

3.4

4

144

26.1

3 62 women in 1 establishment occasionally worked longer but never in excess of 6 hours.

< 146 women in 1 establishment worked alternate Saturdays of 7 hours.




3.0

6

491

14.3

2

169
253

19. 6
62.8

1

69

12.5

108

Table

IX.—Scheduled lunch period, hy section and city
Number of establishments and number of women whose scheduled lunch period was—

Section and city

Over 30 and under
45 minutes

30 minutes

Over 45 minutes
and under 1 hour

45 minutes

1 hour

Estab­
lish­
ments
All places.. _______________ _____________
Per oent distribution. __ ______________________ _

Women

Estab­
lish­
ments

Women

Estab­
lishments

Women

Estab­
lish­
ments

Women

Estab­
lish­
ments

Women

Estab­
lish­
ments

i 289

19, 529

176

12,292
62.9

2

257
1.3

32

2. 360

4

336
1.7

76

4,284
21.9

10

695

3

182

34

1, 795

7

2 515

3

182

18
19

3812
496
487
834

i

15

100.0

51 .

2,738

4

30

1,546
645
547
7,787

2
1
1

11
10

i 126

99

592
2, 838

17

2,088

2, 629
769
1,434
750
3,422

12
11
6
6
12

1,106
862
403
500
551

13
24
65
21
12

9
6,266

17
32

17
15
47

6
20
12

20

20
10

21

14
16

37

1, 727
533
835
119
1, 666
794

1, 742
587
1,074
238
1, 666
959
536
985
5, 582

1 21

------- ■----66

13
15
3

15
41

750
3,122

12

1,106
698
366
500
452

9
5
6

9

1 Details aggregate more than total, because 1 establishment appears in more than 1 group.
2 59 women in 1 establishment had a half hour on Friday.
3 59 women in 1 establishment had a half hour on Monday and Saturday.
4 A half hour on Saturday
* 1,182 women in 12 establishments had a half hour on Saturday




12.1

Women

7

129
51
430

1

54

2

95

1

24

80

2
12

165
456
174
1, 519

2
1
2

257

1

239

1
1

18

201

3
13

1,071

2
11

475
596

2

164

2

164

8
8

1

154

3
19

1

* 154

16

3 1, 280

4

136

1

37

3

99

2
1

66

173

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Total number re­
ported

Table

X.—Scheduled rest period, by section and city
Number of establishments and number of women having—

Total number
having a rest
period
Section and city

Total number

All places
Per cent distribution_________ ________

1

324

8

387

65

1
1
1
1

34
15

120

3
1

129
49

1
1

6

99
15

1

1
6
1

130
23
275
49

1
1

3

90
23
146

1

154

1

23
294

1,934

100.0

120

2

281

2

281

1

189

1
1

189
92

1
1

189
92

1

1§9

147 women in 1 establishment had 10 minutes on Monday.




Estab­ Wom­ Estab­ Wom­ Estab­ Wom­
lish­
lish­
lish­
en
en
en
ments
ments
ments
220

282

3

1

178

1

178

1

178

1

178

3

104

2

42

1

23

1

23

I

19
62

1

19

1

62

3 154

1

1

Duration not
reported

92

711

15

111

each

92

1
1

188
2 139
139

14

815

10 minutes

76

466

8
1
2

7

74

5
3

11

2

150

2

788
434
139
215

966

2
1
2
2
1

3

12

28

17

3

1,133
58.6

2,216

1

Total number

20 minutes

629
32.5

13

32

9

_

15 minutes

Estab­ Wom­ Estab­ Wom­ Estab­ Wom­ Estab­ Wom­
lish­
lish­
lish­
lish­
en
en
en
en
ments
ments
ments
ments

12

Middle western. _______________

10 minutes

A PPEN D IX A— GENEKAL TABLES

Estab­ Wom­
lish­
en
ments

2 rest periods

1 rest period

172
8.9

4

3

172

3

1 172

100.0

22.0

78.0

1

62

1

62

40

2 In June, July, and August only.

1

3“5 0r 10 minutes if they care to take it.”

O

CO

110

Table XI.—Hours actually worked, by section and city

Section and city

Under 30 hours
Negro

30 and under
33 hours

Negro

1.8

1.8

1.2

2.5

2.2

3.8

• 1.6

3.9

1.3

11.7

2.0

10.7

5.0

6.8
2.2

1.4

26.7

1.7
4.4

24.4

All places......... ............... ........ ..........-.................... ........ 10,680

2,144

4.3

6.2

1,697

103

4.8

2.9

1,102

.8

6.7

3.5

Negro White

White

White

--

36 and under
39 hours

Negro

White

White Negro

Eastern....... .........................................................................

33 and under
36 hours

39 and under
42 hours
White

42 and under
44 hours

Negro

White

Negro

7.6

7.6

4.9

5.0

7.3

7.8

8.1

11.7

6.7
17.1
3. 5

2.3
15.6

11.1

20.5
6.7

----------

' 181
314

44
45
14

11.6

Middle western. _ ---------------- ------ ------- --------------- --

3,908

1,189

4.4

6.8

1.1

1.6

2.3

1.5

3.4

4.5

7.7

10.3

7.7

5.0

571
370
554
89
896
440
386
602

648
4
223

4.6
5.1
3.8
4.5
4.0

6.3

1.1
1.1
1.1

.6

.5
.3

.5

1.9

2.5

2.8

4.8

3.2
3.8
14.6
5. 6

10.8

.2

6.0
1.2

4, 974

9

4.1

2.3

.3

2,484
' 546
1, 434
510

9

4. 3
3.5
3.0
7.1

2.4
2.4
1.9
2.9

201

843

26

144
363
90
64
182

Jersey City and Newark----------------------------

Southern.........................................................-.............................

66
2
1

106
i Not computed, owing to small number involved.




289
24

5.1

6.8

3.9
3. 7

9.0
6.2

8.3

4.0

5.7

(>)

16.0
1.9
4.4
10.9
3.8

6.6

1.6
1.6

1.1

1.3

2.2

1.8

(0
1.8

2.2

1.6

5.6

10.3

3.8

3.6
3.2

3.5

3.7
4.1
6.7

5.2

22.9

12.2
1.1

.9

10.4

13.8

.8

11.7
5.9
7.3
3.8

1.2

8.0

p)

1.7

.6

«

.9
.3

3.1

8.7
5.9
7.2

.7
7.0

2.0

3.0

3.4

3.0

4.3

5.6

.6

3.8
1.5

5.6

11.5
1.5

9.7
.3

6.3

(i)

10.9
4.9

1.9

20.3
3.3

1.6
.6

1.8

2.0

2.7

3.5
1.4
3.8

5.1
14.8

3.3
.6

.2

1.3

2.0

1.6

3.8
1.5

6.9
.3

1.9

9.4
3.3

7.8

7.0
1.5
(>)
11.3

9.6
5.0

1.8
.6

8.6

1.6

2.8

1.1
1.1

2.2

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Per cent of women who worked during the week—
Number of
women re­
ported

Per cent of women who worked during the week—Continued
44 and under
48 hours

Section and city

Over 48 and
under 50 hours

48 hours

Over 50 and
under 54 hours

50 hours

Over 54 and
under 60 hours

54 hours

60 hours and
over

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

9.4

37.0

4.0

6.5

4.6

6.1

7.4

7.1

21.1

0.7

3.6

1.9

12.1

0.5

11.1

26.5

10.7

36.3

30.1

2.9

1.0

6.3

2.7

9.7

.1

70.5

Eastern___________________________

White

18.2

All places

Negro

.3
21. 5
1.3

14.9
23.2

.1
2.2
12.1

4.3

.2

2.2

6.9

.2

3.9

13 4
Middle western.-

--------- --------------

18.5
9.3

12.3
7.9

C1 TiUumtll _ - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8

6.1

4.0

.4

1.6

17.1

(i)

.9

22.2

1 l
2.9

7.3

15.6

12.5

6.3

5.1
4.5
19.9
17.3
19.4

9.0

13.9
37. 5^
23.8
17.1

5.9
25.0

6.0
12.0

13.3

7.1

11.8

13.3
20.6
2.8

17.7

Western____________________
T

\

15.7

64.1

-_

5.0

11. 5

St. Petersburg and Tampa----------

6.5

2.8
2.8

9.4

10.4

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




1.7

5.9

8.6

10.6

1.1

(‘>

1.2

10.5

20.4

2.0

11.5

27.8
29.0
16.7
6.3
4.4

4.5

41.1

(0

2.4

.1

.l
4 4

3.5
7.2
1.1

3.0
33.7
.5
2.9
.3
4.7

20. 8

.8

30.9

24.8

.7
1.4

57.7
28.7

19.4

.9
.4

4. 2

1.1

.3

.4

.1

.2
.5

.1

.6

6. 2
1 2

64 7
70.0
Southern---------- ----------—.........................

1.3

22.7

10.4
29.2

0)

_______

1

(o

35.5

8.1

(o

.3

.1

16.8
4.3
5.2
47.2
16.2
24.7
2.1

2.8

Negro

.2

3.0

.8

1.5

1.0

2.1
.6

6.1

1.9

1.4

1. 6
2.2

3.0

.6

2.3
2.8

12.1

7.8

1.6

.5

9.4

27.1

7.7

25.3

25.0

43.9

29.7
60.0

20.8

26.4

11.0

3.8

.5

26.4

38.5

A PPEN D IX A — GENERAL TABLES

White

112

Table XII.—Week’s earnings, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN

Eastern section

Middle-western section

Week’s earnings
All
places

Total..___ ___________
Median.____ ___________
Under $1
$1 and under $2_____________
$2 and under $3___ _
$3 and under $4__________
$4 and under $5_____ _
$o and imder $6_____ .
$6 and under $7..... ..................
$7 and under $8 _________ .
$8 and under $9... ...
$9 and under $10--...
$10 and under $11_____
$11 and under $12____ _______
$12 and under $13 ...
$13 and under $14....................
$14 and under $15......... ...
$15 and under $10 ______ _ .
$16 and under $17.........................
$17 and under $18 .
$18 and under $19$19 and imder $20_
$20 and under $21
$21 and under $22 ................... ...
$22 and under $23........................
$23 and under $24__________
$24 and under $25....................
$25 and under $30.............. .
$30 and under $35
$35 and under $40___
$40 and over ..................... ..........




14,104
$16.10
7
40
78
56
47
82
81
85
144

211

427
545
1,135
1,207
1,358
1,360
1,772
1,164
1,040
832
703
396
418
164
155
482
85
23
7

Boston

Jersey
City and
Newark

Provi­
dence

2,306
$14.50

1,423
$14. 60

365
$14.80

518
$13.65

5,692
$14.75

11

5
7

2
1

4
4
5

3
4
4

6
2

17
32
26
26
37
36
49
76
104
227
290
704
654
749
721
530
332
298
165
208
76
82
57
35

Total

14

12
8
11

19
16
28
45
93
166
276
312
288
259
2C9

131

111

61
72
44

39
18
10

32
14
4

1

6

4
5
9

10

14
29
44
93
146

220

190
170
131
82
74
35
40
30
26
14
7
21
8
1
1

3

6

4
8

34
30
38
52
49
39
20

18

3

8

12

41
39

100

54
46
40
39
29
19

6

20

14

3

2

Cincin­
nati

Cleve­
land

Des
Moines

Detroit

Indian­
apolis

Mil­
waukee

746
$16.65

539
$14.05

608
$15.25

238
$14.00

1,245
$15. 35

900
$13.45

529
$14.65

4
7

1
1

1

1

4

3

3
4
3

3
5

12

2
1

4
7

3

4
9

10
12

1

18
4
8
1
1
2

Chicago

Total

10

5
3
2

9
3
1

122

32
4
2

2
6
8

3
5

4
5
13

3

8

18
19
38
46
49
96
77
55
69
29
62
23
27
17
13
36
13
1
1

2

2

9
13
19
56
62
90
77
60
42

22

9
18
16
12

5
8

4

1
1

4
4
3
7
7

20

30
72
86

43
92
62
37
40
22

24
5

8
12
2

18

2
1

1

3
4
3

2
2
22
6

41
31
33
43
15
12

7
3
2

2
6
8

19
36
50

110

94
208

202

144
95
68

38
49
23

3

887
$14.10

1

12

1

Minne­
apolis
and St.
Paul

4
30
5
2

24
32
68

61
179
74
103

66
68

36
44
17
19
14

3

8
8

13
15
25
44
84
89
42
46
44
32
22

4

19
5
7
3

14
3

4

8

11

1

2
8

4

6

4
4
7
4
7
5

10

29
43
158
149
147

120

76
31
29
16
17
5
4
4
2

5
1

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Number of women with earnings as specified in—

Number of women with earnings as specified in—Continued
Western section

Week's earnings

Los
Angeles

Total

Port­
land

San
Fran­
cisco
1,434
$20.70

5,564
$17.90

2,613
$17.00

768
$15. 35

4

3
7
19
7
5

3

10

31
15
12

$12 and under $13__---------------------------------------------- ------- -$13 and under $14__________ _____ _________ ___________
$14 and under $15 - . .
... _________________
$15 and under $16
. -______________ .. ...

$20 and under $21________ ______________________________

$25 and under $30. _.




.

13
34
27
54
49
74
207
282
319
999
675
602
591
399
272
282
85
107
316
38
14
3

3
2

10
2
22
8

4

33
23
• 25
116
85
93
850
343
349
114
162

9
13
33
74
159
182
97
51
39
32
17

68

74
38
41
80
9
9
3

6
6
8

6
10

4
3
5

749
$18.05
2
8

7
3
3

2
2
2
8
6

3

1
10

4
3
4
3

6
10

11
11

5

9

29
24
19
235
168
53
55
30

20

33
46
46
392
165
168
176
36
52
207
21

6

22

7

11

24

8
1

1----------------

Atlanta

Birm­
ingham

Jackson­
ville

542
$13. 95

180
$14.40

118
$15.80

47
$15.40

2
1

St. Peters­
burg and
Tampa

1

Total

Rich­
mond
11

m

1

1

3
1

4
6

1

7

6

35
40
81
34
39
61
34
26
29
15
24
4
15
4'
3
12
1
1
1

4
18
13
30
14
17
20

18

11
12
6

4
3

1
2
1

1

1
1

2

5
o
13
4
9
24
6
10
6
6

9
3

186
$11.95

3
1

7
5
4
3

6

5

©
1
2
1
1
2

7

2

31
11

9
9
3
7

4
2

A-

30

20

1
1

Seattle

A PPEN D IX

Total..___________ _______________________________
Median. _________________ _____________ . ---------------

Southern section

2

7

a
w
>

t-1

n
w
on

10

1
1

3

2

1

5

1
1

CO

114

Table

XII.—Week’s earnings, by section and city—Continued
NEGRO WOMEN

Eastern section

Middle-western section

Week’s earnings
All
places

Total
Median _____________




..

Boston

Total

5,076
$8.85

246
$12.50

Jersey
City and
Newark

Provi­
dence

67
$13. 35

160
$11.90

19
$14.15

1,938
$12.25

13

202

183
85
39
38
10
8

3
4

8

Cleve­
land

989
$12.45

50
$12.10

6
2
1
1
2
6

4
13
18
56
39
33
27

20
11
6
2

21

16

Cincin­
nati

1
2
1
1

2
1
1
1
1

4

1
8

13
16
5

23
14
18

3
3
3
4

4
3

3
3

4

8
1

10
1

12

12

1
6

3
9
17

2

24
17

66

61
76
147
441
677
716
411
397
377
316
519
242

Chicago

Total

2

26
23
28
50
75
190
216
209
406
190
162
154
58
24

19

4
14
13
17
27
41
56

11

84
238
115

5

101
66
22

2
1

•

4

6
1

8

13

7

5
7

3
4

3

3
5

6

2

Indian­
apolis

448
$10.85

399
$12. 55

$12. 50

4
4
4
4
5
4
5

4
4
5
5
7

1

25
103
63
57
58
27
19
25
8
6

1

2
1
1

Milwau­
kee

Minne­
apolis
and
St. Paul

1
1
1

7
4

11

2
1

12
2

13

21

Detroit

12
1

5

102

11

1

2

Des
Moines

(>>

2

1
1

11

22

39
56
80
38
35
57
23
3
3

4
1

7
18
8

3
3

1

2

2
1
1
1
1

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Number of women with earnings as specified in—Continued

Number of women with earnings as specified in—Continued
Southern section

Western section
Week’s earnings
Los
Angeles

Total

16
$17.50

San
Fran­
cisco

Seattle

2,876
$7.15
7
42
42
63

120

1

5
4

5
4

2
1
2

2
1
2

1

1

8
11

5
13
7

2

Birm­
ingham

Jackson­
ville

940
$6. 45

742
$7, 00

352
$6. 80

477
$8. 20

4
14

4

116
190
214
71
48

9
13
57
108
90
49
5
3

3
4

7
27
39
131
96
64
36

4

28

1

5

1

19
15
32
71
197
293
199
62
23
13
8

4
1
1
1

12
10
22

22
6
6

3
3

8

1

1

6

11

6

1
10
1
1
1

365
$9.80
2
2

3

6

7

21

17
26
54
54
69
26
32
10

3
5

A
-

418
647
660
332
194
143
51
74
19
13
1

St. Peters­
burg and
Tampa

Rich­
mond

Atlanta

Total

APPENDIX

16
$17. 50

Port­
land

Q
tel
2
tel
a
>
te1

4

11
6
2

3

3

1
1

te

tel
m

i
1

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




Oi

Median of the week's earnings of undertime, full-time, and overtime workers, by section and city
Number of women and their median earnings where week worked was—
Less than scheduled hours

All places____________

White women

Negro women

White women

Negro women

Scheduled hours
White women

More than scheduled hours

Negro women

White women

Negro women

Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median
Num­ Median
earn­
earn­
earn­
ber
earn­
ber
earn­
earn­
ber
ber
earn­
ber
ber
earn­
ber
ings
ber
ings
ings
ings
ings
ings
ings
ings
10,678 $16.30
2,144 $10.45
4,229 $14.15
1,116 $10. 25
5,361 $17. 80
622 $10.25
1,088 $15.85
406
$11.80

Eastern___ ________________

1,597

14. 50

103

12.85

395

12.00

52

11.15

1,101

15.05

47

13.80

101

15.65

Boston_______ ________
Jersey City and Newark...
Providence_____________

1,102

181
314

14.65
15.00
12.95

44
45
14

13. 45

11.10

247
89
59

12.20

6

12.50
10.65

42
4

0
11.00

15.15
17.05
13.90

38

13.60

27

15. 90

«

828
49
224

to

31

3,906

14.70

1,189

12.25

2,122

13.60

727

11. 50

919

15.90

247

12.75

865

Chicago_______________
Cincinnati_____________
Cleveland______________
Des Moines___ _________
Detroit________________
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee_____________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.

571
368
554
89
896
440
386
602

16. 95
14.20
15.25
13.80
15.00
12.55
14. 55
14.00

648
4
223

12.20

(0
11.80

12.00

339
4

10.70
(■>
10.15

221

65

12.75

14.45
10.80
14. 30
12.85

253

11

12.30
to

20
2

15. 55
(0

156
129
15

17.60
17.40
16. 75
(i)
16. 60
13.50

112

17. 60
14.85
16. 00
14. 30
17.25
15.45
16.65
14.60

12.55

12.55
12.40

234
152
136
74

160

289
24

116
189
359
13
654
240
317
234

Western.....................................

4, 974

17. 95

1, 644

15.35

2

(0

3, 272

19.05

7

(>)

58

19.35

Los Angeles____________
Portland_______________
San Francisco............. ........
Seattle........................... ......

2,481
546
1,434
510

16. 95
15.15
20.70
17. 95

620
467
417
140

14. 40
14. 90
18. 95
14.95

2

(■)

1,862
52

17.60

7

(>)

2

0)

Southern. ...................................

201

13. 55

843

7. 25

68

11.05

335

6.60

Atlanta_ ____ _____ ___
_
Birmingham____________
Jacksonville____________
Richmond_______ _____
St. Petersburg and Tampa.

26

13.50
16.20

0
0)
0)
0)

61
59
32
57
126

4.25

(0
0)
11.55

5.90
7.40
6. 35
6. 45
10. 55

8

1
106

144
363
90
64
182

Middle western. __________

66
2

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




0)

0)
(0
0)

5

2
1

52

12.90
13. 90

10.25

120

86

71
54

9

1,001

357

6.10

5. 45
6.25
10.15

18. 00
21.10
18. 45

69

15. 55

321

8

(■)
15.85

13
240
57

44
17

14.25

27
59

2

4

(o

12. 80

1

«

15. 75

215

12.85

149

12. 85

38

12.15

16

16. 60
(>)

11

0

27
16
13

6

5

(l)

7.25

64

13. 85

187

8.25

«
7.40
6. 65
(l)
«

10

(0

17

18.15

70
64

6.80
8.30

37

12.15

51

14.50

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Total for whom time worked
was reported

Section and city

116

Table XIII.

Table

XIV.—Extent of undertime, full time, and overtime, by section and city
Women who worked during the week—
Number of
women reported

Less than scheduled hours

Scheduled hours

More than scheduled hours

Section and city
Number

Per cent

.

White

2,144

4,229

1,116

1,597

103

395

52

247
89
59

6

2,122

_ .. .

181
314

44
45
14

Middle western_____ ____________________ ____ _______

3,906

1,189

Providence______ _______________

___ _____

Chicago. _____________ __________________ ______

Atlanta_____________ _____________________ _____
Birmingham........................................................................
St. Petersburg and Tampa............................. .................. .
1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




White

29.0

1,088

406

10.2

18.9

45.6

101

4

6.3

3.9

86.4

9

75.1
27.1
71.3

27
43
31

3
1

2. 5
23. 8
9.9

6.7
(>)

247

23.5

20.8

865

215

22.1

18.1

24.7

221

149

38.7
7.3

23.0

Negro

39.6

52.1

5,361

622

50.2

24.7

50.5

1,101

47

68.9

42
4

22.4
49. 2
18.8

13.6
93. 3
«

828
49
224

38

727

54.3

61.1

919

339
4
253

1

116
189
359
13
654
240
317
234

20.3
51. 4
64.8
14.6
73.0
54.5
82.1
38.9

9

1,644

2

33.1

0)

3,272

9

620
467
417
140

2

25. 0
85. 5
29.1
27.5

«

1,862
' 52

201

843

68

335

33.8

39.7

69

26

144
363
90
64
182

8

61
59
32
57
126

30.8
7.6

42.4
16.3
35. 6
89.1
69.2

8

66
2
1

106

289
24

5

2
1

52

120
11

0
0)

49.1

52.3
0)
53.8
87.5
45.8

234
152
136
74
86

71
54

160
65
20
2

112

_

41.0
41.3
24.5
83. 1
9.6
16.1
14. 0
18.6

29.1
6.9
8.3

65.8

27
59
2

156
129
15
256

38
16

11
1

10 6

2. 2
17.4
29.3
3. 9
42.5

58

5.5
45.8
<■)

1.2

2

17.0

.1
4.9

0)

321

34.3

38.1

64

187

31.8

22.2

13
240
57

30.8
66.7

9.0

10

17

70
64

38.5
25.8

48.6
17.6

5

16.0

37

51

34.9

28.0

'357

6

17

«

Negro

75.0
9. 5
69.8
70.0

1,001

44

White Negro

66.1

63.3
9.4
2.7

27
16
13

1.1

2.5

1
1

1.1
1.6

TABLES

Southern......... ......................... ................................. ...........

Negro

White

2,484
' 546
1,434
'510

Detroit... ... ____________
___ ______ _
Indianapolis.. _____ ___________ _________________

648
4
223

4,974

Cleveland................................................................. ............

571
368
554
89
896
440
386
602

Wrhite

Negro

A — GENERAL
-

Negro

10,678

__ __ ___________________

White

1.102

All places____

Eastern___________________________ ______ _ __ .

Negro

Per cent

Number

APPENDIX

White

Per cent

Number

118

Table XV.—Week’s earnings of full-time workers, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN

\

Eastern section

Middle-western section

Week’s earnings
All
places
Total

Total ___________ _________
Per cent of total number reported_____
Median of the earnings___ ___________
$7 and under $8_ ______ _____
$8 and under $9_ _
$9 and under $10.... ........ .
$10 and under $11 ______ ______ _
$11 and under $12.. ___
$12 and under $13_______ _____
$13 and under $14 ______ ______________
$14 and under $15_ ____________
$15 and under $16_________________
$16 and under $17. ______________
$17 and under $18_____ . __
$18 and under $19 ____ ___
$19 and under $20 ..........................
$20 and under $21________________
$21 and nn^er $22. ____ _________
$22 and under $23____ ____
$23 and under $24.____ ________
$24 and under $25
________ ___
$25 and under $30. ___ _
$30 and under $35...... ........... ..........
$35 and under $40______
__
$40 and over___ ________ ______




5,361
50.2
$17. 80
1
2
8

39
63
235
285
285
323
976
590
566
541
401
254
279
82
90
281
42
14
4

Boston

1,101

68.9
$15. 05

828
75.1
$15.15

1

Jersey
City Provi­
and
dence
Newark

1
2

3
29
39
134
174
165
150
123
77
75
31
33
19
15
9
4
14
4
1
1

49
27.1
$17.05

21

25
14
13
9

7
3
3
5
6

7
6
2
6
1
1

2

1

9
3

1

1

919
23.5
$15.90

234
41.0
$17. 60

1

3

224
71.3
$13.90

1

1

22

77
151
141
128
93
57
56

Minne­
Total Chicago Cincin­ Cleve­ Des Detroit Indian­ Mil­ apolis
nati
land Moines
apolis waukee and St.
Paul

4

26
17
50

20
21

17
24
13
13

8
2

4
1

8
21

96
104
95
143
107
76
76
38
48
14

1

22
10
11

5

39

1

6

152
41.3
$14. 85

136
24.5
$16.00

74
83.1
$14.30

9.6
$17. 25

1
21

1

2

5

11
10
10
10
2

86

10

14
19

20

24
29
30

8
20
6
11

5
9
14
3

54
14.0
$16. 65

112

18.6
$14. 60

4

8

3

71
16.1
$15. 45

14

22
22
21

25
17

8
1
12

5
1
2
1
1

5
14
7
42
17
8

7
8

9

13
7
13
4
5
5
3

2
2
2

12
1

8
11

15
13
16
1
6
1

4
1

2

3

1

4

7
2
2
1
2
2
2

2
12

4
7
3
8
6

4

2
1
2

3

32
13
19
15
17
3
4
2

4
1

2

A STJRVET OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Number of women with earnings as specified who had worked the firm’s scheduled hours in—

Number of women with earnings as specified who had worked the firm’s scheduled hours in—Continued
Southern section

Western section
Week’s earnings
Los
Angeles

Total

Portland San Fran­ Seattle
cisco

Atlanta Birming­ Jackson­
ham
ville

Total

'75.0
$17. 60

1,101

69.8
$21.10

357
70.0
$18. 45

8

12
2

742
433
411
470
314
219
240
62
75
227
32
13
3

738
295
291
91
136
67
63
36
39
75
6
8

3

10

6
2
1

4

2
2

I

8

5

4
5
9

30.8
pi

3
5
5

2

17

12

52
9. 5
$18.00

2

131
111

346
141
140
160
19
33
137
19
4

27
35
11

13
5
3
13
7
1

18
4
4
4

2
6
2
2
1
1

44
66.7
$15. 85

St. Pe­
tersburg
and
Tampa
17
16.0
$14. 25
1

2
2
2

1
1
1
1
2

4
14
4
4
1
2

1

4
3
2
2

3

5

2
2
1
1

APPENDIX A— GENERAL TABLES

2

1, 862

69
34.3
$15. 55
1
1
2

3,272
65.8
$19. 05

Rich­
mond

i Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




O

XV.—Week’s earnings of fulUtime workers, by section and city—Continued

120

Table

NEGRO WOMEN

Eastern section

Middle-western section

Week’s earnings
All
places
Total

Total..________________________________________
622
Per cent of total number reported____________ __________
29.0
Median of the earnings .. ..........._..................
$10. 25
$4 ahd under $5___________________ _
$5 and under $6____
______________________
$G and under $7____________________ ________
$7 and under $8........... .
$8 and under $9_____ .
$9 and under $10___ _______ ______
$10 and under $11... ...
___ _ _
$11 and under $12_______ _____
$12 and under $13____________________ _
$13 and under $14. _____ ____________ ___
$14 and under $15... _______________ ___
$15 and under $16. ____ ____
$16 and under $17_______ ______ ________ _
$17 and under $18__________________ ___ _
$18 and under $19__ .. ......... ........... . .........
$19 and under $20. _____
___ ____ ____________
$20 and under $21_____ __________________________
$22 and under $23
1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




Boston

47
45.6
$13. 80

38
86.4
$13. 60

Jersey
City Provi­
and
dence
Newark
9
(>)

Minne­
Total Chicago Cincin­ Cleve­ Des Detroit Indian­ Mil­ apolis
nati
land Moines
apolis waukee and St.
Paul
247

20.8

$12. 75

160
24.7
$12. 55

65
29.1
$12. 75

20

6.9
$15. 55

2

8.3

0)

7
1

123

122

35
14
36
49
78
43
33
43
15

1
1

4

4

17
7
7

15
3
5

10
6
1

3

3

5

1

1

1

6

2

6

1

1

27
43

24
26
51
17
15
13

68
2

4

2
1

25
24
36
12

3
3

1
2
1

1

8
2
1
1
1

3
16
17
7
7
9
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
2

14
3
1

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Number of women with earnings as specified who had worked the firm’s scheduled hours in—

Number of women with earnings as specified who had worked the firm’s scheduled hours in—Continued

103127°—3 0

Southern section

Western section

o
$5
to
10

Week’s earnings
San Fran­ Seattle
Los
cisco
Angeles Portland

Total

Atlanta Birming­ Jackson­
ville
ham

Total

St. Pe­
tersburg
and
Tampa

Rich­
mond

CO

7
Median of the earnings-----------------------------------------------------

0

0
0

7

321
38.1
$7. 25
7
1
123
122
34
13
9
2
4
1
2

*

0

13
9.0

240
66.1
$7.40

57
63.3
$6. 65

75
110
30
12
9
1
1

45
11
1

0

6
9.4

7
3
1
1
1

0

5
2.7

1

2

1
1

1

2
1

1

1
$18 and under $19_________ _______ -........... -............................

4
1

4
1

$20 and under $21...............................................................................

2

2

i Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




2

2

APPENDIX A— GENERAL TABLES

o

to

XVI.—Week’s earnings, by occupation

122

Table

WHITE WOMEN

Week’s earnings

Total....... ..................... ............ 13, 748 2,914
33
Per oent distribution _
100.0
21.2
0.2
Median_______________ ______
*16.05 $17.35 $15.30
Under $1__ ____ _ ______
_
$1 and under $2________ _______
$2 and under $3___________
__
$3 and under $4______ _____
_
$4 and under $5____
$5 and under $G__ _________
$6 and under $7___...
_ __
$7 and under $8___ . ___ __
$8 and under $9 .
$9 and under $10______________
$10 -and under $11_____________
$11 and under $12 ...
$12 and under $13................
$13 and under $14_____ ...
$14 and under $15_____ ______
$15 and under $16.. ___________
$16 and under $17______________
$17 and under $18_____ _______
$18 and under $19 ..
$19 and under $20__.....................
$20 and under $21_____________
$21 and under $22__..................... .
$22 and under $23__________
$23 and under $24.........
$24 and under $25............
$25 and under $30_
_ _
$30 and under $35_
_
$35 and under $40_
_
$40 and over___ ...




7
36
76
53
43
75
76
85
143
206
421
532
1,113
1,194
1,347
1,344
1,735
1,134
1,013
799
671
376
398
158
142
458
84
22
7

4
4
6
4
8
15
10
21
40
64
75
147
179
230
281
287
234
268
157
233
97
137
67
66
244
31
4
1

Fore­
lady

Shirt

12
316
30 5, 296 1,711 1,883
74
83
290
172
362
93
221
178
0)
2.3
0.2
38.5
12.4
13.7
0.5
0.6
1.3
2.1
1.3
2.6
1.6
0.7
(!) $16. 55 $16.65 $14. 55 $16.70 $16. eo $14.65 $15. 75 $16.30 $15. 20 $16.35 $16.20 $23. 70 $18.85
6
22

1
3
4
4
4
5
5
3
4
1

Cur­
tain Collar Bun­ Mend;
and or col­ dle,
Gen­
blan­ lar wrap, seam­ eral
ket starch pack stress
dryer

1
i
1
1
3
4
8

1

29
24
38

1

8
4
9

8
19
21
40

13

1
1

2

------- 1
4
1

2
5
6

585
446
729

162
195
220

195
201
258

11
A
8

11
14
8

31
42
40

15
29
21

36
52
43

14
21
38

2
3

2
1

37
26

2
1

203
374

174
92

184
81

6
6

8
2

25
19

9
10

40
13

11
5

12
7

9
9
3

1

16
49
7
3

30
58
11
1
1

7
1

1
1

67
0.5
$16.25

1

4

27
39
32
41

1
1

13
0.1

1

8
7

51
76
118
240

Clean Other

1

---- 3
3
3
2
11
1
18
1

3

4
6
15
7
3

29
9
9
2

1

1
1

10
1

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Number of women earning each specified amount whose occupation was—
Num­
ber of
women
Press
Ma­ Starch
Elatreport­ Mark Hand chine and Tum­ work Press Hand and
and wash
oper­ iron hand
ed
wash damp­ bler ironer ate
sort
iron
en

NEGRO WOMEN
Total_____ ______ _______
Per cent distribution.......................
Median_________ _______ _

$22 and under $23..............................
$25 and under $30_____ _____




11
56
55
71
141
435
676
709
403
393
374
309
511
241
201
183
84
39
37
22
14
12
8
3
4
8

1
1
1
4
7
16
27
7
12
24
23
25
13
21
18
23
6
4
2
2
1
2

49
1.0
$9.85

15
0.3
$9.75

114
2.3
$8.90

14
0.3
(2)

1
1
3
5
10
3
3
3
1
6
4
4
1
3

1

i Less than 0.05 per cent.

1
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
1

1
1
1

1
1
1
18
23
13
3
7
7
11
6
5
6
7
2
1
1

____
1
4
1
1
2
1
2

2

2,367
47.3
$8. 65
5
32
32
37
84
275
339
285
145
187
210
178
265
135
82
47
12
7
5
2
1
1
1

838
16.8
$9.50

1,027
20.5
$7. 95

4
6
5
14
34
93
133
93
74
50
30
97
35
42
53
22
10
10
8
6
6
4
2
2
5

6
16
14
22
35
99
148
179
106
89
52
42
66
31
28
44
13
11
12
4
4
1
2
1
1
1

58
22
1.2
0.4
$7. 85 $12.15

62
1.2
$8. 80

1

1

1
1
3
19
6
11
2
3
3
4
1
2

2

2
1
1
2
1
2
6
2
2
1

1

51
56
1.0
1.1
$7. 95 $12.00

34
0.7
$7.65

1

2
9
14
6
5
3
5
3
2
1

(>)
(2)

2

18
0.4
$11.00

28
0.6
$12. 25

1
4
2

2
2

1

1
3
6
14
9
4
9
4
3
1
2
3
1
1

4
0.1
(2)

3
2
5
4
2
7
10
3
5
3
1
2
2
2

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

1
•3
10
3
1

1

5
3
2
3

3
4
l_i
1
1

1

1

4
4
6
1

APPENDIX A— GENERAL TABLES

$17 and under $18_ _
_
$18 and under $19....... ..................... .

5.000
241
100.0
4.8
$8.85 $11. 90

XVII.—Median of the week’s earnings, by occupation and by section and city

124

Table

WHITE WOMEN

Section and city

AU
Cur­
women
Press tain Collar Bun­ Mend;
Mark
Ma­ Starch
Flat- Press
re­
and
and
and
or
ported and Hand chine damp­ Tum­ work oper­ Hand hand blan­ collar dle, seam­ Gen­
bler ironer ate
iron
eral
wrap,
sort wash wash
iron
ket starch pack stress
en
drier

All places:
Number of women
i 13,748 i 2,914
33
Median earnings_______ _____ $16.05 $17.35 $15.30

Fore­
lady

Shirt Clean Other

12
316
30 5, 296 1,711 1,883
74
290 i 172
362
221
83
178
93
« $16. 55 $16. 65 $14. 55 $16. 70 $16. 60 $14. 65 $15. 75 $16.30 $15.20 $16. 35 $16. 20 $23. 70 $18.85

13

to

67
$16. 25

«

TO

c!>

TO 4

Eastern:
2,302
421
Median___________ ______ $14.50 $16.20

(s)

Boston—

1,421
286
Median
$14.60 $15.85
Jersey City and Newark—
'
Number _
365
44
Median. _ _ ____ ______ $14.80 $17.60
Providence—
516
91
Median_____________
$13.65 $16. 55
Middle western:
Number____
Median

_ _______

3

«
0)

4

4

44
$15. 75

209
1 038
323
$13.10 $16.35 $15.80 $14.00

(=)

33
$16.65

128
604
214
$13. 30 $16. 55 $15.85

to

3

25
222
42
$13. 85 $16. 25' $15. 40

o

8

56
212
6%
$12. 35 $15.30 $16.00 $13.35

to

«
(?)

2

5, 623 1.195
23
$14.80 $16. 45 $15.10

Chicago—
Number____ ___________

«
C)

4

154
$15.40

737
122
$16. 70 $20. 45

Cleveland—

12
«

608
148
Median.......... ........................ $15.25 $16.65
Des Moines—
238
37
Median...................... ........... $14.00 $15. 45

»

12

22
$19. 25

539
97
$14.05 $15.15

Cincinnati—
Number___________ ____




(2)

5

*

(>)
w

2
1

12

to

«

7

(!)'

to
to

«

$15.39
2

$14. 85

TO

«

$14.90

4

to

«
«

(!)

«

m

222
72
62
$13.10 $15.80 $14. 75

. 7
«

1

193
82
79
$13.40 $16.00 $15.40

c)

1

77
68
29
$12. 45 $14.60 $14. 40

5

to
to

to

7
3
9
5

19
$19.50

7

c)

5

(’)

to

TO

to

3

(?)

$20.00

(s>

to

TO

10
« $15.85

12
«

«

(!)

5

«

r

9

23
$13. 85

to

to

23
23
$15.15 $14.50 $17. 65

to

TO

$22.60

2, 006
751
834
48
42
136
106
149
54
74
$13.15 $15. 70 $15. 30 $15.00 $15. 30 $15. 55 $14. 65 $15. 80 $15. 90 $23. 35
289
125
97
$15.00 $18.10 $18. 95

1

$15.30 $13.75 $14. 75 $13. 50 $22. 80

3

(!)

3

*

(!)
m

«

«
1

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Number of women and their median earnings where occupation was—

Detroit—
Indianapolis—

229
897
$13. 45 $15. 40

Milwaukee—
Minneapolis and St. Paul—

69
529
$14. 65 $18. 50

8

.

(2)
(2)

149
834
$14.20 $15. 95

0

957
5, 282
Median________________ - $17. 85 $20.15

0

Western:^

Los Angeles—

0

0

1

139
749
$18. 05 $20. 70

Southern:
Median----- ------ ------------Atlanta—

i 541 i 341
$13. 95 $15.10

3

0

25
$15. 65
17
$20.85
31
$18. 95

2

0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0

1

0

e

161
281
$12. 95 $14.50 $14.85

186
56
$11. 95 $13. 50

0

19
$23.75

15
$14.15

0

0

21

0
0
0

0

378
263
1,058
$16. 65 $17. 35 $17. 50
121
286
$14. 75 $15. 55 $15.15

168
234
515
$19.40 $21. 55 $22. 45
98
298
103
$17. 45 $18.35 $18.35

0

95
$11.05

0

36
47
$15.40 $16. 00

St. Petersburg and Tampa—

21
36
28
$16.15 $15.00 $16.00

$14. 65

0
0

0

0

16
28
24
$15.35 $15.00 $14.60

14

0

0

0

0
0

27
$21. 85
15
$18. 70

0
0

15
$15. 35
54
$20. 45

0
0

0

$18. 20

0

0

1 12

$23. 50
20
$21.00

0

0

i Includes Richmond not shown separately.

15
$14.15

0

37
$14.10

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
$11.20

14

10

89

0

0

80
00

0

0

0

0

0
0

38
$16.65
34
$16.55

0

20

0

0

0

$20.

32
16
$25.85 $20.90

22

0

0

0

33
20
32
84
29
$18. 50 $17.00 $18. 45 $16. 45 $25. 20 $18. 30

0

0

0

0

0

9

0

0

0

76
108
123
31
83
25
$18.30 $19. 25 $17.50 $18. 75 $16. 50 $25.10

0
0

0

0

0

96
118
$15. 80 $15.90

Jacksonville—

0

5

63
215
$13. 60 $14.90 $15. 45

179
143
$14. 40 $14.15

Birmingham—

0

120

831
628
17 2,157
117
$18.60 $17.85 $16. 90 $18. 45 $18.40
44
$18. 25

1.309
216
$20. 65 $25. 25

Seattle—




5

$14. 95

0

0

767
166
$15. 35 $16.85

San Francisco—

7

24
109
131
300
$11.85 $15. 30 $14.60 $15.00

0

2

2,457
436
$16. 95 $19.00

Portland—

3

145
144
429
$14. 20 $16.15 $15.30

37
$13.90

0

0

12

33
$16.40

2

344
1, 241
$15. 35 $16.90

0

2 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.

0

0

126

Table XVII.—Median of the week's earnings, by occupation and by section and city—Continued
NEGRO WOMEN

Section and city

All places:
Number of women..

All
Cur­
women
Press tain Collar Bun­ Mend;
Mark Hand Ma­ Starch
Flatre­
and Tum­ work Press Hand and
and
dle,
Gen­
ported and wash chine
or
oper­ iron hand blan­ collar
wrap, seam­ eral
sort
wash damp­ bler ironer ate
iron
ket starch pack stress
en
drier

3 5, 000
4 241
$8. 85 $11.90

Eastern:
Number. _____ ________
9 239
Median__________ _____ $12. 60
Boston—
Number.______
Median. ___
Jersey City and Newark—
Number __________
Median__ ____ _
___

s 49
*9.85

e 15
$9. 75

4

m

153
$11.95

8 14 ?2,367
$8. 65

0

«

3

1

7 838 31,027
$9.50

7 58

s 137
9 40
9 47
$11.90 $13. 85 $13. 30

»3

m

67
$13. 35

$8.90

91
0

3 22

$1— lu

1

Chicago—
Number______ _________
Median. _____
Cincinnati—
Number_____________
Median
Cleveland—
Number_______
Median___ _____________
Detroit—
Number________
Median..................................




929
37
$12. 55 $15.15
50

$12.10

62
5 38
(2) $13. 65

7

0

0

1

0

399
15
$12.55 $16.15

17
$10. 30

0
0

4

1

0
3

10

13

3

0

, 22

0

5 14
(2)

3 13
(2)

(2)

0

0

0

0

12

10

201
80
58
$11.90 $12.95 $12. 75

1

0

0

(2)

0

0
01

0
01

6

(2)

3 35
$12. 85

318
$11.00

28
$12. 25

1

1

(2)

19
$14.15

0

0

279
58
47
$9. 85 $13. 65 $12. 95

0
0

7

(2)

0

1

610
132
71
$12.15 $14. 65 $13. 55

0

0

11

22
448
$10.85 $12. 50

01 31,108 3 287 10195
$11. 35 $13. 95 $12. 95

(2)

0

0

103
17
28
$11. 65 $13. 65 .$12. 65

io 1,878
5 88
5 23
$12. 30 $14. 55 $13.15

34
$7. 65

0

Middle western:
Median___________

51
4 56
$7. 95 $12. 00

93

0

31
15
16
$12. 75 $14.15 *13. 75

0

7 62
$8. 80

Fore­ Shirt
Clean Other
lady

(2)

10

1

3 10

0

(2)

24
$12. 75

(V

(2)

(0

$11.50

10

01
0
0

(2)

1

1

(2)
0

0

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Number of women and their median earnings where occupation was—

Southern:

St. Petersburg and Tampa—
Number. _ ______
...
Median

(2)

(2)

(!>

0

12
(2)

(!)

364
$9. 85

3

182
$7. 30

225
$6.40

24
$6.90

(2)

8

297
$6.50

112
$7. 35

194
$7.00

17
$6. 80

0

0

0

11
(2)

0

(!)

163
$6. 35

$7. 00

90
$7.15

0

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

$8. 50

(!)

7

389
$6.00

0

1

185
$7.40

68
$9.25

110
$8. 85

6

7

88
$10. 25

83
$9. 85

154
$8.95

(2)

(s)

p)

9

1.122

13

12

0

(2)

3

(2)

(2)

10

• 12

0

0

4

(2)

3

0

2

0

1

(2)

3

8

C2)
0

8

0

4

(2)

1

0

8

0

4

0

1

0

4
2
1

2

2

0

1

0

1

0

1

2
—

7 Includes Providence and Indianapolis, n. s. s.
3 Includes Los Angeles, n. s. s.
9 Includes Providence, n. s. s.
i° Includes Indianapolis and Minneapolis and St. Paul, n. s. s.

2 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.
3 Includes Providence, Indianapolis, Minneapolis and St. Paul, and Los Angeles, n. s. s.
4 Includes Indianapolis and Los Angeles, n. s. s.
6 Includes Indianapolis, n. s. s.
6 Includes Minneapolis and St. Paul, n. s. s.
Table

1

1

(2)

XVIII.—Extent of full-time work and median of the earnings in laundries reported in Stale surveys by Women’s Bureau, by State and year
*
State and year

Tennessee, 1925_____________ _____ ____ ________________




Number of women for whom
it was possible to determine
whether working full time
Number
of estab­
lishments
reported
Negro
All
White
women women women
5
10
4
26
23
26
32
19
18
14
14
12
18

196
733
142
1,076
383
968
694
448
643
426
280
233
948

196
585
142
1,005
183
616
643
66
100
351
61
28
329

148
71
200
352
51
382
543
75
219
205
619

Full-time workers
Negro women
All
women

White
women

134
497
92
446
250
436
489
234
424
288
177
148
599

134
410
92
431
123
304
469
30
79
251
47
21
238

Number

Per cent

87

17.5

15
127
132
20
204
345
37
130
127
361

3.4
50. 8
30. 3
4.1
87.2
81.4
12. 8
73.4
85. 8
60.3

Median earnings of—
All
women

White
women

$9.95
12.95
12.30
13. 40
10.10
11.95
12.15
6. 55
7.15
10.80
6. 75
6. 20
7. 60

$9.95
13. 35
12. 30
13. 50
10.55
12.80
12. 25
12.80
14. 45
11.10
10.20
12.50
10.10

Negro
women

A PPEN D IX A — GENERAL TABLES

Richmond—

«

64
476
$8.25 $11. 65

Jacksonville—

0

13
(2)

1

15
$7. 70

39
$7.70

10
(2)

0

1

0

352
$6. 80

Birmingham—

11
0

23
$6. 65

45
$6. 90

31
$6. 90

26
$7. 30

19
$8.15

773
$7.30

3

933
$6. 45

36
$7.45

511
$7.85

73
$7.65

26
$7.60

46
$7. 95

$6.50

13
«

2,867
148
$7.15 $10.15

742
$7.00

Median..................................
Atlanta—
Number. ................ .............

____ ___
$10. 75
11.65
10.35
9.25
6. 45
6.85
9.45
6.45
5.95
6.85

to

-1

Median of the week’s earnings of timeworkers and of pieceworkers in four occupations having most women, by section and city
WHITE WOMEN

Section and city
Number
All places...............................

Median Number

1 2,500
352
249
59
974
67
135
147
64
850
352
324

Cleveland____ ______
Indianapolis . ___
Milwaukee. .................
Western.......................
Southern______

$17. 30
15. 85
15.60
16. 05
16.45
15.05
16. 40
15.00
18. 45
20.15
18.65
15.10

l 1, 250
204

Providence_______
Middle western....... .........

Flat work

Per cent
Timeworkers
Per cent
Pieceworkers
by which
by which
piecework
piecework
median
Median exceeds Number Median Number Median median
exceeds
timework
timework
median

Pieceworkers

$16. 35
15.75
15. 75
15. 00
15. 30
17.50
14. 50
15.50
16.00
14. 65
14. 70
18.40
16.80
15.55

i 229
50
27
23
80
22
10
35
1
83
82
16

$19. 55
19.20
19.60
18. 25
18.25
15. 65
(2)
20.30
(2)
20.70
20.65
16.35

2.7
10.7
8.3

$18. 95
19. 50
19.90
16.75
18.65
18.50
19. 75
17. 65
18.85
18.30
17.15
19.05
18.70

15.9
23.8
26.3
11.7
21.9
5.7
36.2
13.9
17.8
24.9
16.7
3.5
11.3

13.0
21.1
25.6
13.7
10.9
4.0
35.3

i 4,669 _ $14.50
927
13. 10
560
13. 20
146
12.35
1,721
13.10
179
12. 70
174
13.40
226
12.05
181
13.60
1, 935
16.90
863
16.55
86
10.80

Press operate
All places___________
Providence_______
Middle western....... ..........
Cincinnati.. ..
Cleveland_____
Detroit_______
Indianapolis.
Milwaukee___
Western.......... .
Portland..............

—_—

-

-

-




"

‘
"

36
520
68
31
55
119
61
34
517
176
78

i 348
110
81
27
145
15
29
22
19
37
23
93
87

i 292
22
14
8
81
35
18
1
27
189
189

$16.65
15. 35
.«
14.40
14.60
17.00
(2)
13. 95
17. 30
17. 30

14.8
17.2

9.9
15.0
26.9
2.6
2.4
4.5

Iron
i1,314
151
110
18
579
72
37
68
137
43
58
575
163
94

$16. 40
15.70
15.75
15.35
15.10
17. 65
13.85
15.10
15.40
13.10
15.15
18.80
17.45
15.05

i 364
49
16
31
165
11
33
11
3
53
. 43
150
118
19

$17. 75
17. 65
19. 50
17. 50
17.30
(2)
15.90
(2)
(2)
18.55
15. 65
18.40
18. 50
16.20

8.2
12.4
23.8
14.0
14.6
14.8
41.6
3.3
3 2.1
6.0
7.6

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR W OMEN W ORKERS

Mark and sort
Timeworkers

128

Table XIX.

NEGRO WOMEN
Flat work

Mark and sort

Pieceworkers
Timeworkers
Per cent
Per cent
by which
by which
piecework
piecework
median
median
exceeds
exceeds
Median timework Number Median Number Median timework
median
median

Pieceworkers

Timeworkers
Section and city
Median

Number

i 232

$12. 05

*3

85

i 95

$11. 50

11.20

58

13.40

19.6

495
257

12.15
9. 75

36
22

13.75
12. 30

13.2
26.2

949

1

14. 55

$8.45

i 2,160

36.1

36
22

15.10
12. 50

142

10.30

2

1,074

6.50

37

7.55

16.2

33

7.95

2

255

6.40

37

7.55

18.0

Iron

Press operate
$13. 35

i 668

$8.70

i 141

27

13.30

13

179

13.55

84

15.10

11.4

i 771

$7.80

i 230

$8. 55

9.6

30

53.4

w

13. 65

17

11. 75

3 13.9

12.90

43

13.50

4.7

141

4

Atlanta.............. .............. -------------------- -------------------------------------

90
22

14. 35
12. 85

39
36

15. 40
14. 00

7.3
8.9

47
28

13. 90
12. 40

20
18

13.25
14. 00

462

Cleveland........................-.................... -......................................................

3 4.7
12.9

7. 75

44

9.35

20.6

594

7. 30

164

7.45

2. 1

7. 00
7. 30
9. 90

28
9
4

9. 40
(*>

34.3

205
120
90

6. 40
6.90
10. 25

20
67
58

7.00
7. 85

9.4
13.8

101
77

1 Totals for sections include cities not shown separately because numbers too small for the computation of a median.
2 Not computed, owing to the small number involved,
s In this case the timework median is the higher.




-------:—-

A PPEN D IX A— GENERAL TABLES

Number

130

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table XX.—Median of the week’s earnings, by
WHITE WOMEN

Women for
whom hours
and earnings
were reported

Section and city

Num­
ber
11,009
2,306

48

Western....... ............. .............

Num­
ber

Me­
dian

Num­
ber

Me­
dian

Num­
ber

Me­
dian

$16. 10

478

$14. 80

1,629

$14. 60

6,540

$17.30

14.50

83

14.50

834

14. 65

994

14.40

14. 60
14. 80
13 65

80
3

14. 60
(>)

464
80

14. 95
14. 60

879
20

17 50

14. 75

392

14. 80

717

14.50

174

14. 65

734
533
008
238
1,244
900
529
834

.

Chicago. _______________
Cincinnati_____ _________
Cleveland.__ ____
Des Moines ____________
Detroit............................. .
Indianapolis. _______
Milwaukee__________
Minneapolis and St. Paul____

16. 60
14.05
15. 25
14.00
15. 35
13. 45
14. 70
14. 05

41
22
102

17. 85
13. 85
15.15

37
32

13. 85
15.45

21

13. 25

205
11
11

14. 65
0)
C1)

237
8
147

14. 70
(l)
13. 65

51

16.10

22. 00

5, 372

17.85

5,561

12

13. 80

3

157
118
47
11
186

Atlanta _______ .
Birmingham__________ . .
Jacksonville______ ___ _
Richmond .
St. Petersburg and Tampa___

38

17. 00
15.35
20 70
18. 05

519

_

17. 90

2,613
' 768
1,434
749

Los Angeles______________
Portland______ _____
San Francisco__
Seattle___ _____
. .
______

44 and under 48

5, 020

Boston............. .
Jersey City and Newark..........
Providence__________

Southern _ _

Under 44

1,423
365
518

All places.. .. . __ ...
Eastern_________________

Middle western_________

Me­
dian

Number of women and their median earnings
where scheduled weekly hours were—

14.15
15. 80
15.40
0
11.95

3

n nm

25

22.25

(■)

40

12. 15

0

11

0

749

18. 05

1

29

NEGRO WOMEN
All places....... .............

5,018

Boston_________ .
Jersey City and Newark___
Providence.. ______

Chicago_____________
.
Cincinnati________________
Cleveland_______________
Detroit.. ________
Indianapolis_________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
_
Western—Los Angeles...................
Southern. _________
Atlanta______________
Birmingham________
Jacksonville. _......... ......
Richmond___ ___
St. Petersburg and Tampa _

.

$11.40

213

35

11. 50

5

13. 35
11.90
14.15

11
24

0)
11.20

5

1,880

Middle western______ _

177

12.50

67
160
19

_

$8. 75

246

Eastern............................. .

12.15

117

12.10

138

931
50
448
399
50
2

12. 35
12.10
10.85
12. 55
12. 50
w

111
6

11. 90
0

100

16

7.15

25

4. 65

68

940
742
352
477
365

6. 45
7.00
6.80
8. 20
10. 80

25

4.65

3

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




62

13.00

56

13.20

12.80

9

0)

14.55

9

0
0

0

65

$14. IS

0

17.50

2,876

85

0

14

1

$11. 30

8.40
0

8.30

131

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

scheduled weekly hours and by section and city
WHITE WOMEN—Continued
Number of women and their median earnings where scheduled weekly hours were—Continued
Over 48 and
under 50

Over 50 and
under 54

50

Over 54 and
under 60

54

Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­ Median Num­
ber
ber
ber
ber
ber
1,303

$15.10

1,871

$15.10

1, 514

$14. 70

411

$13. 20

135

15.70

90

12. 55

105

13. 55

65

15.70

12. 75
14.70

1,000

14.55

1, 778

15.20

1,210

14.85

279

130

15. 75

259
291
408

16.90
14. 20
15.45

161

15.45

55

142
308

14. 65
15. 70
12. 60

134

199

Me­
dian
$15. 40

14. 25

12. 55

62
43

65

90

Num­
ber

14. 25

135

Me­
dian

60 and over

0)

213
154

$12. 95

92

13. 40

67

12.70

3

to

12.70

5

(■)

3

(>)

48
130

13.20
;3. 75

38
24

12. 75
11. 60

14. 45

46

13.35

14.50

67

12.20

19.30

154

15. 70
14. 70

171

19. 30

14

0)

3

«

104

13.50

89

15. 45

«

22
42
15

12. 35
15. 45
14. 85

31
20

16.50
14.50

11.00

25

12.40

38

13. 50

915

$7. 35

552

$7. 95

(•)
40
5
6
44

(>)
o

16.50
Q)
0)
11. 50

7
50

NEGRO WOMEN-Continued
1, 828

$7.85

468

$9. 85

11

<*)

59

11.95

74

12. 50

11

0)

46
13

11. 60
(l)

74

12. 50

447

$9. 35

333

$12. 45

266

10.05

296

12. 65

576

12. 70

240

10.30

151

11. 80

87

12.35

16

12.60

117
50
104

12. 77
12,10
12. 70
0)

380

12. 90

240

10.30

91

12. 35

87

12. 35

11
1

12. 55
12.30

11.10

w

173
23

60

14

170

7. 25

37

7.10

1,193

6. 85

154

8.35

764

6.95

465

7. 65

90
2

6.55
«

37

7.10

54

7.60
8.00
9. 70

5. 85
6. 55
6.20
8. 95
9.15

7.25
7. 05

66

110
283
97
246
28

137
189

8.10

6. 45
7. 20
5.50
7.80
8.35

34

78

621
320
32
153
67

139

10.90




132

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table XXI.—Median of the week’s earnings,
WHITE WOMEN

Section and city

All women
reporting
time with
the firm

Numher

Number and per cent of women and their median
earnings where time with the firm was—
Under
3 months

Me- Num
dian ber

Me- Num
dian ber

All places.___ __________ - 9.707 $16.15
Per cent distribution.___ _____ . 100.0

441 $13. 20
4.5

Eastern_______ _____ ________
Per cent distribution______

15
1.1

14. 75

10
1.1
2
4.8
3
.8

(■)

1,336
100.0

14. 70

Boston.______ ___________
922
Per cent distribution___ 100.0
Jersey City and Newark____ - 42
Per cent distribution___ 100.0
Providence
372
Per cent distribution..... 100.0

14.90
14.00
14. 30

Middle western____ ____ ______
Per cent distribution

4.455
100.0

14. 95

Chicago
Per cent distribution___
Cincinnati
Per cent distribution___
Cleveland_____ __________
Per cent distribution___
Des Moines
Per cent distribution___
Detroit
Per cent distribution___
Indianapolis
Per cent distribution___
Milwaukee______________
Per cent distribution___
Minneapolis and St. Paul___
Per cent distribution____

544
100.0
428
100.0
469
100.0
145
100. 0
1,061
100.0
704
100. 0
417
100.0
687
100.0

16. 95

Western
Per cent distribution
Los Angeles
Per cent distribution___
Portland
Per cent distribution____
San Francisco
Per cent distribution____
Seattle_________ __________
Per cent distribution____

3, 528
100.0

15.40
14. 35
15.45
13. 90
14. 90
14.15

47
1.3

1,487 17. 35
100.0
570 15. 35
100.0
985 _____
20. 75
100.0
486 18.25
100.0

12
.8
20
3.5
5
.5
10
2.1

134
100. 0
86
100.0
17
100. 0
6
100.0
145
100.0

«
13.10

Me- Num
dian ber

985 $14. 25
10.1
77
5.8

12. 75

53
5.7
5
11.9
19
5.1

12.95

583
13.1

(■)
11.25

995 $15.15
10. 3
112
8.4

12. 75

83
9.0
2
4.8
27
7.3

12. 85

4.3
37
4.0
3
7. 1
17
4. 6

13. 50
13. 85
0)
12.50

14.10

264
5.9

14. 45

88 16. 00
16.2
63 13.60
14.7
56 12.95
11.9
9
ra
6.2
107 14. 45
10. 1
101 12.25
14.3
61 13.80
14. 6
98 13. 20
14.3

62
11.4
32
7.5
51
10.9
12
8. 3
98
9. 2
85
12.1
40
9. 6
61
8.9

15.95

29

16. 25

13. 35

19
4 4
24

15.15

16. 45

399
11. 3

(o

145
9.8
55
9.6
46
4.7
43
8.8

16. 55
19. 75

186
12. 5
57
10.0
109
11. 1
47
9.7

o

12.45

551 $15. 40
5.7

441
9.9

289
8. 2

0)

0

Median

13. 60

15. 30

13. 65

Me- Num
dian ber

14. 40
17. 50

13. 75
(■>

5

15.00
«
15.20

12. 85

84
7 9
57

14. 00

22

13. 80

13. 30

24
3. 5

12. 65

17.05

202
5.7

17.15

14. 80

12.85

16. 65

91

16.90

14. 65

41
7.2
33

14. 55

17. 65

37
7.6

17.90

28
7.2

13. 50

19. 75

19. 80

14.05

30
7.7

10.65

36
9.3

12.00

43
11.1

12. 55

14. 45

5
3.7
1
1.2

(*)

7
5.2
7
8.1
2
11.8

0)

11
8.2
6
7. 0
6
35.3

c)

6

0)

o

(■)

8

(9

<■)

1
5.9

(*)

20
13.8

11.50

13
9.0

12.40

15.80
14. 50
(>)
12. 30

24
16.6

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




(■)

50 14.15
9.2
53 11. 95
12.4
29 13.85
6.2
11
m
7. 6
68 14.20
6.4
49 12.05
7.0
23 13. 65
5.5
66 13. 35
9.6

18.25

Southern_________ ____________
388
Per cent distribution
100.0
Atlanta_________________
Per cent distribution____
Birmingham
Per cent distribution___
Jacksonville
Per cent distribution____
Richmond
Per cent distribution___
St. Petersburg and Tampa...
Per cent distribution____

14. 00

349
7.8

3 and under 6 and under 9 months and
6 months
9 months under 1 year

10.80

20
13.8

0)
(■)

11.50

133

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

by time with the firm and by section and city
WHITE WOMEN—Continued

Number and per cent of women and their median earnings where time with the firm was—Continued

1 and under
2 years

2 and under
3 years

Number

Median

Number

1,808
18.6

$15. 65

216
16.2

13.95

188
14.1

142

14. 20

Median

3 and under
4 years
Number

Median

4 and under
5 years
Number

Median

5 and under
10 years
Number

Median

1, 439 $17.90
14.8

10 and under
15 years

15 years and
over

Number

Median

Number

418 $18.30
4.3

273
2.8

119. 30

Median

795 $17.00
8. 2

694 $17.35
7.1

14.00

106
7.9

15.15

91
6.8

15. 55

278
20.8

15.75

112
8.4

17.40

84
6.3

18.35

120
13.7
4
9. 5
58
15. 6

14.20

77
8.4
2
4.8
27
7.3

15.35

59
6.4
2
4.8
30
8.1

15.40

192
20.8
11
26.2
75
20.2

15. 80

91
9.9
2
4.8
19
5.1

17. 30

52
5.6

18. 50

18.50

32
8.6

17.75

1,308 $16.40
13.5

0

o

«

65

13.40

845
19.0

14.75

532
11.9

15. 30

348
7.8

15.95

282
6.3

16. 96

530
11.9

16.95

165
3.7

17.15

116
2.6

18.60

85

15. 90

61
11. 2
47
11.0
56
11 9
27
18.6
141

17.80

18.90

63
11.6
42
9.8
59
12.6
20
13.8
129
12.2
70
9.9
48
11.5
99
14.4

20.30

22
4.0
11
2.6
18
3.8
4
2.8
32
3.0
31
4.4
19
4.6
28
4.1

19. 50

19
3.5
17
4.0
12
2.6
2
1.4
15
1.4
18
2.6
17
4.1
16
2.3

22.50

14. 25

32
5.9
33
7.7
38
8.1
18
12.4
62
5.8
23
3.3
22
5.3
&4
. 7.9

20.00

63
8.9
54
12.9
83
12.1

33
6.1
33
7.7
45
9. 6
12
8.3
84
7. 9
- 69
9.8
30
7.2
42
6.1

22. 25

78

14.15

(>)

o

9

13. 30

14.45
16.00

14. 25

15. 75
15.80

0
16. 65

14.40
15.90

15. 85

15.40
18. 20

0
16. 50

17.50

0
0

81

15.20

25

13. 75

241

15.20

138

14.40

81

14.45

116

14.05

658
18.7

17.80

534
15.1

18. 50

305
8. 6

18.60

299
8. 5

19.35

597
16.9

19.35

130
3.7

20.80

68
1.9

290

16.95

18. 05

52
3.5
11
1.9
53
5.4
14
2.9

20.15

20.50

227
15.3
103
18.1
192
19.5
75
15.4

18. 60

98

115
7.7
45
7.9
94
9.5
45
9.3

18. 50

172

139
9.3
42
7.4
91
9.2
33
6.8

17. 80

15.15

216
14. 5
83
14. 6
163
16. 5
72
14.8

17. 70

98

14
.9
15
2.6
27
2.7
12
2.5

89
22.9

13.50

54
13.9

14. 55

36
9.3

16.70

22
5.7

16.40

34
8.8

18. 00

11
2.8

(0

5
1.3

0

30
22 4
24
27.9

13. 25

20
14. 9
11
12.8

14.00

12
9.0
10
11.6

0

12
9.0
5
5.8

0

23
17.2
8
9.3

16. 50

6
4.5
3
3.5

0

2
1.5
3
3.5

0

3

0

2
1.4

0)

15.15
(>)

12.65

15.80

16. 25
14. 25

15. 60
20. 95
18.40

(0

0
16. 70
15.05
17.80
14. 35

15. 75
21.10
18.90

0

15.00
17.00
14. 25
16.15
14.60

16. 65
21.10
19.60

0

16.50
17.40
16. 70
16.40
15.30

16.10
21.15
18. 70

0

0
18. 25
16.60
16. 65
16. 90

0
22. 35
0

0

(>)

17.6
32
22.1

14. 25

1
(l)
17
11.7

«
13.90




(i)
14
9.7

0

2
1.4

0

2

(>)

1
.7

0

0

17.75
17.50
19.75
17.35

0
20.85
24.50

0

0

134

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table XXI.—Median of the week’s earnings, by
NEGRO WOMEN

Section and city

All women
reporting
time with
the firm

Number and per cent of women and their median
earnings where time with the firm was—
Under
3 months

3 and under 6 and under 9 months and
6 months
9 months under 1 year

Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­
ber
dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian
409
12.4

$8.40

353
10.7

$7.90

147
4.4

$9.45

13.70

2
3.0

(0

4
6.1

(«)

5
7.6

(‘)

13. 60

1
2.0

(0

3
6.1

(')

(‘)

1

0)

1

<0

2
4.1
1
0
2
(0

3,309
100.0

$9.10

66
100.0
49
100.0
3
100.0
Providence_________
14
Per cent distribution. _ . 100.0

Jersey City and Newark__

Middle western .
Per cent distribution...

267
8.1

$7.15

o)
«

(0

0

0
«

1, 262
100.0

12. 60

87
6.9

11.35

178
14.1

12.05

132
10.5

12. 25

61
4.8

12.35

Chicago. _______
647
Per cent distribution... . 100.0
Cincinnati__
39
Per cent distribution._ _. 100.0
Cleveland____
269
Per cent distribution. _ 100. 0
Detroit_____
276
100.0
Indianapolis___
30
100.0
Minneapolis and St. Paul
1
Per cent distribution _
100.0
Western—Los Angeles. ___
16
Per cent distribution
100.0
Southern______
1, 965
Per cent distribution___
100. 0

12. 75

65
10.0

11.20

12.30

31
4.8

12.50

o

67
10.4
4
10.3
34
12.6
26
9.4
1
3.3

12.50

10
3.7
10
3.6
2
6.7

103
15.9
5
12.8
32
11.9
34
12.3
4
13.3

11
4.1
13
4.7
6
20.0

w

1
6.3

(0

Atlanta______ ___
Per cent distribution
Birmingham ___
Per cent distribution._.
Jacksonville_______
Per cent distribution..
Richmond____________
Per cent distribution___
St. Petersburg and Tampa. _.
Per cent distribution___

636
100.0
501
100.0
184
100.0
374
100.0
270
100.0

12. 30
11. 55
12.85
12. 85
«

(0

10.15
12. 35
<0

w
10.25
13.00
<0

17. 50
7.30

180
9.2

6.25

229
11.7

6. 60

63
9.9
38
7.6
21
11.4
18
4.8
40
14.8

5. 95

57
9.0
72
14.4
27
14.7
40
10.7
33
12.2

7. 20
6. 65
8. 30
10.15

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




(0

o

5.85
6.15
7. 35
8. 20

(‘)
0

6.60

217
11.0

6. 65

80
4.1

7.05

6.25

81
12.7
63
12.6
18
9.8
38
10.2
17
6.3

6.15

24
3.8
20
4.0
9
4.9
12
3.2
15
5.6

6. 55

6.40
6.05
7.55
8.65

6.95
6.15
7. 55
9.50

6.00
(0
0)
9. 80

135

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

time with the firm and by section and city—Continued
NEGKO WOMEN—Continued
Number and per cent of women and their median earnings where time with the firm was—Continued

2 and under
3 years

2 years

3 and under
4 years

Me- Number
dian

4 and under
5 years

Me- Numdian
ber

Median

5 and under
10 years
Number

Median

10 and under
15 years

Number

no S10. 65
3.3

29
0.9

$10.40

p)

2
3. 0

P)

p>

1
2. 0

P)

1

(0

her

551
16.7

$8. 70

450
13.6

$9.20

298
9.0

$9. 30

10
15.2

(«)

4
6.1

0)

7
10.6

P)

9
13.6

P)

18
27.3

14. 00

5
7. 6

8
16.3

(>)

4

(>)

6
12. 2
1
«

(l)

8
16.3

P>

p).
p)

5
10. 2

1

Pi

11
22.4
1
0)
6
p)

P)

233 fio. 55
7.0

0)

462 &10. 50
14.0

Median

Median

Number

Median

her

15 years and
over

p)

p)

23Q
18.2

12.50

170
13.5

12. 65

92
7.3

13.45

106
8.4

13. 55

185
14.7

14.20

21
1.7

13. 70

107

12. 70

80

13. 45

42
6 5

13.50

56
8.7

13. 60

12. 60

16
2. 5
1
2.6
3
1.1
1
.4

14.00

24
8. 9
25
9. 1
1
3.3

80 14. 55
12.4
p>
9
23.1
12. 75
42
15.6
50 14.45
18.1
p)
3
10.0
p)
1
100.0

2
12.5

p>

5
31.3

p)

1
6.3

p)

197
10.0

116
5.9

7. 75

254
12.9

9.00

83
4.2

9. 75

27
1.4

6.85

94
14.8
69
13.8
19
10.3
53
14.2
19
7.0

7. 30

29
4. 6
13
2.6
4
2.2
32
8.6
5
1.9

7. 75

9

p>

3
.6
1
.5
10
2. 7
4
1. 5

p)

38
14.1

48
7.5
22
4.4
7
3.8
21
5. 6
18
6. 7

<>)
48

11. 00

41

10. 70

60

12.45

41

12.50

7

o)

0)
2
12.5 ---- ---7. 20
309
15.7

3
10.0

o

3
TO
18.8 —
7.65
273
13.9

105

6. 55

71

6. 70

76

7. 25

72

7.50

40

6. 65

20

6.80

53

7. 75

64

8.25

35

10.30

46

10. 25

I 1X0




17. 9
24
8 9
16
5 8
3
10.0
2
12.5

(•)
12. 65
15.15
o

p>

7.70
..... ....
6. 80
55
8 6
7.50
53
10. 6
7.20
18
9 8
8. 80
33
12. 00

15.05
p)

8.00
p)
8.65
12.00

8.20
7.80
9. 05
13.25

w
p)
p>

p>
p)
11.20
p)

10.15

p)
(0
p)

Table XXII.—Median of the weekly rates, by occupation and by section and city
OJ

WHITE WOMEN

Section and city

Number of women and their median rates where occupation was—
Mark and
sort

Hand wash

Machine
wash

Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num
ber
dian ber dian ber dian ber
All places _

11,326 $16.45 2,447 $18.00

Eastern_______

1,930

359

16.30

0
0

0

Chicago_ ____ _______
_

253
45
61

16.00
17.90
16.05

4, 380

Middle western.

14. 70
15.45
13.50
15.20

932

17.10

15.00

550
396
532
218
1,137
532
316
699

Cincinnati_______

Cleveland_____ IIIIIIIII

Des Moines_________
Detroit_____________
Indianapolis___________I

Milwaukee________ _ ~
Minneapolis and St. Paul"
Western.

16.50
13.80
15. 60
14.05
15.80
13. 50
15. 85
14* 45

89

68

135
32
313
134
48
113

20. 60
15.30
17.25
15.70
18.10
15.40

20. 00

16. 35

4, 533

Southern..

18.50

1,848
657
1,303
725

Los Angeles__
Portland_____
San Francisco..
Seattle_______

17.10
16. 00
21.15
18.30

352
144
216
138

18.95
18.20
25.40

483

Atlanta_________ ___________
Birmingham_____

Jacksonville___________ III”
RichmondIIIIIIIIIIIII
St. Petersburg and Tampa___ III

•p

14.05

306

15.25 I

166
97
47

14.80
15. 65
15. 65

130
78
36

12. 20

12

0)

11

51

(0
13.90

33
3
7

16.65

128

15.80

0

0

(0
f‘)

0
0

0
0

0

15.50
18.75

0

18. 15
16.50
21.15
19.25

0

16.15
14. 65

(')

0
0

0

0

0

(■)
0
17

(<)

233
181
176
74
406
207
157
232

17.85 1,935

0
0

0
0
0
0

0

Me- Num
dian ber

Iron

Me- Num
dian ber

Median

30 $16.70 4,618 $15.45 1,248 $16.80 1,301 $16. 80
938 13.50
209 16.00
151 15. 95
570 13. 55
132 15.80
110 16.10
222 14.40
40 16. 55
23 15.80
146 12.30
37 15.25
18 15.20
0 1,666 13.85 515 15.65 569 15.50

0

14.65
15.85
16.15 I.........

161

15.85

0

8

20.65

21.10

$16.85
43

18.50

0)
(0
0)
0)

FJat-work
Press operironer
1
ate

Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num
ber dian ber dian ber

(0

0)
(0
~W

Tumbler

dian

$15.20

1,248
357
325

Boston_______________
Jersey City and Newark!
Providence..... ........... ......




14.70

Starch and
dampen

15.15
13.15
14. 70
12.75
14. 50
12.40
15.10
13. 15

68
31
56
68
119
64
26,
83

17.40
15.30
15.85
14. 75
16. 35
15.00
15.80
14.85

72
37
68
25
138
41
48
140

17. 65
14. 55
15.95
13.85
15.90
13. 95
16. 65
14. 75

Press and
hand iron

ber
29

Median
$15. 25

11

(>)

6

0

5
16

0
15.50

1
5

(i)

5
5

(i)

0
0

17. 35

515

18. 70

572

19.25

2

0

863
259
515
298

16.70
15.40
19. 60
17.60

176
78
166
95

18.05
16. 55
21.65
18. 50

163
94
231
84

18.00
15. 75
22.60
18. 45

2

0

79

10.85

9

0

2
4

0
0

1

0

73

10. 95

8

0

9

(>)
-.......

9

0

— —

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Women for
whom occu­
pation and
rate were
reported

cv

Number of women and their median rates where occupation was—Continued

103127

Mend; seam­
Bundle,
Curtain and Collar or col­
wrap, pack
stress
blanket drier lar starch

t-l
Section and dty

m

to
10

General

Forelady

Shirt

01ean

Other

Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­
Me­
Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ dian Num­ dian ber dian ber dian
ber
dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber
ber
All places

hJL Eastern
o
Boston
Jersey City and Newark-------------------------------

11
7
2

©
«
(0
. «

260 $16.65
51
30
6
15

15.30
15.35
(0
14. 40

154 $15.35
23
10
9

15.40
a
(0
0)

330 $16. 75
49
41

15. 25
15.45

13

©

59

$16.50

14

«

48

22.80

6

(>)

3

«

5

«

10

©
1

31

1

ft

3

«

4

«

12

22.65
«
«

69

22.65

3

«
0)
0)
0)
23. 50
0)
0)
0)

158 $16.85

8

209 $23. 70

40

Middle western
Cincinnati--------------------- --------------------------Des Moines
Detroit _ ------------------

75 $16.75

---- ----------------------

15.40

116

16.10

93

14.95

126

15. 85

42

16. 60

5
3
9
5
11
1
1
5

©
0
(1)
«
©
m
m
©

16
11
23
5
19
16
5
21

18. 50
0)
15. 75
(0
17. 50
15.00
(0
15. 90

6
10
23

©
(0
15.10

18
18
14
3
34
9
4
26

20. 15
16.00
(>)
0)
16.15
0)
0)
14. 55

9
8

(>>
©

9

10
3

©
(0
0)
0)

18

25
4
9
16

©
(*)
14. 65

8

6

75 $20.05

1

«

9

©

18

2
4

©
©

7

©

2

«

2

«

«

4
3

«
«

«

«

15.00

w

24

18.70

78

19. 90

28

18.00

121

19.70

102

17.00

74

25.15

66

20.25

1

(>)

36

3
5
7
9

Western---------------------------------------------------------

16.85

0)
©
©
©

26
10
27
15

18. 65
©
22.15
18. 90

19
1
7
1

17.15
«
w
«

32
14
53
22

18. 60
0)
20. 60
18. 35

78
9

16. 90
(0
0)
t1)

31
7
16

25. 30
to

26

18.25
(0
22. 00
(0

1

©

33

16.80
(0

A PPEN D IX A— GENERAL TABLES

o

21.00

15

14.15

10

©

34

14.15

18

Atlanta.....................................................................
B irmingham------------------------- ------ -............. .

10
3

(0
w

3
1

©
«

2

«

1
5

3

1

(0

©
(0
©

Richmond________________________________
St. Petersburg and Tampa----------------------------

«
«
©
«'

9
5
1

©
©

14
7
5

32

©

8

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




CO

Median of the weekly rates, by occupation and by section and city—Continued

138

Table XXII.

NEGRO WOMEN
Number of women and their median rates where occupation was—
Mark and
sort

Hand wash

Machine
wash

Starch and
dampen

Tumbler

Flat-work
ironer

Press
operate

Iron

Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­
ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian
All places___________

4,179

$9.20

2,116

$9.55

650

$8.70

738

$7.90

215

13. 35

4

©

4

(■)

141

12.80

28

14.15

30

14.15

61
138
16

13.50
13.15
14.50

3
1

0)
©

2

0

2

0

35
103
3

12.95
12. 70
0)

12
10
6­

0
0
0

8
20
2

0
14.00
0

Middle western____ _________

1,489

12.75

84

14.90

16

13. 80

28

13.85

4

0

935

12.20

172

14.55

136

14.40

Chicago_______________
Cincinnati ___ ___
Cleveland_____ _____
I>etroit _____ _ __
Indianapolis _____ ___
Minneapolis and St. Paul ...

716
42
378
324.
28
1

12.75
12. 30
10.95
14. 55
12. 70
0)

35
9
.22
16
2

15.05
0
13. 80
18. 00
0

5

(■)

0

o)
(0
«

1

9
2

(>)
(■)
C1)
(>)
(■)

1

4
1
6

6
ai

3

0

490
17
263
165

12.50
10. 50
10.10
14.30

83
5
24
54
6

14.85
0
14.00
14.65
0)

42
5
28
53
7
1

14.85
0
12.15
14.75
0)
0

1

0

7.60

13

0

71

7.70

5

0

1,040

6.85

450

7. 70

566

7.40

ft
S

3
1
1
2
6

0)

31
13
5
15
7

7.05
0)
0)
8.75
0)

1
4

0)
0

384
226
165
189
76

6.40
6.60
6.55
7.75
9.45

157
91
63
69
70

7. 30
7.35
7.60
9. 45
9.90

208
99
79
103
77

6.65
6. 95
7. 20
9.10
10.10

Eastern.____ _____
Boston ______ _
Jersey City and Newark________
Providence________

Western—Los Angeles_____
Southern________
Atlanta..___________
Birmingham____________ _ „
Jacksonville______
Richmond_________ _
St. Petersburg and Tampa........




10

0)

225 $12.90

1

41

$9.75

14

1

0

0

0

103

$8.80

0

2,465

7.35

136

10.75

25

875
515
340
475
260

6.70
7.05
6.90
8.55
10.05

26
27
7
64
12

7. 50
7.90
0)
12. 65
0)

11
8
2
2
2

IS1)

1

10

0)

6

0

A STJKVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR -WOMEN W ORKERS

Section and city

Women for
whom occu­
pation and
rate were
reported

Number of women

Section and city

Press and
hand iron

Collar or
Curtain and
blanket drier collar starch

and their median rates where occupation was—Continued

Bundle,
wrap, pack

Mend;
seamstress

General

Foreiady

Other

Clean

Shirt

Me­ Nnm- Me* Num­ Me­
Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­
Me­
Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ dian Num­ dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian ber dian
ber
ber dian ber dian ber
$13.00

$12.85

$8.45

0

Eastern..............

$7.15

(0

(0

(0

$12. 90

18 $12. 25

«

(0
w

Boston________________
Jersey City and Newark..
Providence--------------------

0)
0

Middle western.
Chicago______________________
Cincinnati-----------------------------Cleveland
Detroit------ ------------------ ---------Indianapolis--------------- -----------Minneapolis and St. Paul........ —

"«?r

(0
w
m
0
(>

0

0

T1)'

13.95

(0

0

14.50
(>)
0)

CO

(0

(')
«

33

10

0
0

(0
(’)

23

co
«

(')

CO

14.15
12.60

0)

(>)

Western—Los Angeles..
Southern..........................
Atlanta------------ ------- -----Birmingham------------------Jacksonville-------------------Richmond---------------------St. Petersburg and Tampa.
> Not

<>>

18

0
0

0)
0

to
(')

44

8.00

7.70

(0
0)
CO

0

(>)

0)

0
8

8.40
(>)

CO

(')

(0
«

6.65

CO

(0

(')

l1)
(0
(0

(')

(>)

n
(0

(0
(0

(>)

(■)

A PPEN D IX A — GENERAL TABLES

8.60
(*)

$6.90

All places.

CO

computed, owing to the small number involved.




CO
CO

140

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table XXIII.—Median of the weekly rates, by
WHITE WOMEN

Section and city

Number of women and their median rates where time with the
firm was—

Total for
whom rates
and time
with firm

Under 3
months

3 and under 6 and under 9monthsand
6 months
9 months under 1 year

Num- Me- Num- Me- Num
ber dian ber dian ber
All places.

7,950 $16.50

Eastern

1,065
Boston 787
Jersey City and
Newark
42
Providence 236
Middle western____ 3, 484
Chicago 407
Cincinnati 311
Cleveland______ 415
lies Moines
129
Detroit
986
Indianapolis
409
Milwaukee
258
Minneapolis and
St. Paul.......... 569
Western 3, 061
Los Angeles._
1,129
Portland
484
San Francisco_
_ 981
Seattle
467
Southern 340
Atlanta
123
Birmingham___
69
Jacksonville
17
Richmond
6
St. Petersburg
and Tampa___ 125

356 $14. 00

14. 65
14.80

12
9

Me- Num- Me- Num
dian ber dian ber

798 $15. 00

«
0)

69
47

830 $15. 85

12. 95
13.40

93
73

Median

Under 1
year

ber

dian

447 $15. 90 2,431 $15. 30

12. 75
12. 85

47
32

13. 65
13. 90

221 13. 05
161 13. 30

14. 65
13. 95
15. 25
16.65
13. 75
15. 70
14. 25
15.85
13. 65
16.10

2
(•)
C1)
1
271 13. 90
36 15. 00
39 12.90
24 14. 45
»
10
62 14. 55
33 12. 55
16 15.20

5
17
439
65
39
54
9
101
58
31

m
11.40
14.05
15. 50
13. 40
14. 60
o
14. 95
12. 60
15.20

2
m
18 12.20
346 14. 60
55 15. 85
24 13. 20
50 15. 00
o
12
95 15.20
39 13. 05
18 15.35

3
12
201
19
12
20
5
78
29
16

0)
12
0)
0)
48 12. 05
14. 90 1, 257 14. 30
15. 90
175 15. 55
(')
114 13. 30
14, 90
148 14. 75
(■)
36 13. 60
15. 45
336 15.10
12.70
159 12. 70
15.00
81 15. 20

14. 35
18. 85
17. 50
15. 95
21.25
18. 45
14. 05
14. 75
15. 60
14.50

51
45
12
18
5
10
28
5

82
200
129
43
46
42
30
7
5
2

13. 35
17. 05
16. 70
14. 95
20. 20
17. 85
12. 10
0
(■)
(■>

53
352
147
49
109
47
39
10
6
6

13. 60
17. 90
16. 75
15. 30
19. 90
18.00
12. 45
<■>
w
0)

22
174
72
33
33
36
25
5
7
1

14. 00
17.80
17.00
15. 55
19.90
18. 15
14. 15
0)
<<)
0)

10.85

17

11. 15

12

m

0)
12. 35

13. 95
16. 55
0)
14. 85
a
C1)
10. 80
C1)

23 |

10. 80

16 1

208
831
360
143
193
135
122
27
18
9

13. 55
17. 50
16. 75
15. 25
19. 95
18. 00
12.30
12.45
15.20
«

68 11. 40

NEGRO WOMEN

Section and city

Total for
whom rates
and time
with firm
were reported

Number and per cent of women and their median rates where
time with the firm was—
Under 3
months

3 and under 6 and under 9monthsand
6 months
9 months under 1 year

Under 1
year

Num
ber
All places
Eastern_____
Boston_______
Jersey City and
Newark
Providence .
Middle western___
Chicago_______
Cincinnati..
Cleveland__
Detroit. _____
Indianapolis___
Minneapolis and
St. Paul
Western-Los An­
geles________

Me­ Num
dian ber

Me­ Num­ Me­ Num­ Me­ Num
dian ber dian ber dian ber

Me­
dian

Num­ Me­
ber dian

2, 719

$9. 15

*7.55

$9.50

57
42

13. 85
13. 65

979 $7.95
10 UT
5
«

2
13
979
484
31
225
219
19
1

10
1, 673
Atlanta__
595
Birmingham____ 321
Jacksonville ...
184
Richmond___
376
St. Petersburg
and Tampa___ 197

223

340
2
1

{')
P)

303
4
3

$7.75
(>)
(>)

8
13.00
12.95
12. 50
11.65
14.65
12.65

113
4
1

«

1
2
46
26

w
(0
12.65
12.75

9
6
5

(’>
>)
(>)

1
4
359
198
7
78
64
12

12.40
12. 50
(0
11.10
14.35
0)

1
(")

610
212
129
76
108

6.85
6.30
6.60
6.40
7.85

8.75

85

9.30

W
(0
(■)

1
141
78
4
28
27
4

0)
12.40
12.55
(0
11.10
14.05
0)

1
107
49
3
30
24
1

(0
12. 30
12. 35
(0
10.35
14. 55
0)

63
21
22
18

6.35
6.40
6.40
7.60

197
51
56
27
40

6.85
6. 35
6.50
6.30
7.95

192
79
44
18
38

6.80
6. 25
6. 85
6. 40
7.85

63
19
8
9
12

7.30
6.25
(>)

34

9. 45

23

9.15

13

(0

15

65
45

12. 35
12.40

11
7
2

0)
7.40
6.70
7.20
6.80
8. 60
10.10

8

0)

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved,




$8. 80

141

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

time with the firm and by section and city
WHITE WOMEN—Continued

Number of women and their median rates where time with the firm was—Continued

1 and under
2 years

2 and under
3 years
Number

3 and under
4 years

Me- Numdian
ber

Median

4 and under
5 years
Number

her

Median

1, 501

$16.00

184
126

14.15
14.30

146
110

14.20
14. 45

77
62

14.75
15.05

69
50

9
49
664
57
52
73
23
229
82
51

0)
13. 60
14. 90
15.50
13. 70
15.50
13.95
15.45
13. 65
15.45

4
32
418
49
32
45
25
131
34
38

(0
12.90
1'5.60
17.10
14.00
15.95
13.90
16. 25
14. 00
16. 70

2
13
256
23
25
37
11
76
36
15

h
15.90
18. 60
15. 30
15.85
c)
16. 90
14. 65
16.85

0

2
17
219
20
25
31
14
55
16
13

97
573
225
81
172
95
80
26
21
3

14.10
18.40
17. 30
15. 65
20.80
18. 25
13. 85
13.00
15.10
o

64
454
154
70
161
69
46
18
8

14.90
19. 10
18.00
16.15
21.40
18. 55
14.85
14. 35
ro
(i)

33
274
115
36
91
32
27
12
6

14. 25
Id. 30
17.90
16. 35
21. 55
19. 60
16.20
0
<>)

45
263
86
41
94
42
20
10
5

30

12.90

14

1,064 $16. 70

634 $17.05

571 $17. 50

Number

10 and under
15 years

1,173 $18.05

Number

349 $18.40

227

$20.05

17. 55
17.45

63
41

18.40
18.15

22
99
17
16
12
1
12
14
15

19.00
19. 40
21.75
17.00

9

«

15.30
15. 30

214
159

15.65
15.65

91
78

0

11
44
434
47
37
51
15
119
46
33

0

15.80
17.00
20. 05
15. 25
18. 60
16. 25
17. 55
15.65
16.95

2
11
137
19
10
18
4
28
22
12

0
0

86
494
143
91
190
70
31
22
7

15. 70
19. 80
18.50
16.95
22.10
18.85
17. 65
17. 35

24
111
35
10
53
13
10
6
2

0)

2

2

(1)

15.50
16. 20
19.00
13. 95
16.50
0

16.85
14. 25
0

14.90
19. 60
18. 65
16.85
21.30
19.40
16.85

0

15 years and
over

Median

Me- Numdian
ber

3

(l)
0

Median

5 and under
10 years

0
0

17.30
19.40
0)
17.35
0
18.00
16.85
0

16.90
21.45
19.50
(0
22. 65
0
0
0

0

Median

0
0

0
0
20.50

12
61
11
12
27
11
4
2
2

0

22.85
0

0
24.90
o
0
0

(■)

0

2

0

NEGRO WOMEN—Continued
Number and per cent of women and their median rates where time with the firm was—Continued
1 and under
2 years
Median

ber
446
6
5

$8.55
<0
0

2 and under
3 years

3 and under
4 years

4 and under
5 years
Number

Number

Median

Number

Median

367

$9. 45

243

$8. 65

(0
0

5
5

7
6

0
0

134
57

13. 50
13. 65

70
27

36
43

10. 90
14.25

36
35

11.35
14.40

20
15

13. 65
13. 65
(i)
12. 75
15. 40

186 $10.90

0

0

0

Number

26

Me- Numdian
ber

374 $11.00

Number

96 $10. 55

28

$10.60

3
2

0
0

1

0

17
11

14.50
to

3
3

0
0

1
82
42

(!)
14.10
13. 70

(!)
14.70
14. 95

17
14

Ii 50

19
21

13. 30
15.35

6
148
63
8
34
40
2

12. 90
15.20

2
1

0
0

9.50
7.75

0

0

0

15 years and
over

Median

0
0

1
1
270
103
49
40
52

10 and under
15 years

6
5

0

(l)
12.70
12.80

1

169
83

Median

5 and under
10 years

0

_____

0
0

7.25
6.65
7.35
6. 75
7.85

3
225
63
45
20
63

7. 65
6.80
7. 40
7.10
8.45

1
165
. 51
38
18
33

7. 60
6. 85
7.35
7.40
8.90

1
97
45
14
7
22

7. 75
7.06
0
0
9.15

4
205
87
35
18
64

8.00
7.45
7. 90
7. 80
9.85

76
25
10
4
34

12.36

25
9
1
1
10

10. 45

34

10. 55

25

10.40

9

0

11

0

3

0

4

0

0




0

Median

0
0

10.15
0
0
0
0
0

-Median of the rates and earnings of timeworkers and of the earnings of all women, hy section and city

Section and city

White women

Earnings of timeworkers

Negro women

Number

Median

Number

All places.

14,104

$16.10

5,076

$8.85

Eastern_______

2,306

14.50

246

12.50

1,423
365
518

14.60
14.80
13.65

67
160
19

5,692

14.75

746
539
608
238
1,245
529
887

16. 65
14.05
15.25
14.00
15.35
13.45
14.65
14.10

5,564

17.90

16

2,613
1,434
749

17.00
15.35
20.70
18.05

542
180
118
47
11

Boston____ ___________
Jersey City and Newark.
Providence____________
Middle western.
Chicago_______________
Cincinnati_____________
Cleveland______________
Des Moines____________
Detroit________________
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee_____________
Minneapolis and St. Paul..
Western..
Los Angeles_
_
Portland_____
San Francisco..
Seattle_______
Southern..
Atlanta_________________
Birmingham____________
Jacksonville..........................
Richmond______________
St. Petersburg and Tampa..

White women

Median Number

Rates of timeworkers

Negro women

White women

Median

Number

Median

Number

Median

Number

11,827

$16.00

4,328

$8. 60

11,670

$16. SO

4,203

$9.25

1,910

14.30

215

12.45

1,935

14.70

221

13.30

13.35
11.90
14.15

1,231
355
324

14.35
14.70
13.40

55
144
16

13.35
11.85
14.25

1,251
357
327

14.70
15.45
13.50

61
144
16

13.50
13.10
14.50

1,938

12.25

4,582

14.65

1,534

12.20

4,442

15.20

1,498

12.75

989
50
448

12.45
12.10
10.85

12.45
12.05
10. 30

725
42
378

12.75
12.30
10.95

339
31

12.65
12.55

560
396
532
218
1,141
535

16.45
13.80
15.60

12. 55
12.50

15.80
13.55

324
28

14.55

(■)

16.40
13. 50
14.95
13.85
15.35
12.85
14.60
14.15

751
41
370

399
50

558
393
528
218
1,146
570
392
777

2

p)

744

14.40

1

p)

17. 50

4,819

17.95

10

p>

4,809

18.55

10

p>

16

17.50

2,002
658
1,434
725

16.85
15.30
20.70
18.00

10

p)

2,002

17. 20

10

p)

13.95

2,876

7.15

516

13.95

2,569

7.10

484

14.05

2,474

7.35

14.40
15.80
15.40
<■)
11.95

940
742
352
477
365

6.45
7.00
6.80
8.20
9.80

167
114
47
11
177

14.40
15.70
15.40
(0
11.90

875
595
338
466
295

6.40
6.95
6.75
8.20
10.25

167
97
47
12
161

14.85
15.65
15.65
(1)
12. 20

881
515
340
477
261

6.70
7.05
6.90
8. 55
10.05

2

‘

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




Negro women

r

Median

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Earnings of all workers

142

Table XXIV.

a#

Table XXV.—Marital status of the women who supplied personal information, by section and city
Number and per cent of women whose marital status was—

Section and city

Number of
women
reporting
marital status

Negro Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent
t

All places.............. -.................. 12,371
Eastern.......................-.......................

2,000

4,183

4,158

198

990

33.6
49.5

1,209
86

28.9
43.4

5, 333
644

43.1
32.2

41.1

2,880

23.3

1,253

30.0

80

40.4

366

18.3

32

16.2

212
73
81

17.4
23.4
17.1

■ 15
16
1

20.0
15.0
6.3

1,721

Boston______________ _______
Jersey City and Newark--------Providence

1,215
312
473

75
107
16

621
134
235

51.1
42.9
49.7

31
44
11

41.3
41.1
68.8

382
105
157

31.4
33.7
33.2

29
47
4

38.7
43.9
25.0

Middle western.. --------------- ------

5,220

1,523

1,834

35.1

406

26.7

2,247

43.0

668

43.9

1,145

21.9

449

29.5

132
133
101
51
185
294
72
177

19.3
26.4
18.4
30.4
15.5
35.6
15.4
21.2

265
5
88

33.8
10.9
26.3

77
14

23.9
37.8

36.8

Chicago
Cincinnati----------------- ------ —
Cleveland___________________
Detroit.
-------- ------ ----------Indianapolis-------------------------Minneapolis and St. Paul...........
Western-----------------------------------Los Angeles....... ...........................
Portland
Seattle_____ ____ ___________
Southern____________ ____-........ .
Atlanta........... -.................-..........
Birmingham..............................
Jacksonville----- ----------- -------Richmond--- -----------------------St. Petersburg and Tampa.........

684
504
549
168
1,191
827
467
836
4,610
2,044
645
1,311
610
535
191
106
30
7
201

49.7
36.5
43.5
58.9
41.1
47.4
46.7
34.1

322
19
160
148
18
I

46.0
48.6

5.3

2,261

49.0

II

57.9

1,220

26.5

7

5.6

875
318
704
364

42.8
49.3
53.7
59.7

10

55.6

520
176
371
153

25.4
27.3
28.3
25.1

7

33.8

962

39.4

149

27.9

765

31.3

29.8
31.1
23.3
0)
40.3

339
231
84
153
155

42.6
37.7
32.1
34.6
47.0

46
40
9
1
53

24.1
37.7
30.0
O')
26.4

245
205
81
119
115

30.8
33.4
30.9
26.9
34.8

31.0
37.1
38.1
10.7
43.3
17.0
37.9
44.7

196
22
86

25.0
47.8
25.7

97
5

30.1
13.5

1

212
187
209
18
516
141
177
374

19

1,129

24.5

1

18

649
151
236
93

31.8
23.4
18.0
15.2

1

783
46
334
322
37

1
2,443
796
613
262
442
330

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




340
184
239
99
490
392
218
285

41.1
41.3
47.9

205
88
33
14
3
67

38.3
46.1
31.1
46.7
(*)
33.3

716
212
177
97
170
60

29.3
26.6
28.9
37.0
38.5
18.2

181
57
33
7
3
81

1

0)

0)

38.9
—

A PPEN D IX A— GENERAL TABLES

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Widowed, separated, or divorced

Married

Single

144

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table

Section and city

XXVI.—Nativity

Number of women Num­
reporting nativity ber of
and race
for­
eignborn
Native born
wornen
For- reportW hite Negro horn

and race of the women who

Number of foreign-born women
whose country of birth was—

Aus- Bel- Can- Den- Eng- Fintria gium ada mark land land

try of
birth

All places____________
Per cent distribution..............

8,971
48.8

5, 954
32.4

3, 444
18.7

3, 402

70

26

413

33

Eastern___________________

1, 290

336

714

713

1

1

197

Boston________ ____ ____
Jersey City and Newark. __
Providence_____ _______

747
200
337

97
218
21

471
105
138

471
104
138

1

1

179

Middle western____________

4,172

2, 240

1, 075

1,036

47

10

Chicago...... .........................
Cincinnati_____________
Cleveland______________
Des Moines____________
Detroit............................ .
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee_____________
Minneapolis and St. Paul.

398
480
404
157
.846
818
368
701

1,156
50
525

281
25
135
14
334
11
101
135

13
1
11

2

10

2

290
25
143
14
350
11
106
136

Western.............. .......................

2,995

20

1,635

Los Angeles_______ _____
Portland_______________
San Francisco___________
Seattle_________________

1,334
509
725
427

19

Southern__________________
Atlanta..... ............... ...........
Birmingham___________
Jacksonville____________
Richmond........ ......... ........
St. Petersburg and Tampa




160

34

4

35

4

2
2

22
3
10

3

120

6

49

5

1

6

91

1

10
2

1

4
8

1
3

4
2
9
1
31
1
1

1

1

7
1
9

1, 633

22

15

96

23

74

25

1

721
137
591
186

719
137
591
186

3
6
11
2

1
5
9

37
22
12
25

4
5
8
6

29
8
20
17

5
9
11

514

3, 358

20

20

186
107
30
7
184

1,090
861
433
546
428

3

3

17

17

444
57

18

2

2

1
2
1

145

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

supplied personal information, by section and city

Number of foreign-born women whose country of birth was—Continued

Swe- Yugo- Other
den slavia foreign

way

Poland

Portugal

Eussia

Scotland

90

255

60

199

98

168

139

3

15

55

10

29

12

48

66

2

9
3
'3

1

10

26
2
1

4
2
6

34
3
11

24

38

69

35

77

3

19

3

23

2

12

5

2
2
5
1
2
38

8
1

14
2
20
2
3
13

many

gary

land

Italy

86

258

46

238

338

4

19

2

135

France

23

46

557

6

48

ico

54

3

141
26

33
5

8

27

68

59

96

41

n

li

7

2

ID
2

153

226

8

7

121

2

13
1
66

1
6
2
5

2
22

20
5

2
8

541

53

14

24
1

3
10
11
29

4
3
7

1

1

3

55

33

10

7

22

15

516

14

43

4

111
4

7

27
1

38

11

235

5

165

30

85

3

99

4
1

19
12
125
9

9
3
8
10

13
14
21
37

3

18
10
62
9

1

2

11

1

1

a




1

1

1

11

XXVII.—Age of the women who supplied personal information, by section and city

146

Table

WHITE WOMEN
Number and per cent of women whose age was—

Number of
porting
age

Section and city

Num­
ber
All places_______ ____________

Boston_____________
Jersey City and Newark___
Providence....... ..................
M iddle western ............
Chicago____ _
Cincinnati ..............
Cleveland____ •_____
Des Moines_______
Indianapolis___________
Milwaukee___ ___
Minneapolis and St. Paul__
___________

Los Angeles________ __
Portland.. ___ __________
Seattle______
Southern _

___

___

......... ........

Atlanta________
Birmingham__________
Jacksonville.. _ _
Richmond. ______
St. Petersburg and Tampa...




20 25 years
and under

25 and under 30 and under 40 and under 50 and under
30 years
40 years
50 years
60 years

60 years and
over

Num­
ber

Per
cent

Num­
ber

Per
cent

Num­
ber

Num­
ber

2,170

17.7

1,643

Per
cent

Num­
ber

3.5

1,211

9.9

8.8
6.2
17.9

185

9.2

9.7

114
26
45

9.4
8.3
9.5

198
27
84

173

3.3

620

11.9

950

41
9

6.3

72
71
75

*

12,260

426

2,004

Eastern____ ____ ______

Western___

Per
cent

16 and under 18 and under
18 years
20 years

177

100.0
100.0
1,217
312 100.0
475 100.0
100.0
5,219
100.0
685
100.0
505 100.0
548
171 100.0
1,193 100.0
827 100.0
477 100.0
813 100.0
100.0
4,501
100.0
2,036
641 100.0
100.0
1,222 100.0
602
100.0
536
100.0
191
107 100.0
30 100.0
7 100.0
100.0
201 100.0

75
56
46

12
60
3
13
33
37

21
10
6

1.8
2.2
1.2
5.0
2.7
4.1

.8
1.0
1.6

37
51
82

14.1
13.7
4.1
4.5
10.7

10.1

i- <
Id. 4
17

66

13.9

Per
cent

Num­ Per
ber
cent

3,408

11.2
11.6
5.4

Num­
ber

27.8

2, 312

18.9

855

462

23.1

418

20.9

175

300
24.7
57
18.3
105 • 22.1

256
76

21.0
24.4
18.1

105
40
30

86

Num­ Per
ber
cent
7.0

235
1.9
8.7 — —
54
2.7

8.6
12.8
63

28
13
13

2.3
4.2
2.7

2.1
2.2
5.5

113
191

12.5

18
21.3 _ 141
_
19* 3
65
23.5
114

1,407

27.0

913

17.5

393

7.5

112

12.2
9.7
^22

32.8

22.8
29.2
26.9
23.6
29.4
27.9
25.1

135
82
87
45
162
192
81
129

19.6
16.2
15.9
26.3
13. 6
23.2
17.0
15.9

47
53
35
25
57

6.9
10. 5
6.4
14. 6
4.8

15
28
4

13.6
14.0

224
115
160
46
282
243
133
204

11.5
10.5

11.8
14.3

Per
cent

101 12.2
27
5.7
48

5.9

6
12
20
15
12

.7
3.5

1.0
2.4
3.1
1.5

344

17.6

680

15.1

1,397

31.0

916

20.4

277

1.3

22.4

318

13.7
11.3

197
72

15.6
14.5
16.1

6.2

57

232
41
52
19

547
182
433
235

26.9
28.4
35.4

339
148
286

16.7
23.1
23.4
23.8

99
49
73
56

4.9
7.6

23
18
7
9

1.1
2.8
.6
1.5

22.0

88

16.4

142

26.5

65

12.1

10

1.9

12

29
4

18.8
27.1
13.3

9.4
9.3
6.7
C1)
16.9

3

L6
.9
3.3
0)

5

2.2
2.6
.9

9.5

24.1
29.9
30.0
0)
25.9

18

19

46
32
9
3
52

3.2

39

7.3

13

6.8
10.’0

8

10.4

28

13.9

68

7.5

21

8.7

Per
cent

1 -i n

22.4

6 20.0
(l)

2
37

18.4

10
2

1
34

1
1
1
4

6.0
9.3

2.0

1
6

3.0

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

*

a#

NEGRO WOMEN

Minneapolis and St. Paul-----------------

3.5

100.0

13

6.5

76
108
16

100.0

3

3.9

100.0

1

«

1, 634
Cincinnati-------- ------ ---------------------Cleveland....... ...............-........................-

148

200
Jersey City and Newark.........................
Providence------------- ------- -..................

100.0

100.0

17

799
46
324
37
1
20

St. Petersburg and Tampa....................

14

1
2
160

10.0
1.3
(0
10.4

1.8

83
12

1,176
66

28. O'
33.0

963 |
22.0

925

14.5

29

22.9
40 1 20.0

118

800
616
262
439
331

100.0
100.0
100. 0
100.0
100.0

54
24
23
1
16

4.8
6.8
3. 9
8.8
.2
4.8

305

12.5

91

11.4

67

15.3

20

9.6
10.0

87
10

2.1

13

0.3

5.0

2

1.0

6.6
3.7
C1)

2

2.6

1

.3

5

12
13
4

15.8
12.0
(■)

17
21
2

22.4
19.4
«

5
14
1

6.6
13.0
(0

5
4
1

430

28.0

368

24.0

357

23.3

165

10.8

36

225

28.2

177

22.2

189

23.7

90

21

2.6

97
87

29.7
26.9

79
95

24.2
29.3

72
75

22.0
23.1

41
23
9
1

11.3
2.2
12.5
7.1
24.3
100.0

7

2.1

2

5.4

680
195

27.8
24.4

0)
100.0

10

(>>

525

21.4

556

22.7

25.6

205
75

1

22.7

185
150
55
89
77

<■)

«

10

3

100.0
100.0
100.0

405

40.8
27. 8
(>)

31

2

19
1

1 Not computed, owing to the small number involved.




20

11.5

10.4
26.1
89
11.1
36
.6
2
100.0
100.0 _____ — — —
100.0 — — —
100.0

100.0
100.0

2,448

Seattle .................................................—

1.1

485

23.1
24.4
21.0
20.3
23.3

4
216

0

8.8

7.0
56
8.9
55
8.8
23
49 1 11.2
10.0
33
—

3

—

c)

38

1.6

10

.4

10
12
2
8
6

1.3
1.9
.8
1.8
1.8

4
1
1
2
2

.5
.2
.4
•5
•6
—

—

A PPEN D IX A— GENERAL TABLES

4,202

'

with the firm of women, who supplied personal information, by section and city

148

Table XXVIII.—Time

WHITE WOMEN

Section and

reporting
time with Under 3
the firm months

All places........................
Per cent distribution________

12,115
100.0

6 and 9 months 1 and
under 9 and un­ under 2
months der 1 year years

184
107
30
7
201

Atlanta________________
Birmingham_______ _____
Jacksonville____ _______
Richmond______________
St. Petersburg and Tampa.

II

716
103
98
62
21
136
135
48
113

529

Southern__________________

94
6
37

2,047
642
1,309
608

Los Angeles____________
Portland_______________
San Francisco....... ........... .
Seattle..................................

137

4, 606

Westem...___ ____________

193
148
3
42

694
500
544
168
1,199
826
474
838

Chicago_______________
Cincinnati_____________
Cleveland______ ______
Des Moines____________
Detroit________________
Indianapolis____________
Milwaukee_____________
Minneapolis and St Paul.

1,124
9.3

5, 243

Mi ddle western____________

1,262
10.4

1,737

Boston___ ____________
Jersey City and Newark..
Providence___ _________

1,517
12.5

1, 217
55
465

Eastern__________ ________




3 and
under 6
months

41

2 and
under 3
years

3 and
under 4
years

4 and
under 5
years

5 and
10 and
under 10 under 15 15 years
and over
years
years

605
5.0

2,075
17.1

1,466
12.1

899
7.4

778
6.4

1,622
13.4

473
3.9

294
2.4

135

66

249

211

117

101

313

124

91

99
4
32

44
4
18

165
13
71

144
5
62

82
3
32

64
2
35

220
11
82

102
2
20

34

637

486

288

941

580

386

310

584

188

127

100
65
67
9
118
103
67
108

70
36
62
14
106
93
42
63

35
21
25
5
92
60
23
27

105
84
85
30
251
148
90
148

76
52
59
28
148
67
57
93

39
38
49
16
89
70
33
52

35
33
41
19
69
25
24
64

80
43
64
20
136
73
51
117

27
13
18
4
36
33
22
35

24
17
12

531

439

452

221

771

605

353

339

678

147

70

250
52
139
90

234
56
98
51

215
61
127
49

103
41
36
41

349
110
207
105

253
89
185
78

169
46
102
36

142
47
103
47

260
111
223
84

57
14
61
15

15
15
28
12

77

49

51

30

114

70

43

28

47

14

6

24
7
5

9
10
4

12
8
8

7
8
1

17
6

27
9
2

7
4

3
3

23

14

26
11
5
1
27

13
13

26

39
28
5
1
41

•> 17

2

7

3

55

19
17
18

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR W OMEN W ORKERS

Number of women whose time with the firm was —

4

NEGRO WOMEN

Per cent distributioni---- ------- -----------------

4,066
100. 0
95~

599
14.7

455
11.2

411
10.1

168
4. 1

627
15.4

503
12.4

345
8. 5

266
6. 5

531
13.1

125
3.1

36
0.9
3

10

5

4

6

13

6

8

11

23

6

Boston--------- ------- ------ ------------------------------Jersey City and Newark-------------------------------

76
3
16

10

4

3

10

6

7

10

1

1

15
1
7

6

1

3
1
2

Middle western..---------------- ----------- ------------------

1, 531

195

200

155

66

261

195

108

115

210

25

Chicago....................................................................

796
44
333
320
37
1

131
1
30
28
5

114

77
4
42
30
2

32
1
13
14
6

129
9
53
62
8

98
5
44
44
4

47
7
33
18

58

91
11
48

19
1
4

2

3

2

2
1

3

3

2

5

1

Eastern------------------ ~------ -------------------------------

Western____________________________ -..................

1

20

1

27

2
1
1

1
1

Los Angeles.................................................-...........
Seattle................................................................. ——

19
1

Southern....... ...................................................................

2,420

394

249

252

94

350

299

226

138

293

93

32

775
618
262
434
331

143
93
45
41
72

59
77
29
42
42

89
72
27
42
22

28
24
12
14
16

118
83
52
58
39

80
81
28
64
46

58
60
28
38
42

56
26
11

R)8
82
25
64
19

31
15

10
5




21

35
8

A PPEN D IX A — GENERAL TABLES

Indianapolis ____________________________ ___
Minneapolis and St. Paul------------------------------

39
38
4

3

by section

150

Table XXIX.—Occupation,
WHITE WOMEN

Mark
and
sort

Hand
wash

All places... 13, 925

2,942

33

12

316

432
1,204
957
349

5
23
5

4
4
3
1

44
154
117
1

Section

Eastern___ _____
Middle western...
Southern.... ........ .

2,348
5,731
5,285
561

Ma­ Starch Tum­
chine
and
wash dampen bler

Flatwork
Press
ironer operate

Iron

Cur­ Collar
Press
tain
and
or col­ Bundle, Mend; Gener­
and
wrap, seam­
hand blanket lar
al
pack stress
iron
drier starch

Fore­
lady

Shirt

Clean

Other

30

5,406

1, 733

1,890

77

84

290

174

362

178

223

94

13

68

12
17
1

1,057
2,083
2,160
106

334
762
628
9

211
839
831
9

31
44
2

11
48
25

56
136
83
15

23
108
31
12

53
149
123
37

16
54
108

51
75
76
21

11
3
80

3
9
1

6
24
38

57

34

4

2

20

28

1
10

1

2

11

24

23

3

9

4

NEGRO WOMEN
All places...

5,076

242

Eastern. _. ____
Middle western...
Western
Southern._ ___

246
1,922
16
2,892

4
89
1
148




51

115

24

2

4
38

27

«

15

13

73

14
4
1
9
N

2,408

855

1,037

58

23

62

51

141
1,136

41
296

1
12

15

3
13

3
12

1,131

518

48
197
12
780

45

8

46

36

*

36
2
19

f

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND TH EIR WOMEN W ORKERS

Number of women whose occupation was—

Num­
ber of
women
report­
ing oc­
cupa­
tion

¥
Table XXX.—Occupation, by age
WHITE WOMEN
Number

Number of women with occupation as specified whose age was—

reporting
age and
Under
occupa­ 16 years
tion

Occupation

All occupations. _____ _____________ ______ _________ ____

57
10

31
4
4
1
5
1
1

139
24

236
59

167
42

340
71

3
1
71
17
6
1
1
5
6
1
1

1
1
103
25
18

1
3
64
24
15

2
7
10
1
3
3

3
4
2
3
5

12
1
110
63
44
1
1
5
10
8
2
11

2

9
2

2
1

1

1

213
29

106
7

1
5
1
67
35
45
2
6

37
1
1

1
3

4
10

38
18
20
1
4
1

16
3
9

12

3
2

1

5
1
1
1

1

47
1
3
3

12

3

1

1

13
3
21
1
1

4
2
5

1

1

NEQEO WOMEN
All occupations —------------------------------------------------------ --

--

Flat-work ironer--- -------------------------------------------- ---------- -----------




533
42
8
12
1
222
80
125
10
5
7
8
5
7
1

2

21
1

63
6

156
17
2
3

116
11
1
1

1

14
3
2

38
5
8
1

1

2
1
1
1

70
20
25
4
2
3
4
1
4
1

49
23
21
3
1
1
1
2
2

1

113
6
2
3
1
32
24
41
1
1
1
1

A PPEN D IX A — GENERAL TABLES

1.304
245
1
2
25
7
507
189
161
5
15
22
39
38
12
25
1
2
6
2

50 and
25 and
30 and
40 and
16 and
18 and
20 and
60 years
under 18 under 20 under 25 under 30 under 40 under 50 under 60 and over
years
years
years
years
years
years
years

1

1
Ol

152

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Table

XXXI.—Woman’s reason for working, by marital status
WHITE WOMEN
Number and per cent of women giving
reason as specified who were—

Reason for working

Women re­
porting reason
for working

Single

Married

Widowed,
separated,
or divorced

Number

Per Num- Per Num- Per Numcent ber cent ber cent ber cent

Total............. ...................................

1,315

100.0

468

100.0

495

100.0

352

100.0

To support self..... ........ ........ .................. .
To support family or self; to help family.
High cost of living__________________
Choice or habit........... ........ ....................
To pay bills (doctor, hospital, passage)
To educate children_________________
To buy home or furniture____________
To save for future___________________
Husband ill, injured, or too old_______
Husband’s work not steady____ _____
Husband’s work slack_______________
Husband out of work - _______________
Husband will not work, no good, etc_
_
To buy car_________________ ______
To buy extras.____ ________________

535
459
5
26
12
11
22
12
64
79
10
43
11
6
20

40.7
34.9
.4
2.0
.9
.8
1.7
.9
4.9
6.0
.8
3.3
.8
.5
1.5

339
128

72.4
27.4

1.2
34.7
1. 0
4. 6
2. 4
2. 2
4.4
2. 4
12.9
16.0
2.0
8. 7
2.2
1. 2
3.8

190
159

54.0
45.2

1

.2

6
172
5
23
12
11
22
12
64
79
10
43
11
6
19

L

.9

NEGRO WOMEN
Total.................................................

535

100.0

132

100.0

225

100.0

178

100.0

To support self_____________________
To support family or self; to help family.
High cost of living________________
Choice or habit_________ ______ _____
To pay bills (doctor, hospital, passage)
To buy home or furniture___ ________
To save for future___________________
Husband ill, injured, or too old............
Husband’s work not steady__________
Husband’s work slack_______________
Husband out of work.._____ ________
Husband will not work, no good, etc___
To buy car______ __________________
To buy extras..........................................

176
272

32.9
50.8
.2
1.7
.4
.9
.4
1.7
6.0

76
56

57.6
42.4

14
125
1
8
2
5
2
9
32
6
16
2
1
2

6.2
55.6
.4
3.6
.9
2.2
1.9
4.0
14.2
2.7
7.1
.9
.4
.9

86
91

48.3
51.1

1

.6




1
9

2
5
2
9
32
6
16
2

1
2

1.1
3.0
.4
.2
.4

4

%

153

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES

Table XXXII.—Mothers with children under 14 years of age, by marital status

Mothers reporting num­
ber of children under
14 years

Number and per cent of mothers with children
under 14 as specified who were—
Widowed, separated,
or divorced

Married

Number of children under
14 years
White

Negro

White

Negro

White

Negro

Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per Num­ Per
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Total___________
None____________ _____
1____ _________ ______
2_____ _________
3___________ __________
4
5 ___
__ _________
G
7__________________

849 100.0

401 100.0

498 100.0

226 100.0

351 100.0

175

100.0

531
171
90
34
16
5
1
1

264
69
42
16
7
2
1

291
101
56
29
15
5

58.4
20.3
11.2
5.8
3.0
1. 0

149
41
20
9
6

240
70
34
5
1

115
28
22
i

65.7
16. 0
12.6
4.0
.6

1

.2

62.5
20.1
10.6
4.0
1.9
.6
.1
.1

65.8
17.2
10.5
4.0
1.7
.5
.2

65.9
18.1
8.8
4.0
2.7

68.4
19.9
9.7
1.4
.3

Table XXXIII.—Actual time worked in the. laundry industry, by over-all time since

first laundry job

Over-all period

Number
of women
reporting
time in
the in­
dustry

Number of women with overall as specified whose actual time
worked was—
Under 1
year

1 and
under 5
years

5 and
under 10
years

10 and
under 15
years

15 years
and
over

White Ne­ White Ne­ White Ne­ White Ne­ White Ne­ White Ne­
gro
gro
gro
gro
gro
gro
Total_____________ 1,296
Under 1 year
1 and under 5 years___
5 and under 10 years
10 and under 15 years. ___
15 years and over

217
497
283
100
199

103127°—30------- 11




525

250

114

587

276

269

102

89

25

101

8

81
243
133
45
23

217
26
4
1
2

81
25
5
1
2

471
88
10
18

218
49
7
2

191
40
38

79
20
3

49
40

17
8

101

8

Number of women who had been employed in
Number of
women
reporting
Laundry and Laundry and Laundry and
Laundry and Laundry and
industrial
Laundry and Laundry and Laundry and
office or
more than
hotel or
one other
experience Laundry only domestic
other service
factory
store
professional kind of work
one other
service
restaurant
work
kind of work
White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro White Negro
1,322

536

441

141

233

8

Eastern.... ...............................

305

10

122

22

7

1

108

Boston______ _______
Jersey City and Newark.
Providence.......................

118
107
80

1
6
3

50
43
29

9
9
4

1
5
1

1

32
44
32

1
1

4
3
6

606

202

165

53

75

64

121

20

30

Chicago..............................
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Des Moines________
Detroit_________ ____
Indianapolis_____
Milwaukee_
_
Minneapolis and St. Paul.

56
57
67
39
85
74
93
135

123
18
31

13
19
23
8
30
17
24
31

39
2
6

5
7
4
4
10
4
19
22

32
9
10

12
12
9
g
17
19
26
18

17

Western........ ...........................

378

2

140

44

1

2

Los Angeles. .....................
Portland ..
San Francisco
Seattle....................... ........

119
77
102
80

2

57
25
43
15

8
6
10
20

1

1

33

322

14

61

161

11
12
2

91
72
52
52

5
4
2

11
13
11
20 |

60
34
20
18

55

3

6

29

Southern....... .........................
Atlanta..............................
Birmingham.....................
Jacksonville____
Richmond____________
St. Petersburg and
Tampa...........................




8

28
2

114

6

12
1

1
2
1

7

1

278

33

64

2

54

4

2

3

21

13

1

31

1

lu
9

3
2
6
4
2
6

32

17

18

4
2
9
11

4

2
2

5
1
1
3

1

2

1

2

2

110
■

18

1
3

1

13

155

2

1

1

2

4
3
8

6

284

9
1

13
14
10
6

1

31

.
*

43

1

21

13

1

18

2
8
1
1

1

5

11
23
10
16
22
17
42

6
1

91

2

10

1

21
26
15
29

1

6

38

1

6

70
15
20
14
9

1
1
3

12

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Section and city

154

Table XXXIV.—Industrial experience, by kind of work done and by section and city

155

APPENDIX A—GENERAL TABLES
Table

XXXV.—Preference for laundry work or for other employment, by kind of
work and reason for preference

Reason for preference

Number of women contrasting laundry work with—
Number of
women
Clean­
report­ Domes­ Restau­
ing
ing pref­ tic
rant or Store Factory office Home Other
erence service hotel
build­ work
ings
740

211

1?3

587

186

94

45

155
173
99
67
10
53
21
9

35
94
24
14
1
6
7
5

13
52
18

22
12

Other work preferred to laundry:
All reasons_______ ______

153

25

29

Better pay.............. ...............
Better hours_________
Easier____________
Working conditions better.
Other__________
Not reported...........

66
8
15
25
7
32

7

16

3
4
4
7

4
1

16

16

45

216

15

20

77
6

6

Laundry preferred to other work:
Better pay. _____________
Better hours_______
Steadier______________
Cleaner__________
Working conditions better
Other. _ ________
Not reported__________




47
6
3
2

1

3

-------- 8

27
8
8

60

25

38
1
3

11

1
1

156

Table XXXVI.—Reason for leaving job, by kind of job left
WHITE WOMEN

Reason

Total
Personal:
Illness of self............ —........ .
Pregnancy and confinement.
Illness of others-—.................
Accident................................ .
Death..____ _____________
Marriage____________ _____
Home duties-....... ......... .......
Education...___ _________
Rest____________________
Vacation_____ ___________
Business-------------------------Distance too great_________
Change of residence-______
Desired a change__________
Another job______________
Not necessary to work_____
Personal reason not specified.
Industrial:
Accident............................ ......
Illness due to job___ _____
WTork too hard.___________
Dissatisfied with conditions..
Hours too long—__________
Earnings insufficient-______
Work slack..._____ _______
No work_________________
Shutdown.-______________
Laid off__________________
Replaced by men_________
Discharged................. .............
General:
Dispute___________ _____
Strike___________________
Weather________ ________
Miscellaneous..-__________




110
47
39
4
6
325
64
20
29
23
2
30
297
86
77
41
39

73
29
14
2
6
88
52
6
25
21
1
18
168
38
59
32
27

81
30
14
2
6
90
71
7
26
26
1
18
222
45
69
42
31

12
22
104
100
74
184
49
96
84
122
11
32

13
23
123
118
76
216
54
127
89
144
11
36

3
4
34
41
11
73
10
12
24
33
1
21

3
4
38
47
11
78
10

68
6
2
9

*

125
49
43
4
6
333
90
24
33
37
2
31
421
109
105
54
48

76
6
2
9

56
6
1
5

2 68

79

2 55

64

18
10
16
1

18
10
17
1

5
2
4

5
2
4

4
1
5

4
1
5

6

6

3

3

82
6
7
1
2

82
6
8
1
2

62
4
6
1
4

63
5
6
1
4

23
3
3
1
1

23
3
3
1
1

31
4

31
4

29
1

29
1

15

15

1

1
1

2
1

1
47
26
13
2
3

9
77
15
7
4
8

9
85
15
8
4
10

1
18

1
20

2
2
1

1

1
43
25
8
2
3

2
2
1

7
3
2

7
3
2

26
13
3
3
2

26
17
3
3
2

2
11
1
4

2
12
1
4

7
4
1

9
5
1

8
14
31
20
3
74
38
37
37
91
7
2

5
11
19
2
13
10
10
1
2

5
12
19
2
13
10
10
1
2

2
21
18
19
14
1
4
9
1

3
24
22
19
15
1
6
9
1

1
2

1
2

7

7

5
1
2

5
1
2

2
3
2
3
1
5
3

2
2
3
2
3
1
5
4

1

1

2

2

1
1

1
1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

i

1

1

1

2
27
19
29
20

25
39
1
24

39
3
1
1
4

7
13
30
20
3
69
35
33
35
80
7
2

62

1

1

5

5

1

1

1
5

Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­
ber of ber of ber of ber of
women separa­ women separa­
tions
tions

8
6
3

2

6

Other work

8
6
3

26
19
29
19
2
32
3
1
1
4

22

Office or pro­
fessional work

2

9

2

1

A SURVEY OP LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

Women who for reasons specified left—
Domestic and
Hotels and
personalFactory work
Stores
restaurants
service work
Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­ Num­
ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of ber of
women separa­ women separa­ women separa­ women separa­ women separa­ women separa­
tions
tions
tions
tions
tions
tions
11,065
2,637
2 645
1,157
2 296
358
2 433
624
2136
151
2163
204
Women report­
ing on leaving Other laundries
jobs

NEGRO WOMEN
Total----------------------------------------Personal:

General:

858

2 273

428

2 215

236

2 65

78

6

6

2 78

95

50
19
10
1
1
34
6
16
44
19
14
101
37
33
7
20

60
24
11
1
1
34
6
21
47
25
14
112
42
36
7
23

36
15
7
1

38
19
7
1

12
2

12
2

4
1
3

4
1
3

2
1

2
1

3
1
1

3
1
1

9
6
10
29
15
9
44
15
26
3
16

9
6
12
31
21
9
45
19
29
3
18

1
21

1
21

1

1

2

2

3
7
2
2
41
15
6
3
3

3
7
2
2
42
15
6
3
3

3
5
1
2
4
4

4
5
1
2
5
4

1
4

1
4

1
11
3
1
1
2

1
11
3
1
1
2

6
2
27
38
47
53
14
73
27
40
7
13

6
2
27
43
50
62
15
76
30
41
7
16

5
2
14
17
6
25
7
16
13
21

5
. 2
14
19
6
28
8
16
15
21

1
9
9
25
16
4
46
2
3
3

10

10

1
6
1
12
2
5
5
13
2
1

1
6
1
12
2
5
5
13
2
1

3
8
16
5
1
9
7
4
1
2

3
8
17
6
1
9
8
4
1
4

14
4
1

14
4
1

12
4
1

12
4
1

2

10
1

1

9
9
25
15
4
46
2
3
3

5

10
1

5

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1
1

3

3

1

5
1

5
1

1
1

1
1

1

APPENDIX A— GENERAL TABLES

Industrial:

3 428

1 Details aggregate more than total, because some women gave more than one reason or had left more than one job. Of the total number reporting, 118 failed to give details for
all jobs.
» Details aggregate more than total, because some women gave more than one reason.
..
. .
3 Details aggregate more than total, because some women gave more than one reason or had left more than one job. Of the total number reporting, 224 failed to give details for
all jobs.




Oi

<1




APPENDIX B.—SCHEDULE FORMS
Schedule

I

This schedule was used for recording the firm’s schedule hours,
the number of employees, and information on working conditions.
Women's Bureau, United States Department of Labor
LAUNDRY SCHEDULE
City,.................................
1. Name of laundry,
.......................... ...................................... Address,.................................................
2. Type,................. ............... .......................................... ...... ........ ........................... ............. ........ ............ .
3. Person interv.,....................................................... ................... Position,....... .................... .....................
Person mterv.,............................................................................ Position,................... ........... ...................
Numbers employed:

White

Colored

Total

Men____ _________________ ____
Women____ __________ _____
Total_________________________
Number employed one year or more: .
6. Firm’s scheduled hours:
Begin

End

Lunch

Rest

Total

Maj. daily
hrs.

Monday___
Tuesday___
Wednesday.
Thursday. _Friday____
Saturday___
6. Seasonal, overtime, holidays, etc.: .
7.

Wages: Overtime pay,
Deductions or bonuses,

Vacation without pay, .............. ...... ................................... ; with pay,
8. Employment policy: Emp. mgr. _____ _______________ Other centr. method,
Other------------------------------------------------- Records kept,
9. Description of buildings,______ _______ _________________________________
10. Stairways:
Loca­
tion

Mat.

Windg.

Light
o. k.

nd. rail

Nar.

Stp.

Rpr.

Notes

Agent,
Date, .
11. Elevators:................................................................................................ .
12. Workrooms:
Workroom

Floor

Material

Repair

Clean

Wet

Good arr.

Obstructions

Special conditions,




159

160

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Schedule

I—Continued

Women’s Bureau, United States Department of Labor—Continued
laundry schedule—

continued

13. Cleaning:
Swept,..................................... By whom,.............................. Freo.,
Scrubbed, ---------- -------------- By whom,....... _
_ Frea
Notes: ________ ____ ___________________ _____ _______ "
14. Ventilation—Natural: _____________________
15.

Ventilation—Artificial:
Fans
Workroom

Port.

Mangle hoods
Pad.

Wall exhausts

Sup.

Loc.

Exh. fan

Special systems

No.

Notes:
16.

Temperature readings:
Near

Time of day."
Dry

Wet

Rel.

Near

Dry

Wet

Rel.

a. Large flat-work
ironers______
b. Small ironers___
c. Presses________
d. Driers and tum­
blers........ ........
e. Other___ ______
f. Outdoor temper­
ature________
17. Natural lighting: a. Source,
b.
c.
d.
e.

Adequacy,...........
Glare or reflection, __
Shades, __________
Remarks,_________

18. Artificial lighting: a. Source,
b.
c.
d.
e.

Adequacy,________
Glare or reflection, ___
Shades, __________
Remarks,_________

19. Seating:
Occupations

Num­
ber of Sitting Stand­
ing
women

Mark and
sort_____
Flat work...
Starching...
Press oper­
ating........
Collar mch.
Hand iron­
ing—
Packing___
Notes:




prov.

Sit or
stand

Platforms
Height

161

APPENDIX B—SCHEDULE FORMS
Schedule

I—Continued

Women's Bureau, United States Department of Labor—Continued
—continued

laundry schedule

20.

Machines: Extractors (guarded),................................................................................................
Driers and tumblers,____________________________________________________________
Starcbers,____ ___________________ _____________________________________________
Flat-work ironers,_____ ______ ___ _______________ ________ ______________________

Small presses and ironers:
Nature of power
Machines

Nature
of heat

Auto.

Semi­
auto.

Method of operation
Guarded

Other

Hand

Other

Heat pro­
tection

Presses.
Ironers.

Notes:

21.

Other strains and hazards:

22. Heating: Heat of industry,...................................
Special system,
23. Drinking facilities:
24. Washing facilities:
Towels provided
No.

Kind

Shared Clean
by men
<»

Faucet_____
Other___ _
Cooled____
Cup indiv._
Cup common
Convenient _




Notes

Hot
water

Soap
Com­ Indi­
mon vidual

162

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Schedule I—Continued

Women’s Bureau, United States Department of Labor—Continued
laundry schedule—continued

25.

Toilets:
No. using

Fir.

Plumbing
Ventilation
Lighting
No. No. Privy
Auto.
per
Worn- Men seats seat
Hand Seat
Out.
Out.
flush flush
wind. Art. Oth. wind. Art.

Repair
Fir. Room Cond.
ceiled fir.

Seat

Cleanliness

Plbg. Room

Seat

Plbg.

Swept
By

Freq.

Seat Seat
incl. sern.

Scrubbed
By

Freq.

Paper
suppl.

Room
needs
desig­
nation

i
Notes: .

26. Service facilities:
Lighting

Room

Fir. Comb. Cln.
with—

Other
Toilet
Cafe­
vents Superv. teria
Cooking
Out.
Hot
Art. wind. into—
Tab. Seats food Hot conven­
drink iences

Lunch

Rest

Cloak

Notes:.

27. Uniforms:
28. First aid:______________
By whom administered,
Where administered, . _.




Cot

Chairs Comf. ch. Bench

Lkrs. Shivs.

RacksHngrs.

Wall
hks.

Seats

163

APPENDIX B—SCHEDULE FORMS
Schedule I—Continued

Women’s Bureau, United Slates Department of Labor—Continued
laundry schedule—continued

29.

Routing and other methods ot stabilizing flow of work:........ ............. .................. ..................

30.

Other welfare provisions:

Schedule II

i

Pay-roll information was copied onto this card, one card being used for each
woman employee. Certain information from Schedule III was added later.
7

U. S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau
Establishment

Employee’s No.

Department

Name

Male

Address

Female

Age

Conjugal condition

Occupation

S

Rate
of pay

Piece

Days
worked

Regular
weekly
hours

Hour

Day

Week

$0.

$

$

Hours
worked
this period

Overtime
hours

H month

Undertime
hours

$

Began work

W

D

Month
$

Earnings

NR

Additions
$
Deductions

This period Computed for
regular time
$

Country of birth

M

Time at work

$
In this trade

$
This firm

Age
At home

Board

Pay-roll period
___days ending
Schedule III

This schedule was distributed in the laundry to be made out by each woman
employee. Certain information was later transferred to Schedule’ll.
U. S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau

1. Firm,.......... ...............................................................................................
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Name,_____ __________________ _____ ______ __________________
Address,___ _______________ _______________ __________________
In what country were you born? ................................ ................................
Age,------------------------- ------ ------------------ White or negro? _______
Are you single, married, separated, or widowed? ____ ______________
What is your job in this laundry? ___ ___________________ ________
How long have you been with this firm? ...................................................




164

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS
Schedule IV

This schedule was used for the information secured during home visits to the
women employed in the laundries surveyed.
U. S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau
PERSONAL INTERVIEW, LAUNDRY STUDY

1. Firm,......................................................
2. Name,________________
3. Length of time in industry,
Overall,....... ............. ........... ...
4. Present job,_______________ .........
5. Length of time on present job,___II””"!
6. Other jobs with present employer,
7. Comparison of present job with other work,'
8. Hours, overtime, seasonal, etc_________
9. Reason for working,_ ________________
_
10. Number of children under 14 years of age”
11. Industrial history:
Industry




Occupation

City,
Actual,

Date
begun

Duration

Reason for leaving

PUBLICATIONS OF THE WOMEN’S BUREAU
[Any of these bulletins still available will be sent free of charge upon request]

*No.

i

T

1. Proposed Employment of Women During the War in the Industries of
Niagara Falls, N. Y. 16 pp. 1918.
No. 2. Labor Laws for Women in Industry in Indiana. 29 pp. 1919.
No. 3. Standards for the Employment of Women in Industry. 8 pp. Third
ed., 1921.
No. 4. Wages of Candy Makers in Philadelphia in 1919. 46 pp. 1919.
*No. 5. The Eight-Hour Day in Federal and State Legislation. 19 pp. 1919.
No. 6. The Employment of Women in Hazardous Industries in the United
States. 8 pp. 1921.
No. 7. Night-Work Laws in the United States. (1919.) 4 pp. 1920.
*No. 8. Women in the Government Service. 37 pp. 1920.
*No. 9. Home Work in Bridgeport, Conn. 35 pp. 1920.
*No. 10. Hours and Conditions of Work for Women in Industry in Virginia.
32 pp. 1920.
No. 11. Women Street Car Conductors and Ticket Agents. 90 pp. 1921.
*No. 12. The New Position of Women in American Industry. 158 pp. 1920.
No. 13. Industrial Opportunities and Training for Women and Girls. 48 pp.
1921.
*No. 14. A Physiological Basis for the Shorter Working Day for Women. 20
pp. 1921.
No. 15. Some Effects of Legislation Limiting Hours of Work for Women. 26
pp. 1921.
No. 16. (See Bulletin 63.)
No. 17. Women’s Wages in Kansas. 104 pp. 1921.
No. 18. Health Problems of Women in Industry. 11 pp. 1921.
No. 19. Iowa Women in Industry. 73 pp. 1922.
*No. 20. Negro Women in Industry. 65 pp. 1922.
No. 21. Women in Rhode Island Industries. 73 pp. 1922.
*No. 22. Women in Georgia Industries. 89 pp. 1922.
No. 23. The Family Status of Breadwinning Women. 43 pp. 1922.
No. 24. Women in Maryland Industries. 96 pp. 1922.
No. 25. Women in the Candy Industry in Chicago and St. Louis. 72 pp. 1923.
No. 26. Women in Arkansas Industries. 86 pp. 1923.
No. 27. The Occupational Progress of Women. 37 pp. 1922.
No. 28. Women’s Contributions in the Field of Invention. 51 pp. 1923.
No. 29. Women in Kentucky Industries. 114 pp. 1923.
No. 30. The Share of Wage-Earning Women in Family Support. 170 pp. 1923.
No. 31. What Industry Means to Women Workers. 10 pp. 1923.
No. 32. Women in South Carolina Industries. 128 pp. 1923.
No. 33. Proceedings of the Women’s Industrial Conference. 190 pp. 1923.
No. 34. Women in Alabama Industries. 86 pp. 1924.
No. 35. Women in Missouri Industries. 127 pp. 1924.
No. 36. Radio Talks on Women in Industry. 34 pp. 1924.
No. 37. Women in New Jersey Industries. 99 pp. 1924.
No. 38. Married Women in Industry. 8 pp. 1924.
No. 39. Domestic Workers and Their Employment Relations. 87 pp. 1924.
No. 40. (See Bulletin 63.)
_
_
No. 41. Family Status of Breadwinning Women in Four Selected Cities. 145
pp. 1925.
.
.
No. 42. List of References on Minimum Wage for Women in the United States
and Canada. 42 pp. 1925.
No. 43. Standard and Scheduled Hours of Work for Women in Industry. 68
pp. 1925.
No. 44. Women in Ohio Industries. 137 pp. 1925.
‘Supply exhausted.




165

166

A SURVEY OF LAUNDRIES AND THEIR WOMEN WORKERS

No. 45. Home Environment and Employment Opportunities of Women in
Coal-Mine Workers’ Families. 61 pp. 1925.
No. 46. Facts about Working V omen—A Graphic Presentation Based on
Census Statistics. 64 pp. 1925.
No. 47. Women in the Fruit-Growing and Canning Industries in the State of
Washington. 223 pp. 1926.
*No. 48. Women in Oklahoma Industries. 118 pp. 1926. '
No. 49. Women Workers and Family Support. 10 pp. 1925.
No. 50. Effects of Applied Research upon the Employment Opportunities of
American Women. 54 pp. 1926.
No. 51. Women in Illinois Industries. 108 pp. 1926.
No. 52. Lost Time and Labor Turnover in Cotton Mills. 203 pp. 1926.
No. 53. Tho^ Status of Women in the Government Service in 1925. 103 pp.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.

54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

Changing Jobs. 12 pp. 1926.
Women in Mississippi Industries. 89 pp. 1926.
Women in Tennessee Industries. 120 pp. 1927.
Women Workers and Industrial Poisons. 5 pp. 1926.
Women in Delaware Industries. 156 pp. 1927.
Short Talks About Working Women. 24 pp. 1927.
Industrial Accidents to Women in New Jersey, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
316 pp. 1927.
No. 61. The Development of Minimum-Wage Laws in the United States, 1912 to
1927. 635 pp. 1928. Price, 90 cents.
No. 62. Women’s Employment in Vegetable Canneries in Delaware. 47 pp
1007

x 1

No. 63. State Laws Affecting Working Women. 51 pp. 1927. (Revision of
Bulletins 16 and 40.)
No. 64. The Employment of Women at Night. 86 pp. 1928.
*No. 65. The Effects of Labor Legislation on the Employment Opportunities of
Women. 498 pp. 1928.
No. 66. History of Labor Legislation for Women in Three States; Chronological
Development of Labor Legislation for Women in the United States.
288 pp. 1928.
No. 67. Women Workers in Flint, Mich. 80 pp. 1928.
No. 68. Summary: The Effects of Labor Legislation on the Employment Op­
portunities of Women. (Reprint of Chapter II of Bulletin 65.) 22
pp. 1928.
No. 69. Causes of Absence for Men and for Women in Four Cotton Mills. 24
pp. 1929.
No. 70. Negro Women in Industry in Fifteen States. 74 pp. 1929.
No. 71. Selected References on the Health of Women in Industry. 8 pp. 1929.
No. 72. Conditions of Work in Spin Rooms. 41 pp. 1929.
No. 73. Variations in Employment Trends of Women and Men. 143 pp. 1929.
No. 74. I he Immigrant Woman and Her Job. 179 pp. 1929.
No. 75. What the Wage-Earning Woman Contributes to Family Support. 20
pp. 1929.
No. 76. Women in 5-and-10-cent Stores and Limited-Price Chain Department
Stores. 58 pp. 1929.
No. 77. A Study of Two Groups of Denver Married Women Applying for Jobs.
10 pp. 1929.
No. 78. A 1930ey °f Laundries and Their Women Workers in 23 Cities. 166 pp.
No. 79. Industrial Home Work. 18 pp. 1930.
No. 80. Women in Florida Industries. (In press.)
No. 81. Industrial Accidents to Men and Women.

(In press.)

Annual reports of the Director, 1919*, 1920*, 1921*, 1922, 1923,
1924*, 1925, 1926, 1927*, 1928*, 1929.
'Supply exhausted.




*

o

i