Full text of Industrial Home Work under the National Recovery Administration, Bureau Publication No. 234

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 OF LABOR
CHILDREN'S BUREAU

. . .

PUBLICATION No. 234

►

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK
UNDER THE
II

NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
F rances P erkins , Secretary

C H IL D R E N ’S B U R E A U

Katharine F. Lenroot, C hief

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK
U N D E R THE

NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION
By
M A R Y SKINNER

Bureau Publication No. 234

UNITED STATES
G O V E R N M E N T PR IN TIN G OFFICE
W A SH IN G T O N : 1936

For sale by the Superintendent o f Documents, Washington, D. C.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Price 10 cents

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CONTENTS
Letter of transmittal_____________________________
Part I.— Industrial home work in general____________________I
The study— its scope and purpose_______________________
Attempts at legal regulation____________________ 1111IZIZ ZI 1111ZZ
Development of home-work provisions of the codes_____________
Home-work operations and conditions of work______________
Possibilities oi adjustment of home workers to factory employment
Summary and conclusions____________________________________
Part IL-—Industrial home work in specific industries__________________
Knitted-outerwear industry_____________________•__________ ~
Lace-manufacturing industry__________________________ ~ "
Infants’ and children’s wear industry_________________________ ”
Art-needlework industry__________________________________
Fresh-water pearl button industry_______________________
Doll and doll-accessory industry________________________
Tag industry__________ _________________________ ~~
Leather-glove industry________________________________

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Page

1
1
2

8
19

24
24
82
88
48
46
49
52
54

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

U n it e d S t a t e s D

L abor,
C h il d r e n ’ s B u r e a u ,

e p a r t m e n t of

Washington, June 26, 1986.
There is transmitted herewith a report on industrial home
work under the National Recovery Administration. This study was
undertaken at the request of the National Recovery Administration
for the purpose of making available to its home-work committee
information regarding the conditions under which home work was
being carried on in industries in which it had not been abolished by
the codes. A preliminary report was prepared and transmitted to
the National Recovery Administration. Because of the widespread
interest in the many problems involved in industrial home work and
the effect of this method of production on labor standards, it seems
desirable to make the findings of the survey available to the general
public. The field work for this study was carried on jointly by the
Women’s Bureau and the Industrial Division of the Children’s
Bureau.
The report was written by Mary Skinner, and the section on legal
regulations was prepared by Ella A. Merritt, both of the Children’s
Bureau.
Respectfully submitted.
K a t h a r i n e F . L e n r o o t , Chief.
Hon. F r a n c e s P e r k i n s ,
Secretary of Labor.
v
M

adam :

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE NATIONAL
RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION
Part I.— INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK IN GENERAL
THE STUDY— ITS SCOPE AND PURPOSE

For more than a century industrial home work has been recognized
as an industrial and social evil, but in spite of investigations, agita
tion, and attempts at control through State legislation this method
of production has continued. During the depression such gains as
had been made through State regulation were rapidly being lost in
the general breakdown of labor standards. When the National
Industrial Recovery Act was passed in the spring of 1933, home-work
earnings had dropped to almost incredibly low levels, and hours of
work were often inhumanly long. Under the National Recovery
Administration, when manufacturers undertook to set code standards
that raised wages and shortened hours for factory employees they
were forced to consider industrial home work from the point of view
both of labor standards and of competitive trade practices.
The establishment of uniform labor standards through the codes
for the various industries brought a general recognition of the menace
of home work to decent labor standards for factory workers. Em
ployers who were willing to pay fair wages to their employees saw
that they would be helpless against the competition of employers
who cut their production costs by unlimited home work. Therefore
the necessity of controlling industrial home work was accepted by
the leaders in many industries, and 107 codes contained provisions
regarding home work, either abolishing it altogether or providing
some means for its regulation. This move on the part of manufac
turers themselves to control home work was a great forward step in
the long struggle to eliminate the practice and was considered one
of the greatest social gains made under the National Recovery Admin
istration. The codes, however, were drawn up by the different indus
tries to meet the needs of each industry irrespective of the needs of
other industries. As the codes were put into operation, a lack of
uniformity in the provisions relating to home work began to work
hardship in some industries and to confuse manufacturers and code
authorities alike. Finally it became evident that if progress in con
trolling home work was to continue and indeed if the gains already
-m a d e through the N. R. A. codes were to be held, uniform policies
® w o u ld have to be formulated and the various home-work provisions
improved and simplified. Therefore a special home-work committee
was appointed in the National Recovery Administration in March
1934 to study the whole home-work situation and to make recom1

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

mendations as to methods of dealing with the numerous problems
that had arisen.
This study of industrial home work, made by the Women’s Bureau
and the Children’s Bureau of the United States Department of Labor,
was undertaken at the request of the Administrator of the National
Recovery Administration for the use of the N. R. A. home-work
committee. The purpose of the study was to ascertain the condi
tions under which home work was being carried on in industries in
which it had not been abolished by the codes; to learn whether the
industries in which home work was subject to specific code regulation
were successfully maintaining the code standards governing industrial
home work; and, if code standards were not being successfully main
tained, wherein and why they were failing. It was proposed also
to determine if possible, in industries in which there was no specific
regulation of home work through the codes, whether the minimum
labor standards set for factory workers had affected conditions of
work for home workers.
The study presents a cross section of conditions among home
workers in 28 industries in which home work was continued under
the codes. Field work was begun in June 1934 and continued through
October 1934. The investigation was carried on in seven States:
Maine, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Iowa,
and Texas.
Information was obtained chiefly through interviews with home
workers and with manufacturers and contractors in the industries
covered by the study. Code authorities, officials of State depart
ments of labor, and representatives of local unions also were consulted.
The findings of the study are based on interviews with 203 manufac
turers and contractors and with 1,473 families, which included 2,320
home workers.
Data regarding hours of work and earnings were obtained from the
workers only for the week previous to the visit, as in most industries
home work is too irregular to permit estimating hours and earnings
over prolonged periods. An attempt was made to supplement this
information with data from pay rolls, but this proved impossible, as
few firms kept complete pay-roll records for home workers. Most
employers noted merely the amount of work given out, the date it
was taken and returned, and the amount paid the worker for each
assignment. The amount may have represented a week’s or a month’s
work and may have been the earnings of one or of several persons.
ATTEMPTS AT LEGAL REGULATION

Attempts to control industrial home work through State laws have
developed out of legislation enacted in the last two decades of the
nineteenth century to regulate factory work done either in the in
sanitary and overcrowded tenement sweatshops set up by the small
manufacturer or contractor or in living quarters in tenement houses.
These two kinds of work places did not fall into distinct and separate
classes because it was a common practice for tenement dwellers who
took in home work to bring their relatives and neighbors into theirj
homes or into shops adjoining their homes to share the work. For
many years this system developed practically unchecked before any
regulation was attempted.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— IN GENERAL

As early as 1828 Matthew Carey called public attention to the
(¡I plight of between 18,000 and 20,000 women home workers in the
clothing industry in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Baltimore.
In words that sound like reports made in the 1930’s, he said that at
least 12,000 of these could not earn, by constant employment for 16
hours out of the 24, more than $1.25 a week, and that, in “ many
cases, half or a third of their time is expended in attending their
children, and no small portion in traveling 8, 10, 12, or 14 squares for
work, and as many to take it back when finished.” 1
The wretched lot of these families and the serious health menace,
both to the consumers of the products made under these conditions
and to the workers themselves, finally aroused public opinion to the
need for remedial measures. The first type of home work regulated
by law was cigar manufacturing. Following a decade of labor dis
turbances in this industry, the home-work system became entrenched
in the trade through the transfer of the work by employers from large
shops to small tenement-house shops in an effort to obtain a supply
of docile labor. In 1884 the New York Legislature prohibited the
manufacture of cigars and other tobacco products in tenement houses
in cities of over 500,000 where there were rooms or apartments
occupied as living and sleeping quarters, thus striking at both kinds of
tenement work. But the New York Court of Appeals, in the famous
Jacobs case,2 held in 1885 that the legislature could not under the
guise of police regulations thus invade the personal right of a cigar
maker to carry on his own trade peacefully in his own home. The
court failed to see that the law had any relation to the public health
and declared the act unconstitutional because it arbitrarily deprived
the individual of his property and of his personal liberty.
This decision effectively discouraged legislation interfering with the
rights of the worker to manufacture in his own home, and no attempt
was made to prohibit industrial home work, as the term is under
stood today, for nearly 30 years. A number of States, however, con
tinued to attack the problem through laws prohibiting certain types
of work in tenements by persons other than “ members of the family
dwelling therein” , and by regulatory laws; for instance, employers
were required to obtain permits before giving out materials to home
workers in tenements and to keep registers of their workers, or inspec
tion was required of the premises on which home work was to be (tone
to determine whether they conformed to certain minimum sanitary
standards that were established, such as freedom from infectious
disease and a certain minimum air space for each worker. By 1904
12 States,3 including besides New York a number of other important
industrial States, had laws of this type on their statute books.
Gradually this kind of legislation, together with the increased
stringency of provisions for factory inspection and laws on tenement
buildings, greatly reduced the numbers of tenement sweatshops.
But it was not until 1913 that a prohibitory law was again passed
applying to the worker in his own home. In that year the New York
Legislature enacted a law supplementing the regulatory provision
i See Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States, 1910, vol. 9, p. 123.
8. Doc. No. 645, Washington, 1910. For further reference, see Carey’s Select Excerpta, vol. 13, pp. 138-142,
dated July 1, 1830; and Free Trade Advocate, Philadelphia, Mar. 14,1829.
1 In i e Jacobs, 98 New York 98 (1886).
* Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.

77552°— 36-------2

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

already in effect and entirely prohibiting the manufacture of food,
dolls and dolls’ clothing, and children’s wearing apparel in tenement
houses, even in the home of the worker himself. This prohibition of
home work on these particular articles has been judicially sustained
as an exercise of the police power for the protection of the public
health. Only one other State, however, (New Jersey) has enacted a
prohibitory law of this type.4
Because of the large numbers of workers involved in New York
State and the spectacularly bad conditions in the old-type tenement
houses in greater New York City, attempts to regulate industrial
home work in that State are especially significant and illustrate how
the home-work system becomes so entrenched in a State as to defy
the best efforts of State legislation and State officials to remedy its
evils. The factory investigating commission, created in 1911 after
the fire at the factory of the Triangle Waist Co. to conduct a broad
inquiry into the conditions under which manufacturing was done,5
reported that the home-work licensing law of 1904 stiff in effect in
New York was inadequate. The commission condemned the home
work system because the cost to the community in life and health of
children and mothers was too great to justify its existence and because
by using it the manufacturer could avoid the State factory regulations.
The commission reported that from an economic point of view the
continuance of home work was unjustified and that public welfare
would be promoted by its eradication. In view, however, of the
difficulties of immediate elimination the commission suggested that
certain specific prohibitions be included in the law, that additions
to the list be made from time to time, and that if investigation showed
that the evils could not be corrected the system eventually be abol
ished eptirely.6 Considerable improvement in administrative machin
ery resulted from this investigation; the scope of the regulatory provi
sions was broadened; and the prohibitions above mentioned (food,
dolls, and dolls’ and children’s clothing) were included in the law. Ten
years later another commission of the State of New York, this time
dealing with child-welfare laws, went into the home-work problem.7
It strongly endorsed the stand of the earlier commission that the
State’s intimate policy should be total prohibition, and in commenting
on its report the State industrial commissioner said:
There is no doubt that on principle manufacturing in tenement houses should
be eliminated. * * * In the 10 years that have intervened since the factory
commission’s report practically nothing has been done toward the solution of the
iroblem. If the advice of the factory commission had been followed, manufacurmg in tenements by this time would either have been completely eliminated
or the problem would have dwindled to one of much smaller proportions. Instead
this system has become so deeply entrenched in our industrial life that its very

* The New York statute was upheld In 1915 by the appellate division of the New York Supreme Court
in the case of In re Belofsky. This case was dismissed m 1910 by the New York Court of Appeals, owing
to the manufacturer’s failure to carry on his appeal. In 1920 the appellate division of the New York
Supreme Court, first department, also upheld the provision in the case of People v. Rapport (193 app.
div. 135) holding that a statute prohibiting the manufacture of infants’ wearing apparel in tenements
used for residence purposes was a valid exercise of the State's police power. This legal provision, how
ever, has not been passed upon by the State court of last resort or by any Federal court. The New Jersey
statute has not been passed upon by the courts. In Oregon a prohibition of home work in the needle
trades has been put into effect through a ruling of the State welfare commission, effective Apr. 29, 1934.
» Preliminary Report of the New York (State) Factory Investigating Commission, 1912, vol. 1, p. 13.
Albany, 1912.
• Second Report of the New York (State) Factory Investigating Commission, 1913, vol. 1, pp. 118-123.
Albany, 1913.
7 Third Annual Report of the New York (State) Commission to Examine Laws Relating to Child W el
fare, p. 12. Legis. Doc. No. 88. Albany, 1924.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— IN GENERAL

involvement is the only reason that can be given for not now recommending the
immediate complete prohibition of home work in tenements.8

The result of the 1923 investigation was a tightening of the home
work law enforcement; not until 1934, however, was the law itself
strengthened. Thirteen States,9 including New York and New
Jersey, had in effect at the time of this study legislation directed
toward some measure of control of the home worker, but except in
New York and Pennsylvania and in Connecticut under the law passed
in 1933 this control extends in practice to little more than sanitary
conditions. The laws or regulations of 10 of these States 10 require a
license to be obtained by the employer, the home worker, or the
owner of the premises on which home work is done; under all the laws
premises must be inspected and employers must keep lists of their
home workers and under some laws must file them with the State
labor department. In New York under an amendment to the law
passed in 1934, employers giving out home work must pay a license
fee of $25. Child-labor provisions of the labor laws apply to industrial
home work in New York, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Wisconsin.
Laws regulating women’s hours of labor are made applicable to home
workers in Pennsylvania and Connecticut. In Connecticut the law
requires that the wage rates for home workers shall be not lower than
the rates paid in the factory for similar work. Some attempt has
been made to apply minimum-wage laws to home work in California
and Wisconsin.
In spite of nearly 50 years of attempted regulation the problem is
still unsolved. In the industrial States great difficulties exist, though
in a few some progress has been made; in the agricultural States, to
which more and more home work is being sent from urban centers,
there is not even a recognition that a legislative need exists.
Regulation through union agreements.

Some regulation of industrial home work has also been brought
about through agreements between unions and employers. A begin
ning in this direction was made in the garment trades coincident with
the rise of strong unions in that industry. Among the abuses against
which the cloakmakers, dressmakers, men’s clothing workers, white
goods and lingerie workers, and other groups waged successive strike
battles between 1909 and 1913 was the practice of giving workers
tasks to take home with them to complete outside factory hours.11
Leaders of the cloak-and-suit strike in New York City in 1910 first
visualized the possibility of abolishing home work by means of agree
ments with employers. As a result home work was banned in the
•Report on Manufacturing in Tenements Submitted to the Commission to Examine the Laws Relating
to Child Welfare, by Bernard L. Shientag, State Industrial Commissioner, p. 7. New York State Depart
ment of Labor. Albany, 1924.
• These States are California, Connecticut, Indiana, Maryland, Illinois. Massachusetts, Michigan,
Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. In 19315 the Connecticut
home-work law was supplemented by a requirement that the home worker obtain a certificate from the
State department of labor, allowing the distribution of home work only to persons 16 or over and only under
certain restricted conditions. The New York law was amended in 1936 to give the industrial commissioner
power to determine within what industries home work might continue without Jeopardizing wages and
working conditions of factory workers in the industry and without injuring the health and welfare of the
home workers, and to restrict the granting of permits to such industries. The commissioner, in M ay 1936,
issued an order prohibiting home work in the men’s and boys’ clothing industry and, with certain excep
tions, in the merchant-tailoring industry.
ii California, Indiana, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsyl
vania, and Wisconsin. In 1936 Rhode Island enacted a law effective on June 1 of that year requiring emloyers and home workers to obtain licenses from the director of the State department of labor, permitting
ome work only under specified conditions, and prohibiting the use of children under 16 years of age on home

W?irThe Women’s Garment Workers, by Louis Levine, p. 176. New York, B. W . Huebsch, Inc., 1924.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

protocol signed September 2, 1910, by the Cloak, Suit, and Skirt
Manufacturers’ Protective Association and certain New York CityJ||
local unions of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union,
and also in subsequent agreements.12
In spite of repeated efforts, however, the needle-trades unions were
never able to put a complete stop to the giving out of home work, and
the needle trades have had the unenviable reputation of providing
the largest volume of factory work that is done in workers’ homes.
There is every evidence that in 1933, before the N. R. A. codes went
into effect, the existing regulations of home work did not and could
not remedy the evils of the home-work situation.
Union leaders turned again to collective bargaining as a means of
supplementing State attempts to control home work after the inval
idation of the N. R. A. codes as a result of the decision of the United
States Supreme Court in the Schechter case in May 1935. The agree
ment signed in'July 1935, by representatives of the Clothing Manu
facturers’ Exchange and the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of
America for the metropolitan area of New York, attempted to salvage
as much as possible of the N. R. A. codes. This agreement was to
run for 2 years and included a prohibition against farming out work
to employees to be done at home.13 Among other agreements con
taining a similar provision is one signed for the Baltimore area on
August 14,1935, by the Baltimore Clothing Manufacturers’ Associa
tion and the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America.14 A prohi
bition against home work was also included in the agreement that
was signed in September 1935 between the Neckwear-Makers Union
in New York and the manufacturers.15
DEVELOPMENT OF HOM E-W ORK PROVISIONS OF THE CODES

One great difficulty in attempting to regulate industrial home work
through State legislation is that the jurisdiction of the State law
stops at the State line, whereas home work may be sent easily from
one State to another. Even though the employer sending out the
work and the worker receiving it may each live in a State having a
law regulating home work, the law of the State of origin cannot
follow the goods across the State line, and the law of the receiving
State does not apply to the manufacturer in another State.
The N. R. A. codes, by setting up standards on the basis of indus
tries rather than States, made it possible for the first time to establish
control over work sent from one State to another.
Of the 107 codes containing provisions on home work that were in
effect at the time this study was made, 90 provided for the complete
abolition of home work either upon the effective date of the code or
within a specified period. Of the remaining 17 codes, 10 restricted
home work to specific operations or provided for a gradual reduction
in the number of home workers, apparently with the idea of complete
elimination eventually, and 7 codes permitted home work to continue
but provided for the establishment of piece or wage rates for the
home-work processes. Practically all the other codes, though they flk
did not specifically mention home work, defined the term “ employee’ ’
» Industrial Court of the Cloak, Suit, and Skirt Industry of New York City, p. 56. U. S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Report No. 144. Washington, D. C., 1914.
13 Daily News Record (New York), Aug. 15, 1935, and New York Herald Tribune, July 30, 1935.
34 Daily News Record, Aug. 15, 1935.
MAdvance, March 1936. Published by Amalgamated Ladies’ Clothing Workers of America, New York

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.-----IN GENERAL

m such general terms as apparently to include home workers, thus
making them subject to the same wage, hour, and child-labor pro
visions as factory workers.
*
The initiative in prohibiting home work was taken by the garment
trades, m wluch the system had been most strongly entrenched,
ln e code ol the coat-and-suit industry, approved August 4, 1933
provided for the immediate abolition of home work# Three weeks
later home work was abolished in the men's clothing industry—
probably the largest home-work industry in the country— with a
period of only 3 months allowed for adjustment. The example set
by these two industries was followed by many others, of which the
following were the more important as measured by the number of
home workers employed in the industry: Artificial flower and feather •
corset and brassiere; medium- and low-priced jewelry; men’s garter!
suspender, and belt; men’s neckwear; millinery; pleating and stitch-’
mg bonnaz, and embroidery; powder puff; toy and plaything;
undergarment and negligee; underwear and allied products. Manu
facturers in the drapery- and upholstery-trimming industry also
agreed to the elimination of home work, but after the code was
approved a stay of this prohibition was obtained and at the time of
the study home work was being distributed as in the past,
u i if Pru}61P.il1 industries in which home work was not abolished but
i f ? j6®? limited to specific operations and the industries in which
it had been regulated or controlled include: Art needlework; freshwater pearl button; cotton garment; handkerchief; infants’ and
children s wear; knitted outerwear; ladies’ handbag; leather and
woolen-knit glove; light sewing. Although no mention was made of
home workers in the code for the lace industry, the term “ employee”
was so defined as apparently to include them, and the code authority
imiustayUP & system of wage ancl k °ur regulation throughout the
It was significant that a number of other industries, in which the
home-work system had not yet become entrenched, took steps to
Pode6nt the development of 1101116 work by prohibiting it in their
Because the immediate abolition of home work in industries in
which it had been a custom for many years might work a hardship to
persons handicapped for factory employment, the President issued
an Executive order on May 15, 1934, exempting certain groups of
workers from the home-work provisions of the codes
This order was administered by the United States Department of
Labor in cooperation with the National Recovery Administration,
and workers desiring exemption under the order were required to
obtain home-work certificates from their State department of labor
?£.
er designated agency. Certificates were issued only to: (1)
Workers incapacitated for factory employment because of physical
disability; (2) workers who had been accustomed in the past to earn
them living by home work and who were too old to adjust to factory
R ou tin e; and (3) workers whose services were absolutely essential at
^ o m e to care for an invalid. Home workers obtaining certificates under the Executive order were to receive the same rate of pav
as factory workers doing the same land of work, and their hours
of work were subject to the same limitations as those of factory
employees.
J

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

HOM E-W ORK OPERATIONS AND CONDITIONS OF W ORK
Home-work operations.

The work encountered in the homes in the course of the study
varied from the simplest mechanical processes to highly skilled and
artistic hand work. More than half of the families, however, were
employed on t^ie more skilled processes. The kinds of work being
done and the number of families engaged in each operation are listed
bel0W:

Kims«,

Home-work operations

of
families

Total................................................................................... M 7 3
Knitted-outerwear industry:
T~
Knitting and crocheting infants’ garments-----------------"j-9
Knitting women’s suits and dresses----------------------------117
118
Knitting and crocheting berets and scarfs------------------Lace industry:
Drawing threads-------------------------------------------------------Cutting lace----------------------------------- - — ----------------""
Making and embroidering infants’ and children s wear--------Ido
109
Making samples of art needlework-----------------------------------Carding fresh-water pearl and other buttons--------------------140
Making doll dresses---------------------------------------------------------Stringing tags------------------------------------------------------------------7b
Embroidering and beading-----------------------------------------------Carding bobby pins, bunching safety pins-------------------------Making and embroidering collars--------------------------------------Making ribbon bows and pompoms for slippers-----------------Cutting embroidery-------------------------------- - — -------------------Embroidering and roll-hemming handkerchiefs------------------Stringing greeting cards----------------------------- ---------------------Appliqueing lace and making button holes on undergar
ments and negligees------------------------------------------------------Making lamp shades--------------------------------------------------------Machine sewing on cotton garments---------------------------------Pasting beads on jewelry-------------------------------------------Making shoulder straps----------------------------------------------------Miscellaneous operations--------------

44
*0
15
1°
10
9

d
3
*
1°

Most of these operations are described by their names, but a few
require a brief explanation. Infants* knitted and crocheted gar
ments included sacques, sweaters, bootees, leggings, and caps, of
both simple and elaborate designs. Women’s and children’s berets
were usually the cheap kind that retail for 25 or 50 cents. ^A worker
of average skill could make one in an hour. Women’s knitted suits
and dresses were of all styles and patterns, even evening gowns.
Some of these retailed for $75 or more.
.
.
r
The work on infants’ and children’s wear consisted of a variety of
processes, such as embroidering, smocking, hemstitching, hand
hemming, and hand seaming. Occasionally, m spite of the fact that
it was prohibited under the code, machine sewing was found also.
Most o f the hand work was very delicate, and almost perfect work
manship was demanded by the factory.
.
Thread drawing in the lace industry consisted of separating bands
of lace by drawing the thread that holds the bands together as th e jA
come from the loom. Cutting, as the name implies, consisted
cutting scalloped edgings, yokes, and medallions from the mesh or
net in which they were woven.
Home work on art needlework was confined entirely to the making
of samples for exhibition in art-needlework departments of retail

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.---- IN GENERAL

stores. The work varied with the trend in styles and with individual
firms. Sometimes it was simple crochet and at other times it was
mtricate embroidery that required considerable artistic ability, such
as needlepoint.
Making gloves, unlike most home-work processes, was a machine
operation and usually involved the complete manufacture of the
article. It was probably the most highly skilled work found in the
course of the study.
Number and age of home workers.

As a large proportion of the home work permitted under the
codes required skill and experience, home work, at the time of the
study, was not a family activity to the same extent that it had been
in the past, but in nearly 40 percent of the families visited there were
at least two workers, and in 13 percent there were three or more.
The majority of the workers were adults, 60 percent of them being
between 20 and 50 years of age; 8 percent, however, were children
under 16 years (table 1).
Although great progress was made through the codes in eliminating
the employment of children, child labor continued in those industries
in which the home work permitted was unskilled or could be broken
down into simple processes. In fact, there is reason to believe that
child labor continued to an even greater extent than the findings of
this study would indicate and that only a partial report was obtained
of the number of children doing home work. In Pennsylvania and
New York, where such work constitutes a violation of both the State
child-labor laws and the home-work laws and regulations, parents
have always hesitated to admit that their children are employed.
At the time of the study the same reluctance to give information on
this point was found among home workers in such industries as the
lace and fresh-water pearl button industries, where parents were
required by certain firms to sign a statement to the effect that the
children would not be allowed to help with the work. In many
instances there were indications that children were working, although
the,parents said they were not.
A few children under 16 were found doing every kind of work
encountered in the study, except the work of making gloves and
samples of art needlework, but it was in the manufacture of doll’s
dresses that they were employed in the largest numbers. Very
young children can clip threads and turn the dresses and older
children can easily do the machine operations on less expensive
models. The number of children found working on dolls’ dresses
was several times that reported on any other tvpe of work.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T able

1.— Industry and age of industrial home workers in fam ilies included in the study
Industrial home workers

TotaL.........................................
Knitted outerwear------ . ------ -----------

2,320
533

2,282
517

100
10

4
2

20 years,
under 50,
not other
wise speci
fied

50 years
and over

Num Per Num Per
ber cent1 ber cent1

Age
not
re
port
ed

158

141

393

382

423

174

432

103

132

3
4
3

45
12
24
2

18
9
20

37
21
20
3

15
16
17

44
24
28
7

18
19
23

7
33
17
1

3
26
14

85
30
16
1

34
23
13

10
3
4
1

4
2
3

8
5
4
2

264
120
120
20

250
120
120
18

8
1
1

3
1
1

6
1

Lace................. ............... ...................

425

419

Drawing threads_______________

254
171

248
171

10
6

4
4

12
7

5
4

26
20

10
12

13
17

5
10

30
24

12
14

42
35

17
20

46
31

19
18

3
20

- 1
12

66
11

27
6

Infants’ and children’s wear________

232
135

230
130

16
4
8
12
9
4
3
36

7
3
5
6
6
6
4
10

89
32
29
16
20
6
11
53

39
25
18
8
13
9
16
15

53
14
32
20
22
18
13
52

23
11
20
11
14
26
19
15

24
27
32
46
19
11
19
65

10
21
20
24
12
16
28
19

(‘ )
14

27
7
4
36

17
10
6
10

22
28
45
14
36
5
13
60

10
22
28
7
23
7
19
17

2
5

180
155
69
67
348

6
5
2
10
7
16
6
7

1
18

101
156
72
68
350

13
7
3
19
11
11
4
26

Infants’ knitted garments_______
Berets.. _____________________

Embroidery and beading.............—
M iscellaneou s.-.________________ -

g
33
7
6

5
17
5
9

1
29
4
1

1
15
3
1

> Not shown where number of home workers was less than 50.
* Less than 1 percent.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2
1
3
2

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N.

Industry

Total
40 years,
30 years,
20 years,
18 years,
16 years,
Under 14
14 years,
for
under 50
under 40
under 30
under 20
under 18
under 16
years
whom
age
Total was
re
port Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per
ed
ber cent1 ber cent1 ber cent1 ber cent1 ber cent1 ber cent1 ber cent1

PART I.— IN GENERAL

Hours of work.

Owing to the irregularity of the work it was impossible to obtain
information regarding working hours from all the home workers
visited, but such information was obtained from the chief home
workers in 1,069 families. Although practically all the codes, by
their definition of the term “ employee” , seemed to cover home workers,
34 percent of the home workers interviewed reported weekly hours
that were in excess of their code maximum, which ranged from 36
to 40 hours per week. Approximately one-fourth o f them had
worked at least 60 hours during the week previous to the interview,
and almost one-tenth reported 70 hours or more (table 2). The
median hours worked were 33.7.
Excessively long hours were reported most frequently by workers
on women's knitted garments and on infants' and children’s gar
ments. Almost half of the workers on women’s knitted garments
and one-third of the workers on infants’ and children’s garments
reported 60 working hours or more a week. According to figures
compiled annually by the State Department of Labor and Industry
in Pennsylvania, the only State in which such figures are available,
the hours of work reported by home workers rose steadily through
out the depression.16 With unemployment in almost every house
hold, competition for the work became so keen that families rushed
each consignment through as quickly as possible in order not to lose
their chance at the next consignment. Furthermore, with piece
rates as low as they were, long hours were imperative if home workers
were to earn even a pittance.
Night work, which has always been one of the evils of the home
work system, was still frequent. Many home workers told of rising
several hours earlier than the rest of the family in order to “ get in a
few hours before breakfast” or of sitting up until midnight or later
to finish an assignment that had to be returned the next day. Women
working on lace, tags, and fresh-water pearl buttons in particular
reported that the greater part of their work had to be done at night
because of the schedule of deliveries and collections maintained by the
factory. In the tag industry the total weekly hours of the home
workers seldom even approximated the code limit, but tags are usually
manufactured on order and home workers were required to rush their
work through with all possible speed even though it meant working far
into the night. One family, in which three home workers were employed
steadily at stringing tags, reported that the work was received daily
“ around 6 p. m.” , and as it had to be ready for collection the fol
lowing morning, thev frequently sat up until 2 a. m. to finish it.
The hours oi work reported b y the home workers did not include
the time spent in collecting and returning work. Complaints were
heard on all sides about time lost in this way. According to the
workers it often took from 2 to 3 hours in the best part of the working
day to make the trip to the factory, wait for finished work to be
approved, and return home. One woman interviewed told of wait
ing from 8:30 a. m. to 1 or 2 p. m. on numerous occasions. Home
workers engaged in making infants’ and children’s clothes were partic
ularly affected, as whenever a new style or pattern was given out they
were required to make a sample garment before they left the factory.
i* Industrial Homo W ork in Pennsylvania under the N . R . A ., p. 12. Department of Labor and Industry.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, 1936. (Mimeographed.)

T7552*— 80------8

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T a b l e 2. — Industry and weekly hours of chief home worker

Families of industrial home workers
W eekly hoars of chief home worker
Total

Total......... ................................... ......
Knitted outerwear___________________
Infants’ knitted garments.................... _.
Women’s knitted garments________
____________
Berets______
Other __
__ . . . . . .
Lace_______

_____

________

Drawing threads. _______ ___
Cutting lace_________________ ________
Infants’ and children’s wear_____
Art needlework_______________
Fresh-water pearl bu ttons...............
Dolls and accessories______________
T ags.................................... ...........
Embroidery and beading_____________
Gloves____________ ___________
Miscellaneous__ ___________

Total

Less than 20 20, less than 30 30, less than 40 40, less than 50 50, less than 60 60, less than 70

70 or more

Not
re
ported Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num
Per Num Per Num Per ported
ber
cent 1 ber
cent 1 ber cent 1 ber cent 1 ber cent 1 ber
cent 1 ber
cent 1

1,473

1,069

240

196

207

172

454

298

219
117
101
17

117
77
92
12

35
3
24

31
16
14
1

26
21

17
12

217

182

124
S3

99
83

45
13

20
10

20
12

18
16

18
19

138
109
100
86
76
51
50
192

122
103
68
31
45
33
48
139

17
17
18
3
14
8
15

14
17
26

16
27
22

20
28
15
8
5
5
9
21

ii
5
u

20
9
25
11
12
27

2
8
9
3

156

29
7

102
40
9

35
25
10

10
10

22
6

404

17
10

14
10

23
8

19
8

9
8

1
2
12

.......

16
6
32
55
31
18
53

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N.

Industry

1Not shown where nnmber of families reporting was less than 60.

►

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— -IN GENERAL

Earnings from home work.

Hourly earnings of chief home worker.— The low earnings prevail
ing in home-work industries before the time of the National Recovery
Administration continued after the codes were in effect. Of the
1,044 chief home workers reporting hourly earnings from their home
work, more than half, 55 percent, had earned less than 10 cents an
hour the week previous to the interview and a little more than onethird, 35 percent, had made no more than 6 cents an hour. Twenty
women reported hourly earnings of only 1 cent. In the infants’
knitted-garment industry two-thirds of the workers and in the infants’
and children’s wear industry almost half of the workers had earned
less than 5 cents an hour. Comparatively high earnings of as much
as 20 cents an hour were reported by appreciable numbers of home
workers in only three of the industries studied, gloves, lace, and art
needlework (table 3).
Although many firms had increased to some extent their rates of
pay to home workers after the N. R. A. codes became effective,
mcreased rates did not always mean increased earnings. Many
workers reported that a demand for added work on the article often
accompanied the raise in rates, and because of the extra time needed
to complete this additional work hourly earn in gs amounted to no
more than they did under the old rates. In some instances hourly
earnings had even decreased because additional work had been required
without an increase in pay. Furthermore, even when rates were ad
vanced as much as 75 and 100 percent, as in the button industry, the
original rate was often so low that the increase in earnings amounted
to very little in actual cash. At the time of the study 78 percent of
the home workers engaged in carding buttons were still earning less than
10 cents an hour and none were making as much as 20 cents an hour.
In only two of the industries studied—leather gloves and fresh
water pearl buttons—had piece rates been established under the
codes at the time of this study, and in both of these the rate set for
home workers was less than the minimum set for factory workers.
Although in most of the other industries included in the study the
codes apparently provided by their definition of the term “ employee”
that home workers be paid the same wages as factory workers, only
in the lace industry were any efforts being made to enforce this pro
vision. And even in that industry, in spite of the efforts of the code
authority, the earnings of only a small number of the home workers
were commensurate with factory wages. More than half, 57 per
cent, of the lace workers for whom earnings were reported had earned
less than 20 cents an hour the week previous to the visit, although the
minimum wage set by the code was 32K cents an hour.
Weekly earnings of family.—Because the family group rather than
the individual was the working unit in most households where there
was more than one home worker, the earnings of the individual
worker could not always be determined. Weekly earnings as re
ported in this study, therefore, represent family earnings. In the
majority, 61 percent, of the 1,370 families from which information
was obtained as to weekly earnings, there was only one home worker;
in 39 percent there were two or more. But whether one person or
several worked, the weekly earnings reported by the large majority
of the families were below subsistence level. Forty-eight percent
had earned less than $3 the week previous to the visit; 70 percent had
earned less than $5; and 89 percent had earned less than $10 (table 4).

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T a b l e 3.— Industry and hourly earnings of chief home worker

jpf

Families at industrial home workers
Hourly earnings of chief home worker

Total

Total__________________________________
Knitted outerwear.. ..................................... —

L e o e ...................................................................... Cutting”lace.. ............ ..................... ..............

Miscellaneous........................... ...............................

Total
report
ed

5 cents, less
than 10 cents

Less than 5
cents
Num
ber

40 cents or
more

30 cents, less
than 40 cents

20 cents, less
than 30 cents

Per
cent 1

Num
ber

Per
cent 1

Num
ber

Per
cent 1

Num
ber

Per
cent1

Num
ber

Per
cent1

Num
ber

1,473

1,044

394

268

107

296

99~

134*

219
117
101
17

116
77
91
12

78
3
17
1

67
4
19

32
40
69
3

28
62
66

5
29
13
8

4
38
14

4
2

5
2

217

188

*41

29
18
11

124
03

103
86

138
109
100
80
70
51
CO
102

90
103
98
16
42
29
49
133

184

42
11
3
9
6
2

47
11
3

429

158

(’)

103
40
10
5

17
13

3
4

3
5

21
8

48
6
2
70
34
22
1
69

12
19

46
33

44
39

25
19

40
33
73
6
30
7
1
43

44
32
74

6
39
22
2
6
10
2
48

7
38
22

2
19

2
18

5
10
21

3
15
9

Not re
ported

12
16

Per
cent1

24
22

>N ot shown where nbmber of families reporting was less than 60.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

10 cents, less
than 20 cents

2
21
2

* Less than 1 percent

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N.

Industry

♦
T a b l e 4. — Industry and weekly earnings of fam ilies from industrial home work
Families of industrial home workers
W eekly earnings from home work
Industry
Total

Less than $1
Total
reported

Number

$1, less than $3

PerNumcen t1
ber

$3, less than $5 $5, less than $10 $10, less than $15

$15 or more

Percent i

Number

ber

PerNumcen t1
ber

Percen t1

Not reported
cen t1

1,473

1,370

177

483

296

257

100

454

402

158

Infants’ knitted garments..
Women’s knitted garments.
Berets___________________
Other____________ _______

219
117
101
17

182
105
99
16

45
15

49
5
58

10
49
19

5
47
19

1
44
8
6

1
42
8

1
7

15
2

89
5
67
7

Lace___________________ _____

217

204

Drawing threads_________
Cutting lace______________

124
93

116
88

4
3

3
3

20
12

17
14

24
13

21
15

43
17

37
19

22
22

19
25

3
21

3
24

8
5

Infants’ and children’s wear___
Art needlework.............. ...........
Fresh-water pearl buttons____
Dolls and accessories_________
Tags............................................
Embroidery and beading_____
Gloves______________________
Miscellaneous________________

138
109
100
86
76
51
50
192

128
109
100
78
73
47
50
179

10
1
5
16
23
8

8
1
5
21
32

48
33
58
36
56

22
31
4
9
2
9
18
43

17
28
4
12
3

6
4
1
4
1
3
12
16

5
4
1
5
1

1
7

1
6

8
3

27
30
32
18
6
11
7
50

21
28
32
23
8

62
36
58
28
41
14
2
52

24
9

11
9

22
5

4
29

14
28

36
24

103

PART I.— IN GENERAL

Total.................................
Knitted outerwear___________

1Not shown where number of families reporting was less than 50.

Crr

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

In almost two-thirds of the families reporting earnings of $10 or more
and in 45 percent of those earning between $5 and $10, there were at
least two home workers. Families in which there was more than one
worker, however, were not always assured of these higher incomes,
since in a large number of instances weekly earnings of only $2 and $3
were the result of several persons’ work.
The weekly earnings from home work reported by the families
included in this study correspond closely to the earnings of Penn
sylvania home workers reported for the same year by the Pennsyl
vania Department of Labor and Industry. In 70 percent of the
families in both groups, weekly returns from home work were less
than $5. The median for the Pennsylvania families was $3.54 as
compared with $3.17 for the families in this study. No figures show
ing the trend in home-work earnings under the codes could be ob
tained in the present study, but table 5 shows the weekly earnings
of home workers reported by the Pennsylvania Department of Labor
and Industry 17 for the years just prior to and following the advent
of the National Recovery Administration, compared with the earn
ings of the workers reported in this study in 1934. In 1928 the
median weekly earnings of the Pennsylvania families were $4.65;
in 1932, the year before the N. R. A. codes went into effect, the median
earnings were $2.83; in 1933, $3.01: and in 1934, $3.54. The gain in
1934, however, which may be attributed in part at least to the codes,
was far from bringing earnings back to even the very low level of 1928.
Percent distribution of fam ilies earning specified weekly amounts from
industrial home work in Pennsylvania, 1928 ana 1981-84-, o-nd in 7 States
studied by the U. S. Children’s Bureau, 1984

T a b l e 6 .—

Seven States
studied by
U. S. Chil
dren’s Bureau

Pennsylvania
Weekly earnings from home work
1928

19311

1933

1934

100

1O0

100

4
26
24
36
10

10
43
27
17
2

12
37
27
20
3

8
35
27
23
8

13
85
22
19
11

1 Last 6 months of 1931.

In the 1,473 families included in the Children’s Bureau study
there were 916 families in which there was only one home worker.
For these families it is possible to show the relation between weekly
earnings and the number of hours worked (table 6). Most of the
workers who were employed less than 20 hours a week earned less
than $3, and it was rare that anyone made as much as $5 in less than
30 hours. As the working hours increased, however, earnings did
not increase proportionately as would be expected; about the same
proportion of the home workers earned between $5 and $10 a week
whether they worked 30, 40, or 50 hours. Even among the group
17 Industrial Home Work in Pennsylvania under the N . R . A ., p. 27. Department of Labor and In
dustry, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, 1935. (Mimeographed.)

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— IN GENERAL

working 50 liours or more, 27 percent received less than $3 for their
labor. So low were rates in some industries that the difference in
money between a 40- and a 50-hour week was practically nothing. In
one family the mother, a married daughter, and three younger
children, who were 18, 15, and 14 years of age respectively, were
cutting lace. The week previous to the visit the family group had
worked 80 man-hours; for this amount of work they had received $5.
In another family a mother and three grown daughters were making
doll dresses. Their combined earnings for a typical week were $12.32,
although all four sewed every minute that could be spared from
household duties, from early morning until late at night, 7 days a
week.
Median weekly earnings of families in each industry in which 50
or more families reported earnings are shown in the following list.
Industry

Median weekly
earningt of
¡families

Total....................................................................................$3. 17
Knitted outerwear________________________________________
Infants’ knitted garments____________________________
Women’s knitted garments___________________________
Berets_________________ •_____________________________
Lace_____________________________________________________
Drawing threads_____________________________________
Chitting lace_________________________________________
Infants’ and children's wear______________________________
Art needlework___________________________________________
Fresh-water pearl buttons________________________________
Dolls and accessories_____________________________________
Tags_____ _____________
Gloves___________________________________________________
Other____________________________________________________

1.
1.
4
2.
6.
5.
9.
2.
4
2.
2.
1.
9.
3.

94
13
96
20
59
93
17
73
04
55
44
59
55
98

In analyzing the earnings of home workers it should be borne in
mind that the actual returns were often even less than the sums
reported would indicate. Low as the earnings were, they were
frequently subject to costs that in factory work would be borne by the
employer. Materials and findings were usually furnished, but in
many instances the home workers had to buy or rent and keep in
repair equipment varying in size and cost from crochet hooks to sewing
machines. If power machines were used, the cost of power and upkeep
was a considerable item. Loss of pay for work improperly done,
charges for materials lost or spoiled, time lost in collecting, delivering,
and waiting for materials, and in making samples for which no pay was
received, and the cost of transportation and postage were other items
of expense that frequently had to be met by the workers.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T a b l e 6 .—

Weekly earnings and weekly hours of home worker in fam ilies with only one person doing industrial home work
_____ ________

_____

_____________________________ ________

— —

---------------------- -—

=H5

Families with one industrial home worker
W eekly hours of home worker

Num
ber

Total............................................. - ............................................
Earnings reported------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Less than $1_______ i----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------$1, less than $3____________________________________________
$3, less than $5____________________________________________
$o, less than $10_______________________________________ _____
$10, less than $15__________________________________________

Less than 20

Total
Per
cent
distri
bution

136
315
188
142
45
14
76

100
16
38
22
17
5
2

142
55
63
14
8
2
1

30, less than 40

Per
cent
distri
bution

Num
ber

135

143

916
840

Num
ber

Per
cent
distri
bution

20, less than 30

100
39
44
10
6
1

134
14
62
32
21
4
1
1

10
46
24
16
3
1

Num
ber

40, less than 50

Num
ber

50 or more

Per
cent
distri
bution

Num
ber

Not
Per repeat
ed
cent
distri
bution
238

163

138

100

162

100

167

4
44
23
21
8

2
34
25
21
10
5

2
35
26
22
10
5

1
43
53
41
16
8

1
27
33
25
10
5

59
52
32
22
2

5
61
32
29
11

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N.

Weekly earnings

W
>

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— IN GENERAL

POSSIBILITIES OF ADJUSTMENT OF HOM E WORKERS TO FACTORY
EMPLOYMENT

One of the arguments advanced most frequently in defense of the
home-work system is that home workers could not adjust to factory
employment and would suffer unduly if deprived of their work. As
the purpose of this study was to gatner material that might serve as
a basis for formulating future policies, it seemed desirable to make
certain inquiries regarding the chief factors that might be expected
to affect factory employment— the age of the home worker, her
ability to speak Enghsh, and the extent to which family obligations
or physical or other handicaps would prevent her working outside the
home.
For the majority of the families interviewed it was found that age
alone would not have interfered with factory employment. Seventythree percent of the 2,282 home workers reporting their age were
between 16 and 50 years of age, and this age distribution corresponds
very closely to the age distribution of women reporting their ages
who are employed in manufacturing and mechanical industries as
shown in the United States Census for the year 1930. Sixty-six
percent of the factory workers as compared with 60 percent o f the
home workers were between 20 and 50 years of age.
The group studied was not so lacking in knowledge of English
as to have had great difficulty in adjusting to factory employment.
In only one-fourth of the families was the chief home worker unable
to speak the English language. Most of these families were FrenchCanadians living in northern Maine or Mexicans living in Texas. In
neither locality is the inability to speak English a serious drawback.
Because a large proportion of the workers m these communities are
unable to speak English, it is the custom to hire factory foremen who
speak their language.
Even family responsibilities were not so serious an obstacle as they
are generally assumed to be. In two-thirds of the families visited
either the chief home worker or some unemployed member of the
family was free to take outside employment if it had been available;
many of the home workers, in fact, were unmarried young people
who had lost their regular jobs and were doing home work only
until they could find other employment. In 349, one-third of the
families reporting, however, adjustment would have been difficult.
In some instances the worker was handicapped by illness or was too
old to fit into the routine of the factory. In other instances her
services were needed to care for a family of growing children. In
only 9 percent of these families which would have found adjustment
difficult, however, were there children under 1 year of age; 44 percent
had children under 6 years of age. In many of the latter families
it is quite probable that further investigation would have revealed
possibilities of adjustment through the services of relatives, the use
of day nurseries, or similar arrangements resorted to by other mothers
working outside the home.
77552 s— 36----- 4

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N . R. A.

There would always remain, it is true, an irreducible minimum of
families in which the home worker could not adjust to the factory,
and in which the income without home work would be insufficient
for the family’s support. For these the only alternative may be
relief. But it must be remembered that the earnings from home
work alone, even when there are several workers in the household,
seldom amount to a living wage, and the returns from home work,
if the family has no other sources of income such as wages from
other members of the family, insurance, and savings, must usually
be supplemented by relief. If the work now done in homes were
brought into the plants and paid for at normal factory rates, thus
eliminating the depressing effect of low home-work wages on factory
wages, workers in the industry as a whole would benefit in the long
run, and there would be an immediate gain in that many persons
who had formerly done home work at low wage rates would be em
ployed in factories at higher rates.
In discussing factory employment with the home workers, repre
sentatives of the United States Department of Labor were impressed
with the fact that many of them were extremely anxious to find
regular jobs outside the home, either in the line of work they were
doing or in some other field. One mother of four children, ranging
in age from 4 to 13 years, was vehement in expressing her sentiments
against the practice of home work, and her opinions were held by
many other mothers visited. This mother felt strongly that a
system under which she was paid 10 cents an hour for work that was
rated at 35 cents an hour in the factory ought not to exist, and she
was eager to obtain work in the factory even though she would
have to pay some one to care for her children.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Attem pts to regulate industrial home work through State
laws have proved ineffective. Such laws in the few States
where they exist do not cover all kinds of work sent into the
homes and do not apply to work sent outside the State. Even
though the employer sending out the work and the worker
receiving it may each live in a State having a law regulating
home work, the difficulty of enforcement is obvious, as the law
of the State of origin cannot, follow the goods across the State
line, and the law of the receiving State does not apply to
the manufacturer in another State. The use of contractors as
distributing agents for many manufacturers adds to the diffi
culties of regulation because the manufacturer is relieved of
direct responsibility for his home workers and the contractor
is more difficult to locate and control.
Long experience with the administration of State home-work
laws has convinced State labor officials and other students of
the problem that the difficulties connected with the present
system of licensing home workers, inspecting homes, and
attempting to regulate hours of work and child labor are
insurmountable. Adequate inspection of homes would require
money and personnel far beyond the resources of any State
department of labor. To obtain an accurate record of the
hours and wages of home workers by means of reports from
employers and contractors or by an inspection of pay rolls is
also a virtual impossibility.
Under the National Recovery Administration great gains
were made where the codes prohibited the giving out of home
work. But in the industries in which home work was still
permitted, even though limited by certain regulations, the
ancient evils continued to exist and to constitute a menace to
the higher labor standards that had been achieved for factory
workers. The great majority of the chief home workers in
cluded in this study earned less than a living wage; over half,
55 percent, made less than 10 cents an hour, and 82 percent
earned less than 20 cents. Only 5 percent of the workers re
porting hourly earnings made as much as the usual code
minimum of 35 cents an hour. Even highly skilled work,
requiring long experience, brought only meager returns. Fine
embroidery on infants’ and children’s dresses, for example,
seldom yielded the home worker more than 10 cents an hour
and frequently it brought less than 5 cents an hour. Only
the most expert knitters, making expensive sport costumes,
earned as much as 20 cents an hour. For the simpler un
skilled work, for which factory workers would receive 30 and
35 cents an hour under the code, earnings of 2 and 3 cents an
hour were not unusual. Long hours and night work were
21

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

inevitable if earnings were to amount to even a pittance. It
was rare to find an individual earning as much as $5 in less
than 30 hours and in many of the industries women worked
50, 60, and 70 hours to earn even $3.
A few codes contained definite provisions for regulating the
rate of pay to home workers; m ost codes, even though con
taining no specific provisions governing home work, implied
by their definition of the term “ employee” that home workers
were subject to the same wages and hours as factory workers.
Although in some industries piece rates to home workers have
been raised to a limited extent, in none of the industries in
cluded in the study were the earnings of any large proportion
of the workers found even to approximate those of factory
workers. Even in the glove and lace industries, in which
sincere efforts had been made to raise the level of home
workers* wages, earnings were far from adequate although
they were distinctly higher than in the other industries in
cluded in the study. In the glove industry, which is a wellorganized trade, rates for both home workers and factory
workers were set by union agreement; y e t those for home
workers were 10 percent below those for factory workers. In
the lace industry the attempt of the code authority to set
piece rates that would yield hourly minimum earnings equal
to those provided in the code and to put into operation a
system of records and reports to safeguard these earnings—
something no other industry had done— had failed to bring
the desired results. Only about one-tenth of the home workers
in this industry earned the hourly minimum that it was esti
mated the rates set by the code authority would yield, and
fully one-third made less than half that amount.
In regard to hours of work and the employment of children,
again only the lace industry had made a concerted effort to
regulate them, and again this effort had not succeeded. The
system of reports and records put into effect by the codeauthor
ity failed to accomplish the purpose and led instead to a great
deal of false reporting. Of the lace workers reporting their
hours almost one-fifth had worked 50 hours or more the week
previous to the visit and in some instances 60, 70, and even 80
hours were reported. The same situation existed in regard to
the employment of children. The efforts of the code authority
had, no doubt, some effect upon the number of children em
ployed but, nevertheless, that the terms of the agreement
signed by the home workers were not being kept was evidenced
by the fact that 8 percent of the home workers included in
the study from this industry were under 16 years o f age. This
failure to regulate the hours of work and the employment of
children, like the failure to raise earnings, has been due in
part to the fact that piece rates have been set too low and in
part—in one branch of the industry, at least— to the use of the
contract system ; but in general it is due to the inherent diffi
culties of regulating home work.
Although there is no doubt that in those industries in which
the code prohibited home work some “ bootlegging” went on
and that unscrupulous manufacturers still made use of the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I.— IN GENERAL

system in violation of their codes, it cannot be denied that the
volume of home work greatly decreased after the prohibitions
went into effect. Investigators of the United States Depart
m ent of Labor, while carrying on the present study, reported
that they experienced considerable difficulty in locating persons
actually engaged in home work in sections where in past years
they had only to walk along certain streets to see entire fami
lies absorbed in work that was later abolished under the
codes.
A number of manufacturers who had brought their home
workers into the factory in compliance with the provisions of
the code stated in the course of their interviews with represent
atives of the United States Department of Labor that the diffi
culties of adjustment had not been so great as they had
anticipated and that the advantages of having the worker on
the premises were many: orders could be shipped more
promptly, there was less waste, mistakes could be more readily
corrected when they occurred, and above all when work was
done under personal supervision more efficient methods of
performing particular tasks could often be devised. These
employers felt that if home work in all industries were pro
hibited so that no one employer had an advantage over another
home work could be successfully abolished.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Part IL— INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

The 1,473 families interviewed during the course of the study ob
tained their work from firms in 28 industries. The home-work
situation is discussed separately for eight industries in which 84 per
cent of the workers included in the study were concentrated. In
three of these industries home work had been confined to specific
operations; in another three a system of regulation had been estab
lished; in one, owing to the manufacturers’ interpretation of the code,
home work was still being distributed in one branch of the industry
although the code actually prohibited home work; and in the remain
ing industry, although home work had been prohibited, a stay sus
pending the prohibition was in effect at the time of the study.
KNITTED-OUTERWEAR INDUSTRY

The knitted-outerwear industry as defined in its code included all
establishments producing knitted and crocheted outerwear for men,
women, children, and infants. In 1931 there were 710 firms in this
industry, 400 of them located in New York State.18 A report of the
code authority 19 showed that of the 710 firms, 172 made use of the
home-work system, 90 distributing directly to home workers, 50
distributing through contractors, and 32 distributing both through
contractors and directly to home workers.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Because of the variety and volume of the work and because the
wide geographical distribution of the workers makes control ex
tremely difficult, home work constitutes a major problem in the
knitted-outerwear industry. According to the reports of the code
authority, at the time of the study manufacturers of knitted outer
wear were employing almost 17,000 home workers located in 29
States. The increasing popularity of knitted dresses and berets
during recent years has encouraged home work in this industry. In
Pennsylvania, where comparable figures showing the number of
home workers in the State are available year by year, reports show
that the knitted-outerwear industry is the only industry in the State
in which the number of home workers had increased constantly
during the depression years. Approximately 800 home workers from
this industry were registered with that department in 1928, and in
1934 the number exceeded 2,700.2°
Home work was prevalent in three branches of the knitted-outer
wear industry: infants’ hand-made garments, hand-made headwear,
and women’s hand-made garments. Hand seaming of machine-made
garments was also done in the home, but as it was less common than
the other types of work it was found in only a few instances in the
u Biennial Census of Manufactures, 1931, pp. 269-270. U. S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, 1935.
» Report No. X of the Home W ork Bureau, Knitted-Outerwear Code Authority, under Order N o. 164-86
approved February 4, 1935, p. 72. (Mimeographed.) _ _ ,
„ _
,
.
. . .
20 industrial Homework in Pennsylvania under the N . R . A ., p. 0. Department of Labor and Industry,
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, 1935. (Mimeographed.)

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

course of this study. In the hand-knitting branches of this industry
very little of the manufacture is done in the factory; the inside work
for the most part is confined to samples used for display purposes
or used as models for home workers to copy. Home work on infants’
garments consisted chiefly of crocheting baby sacques or sweaters,
bootees, leggings, and caps, and sometimes included embroidering
simple designs on those articles; home work on headwear consisted of
crocheting women’s and children’s berets; and home work on women’s
garments of knitting women’s dresses, blouses, and sweaters.
Home workers in the headwear and women’s garments branches of
the industry were concentrated for the most part in metropolitan
areas, but those in the infants’ knitted-wear branch of the industry
were recruited in large numbers from small towns and rural districts,
often at great distances from the distributing center. It is doubtful if
the manufacturers in any other industry, except perhaps infants’ and
children’s wear, sent as much work to rural communities as the
manufacturers of infants’ knitted wear sent. A large proportion of
the firms in this industry were located in New York City, where the
provisions of the State home-work law prohibited work on infants’
clothing in tenements.21 New York manufacturers, therefore, sent
their work to small towns and rural districts in order to be free from
local restrictions. One firm alone, which employed several thousand
home workers, sent work to 600 communities. In one small town in
Maine, which has a population of approximately 3,500, it was reported
that work was being sent in by mail from 27 New York and Phila
delphia firms. A framed sign, listing the names and addresses of
several New York manufacturers that gave out such work, hung in
the lobby of the only public building in the town.
Home-work provisions o f the code.

The code for the knitted-outerwear industry, which became effective
January 1, 1934, prohibited home work in some branches of the indus
try but permitted it to continue on hand knitting, hand crocheting,
hand embroidering, and the hand joining of machine-made parts of
garments for the period of 1 year, that is until January 1, 1935, if
performed in accordance with regulations and piece rates which were
to be established. It provided further for the appointment of a com
mittee for the hand-knitting division of the industry to recommend
minimum piece-work rates and also to study the home-work situation
and report to the National Recovery Administration within 6 months
on the practicability of either discontinuing home work altogether or
setting up a system of control.
This committee was duly appointed and submitted its recommen
dations; hearings were held, but no action was taken as a result of
its report until February 1935. At that time, by an administrative
order, the National Recovery Administration authorized the con
tinuance of home work in hand-knitting operations until April 1, 1935,
and appointed a home-work commission to investigate further, to
study home work in the industry, and to supervise the code author
ity’s administration of home-work regulations. The order further
approved a system of home-work regulation that had been submitted
by the code authority and the establishment of a home-work bureau
11 The New York home-work law as revised in 1935 (ch. 182) no longer includes children’s or infants’
wearing apparel in the list of articles on which home work is prohibited.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

at the code authority’s headquarters. This bureau was to enforce
the regulation and to gather data for the home-work commission,
which had been instructed by the National Recovery Administration
to classify all home-work garments and products in the industry and
to recommend standards for minimum piece rates. Under the system
of regulations put into effect, manufacturers and contractors were to
file written assent to the regulations, manufacturers were obliged to
register their contractors and home workers, and contractors were
required to report the names of their employers. Home-work pay
roll records were to be kept available for inspection for a period of 6
months, and records of all other transactions relative to home work
were to be open to inspection by the home-work commission or the
home-work bureau at all times. Employers were further required to
file such information as might be called for at any time.
On February 27,1935, a further stay of the code prohibition of home
work was granted until May 15, 1935, in order to give the home-work
commission further time to make its study. At the time the N. R. A.
codes became invalid, home work was still being given out under the
same conditions as before the establishment of the National Recovery
Administration, and home-work rates were still unregulated.
Hours of work.

Many manufacturers contended that hand-crocheted and hand-knit
ted articles could not be made in the factory because workers would not
be able to concentrate on work of this type for any prolonged period.
It was found, however, that for a large number of the home workers
included in the study a working week of 40, 48, or even 50 hours or
more was not uncommon. Although it is true that a few of the
workers interviewed were elderly women who did home work to “ fill in
their leisure hours,” a much larger number were women under 50 years
of age and young people who made home work a full-time job. In
Maine the home workers were thn wives and daughters of farmers,
lumbermen, and fishermen living in villages where there were few
opportunities for regular employment. There the young girls take
up crocheting and knitting as soon as they leave school, just as city
girls seek store, office, and factory employment. Many of them are
expected as a matter of course to earn their own clothes in this way,
and after marriage they continue the work in order to help with
family expenses.
Almost two-thirds of the chief home workers from whom informa
tion was obtained regarding their hours of work reported a working
week of 30 hours or more, and two-fifths had worked at least as long as
and often considerably longer than the 40-hour week provided by the
code (table 7). The shortest working week was reported by women
crocheting infants’ garments, but even in this group one-half of the
women had worked as much as 30 hours and almost one-fourth had
worked 40 hours or more in the week previous to the interview. The
longest working week was reported by home workers on women’s
knitted garments. Almost three-fourths had worked at least the code
week of 40 hours; more than half had worked at least 50 hours; and
more than one-fourth had worked 70 hours or more. Long hours were
more prevalent in connection with women’s knitted garments than

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

with any other kind of work included in the study. The median hours
reported for this work were 56.9. It was not at all unusual to have
women engaged in this work tell of working until 1, and even 2
o ’clock in the morning, putting in their best hours after the children
were in bed. As one woman expressed it, they “ knit all day and
straight into the night.”
T a b l e 7.— Weekly hours of chief home workers in the knitted-outerwear industry
Knitted-outerwear industry
Infants’ knitted garments

Total

Weekly hours of chief home
worker

Women’s knitted garments

nereis

Percent Num Percent
Percent
Num Percent
distri Num
distri
distri Num
distri
ber
ber
ber
ber
bution
bution
bution
bution

Other

Total families_______

454

Hours reported............. ......

298

100

117

100

Less than 20 hours........
20 hours, less than 30-..
30hours, less than 40...
40 hours, less than 50...
60 hours, less than 60...
60 hours, less than 70...
70 hours or more______

64
60
62
43
22
24
33

21
17
21
14
7
8
11

35
23
31
17
2
5
4

30
20
26
16
2
4
3

3
2
16
12
8
14
22

4
3
21
16
10
18
29

24
23
14
12
9
4
6

26
25
15
13
10
4
7

2
2
1
2
8
1
1

Hours not reported_______

156

219

102

117

101

Earnings.

Rates of pay.— The home work operations on knitted outerwear
demand skill and experience, particularly in the knitted sportswear
branch of the industry, yet in all branches piece rates were extremely
low. The range in rates for the different kinds of work in this study
is shown in the following list:
Article

Infants’ garments (crocheted):
Summer sets (sacque, bootees, and cap).
Winter sets (sweater, leggings, and cap)
Bootees only__________________________
Caps__________________________________
Sweaters________ _____________________
Women’s knitted garments:
Skirts_________________________________
Blouses or sweaters____________________
Bere.ts (crocheted)_________________________

•

Range in rate

..per dozen sets.. $2. 00-$6. 00
__________ d o____ 5. 00-10. 00
per dozen pairs. _ . 20- 1. 60
_____ per d ozen ..
. 60- 1. 26
..................d o ____ 1. 26- 4. 00
--------------- e a ch .. 8. 00-10. 00
__________ d o____ 2. 60- 8. 00
...................do...............36- 2. 76

The rate of pay for all work varied with the quality of the yam»
the intricacy of the design, and to some extent with the size of the
garment, extra-large or extra-long sizes bringing a slightly higher
rate.
Hourly earnings.— The minimum hourly wage provided by the
code of the knitted-outerwear industry for the least skilled workers
exclusive of learners was 35 cents an hour, yet only 8 of the 296
chief home workers reporting hourly earnings for this type of work
made even 20 cents an hour (table 8).

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

T able 8.— -Hourly earnings o f chief home workers in the knitted-outerwear industry
Knitted-outerwear industry

Hourly earnings of chief
home worker

Infants’ knit
ted garments

Total

Women’s knit
ted garments

Berets
Other

Percent Num Percent Num Percent
Num Percent
distri
distri
distri
distri Num
ber
ber
ber
ber
bution
bution
bution
bution
Total families_______
Earnings reported________

296

100

Less than 5 cents_____
5 cents, less than 10___
10 cents, less than 1 5 ...
15 cents, less than 20__
20 cents, less than 25__
25 cents, less than SO__

69
134
47
8
3
3

33
45
16
3
1
1
M

158

116
78
32
4
1

67
28
3
1

103

101

117

219

454

100

ÖT

100

3
40
23
6
2
2

4
52
30
8
3
3

17
59
13

19
65
14

1
3
7

1
1

i Less than 1 percent.

Although earnings varied considerably in the different branches of
the industry, they were incredibly low in all. Home workers engaged
in crocheting infants’ garments reported the lowest earnings in any
industry of the study. Of 116 chief home workers reporting earnings
from infants’ garments, only 6 made as much as 10 cents an hour.
Fully two-thirds earned less than 6 cents and almost half no more
than 3 cents. For the majority of the workers crocheting berets, the
earnings of the chief home worker were between 5 and 10 cents an
hour, and only two workers made as much as 15 cents. Earnings
from women’s knitted garments were somewhat higher, but, with one
exception, this work probably required the most sk J of all the work
included in the study. Only 11 of the 77 chief home workers report
ing their earnings from women’s knitted garments made as much
as 15 cents an hour.
Weekly earnings.— Weekly earnings were correspondingly low. In
only 18 families were the total weekly earnings from home work on
knitted and crocheted outerwear as much as $7.50j in almost twothirds of the families they were less than $3; and m approximately
one-fourth they were less than $1 (table 9). The median weekly
earnings from women’s knitted garments, the most remunerative
work in the industry, were only $4.96; for crocheted berets they were
$2.20; and for infants’ garments $1.13. The median earnings for the
entire industry were $1.94.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PAKT II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

T able 9 .— W eekly earnings o f fam ilies from home work in the knitted-outerwear
industry
Knitted-outerwear industry
Infants’ knit
ted garments

Total

Weekly earnings of families

Women’s knit
ted garments

Berets

Percent Num Percent
Percent
Num Percent
distri Num
distri
distri Num
distri
ber
ber
ber
ber
bution
bution
bution
bution
Total..........................

454

Earnings reported________

402

100

182

100

Less than $1..................
$1, less than $2..............
$2, less than $3________
$3, less than $4________
$4, less than $5..............
$3, less than $7.50
$7.50, less than $10____
$10, less than $16______
$16, less than $20______
$20 or more___________

08
109
49
32
40
50
9
9

24
27
12
8
11
12
2
2

81
77
12
8
2
1

45
42
7
4
1
1

Earnings not reported

219

117

101

105

100

5
13
36
36
8
7

5
12
34
34
8
7

Other

100

29
28
H
8
8

29
28
U
8
8

4
5
i

, i

One woman, who was engaged in knitting women’s sport dresses and
whose family earnings of $6 a week were above the average, reported
that she usually began working about 6 a. m. and knit every minute
she could spare from her housework until 10 p. m. In addition she
knit “ some” every Sunday. If she did not work on Sunday she would
have to “ knit half through the night.” Her 20-year old daughter
did no housework but knit almost steadily from 6 a. m. to 10 p. m.
The girl did not usually work Saturday night but always knit “ some”
on Sunday. Her earnings the week previous to the visit were $4.
Another woman, interviewed at a time when she was engaged on a
rush order, gave the following description of the conditions under
which she was working. On the Thursday previous to the visit she
had been sent material for a pair of chenille sweater fronts for which
she would receive $2.50 when completed. She knit a sample Thurs
day night and sent it to the factory Friday morning. It was approved
and returned that afternoon. She worked until 10 p. m. Friday night,
most of the day Saturday and Sunday, and until 2 a. m. Monday.
She arose at 6 a. m., cooked breakfast, but did no other housework,
and when she was seen at 10 a. m. she had almost completed one front.
She was extremely worried because she had been given orders to com
plete both fronts by Monday night.
A number of the women visited had kept records of their weekly
earnings over a period of several months. The figures below were
copied from the records of a woman who knit sweaters and of one
who crocheted berets, both of them known in the neighborhood as
rapid workers. Although no information is available on the number
of garments in each assignment or on the number of hours and days
spent working on each assignment, the figures are significant m
considering workers’ total earnings from home work.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

Knitted sweaters

Earnings
from each
assignment

Crocheted berets

Earnings
from each
assignment

Date assignment was received:
Date assignment was received:
June 14________
$0. 70
Jan. 26__________________1 $2. 98
June 15__________________
. 70
Mar. 26___________________
4 25
June 16__________________
. 70
5.00
Apr. 6_____________________
June 18___________________
. 70
Apr. 13____________________ 1 5. 48
. 70
Apr. 26--------------------14 98 June 19______________ _
1. 75
Aug. 25__________________
May 5______ _____ ______ 1 1 4. 98
Aug. 27__________________
. 70
May 10____________________1 4. 98
Aug. 29__________________
1. 75
5. 00
May 19__________________
Aug. 29_______ ______ ____
.7 0
6. 00
May 28__________________
Aug. 31__________________
1. 75
May 31__________________
5. 00
Sept. 1___________________
.7 0
* 4 98
June 6-----------. 70
Sept. 4---- -----------------------June 29____________________1 5. 73
Sept. 5___________________
. 70
July 10____________________ 1 4 25
. 70
Sept. 7___________________
July 18____________________
4 50
Sept. 8___________________
. 70
Aug. 16____________________ 1 5. 23
2 cents deduction for tax on check paid to workers.

Charges and deductions.

Many complaints were received from home workers on women’s
knitted garments and infants’ garments in particular regarding
expenditures their work involved which often reduced their earnings
considerably. In Maine the most frequent complaints were of the
cost of shipping. Some of the manufacturers paid postage only one
way and the worker was obliged to pay it the other way. At the
time of the study, August 1934, only one or two firms were paying
insurance on work returned. Some firms had even issued definite
instructions not to insure work. Home workers had learned, however,
either from their own or another person’s experience, that they had
no redress if consignments were lost in the mail or in the receiving
department of the factory and that they usually had to refund the
cost of the yam or lose all chance of further work. Even if they were
not required to pay for the yarn, they lost pay for the work done.
As completed work was seldom acknowledged except by a check in
payment, which arrived from 2 weeks to several months after the
work was mailed, many workers were unwilling to take the risk of
returning articles uninsured. One worker reported that postage
and insurance on six sweater sets for which she was paid $2 cost her
24 cents, 12 percent of her earnings.
Workers in Maine complained also that they were sometimes
charged unfairly for yam. It was the practice oi most of the firms
in the knitted-outerwear industry to take an annual inventory of
stock in January just before style changes were made. At that time
home workers were required to return all yarn and garments in their
possession, and if the factory’s record of the amount of goods returned
during the year did not check with the record of the amount of yarn
issued the home worker was held responsible. One firm even threat
ened legal action if restitution were not made. If the worker did not
“ make good” she received no more work.
Many f amilies reported considerable delay in receiving their pay,
and some failed to receive it at all. One family reported that they
waited exactly 1 year before they received a check for $8 due them
for several consignments of work sent in at various times. A woman
had failed to receive $3.50 due her, although she had been waiting
for more than a year and had written some 15 letters in regard to it.
The firm had acknowledged receipt of the work but had given no

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

reason for not paying. A third worker had failed to receive a pay
ment of $7 for two shipments of work. She had written several times
regarding it, but the firm had replied to the first letter only, telling
her that they were not obligated to pay but giving no reason.
From the women knitting dresses, complaints were heard frequently
in regard to unfair charges for spoilage, time spent in doing over work
and making samples for which no compensation was received and
the cost of calling for and returning work and samples. As these
workers were handling ^expensive materials, they were generally
required to make a deposit before they were allowed to take work from
the factory or, if they could not spare a cash outlay, payment for
the first garment was withheld as a deposit. The value of this deposit
ranged from $2.50 to $10. If the work done was not acceptable to
the factory, the worker was required to ravel the garment and knit
it agam. If she refused on the grounds that the mistake was not
hers, she not only lost pay for the work done but sometimes lost her
deposit as well. Workers claimed that mistakes were often due to
the failure of the employer to give correct and full instructions.
Because of the variations in styles and the intricacy of the various
stitches and designs, home workers knitting women’s garments were
required to submit samples of their work before they were allowed to
make a complete garment. It was not unusual for a worker to sub
mit three, four, and even five samples before her work was approved.
As no pay was received for rejected samples, a great deal of time was
lost in this way. According to the workers interviewed, it usually
took from 1 to 2 hours to make a sample. One woman, who had had
a number of years’ experience in knitting dresses, reported that for
the dress she had just completed she had made five samples before
one was accepted. She said that this represented 1 week’s work for
which she received no pay and that her failure to do the work satis
factorily was due to the fact that she had been instructed merely as
to the number of stitches per inch but not as to the size of the needles
to be used. Other women complained that even after samples had
been approved completed garments were often refused and had to be
raveled and reknit.
Sometimes firms accepted work that they said was not made accord
ing to instructions, agreeing to pay for it later if they were able to
sell it. ^ However, none of the workers interviewed who had been
told this had heard anything further concerning the garments. One
woman interviewed reported that she had had three garments
confiscated” during the past year. Others who reported the same
experience added that they were not shown the garment after it was
rejected. “ They never show you; they just tell you.” One firm
visited during the course of the study required its home workers to
sign a statement containing among others the following provision:
I agree to do over any work that is poorly done or [name of firm] may pay me
for poor work any amount less than the regular price. If work already paid for
is found to be unsatisfactory and I refuse to do the work over, [name of firm] may
deduct the amount paid for this work from the next pay voucher.

Complaints regarding time lost from work in going to and from the
factory and regarding the cost of transportation were made by home
workers in metropolitan areas. Usually new work was obtained when
finished work was returned, but if samples had to be submitted, as
in the case of knitted sportswear, it meant several trips for each

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A’.

garment. Reports were that it took from 1% to 3 hours to reach the
factory, get worked checked, and return home, so that practically
one-half day was lost each trip. Because of the time consumed in
making these trips, many workers found it more profitable to pay
some one to deliver and to collect their work for them. In one neigh
borhood the workers had clubbed together and hired a man to make
deliveries for the group. Each worker paid 40 cents for the collec
tion and delivery of each garment, this price to include the necessary
trips to submit samples and, when necessary, to procure extra yam.
If many trips had to be made, however, an additional 15 cents was
charged. One worker reported that she had had to pay delivery
charges amounting to 55 cents on a garment for which she received
$5.50.
Interstate shipment o f home work.

Conditions in the knitted-outerwear industry illustrate clearly the
difficulties involved in attempting to control industrial home work
when it is sent across State lines. These difficulties arise because
the State in which the work is done has no jurisdiction over the em
ployer, and the employer is the only person who can be held respon
sible for the home work. Furthermore, when all transactions between
employer and worker take place by mail it is difficult to ^obtain
any reliable check on the conditions under which the work is done
or even to know where the home workers are located. For example,
reports of the New York Department of Labor showed that in the
last registration manufacturers of infants’ crocheted wear in the State
had filed registers of home workers containing as many as 12,000
and 21,000 names for each firm. Agents of the United States Depart
ment of Labor, however, in making this study of home work in Maine,
found that the registration was not an accurate census. In order
to secure enough work to keep themselves regularly employed,
women were obtaining orders under four or five names and from as
many different firms. Neighbors, friends, relatives, and even a
3-year-old child were receiving consignments from New York firms
and turning them over to the actual home worker.
LA C E -M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U ST R Y

The lace-manufacturing industry includes 41 mills, located for the
most part in New England and the Middle Atlantic States: Rhode
Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
According to information furnished by the code authority, about
half of these m ills made use of home workers. Only finishing processes
were done in the homes; some firms specialized in a type of lace on
which the finishing processes were not adapted to home work, and
some did not finish their own product but sent it to other mills or to
jobbers to be finished.
Three lace-manufacturing centers were visited in the course of the
study: Providence, R. I., New York City with neighboring New
Jersey cities, and Long Island. Two hundred and seventeen families ^
of 425 home workers were interviewed. In Providence, R. I., in V
the New Jersey cities, and on Long Island most of the home workers
obtained their work directly from the mill. In New York the dis
tribution was almost entirely through contractors.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PABT II.---- IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

H om e-w ork problem in the industry.

Three kinds of home work are found in connection with the manu
facture of lace: thread drawing, scalloping or cutting, and mending.
Lace edgings and insertions come from the loom in the form of a web
usually 6 yards wide and 36 yards long, the bands of edgings or
msertions held together by one or two connecting threads. As many
as 300 bands may make up one web. To separate these the connect
ing threads must be drawn. Wider lace edgings that have deep or
decided scallops and lace yokes and medallions 22 have to be cut from
web with scissors. This process is called cutting or scalloping.
Mending, as the name implies, consists of correcting the flaws that
occur in the weaving. This work was found only once in the course
of the study.
Probably most of the wider edgings and the lace yokes and medal
lions put on the market are sold to manufacturers in the web, and
by far the greater part of the work sent into the home consists of thread
drawing. This was practically the only kind of work being done in
Rhode Island and on Long Island. In New York most of the work
was scalloping, and in New Jersey both kinds of work were being
done.
Home work in the lace industry has always been marked by the
employment of children. Thread drawing is simple work, requiring
mmble fingers but no skill, and even very young children can do it.
Scalloping is not generally entrusted to young children, but children
can assist with the work by counting the pieces and pinning them
in bundles. In the present study 8 percent of the lace workers were
under 16 years of age. In a survey made in Providence by the
Umted States Women’s Bureau 6 months earlier, 17 percent of the
workers were under 16 years, and in a similar study made in Con
necticut prior to the establishment of the N. R. A. codes about 50
percent were under that age. The efforts of the code authority to
eliminate child labor undoubtedly have brought about some reduc
tion in the number of children employed. There is reason to believe,
however, that the difference in the numbers reported in the three
studies can be accounted for mostly by the fact that the families
interviewed in the later studies were less frank in reporting their
use of children.
Home-work regulations in the industry.

The lace-manufacturing industiy offered the best example of an
attempt to regulate home work of all the industries included in the
study. Although the code for the lace-manufacturing industry con
tained no specific provision governing home work,23 as many other
codes did, the definition of the term “ employee” was such as to
include home workers, and the code authority had made a conscien
tious effort to see that this group of workers received the benefits of
the code provisions. The first step in this direction was to establish
piece rates, which, it was believed, would yield the workers the code
wage of 32% cents an hour or $13 for a 40-hour week. To obtain
MUsed largely for trimming underwear.
» In March 1934 a proposal was submitted by the Labor Advisory Board, at a hearing of the lace-manufactoring industry before the National Recovery Administration, to abolish home work by Mav 1 1934
This P/oposal was notaçcepted; the Industry argued against abolition, asserting that home work could be
regulated and the provisions of the code enforced.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

data to be used as the basis for determining piece rates, every mill
distributing home work was instructed to bring 10 percent of the |
home workers, of average ability, into the factory for a period of 1
week and to record their speed. The piece rates set as a result of these
tests were, in some instances, three or four times as high as the former
ra ^eg

In an attempt to prevent the employment of children, to regulate
hours of work, and further to safeguard earnings, an agreement was
drawn up by the American Lace Manufacturers’ Association, which
each home worker was required to sign. In this agreement the
home worker promised, that she would do the work herself j that no
child under 16 years of age would be allowed to assist; that it she
employed assistants each would sign the agreement; that her home
would be kept clean and free from disease and open to mspection
at certain specified hours during the day; that she would not accept
work at a rate yielding less than 32% cents an hour; and that she
would not work more than 40 hours a week even though she worked
for more than one manufacturer. In order that there might be no
misunderstanding regarding this agreement, letters explaining its
conditions were written in five languages and were sent to all home
workers in the industry by the code authority.
All manufacturers and contractors distributing home work were
required to obtain weekly receipts from each home worker showing
the kind and amount of work done, the number of hours worked, and
the pay received; and to file with the code authority each week
certified copies of their pay rolls containing the names and addresses
of home workers and the number of hours each one worked. Alanufacturers distributing through contractors were required to register
the names and addresses of all such agents.
Hours o f work and earnings.

The attempt of the code authority to safeguard the hours and
earnings of home workers through a system o f receipts and reports
did not work out as intended but led, instead, to^much false reporting.
Workers very generally reported that the receipts they signed were
seldom correct; that the hours reported were not those actually worked
but represented the number resulting from the division of their earn
ings by the specified hourly rate of 32% cents. Sometimes the hours
of work were already entered when the receipt was presented for
signature. Sometimes the work arrived at the house of the home
worker with a tag attached, on which was marked the estimated
number of hours required to complete the assignment; this was the
number of hours the worker was requested to report. “ They mark;
you sign,” was the statement heard in one form or another from one
worker after another.
>
Furthermore it was found that many more persons helped with the
work than the company’s books showed. In some families there
were as many as four or more home workers, although only one had
signed the agreement and the name of only one appeared on the pay
roll. Thus the earnings receipted for as those o f one person were ^
often the earnings of several. One home worker interviewed
remarked, “ To make $113 a week means working until 11 o ’clock at
night, and it takes everyone’s help.” The findings of this study
corroborate her statement. Although home-work wages in the lace

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART

n .—

IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

industry had been raised above the level of home-work wages in
most industries, they were still far from equaling factory wages.
The study made m Rhode Island by the United States Women’s
Bureau in April and May 1934, a few months after piece rates for
thread drawing had been established by the industry, first indicated
that the attempts to regulate home work in this industry were not
bringing the desired results. That study, however, was made when
the code authority was just beginning to get under way with its
program of regulation. When the present study was made, 6 months
later, the same locality was visited and many of the same families
were interviewed in the belief that with a longer period allowed for
adjustment the experiment might show different results. Both
studies, however, revealed the same conditions. In both, the families
interviewed were almost unanimous in their contention that piece
rates had been set too low and that few home workers were able to
earn the hourly rates expected of them. They asserted that the
workers taken into the factory for speed tests were not the average
but the best workers and that more operations were demanded of the
home worker than of the factory worker for the same rate of pay, as
home workers were required to return the lace folded and tied or, in
the case of pattern pieces, counted and bunched, whereas factory
workers merely dropped each piece in a basket as the work was
completed. In connection with thread drawing it was said that the
poorer grades of lace, from which it takes much longer to pull the
connecting threads, were being sent into the homes and the better
grades reserved for factory workers who could not so easily camou
flage their hours of work and that quality had not been considered in
setting rates. Many workers reported that they could “ pull” a
band (36 yards) in a few minutes if the lace were very good, but that
it often took an hour to pull the same amount if it were poor.
Hours of work.— A little more than one-third, 34 percent, of the
chief home workers who reported hours of work had worked at least
the maximum hours fixed by the code authority (40) the week previous
to the study and 27 percent had exceeded that limit. Almost onefifth, 17 percent, reported 50 hours or more. Excessively long hours
were reported more frequently by workers engaged in cutting than
by those drawing threads; 29 percent of those who cut lace compared
with 7 percent of those who drew threads had worked 50 hours or
more.
Night work was usual among all the home workers whatever their
total weekly hours of work. The practice of distributing the work
late in the afternoon and requiring that it be completed and ready for
collection the following day— a practice common to many home-work
industries— was general throughout the lace industry. Reports from
home workers that they had to work late into the night, even to 1, 2,
and 3 a. m., in order to finish work on time were heard often enough
to be expected as a matter of course. One woman said that she kept
at work so steadily that all she could see when she looked up from her
work was “ little holes like in net.”
Rates of pay.— The minimum piece rates established by the code
authority for home-work operations on lace were uniform, of course,
for all manufacturers operating under the code. For thread drawing
the rate was 12 cents per gross yards for bands held together with a
single thread, and 18 cents per gross yards for bands held by a double

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

thread. For cutting there was a much wider variation, the rates
ranging from 60 cents per gross yards for lace edgings to $1.80 per
gross yards for lace more than 5 mches wide with complicated “ cut
outs’ ’ on each side.
All the firms interviewed reported that they raised their rates after
the code became effective and that at the time of the study they were
paying at least the equivalent of the rates fixed by the code authority.
Because of the great variation in styles and the different units used
in quoting rates, this statement could not be verified for lace cutting.
However, in thread drawing it was found that all but two of the firms
were paying the rates set by the code authority. Of these two firms,
one was paying a higher rate, 16 cents per gross yards for single
thread and 20 cents for double thread; the other, instead of paying a
different rote for each process, had set a rate for both processes
halfway between the two code rates.
Hourly earnings.— The hourly earnings of the chief home workers
in families engaged in cutting and drawing threads on lace are shown
in table 10. For most of the workers, earnings from either cutting
or drawing threads did not even approximate the 32%-cent minimum
set by the code authority. The median for lace cutting was 18
cents and for thread drawing 19 cents an hour. Only 19 percent of
all the lace workers earned as much as 30 cents an hour.
Returns from cutting were fairly uniform from day to day, but
complaints were almost unanimous from the workers drawing threads
that their earnings depended to a large extent on the quality of the
lace that fell to their lot. In lace that is woven too tightly or that is
too heavily starched the threads break frequently and do not pull
easily. If the lace were exceptionally good, a worker might earn as
much as 45 cents an hour, and if it were poor, she might make only
9 cents, 6 cents, and even 4 cents an hour. One family reported
having received such “ bad” lace on one occasion that four of them,
working together all afternoon and until midnight, earned only 28
cents.
T a b l e 10.— H ourly earnings o f chief home workers in the lace industry
Lace industry
Total

Drawing threads

Cutting

Hourly earnings of chief home worker
Percent
Percent
Percent
Number distribu- Number distribu- Number distribution
tion
tion
217

124

Earnings reported---------

188

100

103

Less than 5 cents___
5 cents, less than 10..
10 cents, less than 15.
15 cents, less than 20.
20 cents, less than 25.
26 cents, less than 30.
30 cents, less than 35.
85 cents, less than 40.
40 cents or more____

2
28
34
44
26
18
21
8
7

1
15
18
23
14
10
11
4
4

Earnings not reported...

Total families____

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

12
21
24
16
9
12
6
3
21

93
100

100

12
20
23
16
9
12
6
3

2
16
13
20
10
9
9
2
4

2
19
15
24
12
11
11
2
5

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

Although the hourly earnings reported by the home workers in this
industry tell far short of the standard to which the code authority
had sought to raise them, when compared with home-work earnings
in most of the industries included in the study they were high. Fortythree percent of the chief home workers m the lace industry as com
pared with 19 percent of the chief home workers in all industries
earned 20 cents an hour or more. In the glove industry, however,
hourly earnings were somewhat higher than in the lace industry: 43
percent of the glove workers as compared to 4 percent of the lace
workers reported earnings of 40 cents an hour or more. In no other
industry except the glove industry were earnings even approximately
as high as in the lace industry.
Weekly earnings.— The median weekly earnings of families in the
lace industry were $6.59. Returns from lace cutting were consider
ably higher than those from thread drawing, 49 percent of the cutters
as compared with 22 percent of the thread drawers having reported
weekly earnings of $10 or more (table 11). At the time of the study
lace cutting could be obtained with greater regularity than thread
drawing, which probably accounts for the higher earnings among the
cutters. Almost twice as large a proportion of the families of the
cutters as of the thread drawers reported a full 6- or 7-day week.
Of the chief home workers 19 percent of the cutters as compared
with 3 percent of the thread drawers had worked 60 hours or more
the week previous to the visit.
T able

11.— W eekly earnings o f fam ilies fro m home work in the lace industry
Lace industry

Weekly earnings of families

Total

Drawing threads

Gutting

Percent
Percent
Percent
Number distribu Number distribu Number distribu
tion
tion
tion
Total families....................................
Earnings reported___________ _______ _

217

124

204

100

116

100

Less than $1........................................
$1, less than $ 2 ...____ _____________
$2, less than $3______ ____ ____ _____
$3, less than $4................. ...................
$4, less than $5______ ______________
$5, less than $7.50........ ........... .............
$7.50, less than $10_________________
$10, less than $15..................................
$16, less than $20.................................
$20 or more...........................................

7
6
28
12
25
41
19
44
16
8

3
3
18
6
12
20
9
22
8
4

4
4
16
9
15
27
16
22
3

8
3
14
8
13
23
14
19
3

3
2
10
3
10
14
3
22
13
8

3
2
U
3
11
16
3
25
15
9

Earnings not reported............ ...................

The comparatively higher weekly earnings for home workers in
the lace industry were due in part to higher piece rates but in part
to the fact that in 60 percent of the families working on lace there
were at least two home workers and in 22 percent there were three
or more. How the amounts that appeared on the weekly pay roll
as the earnings of one home worker were often earned is shown by the
following remark made by one of the workers: “ No lady can pull
lace to get $13 in 40 hours. Last week I got $13, but it was for

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

2 weeks and for the work of two ladies.” The name of only one of
the “ ladies” appeared on the pay roll. Her share of the $13 was $9,
but she had earned it with the assistance of her husband and two
boys, aged 11 and 14 years, who, with herself, constituted one of the
two “ ladies.”
In 87 of the families visited who were working on lace there was
only one home worker. For 72 of these workers it is possible to show
the difference between the hours they actually worked and the
number of hours that they would have worked to earn the weekly
amounts reported if prevailing piece rates had yielded the earnings
estimated by the code authority. Allowing 1 hour’s leeway it was
found that only 15 of the 72 workers had been able to maintain a
rate of speed that would yield the expected hourly earnings of 32 %
cents, and 57 worked much longer. Of the latter, 25 had worked
more than twice the hours expected and 15 had worked one and a
half times as many hours.
INFANTS’ AND CHILDREN’ S WEAR INDUSTRY

The infants’ and children’s wear industry includes manufacturers
of a great variety of children’s apparel, from infants’ clothing to that
of boys and girls 14 years of age. Not all manufacturers of infants’
and children’s clothing operated under the infants’ and children’s
wear code, however. Because some firms, manufacturers of infants’
knitted outerwear, for example, were already operating under other
codes at the time the code for this industry was established, and
because in some firms more important items of production 24 made
operation under another code preferable, manufacturers of infants’
and children’s wear were given considerable latitude in electing the
industry-group with which they wished to affiliate. Only firms
operating under the infants’ and children’s wear code were included
in the study as representative of the industry.
Manufacturers of infants’ and children’s wear are located prin
cipally in the Eastern States—in New York, Pennsylvania, Con
necticut, New Jersey, and Massachusetts— but there are also sub
stantial manufacturing centers in about 30 other States, as far south
as Texas, as far west as California, and as far north as Michigan and
Maine. Because much of the work done outside the factory in the
Eastern States is sent to homes in scattered communities difficult
to locate, the city chosen for the study of home work in the industry
was San Antonio, Tex., an important southern center where home
workers are concentrated in the immediate locality. This city was
also of interest because an exemption from the minimum-wage pro
vision of the code had been granted to local manufacturers m that
district permitting a minimum hourly rate of 20 cents for factory
workers and requiring piece rates fornom e workers to be computed
on this basis. It was thought desirable, therefore, to ascertain how
this regulation was being observed.
One hundred and thirty-eight families from this industry, including
232 home workers, were interviewed in the course of the study.
Practically all these workers were receiving work from San Antonio
firms.25
« Manufacturers in this industry do not usually specialize in garments of one type or size.
25 Seven of the families doing home work on infants’ and children’s wear were located in New York City
and in Newark, N. J.. and were interviewed in the course of visits to workers in other industries.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

Home-work problem in the industry.

The home-work system has always been used extensively in the
mtants and children’s wear industry and at the time of the study
this industry probably ranked second only to the knitted-outerwear
industry in the number of home workers employed. In 1932, accord
ing to the code authority, there were approximately 23,000 home
workers in the industry, constituting over one-fourth of the total
number of employees.
In the Eastern States the home-work problem of this industry is
like that of the knitted-outerwear industry. In both industries
home work was prohibited at the time of this study26 in tenements
in New York State, and New York City manufacturers (who con
stitute a large proportion of the employers in this industry) were
sending their work into other cities and States, sometimes at long
distances. In both industries, also, a large part of the work was
being given out through contractors. In San Antonio the situation
was somewhat different. Most of the work was being given out to
families in the immediate locality and directly to the home workers.
Contractors were being used by only a few firms and only for the smali
part of the work that was sent outside the city.
. T^e tome-work operations on infants’ and children’s wear consisted
of hand work of all kinds and some machine sewing.27 The hand
processes included not only decorating— embroidering, hemstitching
and smocking— but often the seaming and hemming of the garment
as well. The work varied in the degree of skill required but much
of it was fine and exquisite. All seaming was French seaming and
only the daintiest stitching was accepted. The designs were neces
sarily small and therefore trying to the eyes.
Five infants’ and children’s wear firms were located in San Antonio
drawn there from the East by the abundant supply of cheap Mexican
labor. One of these firms was a branch of a New York firm- the
others were local concerns. With the exception of one firm, which
employed 134 factory workers, they were comparatively small, the
number of inside workers varying from 9 to 30. At the time of the
study practically all hand processes were being done outside the
factory. Before the advent of the National Recovery Administration
some of this work was done in the factory, but with the increase in
factory wages under the codes it was transferred to home workers.
. Practically all the home workers included in the study who made
infants’ and children’s clothes were Mexican. As would be expected
with such highly skilled work, most of the workers were older girls and
women. Nevertheless, 12 children under 16 years of age. 5 of whom
had not yet reached their fourteenth birthday, were found engaged in
this work.
Hom e-work provisions o f the code.

The infants’ and children’s wear code, which became effective April
9, 1934, provided that no machine sewing should be done in the
home but allowed home work on hand processes to continue. It
paved the way, however, for the regulation of the home work that
continued, by providing that within 6 months (that is by Oct. 9
1934), the code authority should recommend to the National Recovery
* T*1® New York home-work law as revised in 1935 (ch. 182) no longer includes children’s or infants’
wearing apparel in the list of articles on which home work is prohibited
mianra
n In violation of the code prohibition.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

Administrator appropriate means for the control of home work in the
industry.
>
Soon after the code was adopted in May 1934 several Texas firms,
including four of the five located in San Antonio, were granted an
exemption from the minimum-wage provision, permitting them to
pay a m inim um rate of 20 cents per hour; i. e., a rate lower by 10 cents
than the southern differential specified in the code, which permitted
manufacturers to pay a weekly rate of $8 for 40 hours’ work. This
exemption was granted, however, on condition that home workers
receive the same rate of pay as factory workers. Furthermore, these
firms were required to submit to the National Recovery Administrator
within 30 days plans for the regulation of home work in their factories.
At the time of the study no plan had been adopted for regulation of
any kind.
Hours o f work.

In only one other industry included in the study—women’s knitted
garments— were excessively long working hours reported so generally
as in the infants’ and children’s wear industry. A working week of
50, 60, and even 70 hours was not uncommon. Of 122 chief home
workers, from whom information was obtained regarding their hours
of work the previous week, almost two-thirds had worked the 40-hour
code week or longer, while one-third had worked at least 60 hours,
and almost one-fifth, 70 or more. The median hours of the chief
home workers in this industry were 48 as compared with 34 for all
workers included in the study. In most Mexican households visited,
young girls who were not otherwise employed were expected to work
at least factory hours and frequently much longer at home work. In
one typical family, two girls 22 and 28 years of age averaged 12 hours a
day, 6 days a week, embroidering infants’ garments. On Saturday
they had “ 4 hours off to rest and do as they please.”
Night work was common. Many families worked until 11, 12, and
even 1 o ’clock. Some firms required that the work be returned daily;
others demanded deliverv at least three times a week, and with part
of the day spent in trips back and forth to the factory late hours were
a necessity. One woman said that when she worked in the factory she
earned $8 a week and had time for recreation, but doing home work
she had to work “ all the time” and usually earned less. The previous
week she had worked 90 hours and earned $4. Night work was
particularly trying to home workers in San Antonio, not only because
the work was fine and required painstaking care, but also because few
of the houses in the Mexican quarter were equipped with electricity,
and the work had to be done by the light of kerosene lamps. Many
of the workers, especially the middle-aged women, complained of
failing eyesight.
Earnings.

Rates of pay.— Rates of pay varied with the kind and amount of
work to be done. One factory had more than 100 home-work
patterns with a specific rate for each. The price paid for the home
work operations in the study ranged from 10 cents a dozen for infants’
dresses, on which the hem had to be stitched by hand, the buttonholes
made, and the N. R. A. label attached, to $9 a dozen-for dresses com
pletely hand-made and elaborately embroidered. For a dozen of the
latter land a fast worker required approximately 96 hours.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

Hourly earnings.— Practically all the home processes on infants’
children’s wear are highly skilled and almost perfect work is
expected of the worker, yet the hourly earnings reported did not equal
those usually received for unskilled labor. In spite of the fact that
under the provisions of the exemption order granted San Antonio
firms, home workers were to receive the same rate of pay as factory
workers, and in spite of the fact that under the National Recovery
Administration some manufacturers had increased their rates in some
instances as much as 30 percent, only 2 of the 90 chief home workers
giving information as to their hourly earnings made as much as 20
cents, and almost half earned less than 5 cents. Details of the
hourly earnings of chief home workers in the infants’ and children’s
wear industry are given in the following list:

Hourly earnings of chief home worker

Number of
Percent
workers
distribution

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

138

Total reported............. ..........

100

47
44
4

Less than 5 cents____________
5 cents, less than 10_______
10 cents, less than 15____
15 cents, less than 20........
20 cents, less than 25_________
Not reported........................... ...

40
4
2
2

2
2

Weekly earnings— In 43 percent of the families doing home work
on infants’ and children’s garments there were at least two home
workers, and in almost two-thirds of the families the chief home
worker, at least, had worked the 40-hour code week or longer. In
only 12 families, however, were the combined weekly earnings from
home work as much as the $8 individual minimum permitted by the
exemption to the code. As the following list shows, in almost half
the families weekly earnings ranged from $1 to $3; in less than onefourth were they as much as $5.
Weekly earnings of family

Total.........—.....................................
Total reported________________

Number of
families

Percent
distribution

138
128

100

Less than $1..... ...........................
SI, less than $2......................................
$2, less than $3...................... ...............
S3, less than $4— ............ _...................
$4, less than S3________________
$5, less than $7.50...................................
$7.50, less than $10____ ____ __________
$10 or m ore.............. ........................

10
32
30
18
9
16
6
7

8
25
23
14
7
13
5
5

Not reported................................................

The median weekly earnings for this industry were $2.73, whereas
for all industries included in the study they were $3.17. Manyextreme cases of long hours and low earnings were reported, of which
the following is typical. Three women in one family, all between 25
and 35 years of age, had been doing home work for the past 6 years.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

None of them had ever worked in a factory but they said they would
have been glad to do so if jobs had been available. The week of the
visit they were smocking and embroidering infants’ dresses. The
two older women “ did nothing but sew” 14j4 hours a day, 6 days a
week. In addition to helping with the home work, the other woman
did the housework and made daily trips to the factory to obtain and
return work. The combined earnings of the group for the week
previous to the visit were $10.70. The two women working the
longer hours made together less than half the code wage m twice the
code hours.
Factory adjustments to home-work provisions.

Between the date the code for this industry went into effect and
the time of the present study the number of both inside and outside
workers in San Antonio factories had fallen off sharply. The de
crease in the number of factory workers was said to be due to the
inability or unwillingness of manufacturers to pay the minimum
wage, in spite of the fact that the manufacturers in this locality had
been granted an exemption from the Southern differential already
provided in the code. The decrease in the number of home workers
was the result of curtailed production following the reduction in
factory force. Before the code became effective, the number of
factory workers employed by individual San Antonio firms ranged
from 30 to 400 and the number of home workers from 100 to 820; at
the time of the study the number of factory workers reported varied
from 5 to 134 and the number of home workers from 50 to 400 per firm.
From reports of home workers generally and from statements made
by members of several firms, it would seem that some manufacturers
were taking advantage of the home-work system to avoid paying the
m in im u m wage in the factory. A startling number of instances were
found in which hand workers who had not been able to make the
m in im u m wage set by the code had been dismissed from the factory
with the suggestion that they do the work at home. As no other work
was available, many of these workers had agreed. ^When interviewed
they were doing the same work they had done in the factory, but
according to their reports they were averaging only $2 and $3 a week
instead of $4 and $5 as in the factory, although their hours of work
were as long as if not longer than their factory hours. One worker
interviewed, 26 years of age, worked in the factory during the day
and did home work at night. Being unable to make the minimum
wage of $8 per week at the prevailing piece rates, she was allowed to
apply the proceeds from her home work to her factory earnings m
order to bring her wages up to the required sum. Her aunt, with
whom she lived, had rented a machine at a cost of $2 a month and
was helping with the work, because even when the girl did night work
she was not always able to make the minimum wage. The week pre
vious to the interview, although they had worked 84 man-hours, the
combined earnings of the girl and her aunt had amounted to only

$8 63

San Antonio firms had adjusted in different ways to the prohibition Jk
of home work on machine operations. Three of the five firms con
tinued to give out the work regardless of code provisions. Twenty
families visited in the course oi the study were doing machine work.
A fourth factory had changed the style of its garments in order to

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

eliminate some of the seams and had the one remaining seam done
by hand. As a result of this change many workers complained that
they were being required to do more work at the same rate of pay.
The fifth firm, which was connected with a New York establishment,
no longer received orders for machine-made dresses; these were being
sent to a branch factory in the Philippines where wages were con
siderably lower than in San Antonio.
A R T -N E E D L E W O R K IN D U ST R Y

The art-needlework industry includes manufacturers concerned
with the stamping of goods and the importation or original sale of
goods used in connection with art needlework, the processing or
importing of yarns and threads for this work, and the sale of artneedlework accessories and tapestry needle-point. It was estimated
that there were 62 art-needlework firms in this industry and that most
of them employed home workers; the majority were located in New
York State. One hundred and nine families, employed by seven of
these firms, were interviewed in the course of the study. Practically
all these families were located in New York City.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Home work in the art-needlework industry consists of various kinds
of hand work, such as embroidery, crochet, needle-point. As a rule
the work is confined to samples or articles to be displayed in the artneedlework departments of retail stores for the purpose of stimulating
the sale of materials, but occasionally home workers are employed on
articles for regular retail trade as well. While most concerns employ
a few sample workers inside the factory, most of this work is done in
the home.
As the home-work processes on art needlework are highly skilled
and the materials valuable, practically all the home workers were
adults. Only 11 of the 130 reporting their age were under 20 years
of age, and none were under 16 years. A surprisingly large number,
almost one-fourth, were 50 years of age or older. Many were men,
heads of families who had lost their regular jobs in the depression and
had turned to industrial home work, hoping to some extent at least
to support their families.
Home-work provisions of the code.

Under the provisions of the art-needlework code, approved March
16,1934, home work was prohibited except on the finishing of samples
and display models not mtended for resale. This prohibition went
into effect April 1, 1934, but individual firms upon which it would
work a particular hardship to adjust to the prohibition within such a
short period were permitted to obtain stays up to 2 months. As the
reater part of the home work in this industry had always been con
ned to samples and display models, the actual reduction in home
work was slight.
Contractors as well as manufacturers were covered by the broad
home-work provisions of the code, and both were required to report
the names and addresses of all home workers to the code authority.
The code contained no provision for regulating the rates of pay to
home workers, and the code authority had made no attempt on its
own authority to regulate their pay. At the time that the codes

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

became invalid, however, an amendment to the code had been
announced, which provided for the establishment of a committee to 4 ^
prepare a schedule of rates for home workers and to study the “ broad
problem” of home work in the industry with a view to making
recommendations as to the possibility of either eliminating or regu
lating home work.
Hours o f work and earnings.

Hours of work.— The maximum number of hours permitted under
the labor provisions of the art-needlework code, which apparently
applied to home workers as well as to factory workers, was 40 per
week. Yet two-fifths, 40 percent, of the chief home workers reportmg
their hours of work in this study had been employed more than 40
hours in the week previous to the interview. Almost one-fifth,
17 percent, reported 60 hours or more. One woman reported that
she sometimes worked until 2 and 3 o ’clock in the morning in order
to finish a piece of work that the factory had made her promise to
return at a given time. Another woman said that she worked “ just
as long as she could hold out” ; on some days she kept at the work
from 8 a. m. to 6.30 p. m. and after an interval for supper worked from
7 to 10 or 11 p. m. On other days 5 or 6 hours were all she could
manage. A third woman, who could not work by artificial fight,
worked regularly 8 hours during the day on home work and did her
housework, including the washing and ironing, at night.
Many other workers reported night work and equally long hours,
refuting the arguments of certain employers in this industry, as well
as in many other home-work industries, that it would be impossible
to have this type of work brought into the factory, as workers could
not concentrate on it for 7 to 8 hours with only a lunch-hour inter
ruption.
Rates of pay.— Rates of pay to home workers varied with the type
of work and the time required to complete it. For such articles as
towels with only a small amount of simple embroidery, which could
be finished by a rapid worker in a few hours, the rate of pay was as
low as 25 cents a towel. Larger articles requiring more time and more
careful and skillful work brought higher prices; the rate for hooking
rugs, for instance, was $ 1.12% a square foot, and for cross-stitched
lunch cloths $3.50 apiece and up.
There seemed to be no systematic method by which rates of pay
were set in the different firms visited. In some, sample makers in
the factory served as rate setters; in others, the methods were more
haphazard. One manufacturer interviewed said that he “ had an
idea” how long it would take to do each article and paid accordingly.
Another reported that the price for each piece of work was reached
through “ haggling.” In other words, he paid the lowest rate he
could persuade the home worker to take, regardless of the price he
was paying other home workers for the same article. Still another
manufacturer reported that he fixed his rates according to the time it
took a home worker to make each article after she had made several
and acquired speed on each pattern.
Several home workers reported that when they were working on
new articles, for which the price to the retailer had not been set, they
were not informed until after the article had been put on the market
how much they would be paid for their work. One woman, working

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART I I — IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

for a manufacturer who sells his entire factory output to two chain
stores, said that she never knew how much she would get for a new
article until samples were submitted to these two concerns and the
sale price settled by them. Sometimes she waited 3 or 4 weeks for
payment.
Hourly earnings.— A considerable number of the home workers,
29 percent, had not done home work before the code was established
for the industry; of those who had, however, only one reported any
increase in the rate of pay since the code became effective; five reported
a decrease, and the remainder had found no change. Nearly twothirds of the chief home workers in the families visited reported
hourly earnings of less than 15 cents, and only one-fifth made as
much as 20 cents.
Number o)
Hourly earnings of chief home worker:
families
Total----------- ------------ ------ -------------------------------------------------------------------- 109
Less than 5 cents------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 cents, less than 10--------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 cents, less than 15------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 cents, less than 20------------------------------------------------------------------------------20 cents, less than 25------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------25 cents, less than 30------------------------------------------------------------------------------30 cents, less than 35------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not reported--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|9
"
1
"

As one woman, engaged in faggoting collars, said, “ To make
15 cents an hour you have to be quick." This woman was an expert
worker and was often called into the factory to set the rate for new
designs. At the factory she was paid 20 cents an hour for her work,
but for home work on a piece-work basis she averaged only 15 cents
an hour although she worked at the same rate of speed. Another
worker visited reported that $ 1 a day for 12 and sometimes 14
hours of work would be a fair estimate of her home-work earnings
during the past 2 years regardless of the kind of work on which she
was engaged.
.
.
, ,,
Weekly earnings.— Weekly earnings, which are shown in the follow
ing fist, fell far short in most instances of the code minimum of $13,
the median being $4.04. Only 10 percent of the families interviewed
had earned as much as $ 10, and 34 percent had made less than $ 3 the
previous week. These earnings, although lower than for knitted
garments, lace, and gloves, were somewhat higher than for the other
industries included m the study and considerably higher than in
boih6— tli© doll, teg, and infants* knrtted~wear indnstries for example.
Number of

Weekly earnings of families:
families
Total---------------- --------------- -------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------- - 109

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1
16

20
17
13

to CrnC>-cO

Less than $1_______
$1, less than $2-----$2, less than $3-----$3, less than $4-----$4, less than $5-----$5, less than $7.50_
$7.50, less than $10.
$10, less than $15_.
$15, less than $20_.
$20 or more_______

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N . R. A.

For 88 of the 109 families visited in which there was only one home
worker it is possible to show the relation between earnings and hours
of work. In only 11 instances were individual workers able to earn
as much as $5 in less than 40 hours, and only 14 made as much as
that by working 40, 50, and even longer hours; in fact, of 36 workers
in the group employed 40 hours or more, 22 earned less than $5.
Charges and deductions.

Almost half of the home workers working on art needlework who
were interviewed reported that they were required to make deposits
varying in amount from $1 to $2.75 to cover the cost of materials that
might be spoiled and of such equipment as frames for hooked rugs
and waffle work. This deposit was returned when work was dis
continued.
Serious complaints were made of the practice of rejecting imper
fect work. According to reports, the practice of most firms when
work was poorly done was to allow the worker to keep the article in
question if she was able to pay for the materials used; otherwise the
company took it and the worker received nothing for her labor. As
the materials used were expensive a home worker was seldom able to
pay the amount demanded for the rejected article. It was reported
that these articles were later sold by the firm at a profit, but this
was not verified.
Before the time of the National Recovery Administration many
firms were in the habit of paying home workers’ carfare to and from
the factory, but this practice was discontinued when the code went
into effect. As many workers made three and four trips a week the
added expense affected their earnings appreciably.
F R E S H -W A T E R PEARL B U T T O N IN D U STR Y

The manufacturers of fresh-water pearl buttons established a code
separate from the other branches of the button industry. Although
it is the largest single branch of the button industry, controlling more
than one-third of the button production in the United States, the
fresh-water pearl button industry is comparatively small, having
altogether less than 5,000 factory employees.
Fresh-water pearl buttons are made from fresh-water mussel shells
found largely in the streams of the Mississippi Valley. Muscatine,
Iowa, is the center of the industry but isolated factories are to be
found in neighboring States and a few are located in Eastern States.
The information for this study was obtained in Muscatine and all
the 100 families interviewed were located there.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Button carding has been a home process for more than 40 years;
the practice was brought from Germany with the beginning of the
industry in this country. Although a large proportion of the button
manufacturers sell their entire output in bulk to clothing manu
facturers, it is estimated that between 12% and 15 percent of the
buttons that are manufactured are carded. Whenever carding is
done it is a home process. Only samples are carded in the factory.
The work is highly seasonal and the maximum number of home

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

workers is two or three times as much as the minimum, In MuscaQ . tine there were seven finishing plants, of which six had at least a
part of their buttons carded. At the peak season one of these firms
employed approximately 600 home workers; the remaining five
together employed between 275 and 300. No contractors were
employed by the firms visited. One factory made use of district
agents who were paid a commission on the amount of work handled,
but the home workers’ pay roll was made up in the factory and pay
envelopes were delivered directly to the worker.
Before the National Industrial Recovery Act was passed much of the
carding of buttons was done by children. Of the 158 persons reporting
home work in the families included in this study, however, only 9
were under 16 years of age. Although the number of children work
ing was no doubt larger than reported, the efforts to prevent their
employment that were made by the one firm employing practically
two-thirds of the home workers in the locality undoubtedly had had
some effect. This firm required every parent applying for home
work to sign a statement that children under 16 years of age would
not be permitted to assist with the work. In addition, this firm
required all home workers to sign the same pay roll, believing that
if they could see the amount of one another’s earnings it womd act
as a deterrent to the employment of children. Nevertheless, several
flagrant examples of family labor that included young children were
found. For example, in one family the mother, two girls aged 13
and 10, and a boy of 7 were the home workers. The children worked
after school and in the evenings, the number of hours they worked
depending upon the amount o f work on hand. The 10-year-old girl
assumed all responsibility for obtaining and returning the work, even
signing the pay roll and collecting the pay envelope.
Home-work provisions o f the code.

The code for the fresh-water pearl-button industry, which became
effective March 12, 1934, neither prohibited nor limited home work.
It provided, however, that the code authority should study the home
work problem in the industry and within 5 months suggest appro
priate provisions for its regulation. The code also required the code
authority, with the approval of the administrator, to set piece rates
for the carding of buttons in homes. Accordingly, in the summer of
1934 piece rates for carding were submitted to the National Recovery
Administration by the code authority. They were approved and
became effective, subject to review after a 2 months’ trial period, on
October 27, 1934. It was estimated by members of the industry
that the new rates represented an increase of 100 percent over those
in effect in July 1933 and that they would yield hourly earnings of
from 18 to 23 cents.
At the time the N. R. A. codes became invalid, these rates were still
in effect, and a new proposed code was under consideration that would
have covered all branches of the button industry.
Hours of work.

The hours worked by button carders depended entirely upon the
frequency with which orders were received at the factory. Many
workers complained of the irregularity of the work and when an
assignment was received rushed to complete it as soon as possible so
that they might not lose a chance at the next. At the time of the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

study most families were receiving only one or two assignments a
^Because of the workers’ desire to obtain as much work as possible,
and because most of the plants required that assignments be returned
within 1 or at most 2 days, long hours were the rule when work was
available. Often the distribution of the buttons was made around 4
p. m., and the work had to be done at night if it was to be returned
the next day. Some families made it a practice to rise m time to
card 5 or 6 gross of buttons before breakfast. One mother reported
that she and her two daughters, 11 and 12 years, had started carding
buttons at 6:30 a. m. the morning they were visited and had worked
until 8:15 a. m., when the girls had eaten breakfast and left for school.
The night before all three had worked from 6 to 9 p. m.
Earnings.

Bates oj pay.—Button carders were paid for the number of cards
filled, a gross of buttons being the unit. The rate varied with the
number of buttons on the card, the smaller number bringing the higher
rate because more cards had to be prepared (tinfoil cut and fitted to the
card) for the same number of buttons, and this necessarily slowed up
^ Under the schedule of rates set by the National Recovery Admini
stration, which went into effect the week after the study, the button
carders had had two increases in piece rates since July 1, 1933. The
following list shows the minimum piece-work rates paid home workers
for carding fresh-water pearl buttons. A range in rates indicates a
difference between factories.

Number of buttons on card

Rate per gross
Rate per gross Rate per gross after Oct. 27,
1934 (effec
before Mar.
from Mar.
tive date of
12, 1934 (ef
12,1934, to
rates ap
fective date Oct. 27,1934
proved by
of code)
N. R. A.)
Cents

2
2%
2 -3)4
2 -3
2'A-3lA
2M-4
3 -6
6 -10

Cents
2)4~3
3)4
3 -4)|
'lyT-'&Yi

3)4-4
2/4~5
4 -6)4
7 -10

Cents

4
5
5
534
6
6
7
8

Hourly earnings.— It was estimated by members of the industry
that the piece rates for carding buttons that were in effect at the
time of the study were yielding earnings of 15 and 16 cents an
hour, and that under the new rates these earnings would be increased
to from 18 to 23 cents an hour. None of the chief home workers
in the families interviewed, however, reported a rate of production
that yielded such earnings. The 12-button card, which was the one
most frequently found in the homes, was the one that brought the
highest earnings. Few workers were able to card as many as 4 gross
of this variety in an hour; the majority averaged 3 gross, and many
could do no more than 2 or 2^ gross. At this rate of production the
hourly earnings of the majority ranged from 5 to 9 cents under
the rates in effect at the time of the study. Under the new rates,

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

which were to go into effect the week following the study, earnings
Mi would have ranged from 8 to 12 cents.
According to the home workers the rates of pay did not increase
proportionately with the decrease in the number of buttons on the
card, so that earnings from the cards with fewer buttons were rela
tively lower. For the cards containing fewer than 12 buttons, 3
gross per hour was an exceptional rate of production. The usual
rate was 2 or 2% gross of 6-button and 1 or at most 2 gross of fewer
than 6-button. The 1-, 2-, and 5-button cards were not being widely
distributed at the time of the study, but for the 6-button the majority
of the workers were earning from 5 to 9 cents an hour and for the 3‘and 4-button from 3 to 10 cents. Under the new rates these earnings
would be increased to from 11 to 14 cents and 6 to 12 cents, respec
tively.
The following list shows detailed hourly earnings at the time of the
gtudy of the chief home workers in the families visited.
Hourly earnings of chief home worker:
Nworker»i
Total— ------------------------------------------------ -------------------------- ------------- 100
Less than 5 cents_____________________________________
5 cents, less than 10______________________________ 11111111
10 cents, less than 15__________________________________•1111111”
Not reported_______________________________________ I
2

o
73
22

Weekly earnings.— The weekly earnings reported from home work
ranged from 31 cents to $11.59 a family. However, as the following
list shows, the great majority, 77 percent, of the families earned
between $1 and $4. Only 37 families reported earnings of $3 or more,
and all but 7 of thèse had two or more home workers in the household.
The median weekly earnings reported were $2.55.
xtt

, ,

Weekly earnmgs of family:

Number of
families

Total------------------- -------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 100
Less than $1______
$1, less than $2____
$2, less than $3____
$3, less than $4____
$4, less than $5____
$5, less than $7.50_.
$7.50, less than $10.
$10, less than $15__

5
29
29
19
13
2
2

Kecords of earnings kept over a period of several months by a
number of the button carders who were interviewed showed that
while individual earnings varied to some extent from week to week
in this industry, they were exceedingly low at all times.
DOLL A N D D O LL-A C C E SSO R Y IN D U STR Y

The doll and doll-accessory industry includes a comparatively small
number of firms, the majority of which are located in New York City.
At the time of this study the New York law prohibited work on dolls’
clothes as well as on children’s garments in tenements but not in one|pand two-family houses in places of less than 200,000 population.
For this reason, home workers employed by New York City firm s were
located, for the most part, across the State line in various New Jersey
cities. As a matter of fact some home workers in New Jersey were
found in tenements (i. e., buildings in which three or more families

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

live), contrary to the law of that State, but New York manufacturers
cannot be prosecuted under the New Jersey law nor can they be
held responsible under the New York law for work sent outside
the State. The 86 families included in the study were all residents
of Newark, N. J.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Home work in the doll and doll-accessory industry consists of
making dolls’ clothes and occasionally of seaming cloth dolls and
animals preparatory to stuffing; both are machine operations. For
many firms the making of dolls’ clothes is almost exclusively a home
process; for others special orders and sometimes even a part of the
regular stock are made in the factory.
Before the code for this industry went into effect the nine doll
manufacturers visited in the course of the study had employed
approximately 600 home workers and 13 contractors. Five hundred
of the home workers were employed by one firm alone. The other
eight firms distributed largely through contractors.
As a rule contractors in this industry are home workers as well as
distributors. Some of them even maintain small shops where part
of their work is done. One such contractor interviewed had 10 and
another had 18 machines, although not all of them were in operation
at the time of the visit. Like the home workers, most of the con
tractors were located in New Jersey.
Making doll dresses is usually a family activity. It is simple,
unskilled work, easily learned. Children too young to operate a
machine cut threads and turn the dresses. Sixty-nine percent of the
families visited included two or more home workers. In one-third
of the families there were at least three workers and in 14 percent four
or more. Several of the families kept two or three sewing machines
in almost constant operation, and wnere there was only one machine
various members of the family often took turns operating it. A
larger number of children were found doing this work than any
other work in the study. Of the 86 families visited, 39 reported the
assistance of children under 16, and of the total number of home
workers reporting their ages in these 86 families, 189 workers or onethird were under 16 and almost one-fifth were under 14 years. In
one family five children, 8, 9, 11, 13, and 14 years of age, respectively,
were found helping with the work.
Hom e-work provisions of the code.

According to the classification of the National Recovery Adminis
tration the doll and doll-accessory industry was a part of the toy and
plaything industry. Under the code for that industry, which was
approved November 4, 1933, home work was prohibited on January
1, 1934. In interpreting the terms of the code, however, some
manufacturers in the doll and doll-accessory industry took the stand
that, because of the failure of the code to cover contractors specifi
cally, contractors in the industry were not subject to the home-work
provisions, and although these manufacturers discontinued giving^
work directly to home workers they were still distributing it througfi(J|
contractors. At the time of the study, at least, manufacturers
giving out home work made no apparent discrimination between
contractors who merely acted as distributors and those who had a
part of the work done m the shop and were thus subject to the code
provisions the same as any other manufacturer.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

Hours o f work and earnings.

Hours of work.— Specific information as to hours of work is difficult
to obtain where home work is a family activity and different members
of the household take their turn at the machine as in the doll industry.
Seasonably accurate data were obtained from the chief home workers
in only 31 of the 86 families interviewed. Of these over one-third
(11) had worked 40 hours or more the previous week, and 7 had worked
60 hours or more.
Earnings.— Piece rates were extremely low in this industry. Smallsize dresses, which for some workers at least were more difficult to
handle than the larger sizes, carried a rate as low as 4 cents, 3 cents,
2 cents, and even 1 cent a dozen; for the larger sizes rates varied from
6 cents to as high as 33K cents a dozen.
Hourly earnings.— The code for this industry set a m in im u m
hourly rate of 30 cents. Information on hourly earnings could be
obtained for only 16 of the 86 chief home workers included in the
study, but of these none reported earnings of more than 12 cents an
hour and 9 earned less thaD 5 cents an hour.
Weekly earnings.— Weekly earnings reported by 78 of the 86
families ranged from 25 cents to $17.48. However, more than threefourths of the families earned less than $5 and almost half earned
less than $2. All earnings of $5 or more and in most instances those
in excess of $2 represented the work of two or more home workers.
In one family visited two girls aged 15 and 12 were the homeworkers.
Each had her own sewing machine. The week previous to the visit
their joint earnings were $1.25. In another family the mother and
father worked regularly during the day, both operating machines.
At 3:30 pv m. a 16-year-old daughter relieved either father or mother
and work was continued until 9 p.m ., with only an interval for supper.
On Saturday the girl worked all day with one or the other of her
parents. A 15-year-old sister turned and trimmed the dresses on
Saturdays and after school on week days. The earnings of the four
had amounted to $10 the previous week. In still another family a
16-year-old girl was the chief home worker. A 14-vear-old sister
helped, sometimes with the stitching but more often with the turning
and trimming. The older girl averaged 60 hours of work a week:
the younger worked irregularly. The week for which they reported
their earnings the two girls had made $4.
Making doll dresses is tedious, irritating work, especially when the
garments are small, and most of the families seemed to agree with the
woman who said: “ It’s better to work in a shop if you can. You have
to sweat to make $2 at home.,,
Operating costs carried by home workers.

Home workers who make doll dresses are subject to considerable
expense in connection with their work. Several oi the families visited
had invested in two or three sewing machines in order to increase
their output, and the monthly installment payments and cost of
power, oil, needles, and repairs were often out of all proportion to
their meager earnings. Furthermore, home workers in this industry
were obliged to furnish their own thread for sewing. It was reported
that the cost of this item usually amounted to 65 cents or 75 cents
for every $8 or $10 earned. One worker, however, reported that the
contractor furnished her with thread regularly and deducted 25

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL HOME WORK UNDER THE N. R. A.

cents from her earnings each pay day (semimonthly). This home
worker's earnings had amounted to 46 cents the week previous to the
interview.
TAG IN D U STR Y

The tag industry as defined by the code includes the manufacture
of shipping and system tags, merchandise and marking tags, and pin
tickets. The industry is not confined to any particular locality, and
its home workers are located both in large cities and small towns.
Those included in the study were residents principally of Philadelphia;
a few, however, were in New York City and Newark, N. J. Seventysix families representative of this industry were interviewed. These
included 156 home workers.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Although employing only between 2,000 and 2,500 factory workers
before the establishment of the National Recovery Administration,
the tag industry had been an important home-work industry for
many years. In almost every establishment a large proportion if not
all of the tags manufactured are strung in the home. This is easy
work that even very young children can do. One manufacturer stated
frankly that he made use of the home-work system for the very reason
that “ whole families, even tiny tots, turn in and do the work, mostly
after supper, and orders can be filled quickly.”
Seven percent of the tag workers included m the study were children
under 16 years of age. This is probably an understatement of the
facts, however, as the majority of the home workers in this industry
were located in Pennsylvania where home work on the part of children
under 16 is a violation of the child-labor law. According to reports
of the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry illegal em
ployment of children on home work is more common in the tag
industry than in practically any other home-work industry in the
State.
Home-work provisions of the code.

The tag-industry code as approved February 1, 1934, prohibited
home work after M ay 1 of that year. On April 27, however, a stay
of the home-work prohibition to June 1 was obtained by the code
authority on the ground that sufficient time had not been allowed
for the elimination of a practice so long established, and during the
period of this stay home work was distributed without restriction or
regulation. A further extension of the stay was obtained on June 20.
Later, October 25, 1934, an amendment to the code was approved,
which set January 1, 1935, as the date on which home work should
be discontinued, the industry by this time having been given prac
tically a year in which to adjust. For the period between the
approval of the amendment and its effective date the code authority
prepared a schedule of rates for home-work operations that would
assure earnings equal to at least the minimum wage of the code, to
be put into effect November 1. Until that date home workers were
to receive rates that would yield at least 80 percent of the code
minimum wage.
Hours of work.

The weekly hours reported by the chief home workers engaged in
stringing tags were not excessive. Because of the irregularity of the
work and the fact that tag stringing, like many other types of home

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

work, is a family activity, it was difficult to obtain information regarding hours of work, but of the 45 chief home workers who were
able to give this information, 25 had worked less than 20 hours, and
only 6 had worked as many as 30 hours the week previous to the
visit. Like most firms in this industry, those giving out work to the
families included in the study manufactured on order, and to insure
filling rush orders promptly, they were in the habit of employing large
numbers of home workers, giving only a limited amount of work to
each family. At the time of the study the “ spread the work” program
in effect during the depression had greatly encouraged this practice.
Many complaints were heard as to the small amount of work available
and a number of women told of standing in line 2 or 3 hours at a time
only to find the supply of tags exhausted by the time their turn came.
Although the practice of giving out work late one day and requiring
it to be returned early the next was not so common at the time of the
study as it had been in the past, nevertheless many of the home workers
interviewed reported that considerable night work was necessary in
order to complete the work in time for the morning collection. The
usual daily assignment of work varied from 1,000 to 5,000 tags;
occasionally an especially favored family received more. The time
necessary to complete the assignment depended, of course, upon the
number and speed of the workers. One family, which had had 10
years’ experience in stringing tags and which was able to obtain
exceptionally large assignments, gave the following report of their
work. At 11:30 a. m. the day of the visit, the family had received
10,000 tags which were to be called for early the next morning. At
4:30 p. m., when the representative of the United States Department
of Labor arrived at the home, the mother and three children, aged
18, 13, and 8 years, had been working steadily since the arrival of the
work and were on their “ fifth thousand.” The mother said that as
soon as the 16-year-old girl came in from school she would help and
that an older daughter and the father would join the group after
supper and work until the consignment was finished.
If delivered late in the afternoon, even small assignments meant
night work. One family, which had strung 20,000 tags the week
previous to the visit, reported that if the tags arrived around 1 o ’clock
in the afternoon by working steadily they could finish with only an
hour or two of work after supper; but if delivery was not made until
late in the afternoon they had to work until 11 or 12 p. m.
Earnings.

£
^

Although three of the five firms distributing tags to the workers
included m the study reported increases in rates under the National
Recovery Administration varying from 10 to 50 percent, in the fall of
1934 earnings were still too low even to approximate a living wage.
Piece rates varied considerably with the different lines of production
and with the size and quality of the tag. During the short period just
preceding the prohibition of home work, when minimum piece rates
were set by the code authority, about 150 or more rates were in effect.
At the time of the study most of the family were working on “ end
knots” / 8 for which the rate varied from 5 to 22 cents a thousand, and
“ plain loops” ,29 which brought from 9 to 20 cents a thousand.
n On “ end knots” the string is slipped through the tag and knotted at the end.
» On “ plain loops” the string is slipped through the tag and looped but not knotted.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

IN D U S T R IA L H O M E W O R K U N D E R T H E N . R . A .

Hourly earnings could be ascertained for only 42 of the 76 chief
home workers stringing tags. Of these 36 earned less than 10 cents
an hour and none made as much as 15 cents. Weekly earnings as
reported by 73 families ranged from less than $1 to $12.50 but in only
4 families were they as much as $4, and in almost two-thirds they
were less than $2. The median weekly earnings were $1.59. These
reports of low earnings given by the home workers were substantiated
by the following pay-roll figures obtained from one firm that regularly
employed about 200 home workers. These figures represent earnings
for the week ending September 26, 1934:

Weekly earnings of families

Number of
home
workers

Percent
distribution

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

118

100

Less than $1.................... ...................... —

17
64
34
3

14
64
29
3

$2^ less than $3_______________________
$3, less than $4...........................................

Charges and deductions.

There were no charges for materials in connection with home work
in the tag industry; all materials were furnished and some waste was
expected and allowed for. Tags were given out in special boxes,
however, and home workers reported that if these boxes were damaged
the workers were charged for spoilage; also that when tags were de
livered fresh from the press, as sometimes happened, if they were
blurred in the stringing the worker was fined 25 cents for each 1,000
tags. Notices warning the worker of the condition of the tags were
enclosed in each box.
L E A TH E R -G LO V E IN D U STR Y

The leather-glove industry was covered by the code for leather and
woolen-knit gloves. This industry is highly localized. According
to the 1931 Census of Manufactures, 69 percent of the wage earners
in the industry were concentrated in New York State, Fulton County
alone having 63 percent of the workers. The remainder were locatedL
for the most part, in Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, and California.3®
The 68 home workers included in this study were located in New
York City.
Home-work problem in the industry.

Home work has always played an important part in the manufac
ture of leather gloves. The practice is not extensive in the Western
States but in New York State, where the industry is centered, it is
estimated that almost 40 percent of the total number of employees
in the industry are home workers.81 This industry is well organized,
and wage negotiations, which are carried on yearly, cover both factory
workers and home workers. Although the rates paid home workers £
have always been lower by agreement than those paid factory workers, ^

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PAR T

n.—

IN S P E C IF IC IN D U S T R IE S

nevertheless they are well above the wage level of most home-work
industries.
Practically all operations connected with the manufacture of gloves
were being performed in the home to some extent, but the chief
home-work processes were the making, or seaming of the glove, and
“ silking.” The latter was the term applied to stitching the design
on the back of the glove. This was a machine operation, although
it was sometimes combined with hand work. Gloves were made, or
seamed, in a variety of ways. The operations performed were similar
m each case, the stitch depending upon the type of machine attach
ment used. Making the glove consisted of inserting the thumb piece;
fitting in the side finger pieces (forchettes) and, on some styles of
gloves, the small triangular piece at the base of the finger (quirks) ;
closing the fingers; hemming or binding the bottom; and on button
gloves hemming or binding the opening. As a rule the home worker
made the complete glove. This work is highly skilled and a consid
erable period is required for learning.
Some of the workers interviewed reported that they had been
making gloves for 30 years or more; many had learned the trade in
France or Italy. Because of the skill and training required, the
workers were all older girls and women. Of the 68 glove workers
included in the study none was under 16 years of age and only 7 were
under 20 years of age.
Hom e-work provisions o f the code.

Under the provisions of the code, which became effective Novem
ber 13, 1933, the leather-glove industry attempted to eliminate home
work by a gradual reduction in the number of workers. Within
6 months after the code went into effect (by May 1934), employers
were required to reduce their outside sewing-machine operators by
at least 25 percent; and within 1 year they were to have made a
further 25-percent reduction. Names of all outside workers were to
be registered with the code authority, and from the date the code
became effective no new home workers were to be employed. At the
end of 1 year the code authority was to submit recommendations as
to the method by which complete elimination could be effected.
In lieu of setting minimum wages for the skilled occupations in the
industry, the code provided that minimum scales for piece-work
operations should be established for the entire industry, such rates to
be determined by the code authority, with the approval of the
National Recovery Administrator. In establishing these rates the
code authority followed the Fulton County, N. Y., wage agreement
between manufacturers and the union, which provides for a wage
scale for home workers 10 percent below that for factory workers.
Hours o f work and earnings.

Hours of work.-—Only 5 of the 48 chief home workers giving infor
mation as to their hours of work had exceeded the 40-hour limit set
by the codes; in fact only 12 reached this maximum, while over half
.worked less than 30 hours.
* Bates of pay.— Only two kinds of gloves were being made by the
home workers visited at the time of this study— overseam and piqué.
Of the two varieties pitjué demands the greater skill and brings a
higher rate of pay. Piece rates for overseaming as reported by
the home workers ranged from $1.35 to $1.60 a dozen pairs, the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

IN D U S T R IA L H O M E W O R K U N D E R T H E N . R . A .

most usual price being $1.35 a dozen. Those for piqué seaming varied
from $1.60 to $1.77 a dozen pairs, the most usual being $1.60. Hemming the bottom of the glove or attaching the cuff brought an addi
tional compensation of from 15 to 25 cents a dozen. The rate for
silking, the only other kind of home work observed on gloves, as
reported by three workers was 30 cents, 45 cents, and $1 a dozen pairs.
Hourly earnings.— Although not commensurate with earnings of
factory workers engaged in the same kind of work, the earnings of
the home workers in the glove industry were relatively high. Even
in the lace industry, in which earnings were above those in most
home-work industries, no large proportion of the home workers made
as much as the majority of the glove workers made. Of the 49 chief
home workers reporting their earnings from work on gloves, 21 had
earned at least 40 cents an hour and only 6 earned less than 25 cents
Weekly earnings.— Weekly earnings were likewise relatively high.
Of the 50 families interviewed almost half had earned at least $10 the
week previous to the visit, and approximately one-fourth had earned
$15 or more. In most of these families there was only one home
worker but in 14 the weekly earnings reported represented the work
of at least two people. Earnings of $15 or more were usually the
proceeds from more than one person’s work, but three individual
workers reported earnings of at least as much as that for a working
week of 24 hours in one instance and of 40 hours in the other instances.
C harges and deductions.

Home workers in the leather-glove industry were under considerable
expense for equipment and electric power. Half the families visited
had invested in power machines at a cost varying from $30 to $200,
depending upon whether the machines were second-hand or new; the
remainder were using foot machines for which they had paid from
$30 to $125. Costs for small equipment, such as scissors, tweezers,
and stretchers, averaged in the neighborhood of $1.50 to $2, and
monthly operating costs, that is for needles, power, and oil, were
around $1.40. The most significant item, however, after machines
are once paid for, is the cost of upkeep. One home worker estimated
that this averaged $6 or $7 a year. Another reported that during
the 5 years she had owned her power machine she had had to change
the motor three times at a cost of $16.50 each time.
R edu ctio n in n um ber o f hom e w orkers.

Although at the time of the study manufacturers in the leatherglove industry had had almost 1 year in which to comply with the
provisions of the code, there was little evidence to show that the New
York City firms at least had made any effort to reduce the number of
home workers employed. According to the provisions of the code
the number should have been reduced at least 25 percent by M ay 1934
and 50 percent by November 1934. Yet in September 1934 only 4
of the 12 glove manufacturers visited had made any permanent ad
justment. Two firms that had never employed more than a h a l f^
dozen home workers had practically discontinued home work and oneW
other, while still employing some home workers, had made an honest
effort to reduce the number and to replace those dismissed with factory
workers. Of the remaining firms several had made no effort whatso
ever to reduce their home-work force and several others apparently

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PART II.— IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

felt no responsibility in tbe matter, as tbey distributed their work
through contractors. No evidence could be found that they were
curtailing the amount of work given the contractors. A few firms
that were operating with a reduced force of home workers reported
that they were doing so only because work was slack; and intimated
that as soon as production increased the usual number would be em
ployed. One manufacturer who had started his business in February
1934, more than 6 months after the code became effective, was em
ploying 100 home workers when he was visited in September 1934.
The evidence obtained in the course of the study— that the pro
vision of the code dealing with the elimination of home workers was
not being observed by manufacturers—was substantiated by infor
mation submitted to the National Recovery Administration at a
public hearing of the industry held March 12,1935. This information
was based upon a statistical report made public by the code authority,
which covered 346 manufacturers in the industry. Of these approxi
mately 34 percent failed to report as to the status of their home
workers. Of the 229 reporting, 13 percent stated they were employing
no home workers; 58 percent failed to show any reduction in the
number of home workers employed; and 6 percent filed notice of re
ductions amounting to less than 25 percent. The remainder showed
reductions equal to or in excess of 25 percent, but none showed a
reduction amounting to 50 percent as required by code agreement.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Full text of Industrial Home Work under the National Recovery Administration, Bureau Publication No. 234

FRASER