The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-07-24
EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN.

it is useless to ask the same compensation
for woman telegraphists as for men, even
though they may do the same amount of
work and in fully as acceptable manner. The
method by which they arrive at this conclu-
sion is, to say the least ingenious. They
argue in the first place, that a woman is
physically incapable of doing mans work;
that though the disposition be there, the
necessary force is not But, laying this
aside, they maintain that a man is more
valuable than a woman who does the same
work, and for that reason he will command
better pay. The Louisville Courier Journal
is among the number that take this ground.
1t says;
employers cannot if they would treat
woman as they do man. They cannot be
so rigid, so exacting so unrelenting. An
employer, to some extent sacrifices his IN
dependence of action when he hires woman
to do mans work. He hampers himself,
for inconvenience and restrictions are the
inevitable result. AS compensation, there
fore, there will be a reduction in wages,
even when the actual work done-the same
number of words sent, the same letters writ
ten, the same orders given-is exactly the
same"
The Courier-Journal must have come
across some very queer men, who cannot
treat woman as they do man. 1t is fact
that will hardly be disputed that woman
will submit to much more than will a man,
and an employer is much safer in being rigid
and exacting with women than with men. A
will etthr 10 MN
foreman or proprietor, and is quicker to
quit or to go on a strike. The woman who
is strong enough ia character and determine
ton to earn her living by any honorable en-
submit to any reasonable requirement. and
is patient enough to submit to many
that are not reasonable. She enters
upon her work with the expectation of
giving satisfaction, and of earning the money
that may be paid her There are exceptions
to this rule but they are exceptions. 1t is
neither nonsense nor silly sentiment" that
demands for women the same compensation
with men for the same service 1t is but
justice, and the very fact that the striking
telegraphists have made such a demand is
proof that the workingwoman is that much
nearer receiving her dues. If woman is
able to send and receive as many messages as
man, she should be paid exactly the same
not one cent more, not one cent less. If
her receive the same wages he does. There
is a bald inconsistency in the argument that
an employer is too gallant, too tinlid, or what
not to ask as much service of woman as of
a man, and yet he is not above asking her
and compelling her to take less wages. A
woman is able to send and receive so many
words an hour. What is such service WORTH
Are you going 10 lay down the rule that,
being done by woman, it is worth 25 per
cent. less than if by man? 1t is no answer
to say that, as a rule, women are not the
equals of men in such pursuits. 1t is not
asked that they all be paid $780, $75 or 800 a
month; but that for the work they do and
do well, they be paid the same as any other
workman of the same grade even though he
be man. 1t is simply astounding that such
manifestly fair proposition should be called
into question. The working women of the
world are nobly fighting their way toward
justice, and are nearer the goal than ever
before. 1t is we'll enough to picture the
beauties of domestic life, and to grow elo-
quent over the joys of home. But what are
the hundreds of thousands of women to do
who have no home, and who are obliged to
grapple with the world Tor the means of sub
sistence It ought to be conceded every
where that the same work done by woman's
hands is just as valuable as though done by
the brawniest man that exists. The man
who is too dffident TO ask woman to do
what she is paid for, but is impudent enough
to ask her to do certain work for less than a
man will, is disgrace to humanity. Equal
pay for equal work, by man or woman.