The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1913-02-12
BY ESTHER GRIFFIN WHITE.

What has become of the eight hour
law?
And the womans minimum wage
measure?
Are they lost, buried in committee,
railroaded to pigeon-holes or disposed
of in other of the various ways known
to the canny legislator?
The attempt to make the public
think the women wage earners of the
state are opposed to these laws, or
proposed laws, is a failure.
1t was said in this city, in instance,
that the girls who work in the laund-
ries preferred nine hour day.
That the girls had so stated.
If you really want to get an opinion
on this subject, go to the girls. Not
the employer.
An employer will skim off the top
and hand 1t out as the whole thing.
When the truth is he has just skim
med the top and hasn't disturbed the
| foundation.
The girls in the laundries of this
city are, according to the observation
of the most casual, overworked.
| An hour at noon is given for lunch,
But when they go on at one they
have to continue until all the work is
out.
Whether it is five o'clock or eight.
And they do not get off for supper
until they are through.
This entails as everybody knows.
continuous standing and working of
the machinery with the foot.
The writer is not acquainted with
the technical details.
But this much is known to the gen
eral public.
There is nothing that is as fatigue
ing and injurious as standing.
| 1t is especially bad for women.
| And when, in addition, YOU must
keep your foot in motion, and engage
in the business of ironing all sorts
| of garments-the result is obvious.
| Some of these young women are
married and after the fatigues of the
afternoon 60 home and prepare a fam
lily meal.
The writer understands the difficult
ties of employers.
Especially of those who do not op-
crate on a small scale.
| And who must meet the demands
of their customers.
| 1t is the demands of the customers
after all, in which the difficulty lies.
The shirt must be there by a Ger.
tain hour or the owner will threaten
! loss of patronage.
The petticoat must be handed in
at the appointed time or mademoiselle
will change her laundry.
The fact is that the public has
very littlt mercy on the employer.
He, in turn, has little on the en-
ploye.
When reduced to the last analysis
it is the public that is the offender.
If there were laws regulating hours
of labor-as there are, of course, ir
many instances-the public would
have to accommodate itself to them.
And it would soon readjust itself
to the new condition.
For nothing lasts long
There is always growing an6
grumbling over changed social con
ditions.
But it is nevitable-people soor
forget, accustom themselves to the
new habit of procedure and go on te
something new.
Laundry labor is abused in this
city.
But If there were an eight houl
law which regulated and restricted
all employers would be put on the
same basis and the public would b.
compelled to abide by the new order
Herein is the benefit of labor leg
islation.
1t becomes part of the social fabric
We get used to it, and, after time
lose consciousness of the contras
with the former state,
The public demands too much.
The employer strains to keep III
and imposes on the employee in Sc
doing.
The whole world rushes on pei
mell-to oblivion.
What boots it if the shirt is no
ready on the moment?
If the petticoat comes in the mex
| morning?