Denver labor bulletin., 1915-04-10
Minimum Wage Question Opens
Discussion as to Facts Presented
Miss Mary C. Porter, Member of Colorado Board Takes Ex
cepton Article Printed in Bulletin and Presents Cores
pondence With Oregon Authorities and Women Workers

to the rulings of the commission. On
the contrary, We have enjoyed complete
cooperation from organized labor.
With best wishes, 1 remain
Sincerely yours,
EDWIN v. OHARA,
Chairman.
Secretary Gleason Explains.
Industrial Welfare Commission
OF the State of Oregon
Portland, Oregon
letter of March IL and have seen the
article in The Denver Labor Bulletin,
purporting to give the effect of mini
mum wage legislation in Washington
and Oregon. 1 do not know where the
writer of the article got his information,
but it is SO contrary to the situation as
We are acquainted with it here that /
am inclined to think that his informer
was grossly ignorant of the true state
of affairs The women garment work.
ers in Portland have not been on strike
since the law establishing the industrial
welfare commission went into effect
The employers in the garment industry
have not petitioned the commission to
investigate that industry and fix a min
imum wage The minimum wage in the
clothing industry for experienced work
ers is Se.64 a. week, not $3.50 as the
writer of the article states One of the
members OF the Garment Workers Un-
ion, who is a member of the Central
Labor Council, acted as a representa-
tive of the employees on the conference
which recommended the minimum wage
of ss.64 week in manufacturing indus
tries. The wage of $S.64 a week to date
has applied only to time workers. As
the vast majority of the work which
is performed in the clothing industry by
both women and men is piece work, our
wage ruling has done nothing at all to
either raise or lower the wages of the
Garment Workers We have received
excellent cooperation from both the
Garment Workers and Bookbinders. Our
rulings have raised the scale demanded
by the Bookbinders Union. Their regu-
lations require Sc week for the first
six months, 81 a week for the second
six months, and IS a week at the end
of the year. As 1 have said earlier. our
ruling requires SS.64 a week in place of
their IS.
The industrial welfare commission of
Washington has established slightly
higher wage rulings than those of Ore
gon- An investigation made by the
commission concerning the effect of the
establishment of rulings, in the depart
ment stores particularly. showed that
wages are higher all along the line be-
ginning with the apprentices up to the
experienced women who had been earn
ing less than the minimum before the
law was established
would like to take time now to ten
you of the number of ways in which the
law establishing this commission has
been power for good during the
eighteen months of its existence. To
those who look at legislation of this sort
as merely temporary relief for unjust
conditions of labor, there is ALWAYS some
point in the management of affairs on
which an adversely critical finger may
be laid; but to those who see in such
legislation plan whereby the efficiency
and training of future young workers
can be cared for, and whereby the in
dustrial life of women can be made to
produce not only more money but more
personal development. the laws estab-
fishing minimum wage commissions are
recognized as blessing.
If you care to quote me in any way
IN your answer to the article, you are
at full liberty to do SO.
Wishing you every success in your
Very truly yours,
CAROLINE J. GLEASON
Secretary.