The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1923-02-20
LNDIANA'S
WORKING
WOMEN

WORKING may work in certain forms of industry, such
WOMEN as that introduced in the State Senate by
Senator Oliver Holmes Of Gary, should be
advocated or opposed on the strength of facts and not mere guesses
or by congratulations Matched of emotional prejudices.
Senator Holmes Bills. B. 324-yould limit the work of
women in mechanical industries, laundries, restaurants and public
telephone exchanges to fifty hours a week, would except women
employed in an executive capacity or as clerical or stenographic
help, and would provide a n~nety-day exemption each year for
seasonal industries, such as canneries and bakeries, that have peak
load periods. The bill is markedly different from one supported
by organized labor, defeated in the general assembly this session,
which provided for an eight-hour day, six-day week, with no
exceptions.
Opposition to legislation protecting women in industry has
come in Indiana chiefly from an organization of business and pro-
fessional women, who would not be affected by the Holmes bill.
They argue against all such legislation, however phrased, saying
that it discriminates against women in favor of men, that it would
reduce womens wages and ultimately drive women out of in
dustry, that working women do not want it and that conditions
in Indiana do not justify legislative action.
What are the factsq
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that protective
legislation for women in industry, already in force in fortythree
States of the Union, is constitutional and not discriminatory, be-
cause of the physiological differences between men and women
which justify the protection of the mothers or potential mothers of
the race in the interest of social welfare.
In twenty-five years before the World War, in the States
where such legislation had been passed, the number of women
in industry increased in greater proportion than the increase of
the total female population. The average number of women in
industry in States having this legislation is at present % to the
100 of the industrial population, as compared with Is to the 100
in Indiana.
The minimum wage for women in industry in California, which
also has a minimum hour law, is $40 a week, as compared with an
average wage of $l288 a week for working women in Indiana
in 1922. Figures reported by the Department of Labor from other
States with protective legislation for women sustain the
comparison.
Official representatives Of women's national organizations in
twenty-six occupations Endorsed such legislation at an industrial
conference held by the Department of Labor in January, this year.
Is legislation needed in Indiana? The annual report of the
State industrial board will answer. Whereas Is per cent Of all
women working in Indiana offices in a clerical, executive~or pro-
fessional capacity had an eighthour day in 1922, only 10 per cent
of women in other forms of work had such working day. More
than so per cent of 1854 women working in $40 plants in Indiana
last year were on duty more than ten hours a day. Why not moral
suasion instead of compulsion? Because the facts show that
there are persons and organizations to whom a governmental
''ThOu shalt not is the only corrective of social injustice.
Indiana has many employers with generous feelings who vol
unfairly have shown their recognition of the demands of social
welfare on their industries. Many of these have spontaneously
offered Endorsement of the Holmes bill.
Indiana is one of only two States north of the Mason and Dixon
line and one of only five States IN the Union without protection of
wOmanhOod in industry. State pride and public welfare demand
such protection.