Evening star., 1933-06-18

And the Labor Secretary replies

And the Labor Secretary replies:
Just one of the strange paradoxes Of human
behavior. When times get difficult and con-
sumers begin to hold back their money. certain
short-sighted employers get panicky They
try to continue to make profits by getting moro
labor for their money.
The law Of supply and demand aids them
at such a time in the prosecution Of such pol
icies. What can q worker do? She knows II
she quits. some one else will be glad Of her job
no matter what the wage.
uCvEN employers who are reluctant to fol-
l. low suit and thus work their labor over
time with starvation wages are up against the
competition Of others who are In business with
selfshness and inhumanity
Human nature does not reason well en-
masse. Employers cut off their own noses when
they decrease the purchasing power Of potential
consumers by drastic wage cutting Thoughtful
persons know that the most enlightened selfish
ness would protect itself by policy of high
wage levels.
There remains only one thing to do as I
see it. to protect the eDod employer and the
worker. Have minimum requirement labor
laws and enforce them to the letter
Here is letter I received from a very fine
woman employer just a few days ago. Read
what she says. 1t Is very interesting"
Herewith Is the letter in part:
Dear Miss Perkins: For year have been
active in trying to get legislation in Massa-
chusetts to enforce the minimum wage law
"An high-grade manufacturers are willing
to pay their employees a living wage. but too
many of US are nearing bankruptcy on account
of sweatshop competition -.
I'm my Investigations have found that many
owners Of sweatshops today formerly were en-
ployes in some factory. But, now that they
own q business, they do not hesitate to crush
the lives Of their employees :.
II realize what tremendous task you have
ahead Of you to straighten out the tangle.
Every day I pray that our business may
be saved so that faithful employees who have
been with us for % years may not be deprived
Of their livelihood
OF the II 100000 women who have been
working in the last few years prior to 1929,
1t Is startling to learn that only a minority
have ever made decent living wage even in
our prosperous years, and all too few OF the
women in industry have ever enjoyed a work.
ing day as short as eight hours, or a working
week held down to 48 hours. Women's Bu-
reau investigations have constantly proved this
point.
work day of eight hours or less was re-
ported for only one-fifth Of the 227, 900 women
working in 2.700 factories, stores and laun-
dries scattered throughout Is States which were
studied by the Womens Bureau during the
period 1919 to 1923.
Twelve States were surveyed by the womens
that the median of weeks earnings Of full
time woman workers ranged from s16.25 to
$3.50. Half Of the women in each case earned
less than the median.
In the Fall of 1881, the Women's Bureau
studied the contract sewing shops In Con-
necticut
. BUSINESS in most Of the shops was conducted
y on a hand-to-mouth scale. Rush orders
were the rule One week the entire plant
might work overtime and the next week the
shop would be practically closed.
These official investigations Of the bureau
tend to report average conditions, whereas fndi-
vidual case histories are much more heart
rending.
Miss Helen P. Cans Of the New York City
Consumers League has reported women making
so cents q day working on rugs for which they
receive 81 each. FfniShers on velvet pajamas
receive only 40 cents Q dozen, she said and
cannot finish dozen pairs in one day. An ex-
pert lamp shade maker, formerly commanding
$35 per week. now receives $462 for . 40
hour week, binding tops and bottoms Of lamp
shades.
Cases have been cited in Connecticut where
It was said girls were paid less than 81 a week
Certain employers have q scheme, 1t IS claimed
Of enticing beginners to come and work for
nothing to learn the trade. Girls are fired each
two or three weeks and . new crop Of ~stu-
dents" taken m