Evening star., 1933-07-12
Injustice of Dismissal of
Married Women Workers
To the Editor Of The Star:

Will the Democrats prove be to wom-
en- Greeks bearing gifts? Will they
give to her with one hand the hiG nest
political positions she has yet held,
while with the other hand taking from
her the right to earn living?
Under section 213 of the economy act
there seems to be persistent effort to
force married women out of the Gov
eminent service and establish prece-
dent leading eventually to her elinina-
ton as a wage Garner everywhere. II
this Is to be the law Of the land 1t IS
at least yet to be determined. 1t Is
not the law now.
The Government accepted married
workers with full knowledge of their
status. There was no suggestion that
because Of such relations they would
not be entitled to full protection OF the
civil service laws.
! All Government workers believed their
positions secure and made their living
plans accordingly. They incurred obli-
cations, their creditors allowing them
credit in turn believing their positions
secure. It is a grave injustice-and Is
it essentially different from the violation
of contract-summarily to dismiss
Government workers through no fault
of their own unless it is essential to the
salvation of the country. If the country
can not be saved without serving the
Government employe as . burned
offering it will fall, as Rome fell and
as other governments have fallen.
Alack! and alas!
The dismissal Of one Of two married
persons is particularly deplorable. That
an argument is plausible does not make
1t sound. At first glance it would seem
that where dismissals are necessary one
of two married persons should be the
first to go. Granted in some instances.
But no distinction or exception what
ever is made. Many married persons
are making payments on homes. Fur
nishings for them bought on the in
stallment plan are not yet paid for. They
are giving their children better prep
aration for their place in the world
than would be possible If the husband
alone were working at the average SAL
ary, They give to charity and many
times give employment to others. They
pay income taxes, their combined sal
aries not being sufficient to warrant
for them place on the United States
preferred income tax evasion list
would be broken hearted if she had to
give up her position. for she did not
see how they could continue the pay
mentS on their home. I know OF one
married couple who not only are edu-
eating and caring for their own chill
dren and assisting relatives, but who, at
much sacrifice to themselves. are always
helping some one outside the family.
/ Last year they took man and his wife
who were destitute into their home
new start. Another time they took in a
downward path, turned him back and
aided him until he got work.
When one Of two married persons is
dismissed what is the result? In the
first place such policy may be the first
cause of the separation of some couples
1t will deter the marriage OF young peo-
pie in the Government service who may
have contemplated marriage, or cause a
secret one. In the home the living
standard is at once lowered, often cauS-
ing great hardship and loss.
According to statistics some millions
Of married women are gainfully en-
ployed. There must be reason for it.
Should it be the policy of the Govern
ment to strike back those husbands and
wives with their families, to a mere
| existence level who by their united
efforts have struggled to a place above
it? Should the Government now say
instead: Well done, good citizen. Hitch
your wagon to star nor will jolt you
from the seat thereof
MISS PAULINE WOOSTER.