HomeStudent Archival EssaysHow did the Victorian Trades Hall Committee affect the success of Female Campaigns for Equal Pay and Wage Rights, throughout the early 20th Century?

How did the Victorian Trades Hall Committee affect the success of Female Campaigns for Equal Pay and Wage Rights, throughout the early 20th Century?

by Ellen Leishman

trades hall minutes january 29.jpg
Munitions Union Claim Women Replacing Men Should Be Paid 'Female Rates
83602555363863b3fdc27080b7c8cf0a.jpg
Tailoresses Strike Over 'Long Hours, Arduous Work, Poor Pay'
trades hall minutes june 3.jpg
Trades Hall Council Submits Case For Female Minimum Wage To Arbitration Court

This paper will chronologically investigate how the Victorian Trades Hall Council (THC) interacted, supported and opposed equal pay in the early twentieth century. The status of female employment in Victoria was in constant flux throughout the early twentieth century, subject to the whims of war, economic depression and male ascendancy. This essay will introduce how feminism and the labour movement coalesced in the early 1900s, and how it was then flawed by political conflict. Female wage equality was advanced in the interwar years from the separate Union structure and increased female Unionists autonomy from the Trade Hall Council. However, World War Two and the rise of female employment caused some resistance in the Trades Hall Council towards equal pay. The post-war years also echoed sentiments of opposition to the equal pay movement, as the THC adopted a patriarchal mentality designed to exclude women.  The Trades Hall Council had a complex approach to organizing women, which was separate initially but forcibly became ingratiated by changing contexts and were challenged by resistant elements.

The Melbourne Trades Hall Council came to prominence with the internationally unprecedented introduction of the Eight-Hour Day in 1856.  The building itself was laid on the 26th January 1874 to serve as a meeting point for Union leaders.1 The Female Operatives Hall was erected following the infamous Tailoresses’ Strike of 1882, as women were excluded from the Unions. This heralded the beginning of the search for female equality in unionism. The early twentieth century saw the rise of the political left, with communism and socialism directly influencing the Union movement. Melbourne was a formidable centre of leftist politics, which some female socialists and communists were able to use in their struggle for equal pay.2

*Early Organisation 1900’s

The historiography of women organizing in Victoria has generally been omitted from the male-dominated spectrum of Union history. Traditional scholarship of the Victorian Trades Hall Council has centred on male Unionisation and ignored female attempts at organizing labour.3 Jill Matthews has acknowledged the systemic lack of balanced history, and has advocated for feminist history to reclaim the problematic relationship it has held with the Trades Hall Council.4 With the emancipation of female suffrage delivered in 1901, the feminist movement was a burgeoning force in the early twentieth century.  The role of women in the early twentieth century labour movement has traditionally been regarded as ‘assimilationist’, diffusing their efforts by casting them as supporters.5 Many early attempts at this form of assimilation coalesced the feminist and labour movement into a mobilized force for equal pay, by reinforcing the quintessential image of the ‘mother’, ‘daughter’ and ‘wife’.6 Some elements of the feminist movement were irreconcilable with Unionism, believing that it was, “designed to hold workers in check rather than to liberate them.”7 Indeed, research would suggest that this was the prevailing ethos; that the Trade Hall Council was not concomitant with the realization of equal pay.

However, an alternative historical discourse has emerged which recognizes the feminist labour movement through their desire to substantiate their political rights through to economic rights to realizer their full citizenship in Australia.8 Entry into the workforce represented an opportunity for women to retaliate against widespread dependence on men. Economic rights were correlated with independence and equality, and were required to transform the male-dominated Union from its exclusionary policies.9 The socialist tenets of working women divided the feminist movement, with the left prioritizing independence as opposed to equality. Indeed, there was some derision that feminism was a ‘bourgeois deviation’ that sought to undermine motherhood and family, and thus threaten males.10 However, the left was attracted many women to the cause because of its egalitarian stance and radicalism. The rhetoric of the left was hinged of three vital elements, equal pay, motherhood endowment and child endowment.11 For the purposes of this essay, we will primarily focus on the advancement of the equal pay movement.

The feminist movement was heavily involved in improving the wage situation for female workers, and achieved some early signs of success. Raelene Francis recognized the infestation of bias in the Victorian Clothing Trade Union, where the men of the Union, “were able to draw on ideological constructions of femininity which portrayed women as the weaker sex” to exclude them from equal pay.12 This denigration served as a reasoning for the Unions to systemically exclude women, based on the traditional ethos of subordination. Indeed, the courts recognized the distinctive levels of prejudice within the Union system by acknowledging that, “male representatives on these tribunals deliberately refrained from using their best endeavors to improve the lot of women mainly on account of sex jealousy in relation to industry.”13 Therefore, there was significant internal resistance within the Union Movement, which fiercely blocked attempts by women towards an equal pay situation. Indeed, the records reflect the antipathy of the male Unionists towards women’s equal pay, with archival minutes indicating that the THC endorsed of female pay at 6/-10/ compared to the male equivalent at 20/-25/.14 Both arbitration and internal reticence towards equal pay stymied progression in the early 1900s, primarily because the Union failed to advocate for the organization of women.

*Interwar years and separation

The interwar years (1919-1939) were a period contrived by contradiction within the Trades Hall Council as some attempts were made towards gender equality. Miss Lewis, a prominent union leader, frequently lodged complaints and campaigned to the Trades Hall Council for the betterment of women. On the 9th February 1939, Miss Lewis called for equal benefits, which were recognized by the THC, but not equal pay.15 Additionally, she requested greater representation for women at the Wages Board by removing male representation. She was repudiated for such a request and the THC recommended her to “fall in with the suggestions made by the men’s Union…. in the interest of Unionism (to) bring about an amicable settlement.”16 The THC’s response personified the dismissive attitude many male Unionists held towards female emancipation; that it was constantly impeding the Union movement and undermining their status. Although some improvements towards recognizing the need for better conditions and equality in the workforce, the THC did not tangibly endorse change during this period.

Additionally, significant scholarship has concluded that the interwar years saw separate female unionization as beneficial to the equal pay cause, rather than cooperation with exclusive male Unions. The period of separate female unionization saw the rise of prominent female Union leaders like Murial Heagney who suggested that ‘dependence’ on men was the most ‘strangulating’ and prohibitive factor towards the realization of equal pay.17 Separate unions may have contributed to the creation of a distinctive female-dedicated sphere with an established core of female activism. Evidently, Cathy Brigden associates the amalgamation period at the end of the 1930s with the Trades Hall Council as contributing to the decline of female activism, related to the internal configuration of Union politics that confronted them.18 Following the amalgamation, several initiatives were made to render women in the THC insignificant. The decision of the Sunshine Harvester Works case reflected an attempt by the THC to relegate female pay and opportunities, by limiting the amount of work women were permitted to do, although in favour of ‘education’, and an inferior wage structure.19 Ultimately, the work achieved in the early twentieth century was internally ravaged by the lack of action from male Unions and decreased their viability as a movement.20 The early period of separation undoubtedly advanced the equal pay movement more than the regressive and exclusionary policies adopted by the THC.

*Second World War

The Second World War brought a significant change to female employment, and challenged perceptions the Victorian Trades Hall Council held regarding equal pay.  During the war, the THC strongly resisted the advent towards equal pay, by insisting it would undermine the male labour position. In April 24 1941, the THC minutes revealed significant prejudice towards equal pay, arguing that war is no excuse for cheap labour, and that jobs post-war should be returned to the male fraternity.21 The THC attitude towards ‘cheap’ female labour insinuates that they felt threatened by the female workforce, and thus sought to alienate rather than include them. The THC archives also illustrate the negative attitude towards the level of production women were capable of. A motion for equal pay was struck down 54-34 votes, because it was “part of the general question of equal pay for work of equal value”, which male members of the Union clearly believed was unsatisfactory from women.22 This demonstrates the fundamental misgivings that the THC held towards female employment, where conservative overtones of the patriarchy undermined the equality movement.

However, the THC archives do reveal some inconsistencies in the rhetoric towards equal pay. A report on the Committee for the Equal Pay for the Sexes, solely comprised of men, enunciated that legislation should award equal pay and created the Women’s Employment Board simultaneously.23 An explanation for this discrepancy has materialized in scholarly debate over the Union’s approach is that the support for equal pay was derived from a desire to ensure men were preferred in employment over women, who would not provide the more economical option anymore.24  Thus, the minimal support for women outlined during the war was derived from an acceptance of competition, rather than belief in female labour. Janey Stone comments that the unanimous homefront nature of the war dictated female involvement in employment, which was supported by Unions begrudgingly.25 The Unions recognized that their power base came from their overwhelming influence over workers, and that if women were unorganized, this would challenge their authority. Consequently, much of their policy was ambiguous towards the equal pay movement but ultimately denying its realisation.

However, the Boilermaker’s Society did reflect some elements of Unionism that were in support of female elevation to a level of equality. The Boilermaker’s declared to the THC in 1941, “we as an Industrial Movement believe in equal opportunities and pay for box sexes…”26 Indeed, the ‘Decisions of the A.C.T.U Congress June 2-6 1941” revealed further support for some steps towards equal pay with the report encouraging the removal of barriers and enactment of legislation of equal award rates.27 Thus, fragmented levels of support are evident within the members of the THC, dependent on different forms of Unionisation. The Women’s Employment Board was an opportunity for the THC to embrace their female compatriots through advancement in status. However, male unionists appointed by the THC dominated it. The level of support waged by these individuals was not significant enough to form THC policy, where conservative elements of male protectionism were rife.

The war and equal pay movement ignited a debate in the Union movement, which profiled women as ‘secondary workers’. The rhetoric of Unions and the lack of significant advancement towards equal pay rendered the female worker ‘secondary’ in the eyes of many of the THC. Women in 1948, at a THC meeting designed to garner support for the recognition of female work, described their situation as that of “abject slaves”.28 Additionally, many women in the clothing trade had to take home needlework to compensate for the sub-standard pay they were receiving. Although WWII had brought employment opportunities to women, it was ephemeral and lacked the necessary recognition to afford women equal pay. The Trades Hall Council further undermined female attempts at equal pay through the derision of their status as a ‘second class’ labour force.29 This eroded the female acquisition of economic independence.

*Post-war

There were some positive ramifications for the temporary entrance of women into the workforce due to war. The presence of women in the workforce, and the social acceptability that the war effort demanded of them, enlightened many women about their rights to work and leftist politics. Indeed, the broader community appeared willing to accept “an enhanced status for women” in Australia according to the Union of Australian Women.30 For example, Betty Reilly argued from a communist paradigm, that bringing women into the workforce, regardless of their status or wage, was a liberating force.31 The left furthered their presence in the post-war environment, with communist political leadership inciting industrial action.32 Although facing significant opposition from the Menzies government, the Metal Trade Union was aggressive in campaigning for equal pay and successfully removed the award rate for females.33 Thus, some success was attained dedicated Unions in support of the equal pay movement. However, the large amount of scholarly debate elucidates the level of internal opposition in Unions towards equal pay, with a male desire for retention of their industrial power.

The post-war Union composition was increasingly male-dominated, and saw the relegation of the equal pay movement to patriarchal assertions. Louisa Cross, secretary of the Women Bookbinders Union was a strong female leader but contended that her position was under, “an atmosphere of more or less mutual suspicion and antagonism” from her male colleagues.34 The official THC meetings were also conducted under a similar guise of antipathy towards women, questioning their absenteeism in work as a reason they were not legitimate workers.35 The Trades Hall Council employed rhetoric that played into the ideological conceptions of femininity, and sought to undermine their goal of equal pay. The presence of female activists post-war also dissipated, with a ‘marginal presence’ as the temporary war emancipatory facets were gone.36 There are two theories that Frances et al. consult as explanatory for the Union resistance towards feminism. Firstly, the buffer theory describes female labour as a ‘flexible reserve army’ on which work depends on the natural fluctuations on the market.37 Alternatively, the substitution theory was articulated by Marjories Cohen where employers utilized female labour to replace men during times of recession.38 Both theories attest to the 1940s and 1950s as a time where the introduction of women into the workforce was a result of the context of male exodus.

As the Trade Hall Committee embraced women into their league, the status of the female wage disintegrated into the 1950s and 1960s. Cathy Brigden describes the post-amalgamation situation as pervasively ‘powerless’ for women.39 Additionally, many have commented that the space of the Trades Hall Building was hierarchically gendered to subordinate women and place them in a ‘marginal’ position of power.40  Consequently, the ability of female Union members to consolidate their base or attempt to advocate for equal pay was decreased by the strangulation of male power in the THC. The men of the THC did not possess the progressive labour front, but retained a conservative ethos towards women. Jean Daley described the men in the labour movement as “lack(ing) courage” and they were “not interested in organizing women.”41

Some scholars have intimated that the inherent pattern of female trade union history has been through a conduit of individualism.42 Indeed, the effect of being ignored and marginalized by the THC has defined female labour activism. Suzanne Franzway has characterized the THC as a “greedy institution” for the exclusion of women purely to benefit male members.43

The equal pay movement was unable to garner support from the THC and was impaired by other contextual factors. The Australian Worker, a labour periodical, showed some class solidarity in contending that, “… badly as men have been treated, women have been treated even worse.”44 From the 1950s and 1960s, the momentum of the Equal Pay Campaign increased, with some “enlightened men” realizing the interests of the two genders were mutual.45 However, the conservative movement provided significant barriers towards the realization of equal pay, with the Menzies government deliberately campaigning to prevent it. The government were responsible for what parliamentarian Bryant described as “pragmatic procrastination” in denying equal pay.46 Changes in societal outlook also affected the advancement of equal pay, as a rift between ‘first wave’ feminists and continued national conservatism dominated the wage debate.47 The middle-class also rallied against female emancipation through equal pay, given the conservative overtones of the mid-twentieth century, it was believed that “women’s wage labour might lead to immorality, disease and prostitution.”48  Evidently, rival factors prohibited the advancement of the equal pay movement, not just the internal barriers initiated by the THC.  

In exploring the continuum of female labour organisation in the early twentieth century, this paper reveals many incongruities within the THC’s approach to the issue. Early attempts by women at labour organization were reinforced by the bourgeoning feminist cause. However, the interwar years demonstrated the ambiguous views of male Unionists who ultimately resisted progress towards equal pay. Indeed, the separation of female labour organization appeared to be one of the most beneficial periods of development, where a spatial entity for women empowered their voice. The onset of WWII and the home-front war economy engaged women in the workforce, but saw increased Union agitation towards the question of equal pay. Whilst some elements of the THC supported equal pay, futile attempts were made towards its realization due to overwhelming conservative and competitive protectionism in the THC. The immediate post-war years similarly demoted the role of women in workforce.  Due to serious impediments caused by the THC’ attitude towards equal pay, the movement lacked the momentum of feminist emancipation that the 1960’s and onwards would promulgate. 

References

[1] The Victorian Trades Hall Council. Trades Hall History. 2015. http://www.vthc.org.au/history (accessed September 30, 2015); Carlotta Kellaway, “Melbourne Trades Hall Lygon Street Carlton: the workingman’s parliament”, 1988.

[2] Andrew Reeves, and Simon Booth. Trade Unions . July 2008. http://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM01507b.htm (accessed October 2, 2015).

[3] James Hagan, The History of the ACTU . Melbourne : Longman Chesire , 1981.

[4] Jill Matthews, New Challenges for Feminist History . Vol. 12. Melbourne : Lilith , 2003.

[5] Marilyn Lake, "The Independence of Women and the Brotherhood of Man: Debates in the Labour Movement Over Equal Pay and Motherhood Endowment in the 1920s." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ) 63 (November 1992), 1.

[6] Jackie Dickenson, Patricia Grimshaw, and Sean Scalmer. "Labour Women's Leadership: Concept and History ." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ) 104 (May 2013), 2.

[7] Dorothy Cobble, "Rethinking Troubled Relations beween Women and Unions: Craft Unionism and Female Activity." Feminist Studies 16, no. 3 (1990), 519.

[8] Ibid, 12.

[9] Suzanne Franzway, and Mary Fonow . "Feminist Politics and Transnational Labor Movements ." In Making Feminist Politics: Transnational Alliances between Women and Labour . Illinois: University of Illinois Press , 2011, 8.

[10] Lake, "The Independence of Women and the Brotherhood of Man”, 14.

[11] Ibid, 4.

[12] Raelene Frances,  "Gender and Work Process in the Victorian Clothing Trades, 1890-1939." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ) 50 (May 1986), 95-112.

[13] H. Carter, Evidence, 1922 Arbitration Hearing, ANUA, E138/18/86, 22.

[14] Victorian Trades Hall Council Minutes, June 2nd 1941, “Report on the Committee of Equal Pay”, 1978-0082-0008, University of Melbourne , Melbourne, 495. 

[15]University of Melbourne Archives Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minutes Book Trades Hall Council 1938 to 1940, February 9th 1939, 1978.0082.0016, 203.

[16] University of Melbourne Archives, Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minutes of Executive Meeting held February 18th 1913, 1978.0082.0035 , 366- 367.

[17] Muriel Heagney “Child Endowment”, Labor Call,  1 February 1923, 9 in Lake, “The Independence of Women and the Brotherhood of Men”,6. 

[18] Cathy Brigden, "The Legacy of Separate Organizing: Women in the Victorian Trades Hall Council in the Interwar Years ." Labor Studies Journal 36, no. 2 (2011), 256.

[19] "Women In Industry ." 8 February 1928: Trades Hall Council Addresses Female Unemployment and Recommends Fair Working Conditions. Trove: National Library of Australia. February 8, 1928. Also Available at http://bpeddlesdenweds2.omeka.net/items/show/38 (accessed September 30, 2015).

[20] Melanie Nolan,. "Sex or Class? The Politics of the Earliest Equal Pay Campaign in Victoria ." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc.) 61 (November 1991), 102.

[21] University of Melbourne Archives, Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minute Book Trades Hall Council April 24th 1941, 1978-0082-0017, 120.  

[22] University of Melbourne Archives, Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minutes Book,1978-0082-0020,  259.  

[23] Ibid, 140.

[24] Cobble, “Rethinking Troubled Relations”, 520.

[25] Janey Stone, "Women in the Metal Trades." Front Line International Socialists 5 (December 1975)

[26] University of Melbourne Archives,  1978-0082-017 April 24, 1941 pg 121-122

[27] Ibid, 140

[28] University of Melbourne Archives, Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minutes Book 3rd June 1948, 1978.0082.0020, 24.

[29] Raelene et al. "Women and Wage Labour” 54-89.

[30] Union of Australian Women, 2012, http://www.uaw.org.au/about_us.htm, 2012, accessed 4th October 2015.

[31] Lake,  "The Independence of Women and the Brotherhood of Man”, 15.

[32] Tom O'Lincoln, "Women and the Communist Part of Australia ." Hecate 1, no. 1 (1980).

[33] Tom Bramble, Trade Unionism in Australia: A History from flood to ebb tide. Melbourne : Cambridge University Press , 2008.

[34] Quoted in Frances 171

[35] University of Melbourne Archives, Victorian Trades Hall Council, Minutes Book, 1978-0082-0017, 318.  

[36] Cathy Brigden. "A Women's Place? Women in the Victorian Trades Hall Council from the 1880s to the 1990s ." Australian Feminist Studies 22 , no. 54 (November 2007), 376.

[37] Raelene Frances, Linda Kealey, and Joan Sangster. "Women and Wage Labour in Australia and Canada, 1880-1980 ." Labour History 71 (November 1996), 61.

[38] Marjorie Cohen in Raelene Frances, "Authentic Leaders: Women and Leadership in Australian Unions before World War II." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ) 104 (May 2013): 9-30.

[39] Cathy Brigden, "Creating Labour's Space: The Case of the Melbourne Trades Hall ." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ), no. 89 (November 2005): 125-140.

[40] Brigden, "A Women's Place? Women in the Victorian Trades Hall Council", 378.

[41] Jennifer Feeney, and Judith Smart. "Jean Daley and May Brodney: Perspectives on Labour." In Double Time , by Marilyn Lake and Frances Kelly, 276-287. Ringwood , 1984, 267.

[42] Melanie Raymond, "Labour Pains: Women in unions and the Labour Party in Victoria, 1903-1918." Lilith: A Feminist History Journal 5 (1988), 42 ; Cynthia Cockburn, and Susan Ormrod. Gender and Technology In the Making. Sage Publications Ltd, 1993,
6.  


[43] Quoted in Cathy Brigden. ""A Fine and Self-Reliant Group of Women": Women's Leadership in the Female Confectioners Union ." Labour History 104 (May 2013), 50.

[44] "Equal Pay Campaign: Women Must Fight ." The Australian Worker: The Voice of the Trade Unions . Vol. 1994.0055. Melbourne : Victorian Trades Hall Council, University of Melbourne Achives, April 1955, 1.

[45] Ibid, 1.

[46] Gordon Bryant, "Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates House of Representatives ." Federal Parliament . Vol. 49. December 2, 1965, 3492.

[47] Tom Sheridan, and Pat Stretton. "Pragmatic Procrastination: Governments, Unions and Equal Pay, 1949-1968." Labour History (Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Inc. ) 94 (May 2008),  133. 

[48]Frances et al. "Women and Wage Labour”, 61.