Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:22:07.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Organized Labor, National Politics, and Second-Wave Feminism in the United States, 1965–1975

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Dennis A. Deslippe
Dennis A. Deslippe
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Second-wave feminism, scholars argued until recently, was a product of middle-class educated women who rejected inequality masquerading as domestic tranquility in the postwar United States. Women unionists were either invisible in these accounts or dismissed as unimportant to the development of feminism's objectives and strategies. Recent labor history research has called this portrayal of working women into question. Whether considering a single union or broad national patterns of political change, several historians have pointed to unionists' contributions to campaigns for equality. These came in the areas of pay and job discrimination as well as in the effort to pass the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).

Type
Article
Information
International Labor and Working-Class History , Volume 49 , Spring 1996 , pp. 143 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

A version of this paper was presented at the Organization of American Historians annual meeting, April 1995. I am grateful to all participants for their comments and suggestions. I would like to thank Sheldon Stromquist, Linda Kerber, Nancy Gabin, Alison Kibler, and ILWCH's anonymous reader for their helpful critiques of various drafts of this essay.

1. Gabin, Nancy F., Feminism in the Labor Movement: Women and the United Auto Workers, 1935–1975 (Ithaca, 1990);Google ScholarCobble, Dorothy Sue, Dishing It Out: Waitresses and Their Unions in the Twentieth Century (Urbana, 1991);Google ScholarCobble, Dorothy Sue, “Recapturing Working-Class Feminism: Union Women in the Postwar Era,” in Not June Cleaver: Women and Gender in Postwar America, 1945–1960, ed. Myerowitz, Joanne (Philadelphia, 1994), 57–83;Google ScholarHarrison, Cynthia, On Account of Sex: The Politics of Women's Issues, 1945–1968 (Berkeley, 1988);Google ScholarMilkman, Ruth, “Woman Workers, Feminism and the Labor Movement Since the 1960s,” in Women, Work, and Protest: A Century of U.S. Women's Labor History, ed. Milkman, Ruth (New York, 1985):300–22;Google ScholarKannenberg, Lisa A., “From World War to Cold War: Women Electrical Workers and Their Union, 1940–1955” (M.A. thesis, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 1990);Google ScholarFehn, Bruce R., “Striking Women: Gender, Race and Class in the United Packinghouse Workers of America (UPWA), 1938–1968” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1991).Google Scholar

2. Tillotson, Shirley, “Human Rights Law as Prism: Women's Organizations, Unions, and Ontario's Female Employees Fair Remuneration Act, 1951,” Canadian Historical Review 72 (12 1991):532–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Harrison, , On Account of Sex, 179–80;Google ScholarFreeman, Jo, “How ‘Sex’ Got into Title VII: Persistent Opportunities as a Maker of Public Policy,” Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory & Practice 9 (03 1991):163–84;Google ScholarRobinson, Donald Allen, “Two Movements in Pursuit of Equal Employment Opportunity,” Signs 4 (Spring 1979):416–17;Google ScholarHartmann, Susan M., From Margin to Mainstream: American Women and Politics Since 1960 Philadelphia, 1989), 63–71;Google ScholarBrauer, Carl M., “Women Activists, Southern Conservatives, and the Prohibition of Sex Discrimination in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,” Journal of Southern History 49 (1983):37–57;Google ScholarGraham, Hugh Davis, The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy, 1960–1972 (New York, 1990).Google Scholar For labor's specific opposition to including a proscription on sex discrimination see Peterson, Esther, interview with Paige MulhollanGoogle Scholar, Washington, D.C., November 25, 1968, Lyndon Baines Johnson Library, Austin TX; George Meany to James Roosevelt, January 29, 1962, Box 55, folder 21, American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations Department of Legislation Collection, George Meany Memorial Archives, Silver Spring, Maryland [hereafter, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection].

4. Robinson, , “Two Movements,” 421; Graham, Civil Rights Era, 177, 203;Google ScholarDan Wood, B., “Does Politics Make a Difference at the EEOC?” American Journal of Political Science 34 (05 1990):507.Google Scholar

5. Biemiller, Andrew J. to Doninger, Dolores, May 15, 1972, Box 55, folder 22, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection.Google Scholar

6. Gabin, , Feminssm, 47–142 passim;Google Scholar see Milkman, Ruth, Gender at Work: The Dynamics of Job Segregation by Sex During World War II (Urbana, 1987).Google Scholar

7. Stewart, Charles D., “Social Implications of Technological Progress,” Monthly Labor Review 79 (12 1956):1417.Google Scholar

8. Testimony of Jacob Clayman, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Equal Pay Act of 1963: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Labor of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, United States Senate, on S. 882 and S. 910, 88th Cong., 1st sess. 1963, 88.

9. Sheppard, Harold L. and Stern, James L., “Impact of Automation and Workers in Supplier Plants,” Labor Law Journal 8 (10 1957):717;Google Scholar U.S. Department of Labor, Case Studies of Displaced Workers: Experiences of Workers After Layoff, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin No. 1408 (Washington, 1964), 7; Beaumont, Richard A. and Helfgott, Roy B., Managers, Automation, and People (New York, 1964), 49–50.Google Scholar

10. Ruth Moore to “Dear Ike,” quoted in Kessler-Harris, Alice, Out to Work: A History of Wage-Earning Women in the United States (New York, 1982), 310.Google Scholar On the abandonment of active promotion of protective labor legislation in the postwar years, see Laughlin, Kathleen Anne, “Backstage Activism: The Policy Initiatives of the Women's Bureau of the U.S. Department of Labor in the Postwar Era, 1945–1970” (Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1993), 9.Google Scholar

11. Kessler-Harris, Alice, A Woman's Wage: Historical Meanings & Social Consequences (Lexington, 1990):112.Google Scholar

12. Moody, Kim, An Injury to All: The Decline of American Unionism (New York, 1988), 58–59;Google ScholarLichtenstein, Nelson, “From Corporatism to Collective Bargaining: Organized Labor and the Eclipse of Social Democracy in the Postwar Era,” in The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930–1980, ed. Fraser, Steve and Gerstle, Gary (Princeton, 1989):122–52.Google Scholar

13. United Packinghouse Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Proceedings: Fifteenth Constitutional Convention Officers' Report (Los Angeles, 1966):xxiiiGoogle Scholar; in United Food and Commercial Workers Local P-3 Collection (unprocessed), State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

14. Summary memorandum, “8,854 Job Discrimination Charges Filed with EEOC in First Year,” n.d., Box 7, folder 8, Ellickson, Katherine Collection, 1921–1978, Walter Reuther Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI; Graham, Civil Rights Era, 228–29.Google Scholar

15. Timberlake, Ginger to Meany, George, August 26, 1972, Box 55, folder 22, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection.Google Scholar

16. Testimony of Georgianna Sellers (for the League for American Working Women), U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, The “Equal Rights” Amendment: Hearings, before the Committee on the Judiciary, 91st Cong., 2nd sess., May 1970, 590.

17. Pollard, William E. to Slaiman, Don, August 3, 1972, Box 33, AFL-CIO Department of Civil Rights Collection, George Meany Memorial Archives, Silver Spring, MD.Google Scholar

18. On the UPWA's rank-and-file history see Fehn's “Striking Women”; Horowitz, Roger, “The Path Not Taken: A Social History of Industrial Unionism in Meatpacking, 1930–1960” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1990);Google ScholarWilson, Warren, “The Limits of New Deal Social Democracy: Working Class Structural Pluralism in MidWestern Meatpacking, 1900–1955” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1993);Google Scholar and Halpern, Rick, “‘Black and White, Unite and Fight’: Race and Labor in Meatpacking, 1904–1948” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1989).Google Scholar

19. Napuk, Kerry to All Officers and District Directors, “Analysis of U.S. Membership, March 1966,” October 3, 1966, Box 471, folder 3, United Packinghouse Workers of America, State Historical Society of Wisconsin Collection, Madison, WI; District Council No. 3, United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIOGoogle Scholar, Minutes, Seventh Annual Constitutional Convention (Des Moines, Iowa, 1953):36, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.Google Scholar

20. Fehn, , “Striking Women,” 267–70; clipping, “Women Lay Plans to Combat Automation,” District 3 Blade, February 1959, Box 1, Amalgamated Meatcutters and Butcher Workmen P-1 Collection, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa City [hereafter, AMBW P-1 Collection]; Ralph Helstein to All Affiliates, september 3, 1963, Box 1, folder 5, United Packinghouse Workers Local 46 Collection, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa City.Google Scholar

21. For an example of an ABC classification agreement, see Labor Agreement, John Morrell and Company and Local 1 UPWA (1967–70), State Historical Society of Iowa Labor Collection, Iowa City. Various EEOC complaints review the history of harassment. See, for example, EEOC decision, Case No. KC 7-2-117, Puffinharger et al. Morrell, v. and Local 1 UPWA, August 14, 1968, Box 25, folder 9, AMBW P-1 Collection.Google Scholar

22. Richard Price, interview with Davis, Merle, Waterloo, July 9, 1981, Iowa Oral Labor History Project, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa CityGoogle Scholar. The history of Title VII and the UPWA is the focus of Deslippe, Dennis A., “‘We Had an Awful Time with our Women’: Iowa's United Packinghouse Workers of America, 1945–75,” Journal of Women's History 5 (Spring 1993):10–32.Google Scholar

23. Hammerman, Herbert and Rogoff, Marvin, “The Union Role in Title VII Enforcement,” Civil Rights Digest 7 (Spring 1975):22.Google Scholar

24. Besides Kannenberg's thesis on UE gender relations, see the following for specific information on IUE-UE competition for members: Mary Lou Sauer to Al Hartnett, April 24, 1950 and Mary Lou Sauer to Al Hartnett, April 23, 1950, both in Box 2077, Group 1, International Union of Electrical Workers Collection, Special Collections, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ [hereafter, IUE Collection]; Agreement, Between Philco Corp., Sandusky, Ohio and International Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers, AFLCIO, Local 701, 1960, Box 175, Group 1, IUE Collection.

25. EEOC Decision Cases No. CL 7-2-261U and 6-2-946U, Katherine K. Raschak v. IUE Local 7171, Youngstown, Ohio; June 2, 1967, Box 42, Group 2, IUE Collection.

26. Newman, Winn to Jennings, Paul, February 7, 1975, Box 156, Group 2, IUE Collection.Google Scholar

27. Graham, , Civil Rights Era, 225.Google Scholar

28. Sonia Pressman Fuentes, interview with Sylvia Danovitch, Potomac, MD, December 27, 1990, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, transcript in author's possession.

29. See, for example, Rosenfeld v. Southern Pacific Co., 293 F. Supp. 1219 (C.D. Cal. 1968); Bowe v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 416 F. 2d 711 (7th Cir. 1969); Evans v. Sheraton Park Hotel, 5 FEP Cases 393 (D.D.C. 1972).

30. Quoted in New York Times, September 12, 1970.

31. Maschke, Karen J., Litigation, Courts, and Women Workers (New York, 1989), 103.Google Scholar See also Hill, Ann Corinne, “Protection of Women Workers and the Courts: A Legal Case History,” Feminist Studies 5 (Summer 1979):261;Google ScholarFreeman, Jo, The Politics of Women's Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and its Relation to the Policy Process (New York, 1975), 164–66.Google Scholar

32. Harrison, , On Account of Sex, 201.Google Scholar

33. New York Times, December 14, 1967.

34. On NOW's early years, see Hartmann, From Margin to Mainstream, 56–60; Rupp, Leila and Taylor, Verta, Survival in the Doldrums: The American Women's Rights Movement, 1945 to the 1960s (Columbus, 1990), 166, 179–80;Google ScholarHarrison, , On Account of Sex, 192, 194–97;Google ScholarDeHart-Mathews, Jane, “The New Feminism and the Dynamics of Social Change,” in Women's America; Refocusing the Past, 2nd ed., ed. Kerber, Lindac K. and DeHart-Mathews, Jane (New York, 1987), 448–49.Google Scholar

35. Ibid.

36. Los Angeles Times clipping, March 7, 1966, Box 44, folder 22, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection.

37. Quoted in Gabin, , Feminism, 191. The International Chemical Workers testified against protective laws at the hearings as well.Google Scholar

38. Gabin, , Feminism, 202–5.Google Scholar

39. On the small number of women in elected union office, and the larger number in appointed positions, see Dewey, Lucretia M., “Women in Labor Unions”, Monthly Labor Review 94 (02 1971):44–47.Google Scholar

40. Miller, Ruth to Samuel, Howard, November 21Google Scholar, 1969, Carton 9, folder 294, Esther Peterson Collection, 1910–84, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, MA [hereafter, Peterson Collection, 1910–84].

41. Cobble, Dishing It Out, 4–10.

42. Anne Draper to Andrew Biemiller, Don Slaiman, and Tom Harris, Carton 9, folder 294, Peterson Collection, 1910–84. The IAM is the International Association of Machinists.

43. Ibid.

44. Draper, Anne to Samuel, Howard D., December 22Google Scholar, 1969, Carton 9, folder 294, Peterson Collection, 1910–84.

45. Ibid. Federation lobbyist Andrew Biemiller was still trying to save women's protective laws in 1970 but Draper thought it futile. See Anne Draper to Andrew Biemiller, January 16, 1970, Carton 9, folder 294, Peterson Collection, 1910–84.

46. Hardesty, Doris Gibson, “The Continuing Fight for Women's Rights”, American Federationist (January 1971), 15.Google Scholar

47. Ibid., 13.

48. Ibid., 15; Andrew J. Biemiller to Emily Stoper, March 24, 1972, Box 17, folder 10, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection.

49. Testimony of Ruth Miller, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee of the Judiciary, Equal Rights 1970: Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, on S.J. Res. 61 and 231, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., September 1970, 230.

50. Submitted Statement of the International Union of Electrical Workers, U.S. Congress, House, Committee on the Judiciary, Equal Rights for Men and Women, 1971; Hearings Before Subcommittee No. 4 of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, on H.J. Res. 35, 208, 916, and Related Bills, 92nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1971, 331–43.

51. Testimony of Mrs. Eloise M. Basto Special Representative, Communications Workers of Americaj, U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, The “Equal Rights” Amendment: Hearings Before the Subcommitee on Constitutional Amendments of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, on S.J. Res. 61, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., May 1970, 355; Testimony of Ruth Miller, Senate Equal Rights Hearings, September, 1970, 230–32. See also Submitted Statement of Evelyn Dubrow [Legislative representative, International Ladies Garment Workers Union], Senate Equal Rights Hearings, May 1970, 642–43.

52. Testimony of Miller, Ruth, House Equal Rights Hearings, 1971, 257.Google Scholar

53. Moody, , An Injury to All, 275;Google ScholarFoner, Philip S., Women and the American Labor Movement: From World War Ito the Present (New York, 1980), 501Google Scholar; Babcock, Barbara Allen et al. , Sex Discrimination and the Law: Causes and Remedies (Boston, 1975), 277–78, 281.Google Scholar

54. Testimony of Wolfgang, Myra K., Senate Equal Rights Hearings, May 1970, 317.Google Scholar

55. Cobble, Dishing It Out, 80, 158; Evans v. Sheraton Park Hotel, 5 FEP Cases, 503 F. 2d 177 (1974).

56. Cobble, Dishing It Out, 10.

57. Quoted in Cobble, Dishing It Out, 151. For a discussion of radical feminists' misgivings about the ERA along similar lines, see Echols, Alice, Daring to Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America, 1967–75 (Minneapolis, 1989), 200, 366 fn. 36.Google Scholar

58. New York Times, September 15, 1970; Foner, Women in the Labor Movement, 482–84.

59. Testimony of Miller, Ruth, House Equal Rights Hearings, 1971, 263.Google Scholar

60. Katherine P. Ellickson, interview with Dennis East, Detroit, January 10, 1976, Walter Reuther Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University, Detroit. Ellickson claimed in this 1976 interview that she supported the ERA “not long after” 1967; in 1970, however, she called the ERA “vague high sounding but ineffectual”. See Typescript, Katherine P. Ellickson, Statement of the National Consumers League Before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Equal Rights Amendment, September 10, 1970, Box 7, folder 15, Ellickson Collection, 1921–78.

61. Typescript, Esther Peterson, Address to the AFL-CIO National Auxiliaries Convention, December 11, 1967, Box 1, folder 2, Peterson Collection, 1910–84.

62. Peterson, Esther to Griffiths, Martha, October 12, 1971, Box 2, Esther Peterson Collection, 1960–88, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar

63. Gertzog, Irwin N., Congressional Women: Their Recruitment, Treatment, and Behavior (New York, 1984), 204.Google Scholar

64. Harrison, On Account of Sex, 206, 305 fn. 43.

65. Typescript, Elizabeth Duncan Koontz at Women's Organizations Consultation meeting on the 50th Anniversary of the Women's Bureau, February 26, 1970, Box 55, folder 22, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection. See also Graham, Civil Rights Era, 409; Hartmann, From Margin to Mainstream, 103 for background on the Department of Labor's position on the ERA in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

66. Hartmann, From Margin to Mainstream, 103; Balser, Diane, Sisterhood and Solidarity: Feminism and Labor in Modern Times (Boston, 1987), 103; Kessler-Harris, Out to Work, 315.Google Scholar

67. American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations, Proceedings, Tenth Constitutional Convention, vol. 2: Report of the Executive Council (Bal Harbour, 1973), 109–11.Google Scholar

68. American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations, Proceedings: Tenth Constitutional Convention, 388–89.

69. Pauline Newman, interview with BarbarWertheimer, New York City, November 1976, Box 1, folder 6, Pauline Newman Collection, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Mass.

70. Hammerman and Rogoff, “Union Role,” 27.

71. Submitted Statement of Hoffa, James R., Senate Equal Rights Hearings, September 1970, 402Google Scholar. For examples of sex discrimination court cases involving the Teamsters, see Holiday v. Red Ball Motor Freight, 11 FEP Cases 567 (1974); International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. U.S., 431 U.S. 324 (1977); and Macklin v. Spector Freight Systems, Inc., 478 F. 2d 979 (DC. Cir. 1973). For an account of the Teamsters' poor civil rights record, see Gould, William B., Black Workers in White Unions: Job Discrimination in the United States (Ithaca, 1977), 365–71.Google Scholar

72. Gabin, Feminism, 208.

73. Andrew J. Biemiller to Mary Condon Gereau, December 6, 1973, Box 17, folder 10, AFL-CIO Legislation Collection.

74. Glick, Phyllis S., “Bridging Feminism and Trade Unionism: A Study of Working Women's Organizing in the United States” (Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1983), 349.Google Scholar

75. Milkman, “Feminism and Labor since the 1960s”, 304–7; “Note: Union Liability for Employer Discrimination”, Harvard Law Review 93 (February 1980):712 fn. 60.

76. Milkman, “Feminism and Labor since the 1960s,” 309.

77. Foner, Women and the Labor Movement, 486, 498–500.

78. CLUW News, Winter 1975, Box 13, folder 1, Coalition of Labor Union Women Collection, Walter Reuther Archives of Labor History and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI [hereafter, CLUW Collection].

79. Philadelphia Inquirer clipping, January 29, 1974, Box 1, folder 5, CLUW Collection.

80. CLUW News, Summer 1975, Box 13, folder 1, CLUW Collection.

81. Pamphlet, “Statement of Purpose, Structure and Guidelines, adopted by Coalition of Labor Union Women Founding Conference, March 23–24, 1974, Chicago, Illinois”, Box 1, folder 17, CLUW Collection.

82. See, for example, the charges that “union contracts don't begin to protect women from discriminatory practices” (Memo, n.a., n.d. [1973–1974], Box 1, folder 16, CLUW Collection). CLUW dropped its official naming of unions as suspect parties in discrimination with employers in 1977 (see Typescript, Resolutions Passed, 1977 Convention, Box 11, folder 10, CLUW Collection).

83. Milkman, “Feminism and Labor since the 1960s”, 309.

84. Mary Callahan, interview with Alice M. Hoffman and Karen Budd, Philadelphia, PA, May 7, 1976, Twentieth–Century Trade Union Women: Vehicles for Social Change, Oral History Project, Wayne State University, Detroit, Mich.; Olga Madar to Karen De Crow, May 5, 1975, Box 14, folder 12, CLUW collection.

85. Testimony of Sellers, Georgianna, Senate Equal Rights Hearings, May 1970, 577.Google Scholar