The great strike of 1909 gave a great im petus to the organization of women. The Ladies' Garment Worker's Union soon rose to third place in the American Federation, though it now holds fourth, having been passed by the Machinists. Yet this organization is officered by men.
The attitude of the unions of men toward admitting women is determined partly by geography — more favorable in the West than in the East,— mainly by the character of the trade. Those trades in which men supply the greater part of the labor have tended to be hostile though most have ultimately realized that it was better to have the women with them than against them.
It is the policy of the unions to promote the interests of the members first of all. They seek to do this in many ways, among them by securing the following: (1) Shorter day, now generally eight hours. This is done partly out of consideration for personal welfare, partly to make work for more people. (2) Higher pay, through the closed shop, limiting appren tices, restricting immigration, and sometimes the tariff. (3) The closed shop, through the union label, the boycott, extending the boycott even to the use of machinery made by non union labor, and using it to control commerce and even the retail business. Dealers some times have to get the consent of unions to move perishable goods, simply because they were handled by non-union men in a distant State. Even the United States government has been forced to secure permits. In 1916 a non-union competitor sought an injunction against the cigarmakers' boycott, the object of which was to stop the sale of his cigars at retail. (4) Em ployment for many— through government em ployment at times, such devices as °full crew' laws, opposition to °scientific management,' but opposition to new machinery has about ceased. (5) Limitation of production. Probably this is one reason for opposition to convict labor, though there are others. (6) Compensation for accidents. All are agreed on the employers' liability. but not on a fixed scale of compensa tion fixed by law. (7) The safety of workers. (8) The extension of mutual aid, through strike benefits, insurance, etc. (9) The mold ing of public opinion — through publicity.
The demands of the political parties as formulated in 1916 were: (1) Adequate compen sation for employees of the government, includ ing a minimum wage; (2) a compensation law; (3) a retiring allowance; (4) a tribunal of ap peal and (5) the right to organize; (6) govern ment ownership and operation of the telegraph and telephone lines; (7) equal suffrage and (8) restriction of immigration. The unions do not
enter politics as a party, but they work for the election of candidates who will promise most for the defeat of men known to be hostile.
The unions composed of women or in which the women predominate seek primarily the bet terment of women. The specific things they call for vary according to geography and in dustry, but all are pretty well agreed on the need for greater safety and they have been in fluential in securing better protection against fire in factories. Some are strong for coedu cational industrial training, industrial history, the teaching of the philosophy of collective bar gaininm and of the relation of government to labor. They demand equal suffrage and protest against the anti-woman's suffrage activity of the leisure class.
Legal legal status of the unions, what they may do and what they may not do, is well established in some particulars, in others it is not. Collective agreements are legal and an employee who has contracted for a certain sum may recover more, if it afterward transpires that his union has made an agreement for more for its members. Whether the em nloyer could recover from an employee after having made a lower contract with the union does, not seem to have been decided. The closed shop by agreement has been held legal, but the State may not require private busi ness to be run on this principle, as Arizona sought to do. It may require only union labor on public works, as in the New York case, though the Nebraska Supreme Court has ren dered a decision to the contrary, and quotes cases in six States to sustain it. Neither can the State favor unions by forbidding employers to exact as a condition of employment a promise from the employee not to affiliate with any union (Coppage v. Kans.). Several States had fol lowed the lead of Kansas in attempting to give such protection only to have their acts declared null and void.