THE SHOP HOURS' REGULATION BILL
[TO THE EDITOR OF THR I SPECTATOR"] Stit,—As I am the oldest member of the Society for Promoting the Employment of Women, and have for several years made a study of their industrial condition, I hope you will allow me space to explain why it is that so many people see reason to fear that Sir John Lubbock's Shop Hours' Bill will throw women out of work, and why Mr. Mundella's Short Hours' Factory Bill stands on different ground.
When the profit to the employer on the labour of each worker he employs does not exceed the difference between the wages of a man and of a woman, there is no possibility of men being substi- tuted for women. For example, if a woman earns ls. 6d. a day, and a man 2s. 6d., the difference between the wages earned by them is 1s. ; if the profit to the employer is no more than a *billing on the work done by the woman, it is evident that if she were dismissed, and a man taken in her place, the extra shilling paid to the man would absorb the whole profit. Therefore she -cannot be dismissed. On the other hand, whenever the profit on the labour of each worker widely 'exceeds the difference between the wages earned by a man and by a woman, it is in the power of the employer to dismiss the woman and substitute a man ; he may employ either a man or a woman, as is convenient to him.
In manufactories, each millowner employs many hands ; 500 is not a large number to be employed by one millowner, and in more than one instance as many as 2,000 women and children are em- ployed by the same person, besides a few men to look after the machinery. The profit on the work of each is small, though the aggregate profit is large. If the number of hands in a factory be compared with the (reputed) income of the owner, it will be found that the profit cannot be more than 2s. on the daily work of each hand, and it is probably much less (as reputed incomes are apt to be larger than real ones). The difference between the wages earned by men and women in manufacturing districts being about 2s. a day, it is clear that if a manufacturer were to dismiss the women and substitute men, the increase in the wages he would have to pay would swallow up his entire profit. If, therefore, Mr. Mundella's Bill should become law, manufacturers would submit to any small loss of profit which the shorter time for work might entail, rather than replace their woman workers by men.
Shopkeepers stand in the opposite position. They employ com- paratively few workers, fifty being an unusually large number of salesmen for one shop, while in many shops only half a dozen are kept. Thus the profit on each worker employed is larger than that of the manufacturer, but the aggregate profit is smaller, there being comparatively so few workers. The chief expense of a manufacturer is wages, but wages form only a small item in the expenses of a shopkeeper. His chief expenses are rent and the purchase of goods. His losses arise from not selling the goods he has bought. The difference in wages between a salesman and a saleswoman is about 2s. 6d. a day, but the profit on the goods sold by each seller in the course of the day far exceeds 2s. 6d. Where the goods sold are of an expensive nature, such as lace or silk, the profit on the sales of each seller must amount to many pounds. It cannot in such a case make much difference to the shopkeeper whether he pays his assistants at the rate of 3s. Gd. a day or 6s.
In cheap shops employed by the poor, the profit is naturally much less, but still far exceeds 2s. Gd. a day on each salesman or saleswoman employed. It is in these cheap shops in the East and South of London that large numbers of women are employed, and it is in these poor localities that the sales are chiefly effected in the evening. The servant-girl goes out in the evening, after the late dinner or supper of her master and mistress, to make her pur- chases ; the charwoman goes out after her day's work is done, and she has put her children to bed and given her husband his supper ; the woman or girl employed all day at a handicraft or in a manu- factory goes out after she has had her supper and changed her dress. At nine o'clock the shops are still busy, busier indeed than in the middle of the day.
It is easy to perceive what the effect of the Shop Hours' Regulation Bill would be on a shopkeeper who supplied the poor, if he employed women. His shop would be closed at the busiest moment, and he would see his customers going perforce to his rival opposite who employs men. He would of course dismiss his women next week, and engage men. It may be true, as has been said, that saleswomen are less active and efficient during the last hour, still they are efficient enough to be able to sell the goods. It has never been said that barmaids are too tired to sell liquor after nine o'clock; they remain, by all accounts, quite efficient till much later.
Sir J. Lubbock's Bill, if restricted to young persons, would be of great value, as it is the practice in these small shops to employ very young girls, and to part with them when they reach the age of two or three and twenty ; thus great numbers of girls are brought into the trade, but have ultimately to turn to some other employment. The Bill, if restricted to young persons, would check this practice, and promote the employment of grown women.—
Previous page
