Has legislation displaced women?
Is there, then, evidence to show that any material displacement of women or girls in these trades followed the enforcement of factory legislation? Instances of dismissal must obviously be sought for soon after the Act of 1867, as the employer then knew on what terms he engaged his staff, and, except in a few cases where deliberate evasions of the law might be attempted, the effect of legislation would be to deter him from employing women, rather than lead him to dismiss them. Owing to the lapse of time, it is difficult to find out from those in the trade the immediate consequences of this Act, nor does the Commission of 1876 give much assistance. Of 103 employers questioned by us, not half a dozen remembered dismissing women in consequence of the new enactment.
One employer turned off ten or twelve women "folders" and introduced machinery, alleging as his reason the want of elasticity in the Factory Act. His ordinary hours were from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., but on certain days in the week it was necessary to begin work at 6 a.m. He made arrangements that the total number of hours should not exceed those sanctioned by the Act, but the variation was not allowed. If his women began work at 6 a.m. on any day, his hours had to be regularly 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., except in the case of thirty nights in the year when overtime was permitted. As this did not suit his business, he dismissed the women and had recourse to folding machines. Personally he gained, as the machinery proved an economy, but it told hardly on the women, whom otherwise he would have kept on as they were old hands.
Another employer told a similar tale regarding the introduction of folding machinery, but stated that he had been obliged to dispense with female operatives by reason of the strict enforcement of the regulations regarding overtime only.
In both these cases it is clear that the state of the trade was such that it required only a very slight disability on the part of the worker to make it worth while for the employer to use machinery.
Quite apart from any effect of legislation the machine was destined to supplant manual labour; its advent was merely accelerated by the Act. Its first introduction caused isolated cases of hardship, but its ultimate results were beneficial. Thus at the present day women and girls are largely employed upon the very machines which once seemed to threaten their industrial existence.
The case of women compositors.
In the Economic Journal of 1899 an interesting paper by Miss Bradby and Miss A. Black discusses the position of women compositors in Edinburgh, and deals with the subject of legislation. After an exhaustive investigation, no single instance was discovered of the displacement of a woman by a man owing to the Factory Acts.
The chief contention of those who oppose special factory legislation on the ground that it limits the usefulness of women compositors is, that women are not employed on newspaper work, and they give the legal prohibition of nightwork for women as the reason. Careful enquiry has shown that reason to be purely imaginary. Women are not employed on evening papers, though the factory law does not stand in their way. In the provinces women set-up one or two weekly or bi-weekly journals, the firms employing them preferring them solely on the ground of cheapness. Experience shows that women are not suited for newspaper work, unless the paper does not appear more frequently than, say, twice a week, and if the factory code disappeared to-morrow, morning daily newspapers would afford to women compositors no fresh openings.