University of Wollongong Thesis Collections
University of Wollongong Thesis Collection
University of Wollongong
Year 
A history of the Clothing and Allied
Trades Union
B. L. Ellem
University of Wollongong
Ellem, B. L., A history of the Clothing and Allied Trades Union, Doctor of Philosophy thesis,
Department of History, University of Wollongong, 1986. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/1421
This paper is posted at Research Online.
CHAPTER TWO
NEW SOUTH WALES 1840-1907
68
(i)
ORIGINS
When tailors took up their craft in Australia, they did so as 'free
born
Englishmen',
steeped
semi-secret unionism.
in
the
traditions
of
craft,
guild
and
They were not afraid to continue the vigorous
strike actions which had drawn their masters' hostility at home.
The
tailors of Sydney struck work for higher wages in the winter of 1840.
This action outraged The Australian newspaper which called upon the
masters to use the full force of the law against this 'bare faced and
insolent attempt at unlawful combination'.1
their lot with their days in England.
No doubt -the men compared
So too, in the most scathing
way, did the newspaper which reported that it had:
seen sundry of them, with guns on their
shoulders, going out 'sporting' into the
bush; offering, in their appearance, a
wretched imitation of the worst style of
London cockneys.2
The Australian did not deal with the outcome of the strike, which
seems to have been successful with the men earning up to 13s 6d per
day afterwards3
(a figure which, if correct, would not be achieved
again until this century) .
No doubt this strike reassured
1.
The Australian, 1 August 1840.
2.
ibid., 30 July 1840.
3.
T. Coghlan, Labour and Industry, Vol.1, p.427.
the Union was formed in January 1840.
the men
Coghlan suggests
69
that the occasional, prudent strike would win them their 'fair share'
of the industry's wealth.
In the following year, amid falling wages and rising unemployment, the
tailors encountered more hostility to their 'association' when police
checked on their meetings in the Crown and Anchor hotel.
The publican
was, apparently, pressured into closing his doors to trade meetings.^
The semi-secret society might yet be needed in the new land.
Some
sort of organisation was maintained during the next thirty years or so
but no permanent union was established.
On 8 February
1875, some
thirty
tailors
responded
to
a newspaper
advertisement, met in the Hyde Park Hotel and set up an Amalgamated
Society of Journeymen Tailors (ASJT).5
Melbourne's
Tailors had . an
apparently secure Society but this did not seem to be the inspiration
for the Sydney men.
Rather, they drew upon the ideas of 'New Model'
unionism as worked out in Britain.
Their union's name replicated that
of the national amalgamation established in England in 1866.
In seeking to unite the craft, the English and Sydney societies had
similar aims.
The men were acutely aware of their isolation both from
4.
The Australian, 11, 13 March 1841.
R. Leeson, op.cit. , p. 137
reports the receipt of a letter from the 'Crown' by the
Stonemasons in England.
It was evidently, then, a popular
meeting place for trades' unionists.
5.
SMH, 8 February 1875. ASJT Minutes, 8 February 1875. This hotel
was the venue for meetings of the Trades and Labor Council
(established 1871).
70
the mass of outworkers in the labour market, and from their fellow
unionists
hundreds
of
miles
away
in
the
other
colonies.
They
immediately wrote to New Zealand and to Melbourne asking after their
attitudes
to
amalgamation.6
Within
a
couple
of months
they
had
resolved 'to amalgamate with the Australian Colonies and New Zealand'
and the Secretary, Charles Probyn, was ordered to inform the other
societies of this.7
tailors' unionism.
Thus, the idea of amalgamation was born with
The object was to be part of
bodey' of colonial tailors.8
'one grand united
The difficulties created by distance and
the problems of continuous existence for the unions rendered the plan
somewhat chimerical.
nonsense.
(This is not to suggest that it was tactical
On the contrary, for employers always attempted to recruit
inter-colonial
labour
to break
strikes).
As
the ASJT's
became more secure, the talk of amalgamation diminished
position
for a time.
The great distances between centres retarded other Unions' aspirations
too.
Only
the
Amalgamated
Society
of Engineers
(ASE)
functioned
across colonial borders - as a 'section' of the English union - and
even
it
had
no
central
council
Australasian Council in 1888.
Sydney
had
amalgamated
in
before
the
formation
of
its
The Seamen's Unions of Melbourne and
1874 but
the
structure
was
very
loose
indeed.9
6.
ASJT, Minutes, February-May 1875. See H. Roth, Trade Unions in
New Zealand (Wellington, 1973): a tailors' society had been
established in Dunedin in 1865.
By 1881 there was a national
association. Problems of distance were, of course, less acute in
New Zealand.
7.
ASJT, Minutes, 14 June 1875.
8.
Spelling as in original.
9.
K.D. Buckley, op.cit., pp.76-9;
Empire in Australia, p.211.
ibid., 24 April 1876.
B.
Fitzpatrick,
The
British
71
Because of outwork and the retarded factory system in Sydney, the
ASJT's first meetings evinced a much less exclusive attitude than
appeared in Melbourne.
The most notable example of this was the
appointment of a committee to
'beat up' unionism
workers - and bring them into the Society. 10
amongst outdoor
The only exception to
this pattern was the significant decision to delay a debate (for eight
years as it turned out) on affiliation
Council.11
to the Trades and Labor
They were to be uncomfortable about action with other
workers in the Colony and any 'politics' for some time. Thus, in 1878
it was
decided
that
there
be
no
expenditure
except
for
'trade
purposes' and, in the following year, members reiterated that they
would 'decline to have anything to do with any political Union'.12
This attitude placed the ASJT in accord with many other Unions. 13
Similarly the tailors were united in spirit with other Unions in
virulently
opposing
Chinese
labour.
When
the newly
amalgamated
Seamen's Union struck work against Chinese, the ASJT put aside its
isolation to comment that Chinese labour was
detrimental to the interests of all free men as it
would reduce the remuneration for labour to a
point at which civilised mechanics and others
could not live.l^
10.
ASJT, Minutes, 5 July 1875.
11.
ibid., 27 September 1875.
12.
ibid., 8 October 1978; 21 January 1879.
13.
See R. Gollan, Radical and Working Class Politics, Chapter 4.
14.
ASJT, Minutes, 20 November 1878.
72
The 'civilised' tailors' major union business came down to drawing up
a time-log for the trade.
At first, the wisdom of this was doubted,
then debate raged over the time of serving it - all before an item had
been discussed.
1877.
Several abortive committees sat throughout
1876 and
Just before Christmas, 1877, a committee of five was appointed
'to make a log from the Glasgow log, or other logs'.15
men were not
masters.
confident
that
To assuage their
they could
enforce
Clearly the
their will on the
fears, the committee
moved
for
a
last
minute push to sign more members, although by then (January), the most
opportune season to be on the offensive had passed.16
The newest committee worked quickly and served the log in March 1878.
It was directed against only the major employers, representatives of
whom
met
with
confrontation
particularly
the
with
as
ASJT
their
they
felt
in
April.
employers
that
In
many
some
of
their
of
them
first
the
men
had
organised
were
behaved
'ungentlemanly manner ... towards the log committee'.1^
wary,
in
an
Nevertheless,
only one firm. Farmers, refused to consider the log and, instead, sent
to Melbourne for twenty tailors, to carry on their operations without
union men.
This
dispute
dragged
on
throughout
the
because the men there were unwilling to act decisively.
15.
ibid., 8 May, 12 August 1876; 14 December 1877,
16.
ibid., 12 January 1878.
17.
ibid., 1 May 1878.
year,
partly
By the end of
73
June, six major employers had conceded the log once small adjustments
had been made.18
The new log worked well enough because clarification and uniformity
were
desired
employers
by
most
welcomed
comprehensive
employers
the
time-log.
as
much
discussion
and
Its
on
impact
as
by
unionists.
settlement
weekly
of
earnings
Most
a
fairly
cannot
be
gauged but it was more of a boon to the unionist than the log arranged
in Melbourne in 1873.
The Sydney log was much more wide-ranging and
allowed more time for major items.
It contained no recognition for
machine work, being exclusively a hand-worker's log.
position
and
the average
income
of
the
Sydney
Both the craft
tailor
seemed
more
assured than the Victorian's.19
This state of affairs was
facilitated
by the circumstances
of the
industry because in 1878, clothing emplojmient rose 10 per cent - the
best year since 1875.
In three of the next four years, emplojmient,
and the ASJT's size, contracted.20
in 1879-80, even the powerful ASE
was in difficulties whilst, in the clothing trade, disputes over the
log's details broke out.
What would remain a problem for the clothing
unionist
how
soon
appeared:
to
police
so
complex
an
agreed
log.
18.
ASJT, Time Statement, June 1878, signed by, amongst others, two
firms which would endure long after the ASJT - David Jones and
Milletts.
19.
ibid.
20.
NSWSR, 1886, 1888.
February 1881.
ASJT, Minutes, especially December
1880 -
74
particularly in a piece or task industry.21
An allied problem was
that of where garments should be made.
Outwork created immense concern among the ASJT's members at all times
but most especially during recession.
In the uneasy years
of the
early 1880's the Society was constantly on guard against this threat.
The first clear warning was in April 1882, when Savage's 'union shop'
was discovered having work sent out.
The affair was resolved quickly
when the ASJT guaranteed adequate labour to the firm which, for its
part, promised to have all its work done on the premises.
At frequent
times, other firms had to be approached to give similar undertakings:
in
December,
1882,
it
was
Holle's
turn,
and
in
the
following
pre-Christmas season it was the major firm, Milletts, who were asked
for
an
explanation
of
their
outwork
practices.22
The
Society's
deputations accepted that recourse beyond the shop and factory was due
to 'emergencies' and were prepared to let the matter rest.
In early January 1884, however, it was revealed that
a great deal of work was being made outside while
the men inside were kept partially idle.
The men there promptly struck and the committee tried to increase its
control within the Union by ascertaining who was taking work out.23
It
is
significant
that
the
ASJT's
first
major
strike
was
over
21.
For the ASE, see K.D. Buckley, op.cit., pp.60-61.
see Minutes, 6 February 1881.
For the ASJT,
22.
ASJT, Minutes, 12, 17, 24 April, 6 December 1882; 19 December
1883.
23.
ibid., 2, 10, 17, 23 January 1884.
75
outwork.
No doubt 'the sweating problem' in Victoria had been in the
minds of Sydney's tailors but there is no record of the men thinking
about organising the women employed by sub-contractors.
In trying to control where garments were made, the men thought about
the problem of imports too.
protested
against
the
import
In the recession of 1879-80 they had
of
uniforms
from
Britain,
just
engineers had demanded that locomotives be made in the colony.
did not become
demands
for protectionism.
'officially' support this until 1885.24
NSW
unionists
as
These
did
not
it was, however, the first
sign of tailors being aware that the state might affect their Union;
the first sign that 'politics' might have to be embraced.
At first the Society continued refusing to work with the TLC.
exception
to
this
was
when
the
tailors
joined
an
The one
anti-Chinese
demonstration.
This was little discussed in the Society but it was
promptly
upon
acted
-
Anglo-Saxon craftsman's
both
of
antipathy
which
suggest
the
to the Chinese.
depth
Perhaps
of
the
finding
common ground with other tradesmen, the tailors were one group among
many to join the TLC in the early 1880s.25
A more material inducement
to unity - and the beginning of political activity - came through the
Society's registering under the Trade Union Act of 1881.
This gave
24.
For the ASE, K.D. Buckley, op.cit. , p.60;
for NSW, R. Gollan,
Radical and Working Class Politics, p.95; for the ASJT, Minutes,
15 March 1880.
25.
ASJT, Minutes, 30 August 1880; 9 May 1881; 10 December 1883.
76
protection to union funds and some measure of legality to the unions
themselves.26
Hereafter there are no Minutes of the tailors' unions in NSW before
1904.
Union development may be traced through the rules of 1886 and
the long strike of 1891-2.
the Amalgamated
By 1885 the Union had re-titled itself as
Journejmien Tailors' Association
(AJTA).
It was
a
fairly typical New Model Union, with benefit funds for unemplojmient
and illness and a funeral fund.
Its
'Preamble' declared for thrift
and exhibited a genuine commitment to 'the trade'.
to be spoiled or left incomplete.
whole
to
decide
upon, not
Thus, work was not
Strikes were for the members as a
independent
men.
On
the
other
hand,
democracy was emphasised: there were six-monthly elections, elaborate
checks on the finances whilst the Executive's only power was to pay
incidental expenses
and call special meetings.
It was
there
that
actions would be decided.27
Early unionism in the clothing trades of Sydney, then, was confined to
males who had served an apprenticeship.
English practice.
Within
It.was strongly influenced by
the Australian context
several
long-term
features were part of these origins: amalgamation of like societies,
attempts to control how and where garments were made, and equivocal
attitudes to the state and to politics.
26.
ibid., 7 August 1882.
27.
AJTA, Rules, 1 January 1886
77
(ii) THE TAILORESSES' UNION AND THE TAILORS' STRIKE
By the financial year 1888-89, according to the Statistical Register,
there were
2281 women
in the clothing
factories
of NSW.
This
represented almost two-thirds of the total registered clothing trades'
work force.
decade.28
This proportion had been steadily rising through the
Only on the eve of the depression of the 1890s did the TLC,
in Sydney, move to organise women in the clothing trade.
guidance of
the
'Organizing
Committee', a Tailoresses' Union was
formed on 28 November 1889, with 30 members.
members.
Under the
By 1891 it had only 100
A Female Employees' Union was formed soon afterwards but
there were claims that it 'poached' women workers from other unions.29
The new Union faced overwhelming difficulties.
the Union
to keep
its
officials' names
out
Intimidation forced
of
the
press; the
President, Mr Peter Strong (of the AJTA) was often refused access to
factories and shops; the Secretary, Miss Murray, had been dismissed
three times when her identity was discovered, and the Vice-President
had also been sacked.30
challenge;
The dominance of outwork seemed to be beyond
the Union was too small to strike in protest - although it
28.
NSWSR, 1888, 1896.
29.
This account is based upon W. Nicol, op.cit.
union records.
30.
'Royal Commission on Strikes, Minutes of Evidence', NSWPP, 1891,
Qs.10373, 10375, 10376, 10378-81, 11217.
There are no extant
78
had tried on two occasions to do so.31
were great difficulties.
potent
threat because
women'.32
in the shops themselves, there
Any complaints led to immediate dismissal; a
there was
'great competition
for jobs
among
Despite the support of the TLC's Organizing Committee, the
Union made little headway.
In truth, the machinations in the TLC and
the Female Employees' Union (and between them) further debilitated the
Tailoresses' Union.33
whilst there was some genuine effort by the
TLC, there were others who were less co-operative.
The position of
the tailors' leadership was, to say the least, ambiguous.
Not until the eve of a strike by tailors did the AJTA call a meeting
of women workers.
It promptly considered the
question of strike pay
for tailoresses but Mrs Fairley of the TLC was not impressed, claiming
that tailors had been antagonistic to women.
had been done.
Too little organising
Further, Mrs Higgins emphasised, the stock workers had
never been organised at all.34
Although meetings were held, there was
no union expansion amongst the most exploited.
There were ambiguities
in the thinking of men like Tailoresses' President
Peter Strong who
claimed to support women's place in the trade, but who argued
equal
pay
in
the
belief
that
be
employed.
Significantly, the only tailoress to give evidence before
the Royal
31.
ibid., 10383-97, 10489-90.
32.
ibid., 11235-36, 11257-59.
33.
W. Nicol, op.cit.
34.
SMH, 3 November 1891.
more
men
would
then
for
79
Commission on Strikes, Catherine Powell, disputed the rationale for
this claim. 35
This
tension was
to underpin much
of
the
later
campaigns for equal pay.
The first NSW Tailoresses' Union, then, was a limited and incomplete
venture, hampered by confused leadership and battered by the economic
storms of the 1890s.
With depression
it was in no position to
survive. A half-hearted attempt to enforce a log in the order trade36
and an isolated strike against long hours both failed.
In the slump
following 1891, the Union, along with many others, disappeared.37
Demands for changes in the tailors' log had mainly come from employers
in the early 1880.S.
changes.
In 1891, however, it was the Union which sought
The old ASJT had not been afraid
full-scale operation had ever been launched.
of
strikes
but no
By the early 1890s there
were closer ties with the political movement, chiefly through the
Union's President John Hepher, a member of the Australian Socialist
League (and later a state parliamentarian) and a vice-President of the
TLC.38
The union movement's defeats in the Maritime Strike and the
Queensland Shearers' Strike had already pushed many, including the
35.
'Royal Commission on Strikes', Qs.10430, 10469-70, 11248-51.
36.
Sm,
37.
TLC, Minutes, 21 January, 18 February 1892. W. Nicol, op.cit.
38.
Biographical details see H. Radi, P. Spearitt and E. Hilton
(eds.). Biographical Register of the NSW Parliament 1901-1970
(Canberra, 1977), p.129; P. Ford, Cardinal Moran and the ALP
(Melbourne, 1966) pp.58-9, 80, 84-5, 109, 121, 135 note, 158,
229.
3 November, 16 December 1891.
80
ASL, towards emphasising parliamentary politics.
However, the AJTA
felt that its case was strong and that despite the general economic
downturn its demands would be conceded in the pre-Christmas season.
In October 1891, there were good omens. The Pressers' Union presented
a log to the TLC for approval.
After some uncertainty the kindred
committee of the clothing trades voted to support the men's bid for a
weekly minimum wage of £3. Most employers accepted the increase (from
about £2 10s) and
prompt
strike
action
succeeded
in encouraging
recalcitrant employers to accept the Union's position.39
see, the pressers
tailors did.
retained
greater
control
of
the
AS we shall
industry
than
Their labour was probably of more strategic significance
and less easily replaced.
Their success was an oddity in the early
1890s.
The AJTA's demands were more complex than the Pressers' but their
wages would not rise as much.
The Association claimed that average
weekly wages (taken over a year) were not more than 38 shillings.
In
the busy season a weekly return might be £2 8s which they did 'not
think
proper
remuneration
for
a
Skilled
Tradesman'.^0
(Sydney
compositors were earning a minimum of £3 weekly in the early 1890s,
stonemasons 10 shillings per day and carpenters and joiners up to
lis 6d daily.
Ominously, engineers were beginning to have trouble
39.
sm,
40.
AJTA, Manifesto, n.d.
5, 9, 14, 16 October 1891.
81
holding out against 'freedom of contract') .41
felt aggrieved.
Little wonder tailors
Of equal importance was that rules, conditions and
outwork be taken into consideration.
To resolve these problems and to
discuss wage increases the AJTA's Secretary, R.G. Webster, and John
Hepher called for a conference with Sydney's clothing employers.^2
The Association's
committee
did
good-will of the manufacturers.
not
have
unbridled
faith
in
They had prepared for conflict one
day after publishing the new log, by reducing entrance fees.
new members had been enrolled as a result.^3
informed of their progress and plans.
'a
conference
would
Forty
The TLC was kept closely
The result of the conference
suggested that such precautions had been sensible.
forty employers attended.
the
Only two out of
Eight leading firms sent a curt notice that
not
be
granted'.^^
Not
discouraged,
the
Association arranged another meeting; once again only two employers'
representatives arrived.^5
The attitude of the 'employer militant'
was largely the result of Mr Newman of David Jones.
Some small firms
were willing to discuss terms but it is likely that it was Newman who,
throughout October, organised opposition to the new log.
41.
J. Hagan, Printers and Politics, p.114;
T. Coghlan, op.cit.,
Vol.3, p.1448; K.D. Buckley, op.cit., pp.125-6.
42.
SMH, 30 September, 7 October 1891.
43.
ibid., 23 September 1891.
44.
ibid., 15 October .1891.
45.
ibid., 29 October 1891.
82
Hepher responded to the failure of the second conference by warning
the TLC that a strike was imminent; the men had no choice.
The
reaction was enthusiastic, as one delegate applauded the strike for
promising to end 'thirteen years subservience' in the trade.^6
A
meeting of 300 tailors - the biggest ever held - declared in favour of
a strike.
On Saturday 31 October, the men began to leave work.
A
total of 450 men struck work.^7
Not everyone shared the enthusiasm of the AJTA and the TLC.
The
Sydney Morning Herald denounced 'yet another strike' and warned that
there was 'weakness in the position of the men who are going on
strike'.^8
The men were confident of a quick victory, particularly as
some non-unionists had joined them.
The employers would collapse in
two or three weeks.^9 The strike began well, with massive attendances
at meetings, enthusiastic picketing and the co-operation of the Cabmen's union in restricting the movement of material. 50
Many of the
men worked in small 'first class' tailoring shops where production had
been fully halted and this gave them confidence that they could stand
alone.
The men's officials were privately alarmed at their lack of
funds as early as the second week in November.
46.
TLC, Minutes, 29 October 1891.
47.
SMH, 2 November 1891.
48.
ibid., 31 October 1891.
49.
ibid.; TLC, Minutes, 29 October 1891.
50.
SMH, 4 November 1891.
picketing.
Financial constraints
See also Truth, 8 November 1891, for
83
were the only blot on the horizon at that time, with only 20 shillings
being paid in strike money to each member.51
The strike's progress
seemed to obviate great concern, because 26 firms had conceded the new
log - although most of them did not use first-class material and were
not,
therefore,
comprehensive
paying
log.
the
When
firms
full
increases
did
concede,
provided for all their labour requirements.52
drew closer,
the rate
of concessions
fell
nor
ratifying
the AJTA
the
immediately
As the end of the month
away,
and
in
a
secret
session, the TLC warned that it could not pay any further strike money
for the 350 men still out of work.
A loan of £100 would therefore be
made to the AJTA and a further appeal to affiliated unions would be
issued.53
Some
moves
dispute.
had
been
made,
through
the
Trades' Hall,
to
end
the
On the eve of a meeting, however, the terms of the conflict
were altered such that the tailors were involved in a struggle typical
of the 1890s.
The employers decided to assert their right to 'freedom
of contract' as against
AJTA met
'the arbitary decisions of the men'.54
t.he employers'
representatives
resolve the major issues in the log.
on
20
November
hoping
The
to
It was agreed that the old and
new logs should be taken together and
a compromise might
then be
51.
TLC, Minutes, 12 November 1891 has Hepher appealing for help,
See also Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 13 November, 1891.
52.
SMH, 7 November 1891.
53.
TLC, Minutes, 26 November 1891.
54.
Quoted, SMH, 18 November 1891.
84
arranged.
Webster described how this useful progress came to an end:
Newman suddenly 'stood up and insisted on their right to 'Freedom of
Contract''.55
The Union's representatives responded that
in the eyes of any right-thinking man [freedom of
contract] was
just the introduction of the
sweating system.56
The conference adjourned whilst the strikers were informed of events.
The men voted to 'stand by the principles' of Unionism.
In Secretary
Webster's words this 'of course brought the conference to an abrupt
termination' .5'
The AJTA responded to Newman's assault by attempting to broaden the
struggle in their own terms.
An 'anti-sweating meeting' was held and
handbills were issued which now stressed the manifold problems of the
industry.
They condemned the 'army of sweaters' who were ready 'to
beat down our prices'.
'Politicans, the Press and the Pulpit' were
castigated for their silence now that a union was actually taking up
arms against sweating. 58
serious attempt
it was pointed out that this was the first
to raise wages
in the
trade
and
that without
the
existence of unions, labour would be open to violent exploitation.
There was little sympathy, if the Sydney Morning Herald's response was
typical.
Since
the Melbourne
Tailoresses'
strike, class
55.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 21 November 1891
56.
ibid.
57.
ibid.
58.
AJTA, Manifesto and Appeal, n.d.
division
85
seemed to have firmed in general whilst in NSW there had never been
the kinds of 'fair employer' alliances that characterised the industry
in Victoria.
Hence the Secretary's comment that the men had 'not only
to fight Boss Tailors but Pastoralists as well'.59
publicly disavowed
work.
When employers
sweating, only four men would vote to return to
But this meeting, held on 21 December, was the Association's
swansong because the end of the pre-Christmas rush meant the end of
any strategic advantage which the men may have had.
remained
firm to the resolutions
carried
January, 1892, they voted unanimously
At first the men
before Christmas.
to stay out.
On 10
Almost 300 men
were still on the strike roll, refusing to accept freedom of contract
as the basis for a return to work.60
Resistance had begun to waver by 21 January when one-fifth of the men
favoured a resumption of work.
More significantly, there were rumours
of a split in the TLC over the financing of the strike.61
On the
previous day, Webster had written bitterly to Melbourne of the poor
response
shillings.
from
affiliated
unions.
Strike
pay
Five days later, it was 11 shillings.62
was
down
to
14
While the strike
foundered under the financial load, employers managed to survive.
The
bigger firms had sufficiently diverse operations to do so and smaller
59.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 15 December 1891.
Webster
believed that 'one man had caused the strike' - Mr Newman of
David Jones who, evidently, had been vociferous during the
Maritime Strike.
60.
sm,
61.
ibid., 22 January 1892.
62.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 20, 25 January 1892.
22 December 1891; 11, 15 January 1892.
86
employers reverted to lower prices now that the Christmas season had
passed.
On Saturday 30 January, after a week without meetings - or
hope - the strike committee asked the men to return to work.
They
voted accordingly.63
The
results
privately
of
agreed
surrender'.64
the
strike
with
the
were
catastrophic.
Herald's
The
judgement:
Association
'unconditional
of the 260 men on strike, on the last Saturday, only 60
found immediate work.65
Scapegoats were more readily located than
emplojmient: Russian Jews and Greek pressers,66 the affiliated unions
of the TLC,67 'sweaters' and funding arrangements.68
The only redeeming feature had been the immediate response of the
Melbourne tailors in sending more than £150 at the strike's outset to
'their brother craftsmen ... in distress'.69
those now unemployed.
This could not help
Relief was only paid out at 3 to 5 shillings
weekly from the Association's severely depleted funds.
The aftermath
63.
SMH, 1 February 1892.
64.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 2 February 1892.
65.
sm,
66.
Truth, 17 January 1892. This seems an odd mixture. The tailors'
leaders were known to display a virulent anti-semitism on more
than one occasion.
.67.
1, 2 February 1892.
Peter Strong, quoted, SMH, 1 February 1892.
68.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 2 February 1892; TLC, Minutes,
4 February 1892.
69.
Correspondence, R. Webster to AST, 20 January 1892.
87
of the strike was made no less savage by trade being
'very dull' .
Webster himself was told that he would have to change his name if he
wanted to work in Sydney again.^0
For
all
the
vitriol
in
its
attacks
on
labour,
the
Herald
had
accurately pointed out the weakness of the strikers' position when the
dispute began.
This was exacerbated by the employers' strategy of
delaying conferences throughout October so that when the strike began,
there was only a short period until
the Christmas
rush would
Thereafter, the AJTA was fundamentally disadvantaged.
end.
At the end of
the strike, the Herald noted that it was believed that the AJTA would
now seek to form
different
'an amalgamated
colonies'.71
Thus,
union amongst the tailors of the
as
other
Unions
now
'turned
to
polities', tailors seemed to see their old slogan of amalgamation as
the
answer.
After
all, they
were
already
involved
in
political
action, if only because of the activities of some of their officials
in the ASL.
Any moves for amalgamation were delayed by further decline, which all
clothing trades' unions experienced, in the 1890s.
The Tailoresses'
Union collapsed, the Pressers' Union fell into 'a state of insolvency'
and even the cutters
lengthened
working
found
day.72
themselves
The
70.
ibid., 2 March 1892.
71.
SMH, 1 February 1892.
72.
TLC, Minutes, 31 March 1892.
thrown
experience
of
into disputes
these years
over a
and
the
88
unions' response to them were important considerations in the shaping
of policy when the men and women re-grouped.
(iii)
THE PRESSERS' UNION
There are few records of clothing unions in the 1890s but we may pick
up their history with the Pressers' Union from 1897.
Of the major
unions, only the NSW Cutters' and Trimmers' Union was more reluctant
to move for a federal union of clothing workers.
In one sense, the
Pressers' Union was less affected than others by the setbacks of the
1890s, remaining
aloof
from
political
entanglement
for
some
time.
Although not joining the Federal Union until 1916, the Pressers' Union
merits some attention because of the strategic
play in industrial
conflict
role pressers
could
and because of the leadership pressers
would provide in subsequent years in the Federal Union.
Finally, why
a union would not join the Federation may be as important a question
as why the others did.
The Pressers' Eight Hour Society of NSW, as it was then known, was set
up on 8 September
affiliated
with
1885.
In pursuit
the Trades
of
its nomenclative
and Labor Council
and organized
aim, it
widely
amongst those willing and able to pay its entrance fee of 5 shillings
- twice the AJTA's fee.73
73.
The Society's success in securing a minimum
There are no records before 1897. The date of formation is taken
from Union stationery. The Society had withdrawn from the TLC in
the depression. For entrance fees, see Minutes, 1 July 1901.
89
wage of £3 at the beginning of the depression may have acted as a
buffer against the worst years of that decade.
In 1897, the minimum
wage was £2 10s weekly, which was the rate paid before the increase in
1891.
The Society had been able to defend its members in the classic manner
of craft
Melbourne
unionism.
in
so
It was more
doing.
than
There .was a recognised
control over apprenticeship.
journejmien.74
successful
the
pressers
'union
in
rate' and
Only one apprentice was allowed for four
AS in Melbourne, the trade of pressing was rigorously
defended upon lines of sex and age, and, within the Society, of the
range of skill.
from
Women, boys and un-apprenticTed labour were excluded
emplojmient.
Seam
and
under-pressers
'pressing-off' but there was even opposition
were
excluded
from
to recruiting members
from amongst the order-trade pressers (the best paid and closest to
the
small masters).
pressers,
from
25
There was
shillings
seam-pressers earned
to
an
immense
£3
10s
range
weekly
of pajmients for
in
as little as 5 shillings.75
the
main:
some
The union rate,
£2 10s, was probably the median rate for pressing-off.
This compared
favourably with tailors working machines although the differential had
been eroded since 1891-92.76
Throughout
1897 the committee was in
74.
ibid., 22 January, 5 April 1897.
The Victorian Wages
minimum for pressers was, in the same year, £2 5s.
Board
75.
'Factory Report', 1897, NSWPP, 1898, Vol.3, p.32.
76.
The ratio of £3 to the claimed average for tailors of £1 8s
during the tailors' strike 1891-2, was probably much more in the
pressers' favour than before or after.
90
almost constant dispute in defence of these wages and conditions - as
well as with its own rank-and-file.
A dispute which ran through the winter of 1897 at the Union Clothing
Factory was typical of these conflicts
should do the work - and at what rate.
were to replace
rate.
in
that
it centred
on who
The firm insisted that if men
its boy pressers, they must work below
the union
The Society at first resolved that only those boys who were
apprenticed should be allowed to press at all and, then, that if the
£2 10s rate was not paid, a strike would be ordered.
applauded
these
resolutions
and,
accepting
dispute had become a test case, it stated
that
The committee
this
protracted
that there would
be no
dispensations and that apprenticeship ratios and regulations must be
maintained.
Eventually, the Secretary persuaded the company that the
Society's position was not negotiable.
Other
firms were
similarly
instructed; the Union Clothing Factory conceded.77
In the recovery
of
the
late
1890s, pressers
advantage of their bargaining strength.
value of prompt action.
tended
to
take
full
The men well understood the
They were not disposed to leave matters to
their committee.
That unity and decisiveness on the shop-floor could
be powerful
illustrated
workshop.
77.
was
when
a
conflict
arose
at
Weingott's
The Minute Book laconically reported that
Pressers' Eight-Hour Society of NSW, Minutes, 5 April, 9, 12, 16
August 1897.
91
the men there put their hats and coats on and were
walking out on strike when the matter was speedily
settled.78
Like the AJTA, then, control - both against employers and unionists was
a
key
word
in
the
Pressers'
exclusivism of their male craft.
Union.
This
began
with
the
It also led them towards the state
with frequent discussions about who should fulfil government contracts
and, in late 1897, an attempt to lobby for similar legislation to that
brought down in Victoria.79
Control over where and by whom garments
were made was, then, important.
For pressers, there also appears to
have been some tradition of private agreements with their employers.
Under-rate wages might be exchanged
non-union labour.
for freedom from the threat of
This 'dirty business', as one member described it,
finally so outraged the Society's committee that such contracts were
forbidden.80
no
strikes
Two years later, at the end of 1899, it was agreed that
would
be
held
without
the
Society's
approval.
This
reflected difficulties in 'maintaining the line' in the factories.81
We have
seen
how
consider
threats
the
Society
to the control
functioned
in
1897; we
that had existed
should
now
in the shops and
within the ranks.
If
the
state
well-organised
of
the
economy
permitted
increases
in
workers, there had also been an important
wages
for
series of
78.
ibid., 30 August 1897.
79.
ibid., 8 November 1897.
80.
ibid.
81.
ibid., 18 December 1899. For various conflicts in the trade see
ibid., 8 November 1897; 19 September 1898; 28 August 1899.
92
changes in the ready-made trade in NSW.
Between 1897 and 1900, the
number of women employed almost tripled.
At the same time, average
factory size increased
clear
affects
obvious.
on
from 22.7 to 27.3 hands.
tailors,
but
for
pressers
These changes had
the
impact
is
less
This much, however, may be said: the men's hostility to
women indicates that women could and did do some pressing.
That is,
when women came from the home to the factory, from outwork to being
'indoors' they became, to the presser, an immediate threat - as an
alternative and cheap source of labour.
the
increasing
tailoring,
importance
which
importance.82
also
meant
of
a
A second important change was
ready-made
relative
clothing,
decline
in
as
the
against
pressers'
None of these developments saw machinery threaten the
hand-presser, nor were light-weight irons yet a concern.
However the
employers did secure cheaper production through cheap labour, onerous
task
schemes
and,
from
1907,
by
sending
pressing
to
non-union
dry-cleaning shops.83
In response to these changes, then, the Pressers' Society became even
more tightly organised.
For once it also looked to other workers,
although without much enthusiasm.
In July 1901 it reaffiliated with
the TLC but only after that body had succeeded the Australian Labor
Federation - an attempt to build a militant 'anti-craft' unionism.
the end of
the year, some members
struck work
in
support
of
At
the
82.
The Wealth and Progress of NSW, 1896-97 p.502;
NSWSR, 1906.
1901-02 p.716;
83.
See PUNSW, Minutes, 15 July 1907 for dry-cleaners; passim and
below for other issues.
93
striking tailoresses.
Despite feeling some qualms about the socialist
leadership of the Tailoresses' Union, the committee
pressing
of non-union
garments
during
prohibited
the dispute.84
The
the
Society
still refrained from seeking any closer links with either Victorian
pressers or with the growing mass of women workers in NSW.
Other movements
for working-class
alliances
were
again
related
to
control, as in agreeing to 'clearances' to allow exchange of members
in the different states.
were similarly limited.
Attempts to control the making of garments
Some members sought controls over the choice
of firms getting government contracts.
needs
to be
support.85
fulfilled
within
NSW.
Others called for government
Neither
cause
attracted
much
The pressers held back from policies which could result in
sustained political entanglement or closer ties with other clothing
workers.
A tentative plan to extend the TLC's kindred committee of
the clothing trade received no support when it was raised on several
occasions during 1904.
Whereas, early in that year the AJTA had voted
for federation with the Melbourne tailors and in Victoria, the number
of clothing unions was being reduced by absorptions and amalgations,
no such policy looked likely to be seized by the Pressers.86
84.
ibid., 1 July, 4, 12
tailoresses' strikes.
November
85.
ibid., 16 March, 28 September 1903 (for clearances); 26 October,
10 November 1903 (for contracts); there is also a possibility
that there were some demanding the establishment of a state-owned
enterprise.
86.
ibid., 23 May,
February 1904.
20 June,
1901.
1 August
1904.
See
below
for
the
AJTA, Minutes, 15
94
The major positive response of the Society to changes in the industry
was to look to the arbitration systems of the state.
The example of
New Zealand's legislation, the defeats of the 1890s, and the presence
of labour men in parliament have all been cited as inspirations for
this
acceptance
of
compulsory
arbitration.87
for
clothing
trade
unionists and, perhaps, others there was also the growing evidence of
severe limitations on the work of Wages Boards in Victoria.
Further
encouraging support for the new legislation was the NSW Arbitration
Court's dealing with cases through the unions themselves.
A
'Union
Award' would therefore be handed down, not a determination covering
one section of an industry.
On 21 February 1902, the Society had voted to take advantage of the
Arbitration Court and had changed its name to the Pressers' Union of
New South Wales (PUNSW) .
A series of meetings set about the task of
preparing claims to go before the Court, including ratios of weekly to
piece-men and a limitation upon the number of weekly-hands
shop,
and,
of
course, upon
apprentices .88
No
widening
in each
of
the
presser's horizon came from these meetings: the issues were strictly
economistic.
In contrast to the Victorian Wages boards, there was no
structured incentive to co-operation between unions.
Secretary, M.J.
Reddy (a former 'isolationist' official with the Melbourne Pressers'
Society) went so far as to oppose the establishment of a conference of
87.
J.H. Portus, op.cit., pp.105-6.
88.
PUNSW, Minutes, 3, 21 February, 11 March 1902.
95
clothing
trades' unions
to discuss Arbitration.
could be done through the TLC.
Reddy's way was
finally
Although the
successful
This, he argued,
members
opposed him
for nothing eventuated.89
The
PUNSW was content to push its own barrow in the Court; so, apparently,
was the AJTA, whose hopes for union co-operation were directed more
towards Victoria than towards other unions in NSW.
The
very
popularity
frustratingly slow.
trade
union
to
of
the
new
Court,
meanwhile,
The Tailoresses' Union was
obtain
an
award,
on
20 October
the
made
progress
first
clothing
1902.
followed, on 5 June 1903, and the PUNSW six days later.90
The
AJTA
in drawing
up their claim and in monitoring the Court's likely stand-point, the
Committee considered
that concessions could be made as long as two
demands were met: first, that only pressers and their apprentices be
allowed to press-off, and second, that the award be made
rule.
a common
The men supported this approach and agreed, in return, to an
increase in the ratio of apprentices to journejmien of 1:4 to 1:3.
It
was, further, resolved that time-and-a-quarter would be satisfactory
as
an
overtime
rate,
compared
with
the
previously
sought
t ime-and-a-half.91
When handed down, the Award provided
£2 10s. 92
for a minimum weekly wage of
This was no more than the union rate had been for some
89.
ibid., 12 May 1902.
90.
NSWIAR, Vol.2.
91.
PUNSW, Minutes, 20 April 1903.
92.
NSWIAR, Vol. 2; 11 June 1903.
96
years
-
although
great
universal enforcement.
difficulty
had
been
experienced
in
its
The importance of the Award lay in 'Rule 4'
which read in part:
No person (other than pressers and apprentices)
shall be permitted to press any of the
garments on this log.93
The men swallowed their dismay at the wage and voted to accept and
support the Award.94
The significance of this rule may best be judged
from the frequency with which it was invoked to support various Union
claims
in
the
following
years.
The
parenthetical permit in the widest sense.
PUNSW
interpreted
its
In this it was, to some
extent, supported by the Award's being made a common rule throughout
the
industry.
The
characteristics
of
sex
hierarchy now became even more pronounced.
division
Early
and
internal
in 1904 the men
voted that pressing be done by men only and later, that seam-pressers
be excluded
from pressing-off.95
To defend
this
interpretation of
what arbitration had given them, the pressers would still need direct
action.
Arbitration
procedures
proved
to be
time-consuming.
As
the award
would lapse in 1905, the committee became wholly concerned with it in
1904.
The men were
unionists.
asked
to approve
a claim
This, with the continuation of
93.
ibid, at p.363.
94.
PUNSW, Minutes, 22 June 1903.
95.
ibid., 15 February, 15 August 1904.
for preference
'Rule 4', would
for
further
97
secure their position.96
the spring
of
employers,
now
Association
This matter decided, the log committee spent
1904 at work on
organized
(SOMA), were
Union's deliberations
as
not
the details
the
Sydney
merely
as in 1903.
of
their
Clothing
awaiting
the
claim.
The
Manufacturers'
outcome
It was believed
of
the
that they were
preparing a counter-claim which would demand a cut in the minimum wage
to
£2
and
changes
to
apprenticeship.
The
SCMA's
log
disabused
pressers of any belief that Arbitration may have reconciled employers
to the acceptance of union rates and rules.
The Union's Secretary, Mr
Reddy, noted that their log's only redeeming feature was that 'it was
profusely decorated'.97
Once more, there was a long delay in proceedings which was exacerbated
by decisions in the High Court, where the validity of the common rule
was questioned and significantly undermined and where
that the Arbitration Court
it was ruled
could not deal with disputes between a
Union and employers but only between members of a union and their own
employers.
Two of the most attractive aspects of the state's system
were thus taken away.
Collective bargaining asserted itself in the
confused aftermath to this.
By October, 1905, a series of meetings
between the PUNSW and SOMA had been arranged.
Award
was
revived,
although
the
employers'
increase in apprentices was agreed to.
Eventually, the old
demand
for
a
further
The ratio was now 2:4.98
96.
ibid., 15 August 1904. For time spent in arbitration, J. Hagan,
Printers and Politics, p.189.
97.
ibid., 16, 23 January, 10 April 1905.
98.
J. Portus, op.cit., p.110; for arbitration changes.
For the
Union's Award see PUNSW, Minutes, 30 October 1905.
A third
apprentice could be taken on when seven journejmien were employed.
98
Nevertheless, the committee remained confident that it would be able
to defend its members.
from what
could
have
The log agreed to was not radically different
been
achieved
under Arbitration.
To have a
common rule re-instated and the 'men only' clause ratified remained as
aims of the PUNSW.
Arbitration was not forsaken.
seemed that a new policy might be enacted.
For a moment, it
A desultory correspondence
between the VCOU and the PUNSW had been opened in 1903.
1905 a request
received.
to consider
forming
a new,
On 3 July
inter-State, union was
It is not too surprising that the PUNSW agreed, for they
were then unsure of their award and, therefore, their future welfare.
If they were
to amalgamate
other workers in NSW.
made before 1907.
it would be with fellow craftsmen, not
However, no further mention of the VCOU was
The plan was never carried out.
surmised that when the breadth of amalgamations
It can only be
in Victoria became
clear the PUNSW realised that they might have involved themselves in
the very form of union which, at home, they were eschewing.
Despite
the vote of 3 July, then, the Pressers remained hostile to or, more
precisely, uninterested in either amalgamation or federation.99
Within NSW, the Union maintained
its exclusive policies.
With its
control of the supply of labour under threat, the PUNSW went to any
length to defend the resolution of 1904 and oppose women pressers.
So
great was the hostility that a basic tenet of unionism - keeping the
union rate
99.
- was broken when a dispute arose over a new
line of
The request from Victoria may also be seen in terms of the
jockeying for position then taking place between the unions in
Melbourne. See Chapter Three.
99
material at Mark Foys in Sydney.
use women to press it.
The company claimed that it could
As the material was not included in the log,
the Union was in a weak position but they insisted that their members
do it.
The firm responded by arguing that a rate below the log would
be paid if Unionists were given the job.
employment
members
hung
to press
in the balance.
the material
The fate of the womens'
The PUNSW
decided
to
allow
its
at the reduced rate rather than let
'girls' do it.100
There was similar anxiety about boy labour, with the Union quickly
enforcing the
'pressers only clause'.
The general difficulties
of
enforcing the log came to be increasingly centred on the particular
problem of the work-load required, or 'tasks'.
Once more, there were
instances of private arrangements defying Union attempts to control
the trade.101
The PUNSW had to contend with the problem of weekly wage-hands.
By
bonus systems and task work many of these men were doing prodigious
amounts of work and earning up to 20 shillings over the minimum wage.
One member insisted that such men were 'worse than scabs' because they
deprived others of a living.102
Details were produced at subsequent
100. PUNSW, Minutes, 14 August 1905.
101. ibid., 1 September 1902; 14 March 1904; 27 February 1905; 9
April, 7 May 1906. How many instances went unrecorded can only
be guessed.
The Court's award did not quell this.
On the
contrary, it probably gave employers an incentive to negotiate
private deals.
102. ibid., 9 April 1906.
100
meetings and offenders ordered to slow down.
There was, of course,
suspicion that log-breaking agreements had been made in these cases.
Reddy insisted
Union's log.
that
it was
'absolutely
imperative'
to work
to the
His plea was supported and the weekly hands agreed to
work in the interests of the Union.103
In this period, 1905-06, the PUNSW
short
strikes-in-detail
wherever
asserted
its
possible.
interests
More
often
through
than
not,
however, it discovered evasion of the log well after the event and had
to cajole and expose its own men in order to ensure that others would
not 'rat' with private agreements.
their
Union.
To make
it
Defence of the log was defence of
reasonable
to
expect
such
support
committee had to be able to provide and to guarantee emplojmient.
the
This
lay behind the aggressive interpretation of the 'pressers only' clause
and the insistence, before Awards were ever introduced, on firms using
union labour.
PUNSW
-
the
In short, the two most striking characteristics of the
exclusivist
approach
to
other
workers
and
discipline within its own ranks, were closely related.
the
firm
The Union's
survival depended upon its men being paid the log; their willingness
to refute private deals could be assured if jobs were available.
The surest way to maintain the support of the men was to improve wages
and
conditions
policies,
1907.104
the
whilst
PUNSW
retaining
added
job
ambitious
security.
claims
To
on
its restrictive
the
employers
in
The tensions in the men's positions were immediately evident
103. ibid., 2 July 1906.
104. ibid., 20 May 1907.
101
when work was sent from one shop to laundries for pressing when the
men struck. 105
However, the Union was able to defy employers more
often than not.
Direct action and collective bargaining
secured a
wage of £2 15s per week.106
Thus, when Pinkerton, of the Melbourne cutters' and pressers' union,
visited
Sydney, he
PUNSW.
Earlier
admiration
for
pressers.107
was
that
the
deeply
year,
good
impressed
the
with
Victorians
organisation
and
the
had
high
success
of
professed
wages
of
the
their
Sydney's
The difficulties encountered since the late 1890s had to
some extent been resisted.
If the craft was under threat, then there
was no linear or complete decline.
Rather, from shop to shop, and
from season to season, the pressers resisted their employers and often
recovered lost ground.
Their control of the labour supply and labour
process was not complete - nor was it broken.
Union had reduced
Control
the major threat - cheap labour.
within the
Should lighter
irons, machines or a greater division of labour appear, that control
would
become more
secure.108
difficult.
For
the moment, the PUNSW
appeared
Little wonder that notification of the registration of the
Federated Clothing Trades did not bring forth a response.
Not until
1910 did the Pressers meet the new Union in a conference.109
105. ibid., 19 July, 23 September 1907.
106. ibid., 18 November, 2 December 1907.
107. ibid., 2 December 1907; VCOU, Minutes, 5 August 1907.
108. There are no detailed records of membership but the Minutes
recorded increases in membership in 1900-1901. In 1904 there was
a record amount received in contributions. This trend continued
at least until 1907.
109. PUNSW, Minutes, 2 December 1907, 10 January 1910.
102
In the meantime, a State Award ratified their new minimum rate of
£2 15s and a common rule was won.HO
half-heartedly
The PUNSW's leaders would talk
about amalgamation with
the Cutters' and Trimmers'
Union and less equivocally frown on the influence of 'socialism' in
the Tailoresses' Union.HI
For some time after 1907 they would guard
their 'separateness' just as carefully as in preceding years.
(iv) TAILORS, TAILORESSES AND THE COURTS
If
the
PUNSW
was
unwilling
to
involve
itself
in
Commonwealth
Arbitration and amalgamation, how would tailors and tailoresses react
to changes in industrial law and in their part of the industry?
Once
again, no complete picture emerges from the scarce sources but we may
put some pieces together.
members.112
The AJTA was reformed in 1896 with 155
Some of the personnel from the strike remained as part of
the leadership but like many other unionists they had become more
circumspect in their industrial and political militancy.
Ex-President
Hepher was now merely a trustee in the Union and was shortly to break
110. PUNSW, Rates of Wages, Hours and Conditions of Emplojmient, 1
August 1908. The Award was made on 5 June 1903 as a common rule
for the Sydney area for three years from 26 June.
111. PUNSW, Minutes, 30 December
(cutters).
1907 (tailoresses); 13 July 1908
112. This information is taken from The Co-operator, 7 October 1912.
There are no records of the revived Union before late 1904. We
shall piece together something of its history from the records of
other unions, the accounts of the tailoresses' strike and the
progress of its state awards.
103
with the ASL.
The Secretaryship fell to John Durack at the turn of
the century.
Durack,
although
sympathetic
to
the ASL, would
not
encourage any 'political' activity.
The revival of the Tailoresses' Union was the result
of
the joint
efforts of the woman's suffrage campaigner Rose Scott, a co-operative
and relatively well-off friend Florence Robinson, who was the Union's
first Secretary, and the ASL from whose ranks came Harry Holland fresh
from organising the wharf labourers of Newcastle.
March 1901.
These people met in
By July the Union was active in the shops, 113 mainly in
the 'better end' of the ready-made trade.H^
under the new Industrial Arbitration Act
The Union was registered
in October.
In the same
month, with membership already at 1500, the leaders met employers to
discuss a uniform log and, on 1 November, women at several major firms
struck work.115
whereas, earlier,
This strike has recently been described very fully
it
had
been
seen mainly
in the context
of
the
113. No records of the Union itself have been discovered.
For its
origins see P. O'Farrell, Harry Holland, Militant Socialist
(Canberra, 1964), p.18.
For two more recent accounts see V.
Burgmann, op.cit. , pp.95, 96;
and see especially E. Ryan,
Two-Thirds of a Man: Women and Arbitration in New South Wales
1902-08 (Sydney, 1984), p.58.
A revival of the Union had been
discussed by J.D. Fitzgerald, a Labor parliamentarian, and Rose
Scott as early as 1892; see R. Markey, 'Women and Labour
1880-1900', in E. Windschuttle (ed.), Women, Class and History.
Femininist Perspectives on Australia 1788-1978 (Melbourne 1980),
p.98.
114. This judgment relies upon some features of the Award of 1902 and
upon the later organisation of women by the AJTA. See below.
115. The
strike
was
not
primarily
an
'organisational'
one.
Substantial
numbers
had
already
been
recruited.
The
'organisational strike' was used to great effect in the New York
clothing trade, 1909-16. See M. Dubofsky, When Workers Organize
(Amherst, 1968).
104
development of arbitration, conflicts within the labour movement or of
Holland's own life.
dispute,
the
Here we shall deal mainly with the outcome of the
Union's
Awards
and
their
impact
upon
the
industry
thereafter.116
On
16
October
delegates
President, met
the
discuss
and
wages
concessions.
from
Sydney
the
Clothing
conditions.
Union,
including
Manufacturers'
The
SOMA
Holland
as
Association
to
offered
only
minor
That some of the craft unionists were wary of the new
Union was suggested next day when the TLC's support was announced.
This support was conditional on the Union agreeing to Reddy's (PUNSW)
request that the TLC Executive attend the next meeting of the Union.
At this meeting the TLC officers saw the tailoresses vote unanimously
for increases to bring them to parity with Victoria.117
An amicable solution seemed possible, with many employers agreeing to
the new rates but, on the day of reckoning, it was clear that not all
the employers would concede. Several snap strikes brought some bosses
into line but at one firm, Anthony Horderns, the Union encountered
absolute opposition.
In all, 830 women went on strike.
At Horderns,
they broadened the dispute by insisting that all the women should join
the Union.118
116. See E. Ryan, op.cit., for the most complete account. In addition
to the sources mentioned in note 114, see also I. Turner,
op.cit. , p.35. Oddly this strike seems less well known than the
Melbourne strikes 1882-83. This account is based on SMH.
117. SMI, 17-19 October 1901.
118. ibid., 22 October, 2, 4, November 1901.
105
In the next week, there were accusations of employers locking women
out and, on pay-day,
short-paying
others.119
The main
conflict,
however, was over Hordern's rejection of the very concept of a minimum
wage.
At
this
peculiarities
firm
about
-
one
of
Sydney's
largest
-
there
their production which, in part, explained
were
the
management's attitude.
As Holland
quality.
readily admitted, the firm's goods were
The material used and designs made meant that a normal log
could not be useful.
Holland also agreed that conditions and daily
relations between management and workers were good.
did not afford the Union such pleasure.
he argued.
of the highest
Wages, however,
They were well below average,
The firm offered 75 per cent above the log for some lines,
to appease Holland, but the Tailoresses asserted that, even at this
rate, most of the women would not average more than 15 shillings.
The
Union demanded a minimum of 17s 6d.
In turn, Horderns insisted upon a
guaranteed output from each hand.
With this unhappy compromise the
meeting of 4 November broke up.120
Both sides now seemed more determined
than ever.
The
SOMA wanted
changes in the log,121 but the Union stood firm: trade was booming,
the 'summer season' underway and the labour movement apparently firm
119. Daily Telegraph, 2 November 1901; SMH 7, 8 November 1901. There
were the usual disputes, too, about the way in which rates had
been adjusted.
120. Sm_,
5 November 1901.
121. ibid., 8 November 1901.
106
in support.
The Herald reported Holland's belligerence.
'It had been
hinted that the strike was over but it had hardly yet commenced' , he
told a meeting on 10 November.
the strike would
continue.122
If the SOMA would not grant increases,
A week
later
there
was
cause
for
optimism when the large firm Weingotts paid the log in full.123
At Horderns, trouble over wages continued and was compounded by the
refusal of two apprentices and a self-styled
Union.
forewoman to join the
On Wednesday 13 November, all of Hordern's' tailoresses walked
out again.
Union's
Many had been angered by evasions of the log whilst the
leaders complained
statements
on
wages.124
of deception by
The
strike
the firm
continued
at
in its public
Horderns
alone
because most other firms recognised the union and were paying its log
in full.
Horderns had done neither.
The management now announced that it would
be prepared to recruit women 'whether they belonged to the Union or
not'.
The tailoresses undertook to picket the building.125
Support
seemed to be strong when, the day after Horderns' announcement, the
122. Holland quoted, ibid., 11 November 1901.
123. ibid., 18 November 1901.
124. ibid. , 14, 18 November 1901.
The firm employed the age-old
device of claiming that amounts paid to a leading-hand were
solely her wage when, in fact, they included amounts for
assistants and, sometimes, apprentices.
125. ibid., 26 November 1901.
107
pressers there decided not to work on non-union garments.126
Next
day, 27 November, saw some members of the Cutters' Union walk off the
job.
No
Meanwhile
official
in the
action
by
other
unions
followed
'recognition dispute' neither
these
moves.
side would move.127
The meeting of the TLC, set down for 28 November was now vital.
Many delegates and the Executive itself, believed
the Union
should
take the concessions offered by Horderns because it had won so much at
other firms.
The question of non-unionists should be waived.
Two
delegates from the Union Miss Burford and Secretary Robinson opposed
the recommendation and moved that:
in view of the firm's determination to crush the
Tailoresses' Union and the disastrous effect the
defeat of the Union would have on the working
class generally and the women workers of Sydney in
particular, this Council resolves to stand by the
tailoresses.128
This was defeated and settlement of the dispute was agreed to despite
the AJTA's Secretary Durack making a plea for the Council to support
the stoppage.
He, along with Peter Strong, accused the TLC of being
more anxious about the ASL's activities than the women's welfare.129
On the weekend, the tailoresses accepted
the TLC's recommendations.
Next week the Executive of the Council met the Horderns' management.
126. ibid., 27 November 1901; PUNSW, Minutes, 4, 12 November 1901
where pressers complained that the firm said there was no work but took on boys.
127. sm,
27 November 1901.
128. Quoted, Daily Telegraph, 29 November 1901.
129. SMH, 29 November 1901.
108
and, with much mutual
acclaim,
it was agreed
that
there would be
re-instatement without victimization, the union would be recognised,
although
'compulsory
unionism'
would
compromise log would take effect.
after work was resumed.
At
not
be
considered
and
a
Some details would be worked out
its regular Thursday meeting, the TLC
supported the Committee's action.130
The matter was, however, not settled so quickly nor disposed of so
easily.
In the week, more disputes broke out at Horderns.
At the
next meeting of the TLC, on 12 December, there was a furore when
Holland attended
and unleashed
handling of the strike.
a stinging
attack
on
the
Council's
He perceived a growing threat to the Union's
position and told the TLC that his was 'due to the treachery of the
men you call your executive'.
Holland was expelled from the meeting,
after a brawl had all but erupted.
The Executive deplored the action
of the Union in not calling off the Horderns' strikes.131
After the
anger had subsided,
expressed
the
remaining
Tailoresses' delegates
concern at the conditions of the return to work.
This was ignored
amid renewed criticism of the ASL's role.132
130. ibid. , 3, 6 December 1901.
The firm made it clear
preferred to deal with the TLC, then the Union alone.
that
they
131. Daily Telegraph, 13 December 1901.
132. SMH, 13 December 1901.
One delegate claimed that the ASL had
used 'the women as stepping stones'. O'Farrell, op.cit., p. 18,
suggests that Holland may have been trying to draw unions away
from the Labor Party.
Whatever the motives, no-one had been
successful in organising the women earlier.
109
The Tailoresses continued to articulate their own grievances - which
amounted to an implicit criticism of the TLC.
Mrs Geddes claimed, in
19 December, that some women had not been restored to their original
positions and that some piece-workers were not being given sufficient
work, nor were they given work to take home.
not offer
the strikers
refused any emplojmient.
any
jobs.133
Some
Other employers would
fifteen
women had
been
Although a delegation was appointed to visit
Horderns, 134 it was clear that the TLC had left some of the women
vulnerable.
Apart from inconsistencies in the return to work, neither
the log nor the
limited
'union shop' had been made secure.
recognition
had
been
granted
Only the most
to the Union.
In the other
shops, the strike had been both briefer and more successful.
In the new year, more conflicts broke out in different factories as
wage-rates and work-process details were challenged.
were
prepared
universal.135
system.
to
log
prices
as
long
as
such
rates
were
This, partly, prepared them for the State's arbitration
Despite
Union moved
pay
Most employers
Holland's
quickly
to
personal
secure
a new
suspicion
award.
of
arbitration, the
The
Union's
stated
membership of 1500 was compared by it with a total of 2000 tailoresses
in Sydney.
dressmaking
In addition to these workers there were another 4000 in
and
outworkers.136
order-tailoring
as
well
as
many
The Union's position, then, was not strong.
133. SMH, 20 December 1901.
134. Daily Telegraph, 20 December 1901
135. E. Ryan, op.cit., pp.69-71.
136. NSWSR, 1902.
unrecorded
Further,
110
1902 was the only year between 1893 and 1913 in which emplojmient in
the trade fell.
Trade was reported
worked a full year.137
'very slack' and no tailoresses
Arbitration might, then, defend the strike's
gains.
The Award itself was a mixed one.
Besides granting the common rule,
it gave preference of emplojmient to unionists but weakened this with
the standard qualifying clause 'all things being equal'.
Victoria's wages
- at
20s
per week
- but not
It did match
to earn
more
than
Victorian factory workers was unusual in NSW, which was the high-wage
state.138
The Award
(and the Union) seemed
related
to the better
class of factories be'cause apprenticeships were to be maintained and a
detailed .piece-work log was drawn up.139
Variations
in the Award were significant
in weakening any unionist
control of the trade and in opening the way to greater division of
labour.
The ratio of apprentices which, at 1:2, was already twice
that for tailors, was changed in December to 1:1.
The Union was only
137. The Wealth and Progress of NSW, 1896-97; 'Factory Reports', NSW
Legislative Council Journal, Part 3, 1903, p.12.
The drought
which had begun in the 1890s was at its worst in 1902 and was a
factor in economic decline.
See F. Crowley, '1901-14' in F.
Crowley (ed.), A New History of Australia (Melbourne, 1974),
p.277.
Reddy, PUNSW Secretary, blamed the drought for his
committee's acceptance of a reduced wage demand in 1903.
See
PUNSW, Minutes, 20 April 1903.
138. The Award largely recognised the gains of the strike whereas, in
1903 the Awards for tailors and pressers gave wage levels that
had, previously, only been defended with difficulty.
139. NSWIAR, Vol.2; 20 October 1902, at pp.50, 51, 54.
Ill
to be given one week to supply labour under this clause otherwise
there would be no restrictions.
In the same month, Mark Foys and Horderns obtained variations which
allowed the setting of tasks for trouser-hands, abolished
and lowered wages for younger apprentices.
indentures
Unlike other firms they
could not under any circumstances, employ more than one apprentice per
journejwoman.
against
five
These apprenticeships were of four years' duration (as
for
tailors). I'^O
These
restraints
probably
affected
Horderns very little because, with their line of products, they would
have employed proportionately more journeywomen than most fiirms.
For
them, and others, the common rule and any 'union recognition' would
have meant
far
labour, freedom
less
to
than
impose
their
relatively
and vary
tasks
control over the process of production.
that
few benefits
concerns.
flowed
to
easy
and,
access
to
junior
in short, enhanced
The recession of 1902 meant
the women.
Nor were
these
the only
The Tailors' Award in 1903 was to reveal that there were
further limitations upon the woman worker.
The outcome
confused.
of
the
strike, in political
terms, was
also
somewhat
The Union quit the TLC early in January 1902 and Jamie
Moroney of the ASL and two other delegates
also resigned. 1^1
The
Union's isolation was partly a result of the politics of the men who
had played such leading roles in its formation.
140. ibid., pp.59, 65.
141. SMH, 10 January 1902.
Relations between the
112
ASL and the Labor Party were at their worst and craft unionists were
only then retrieving the TLC from the clutches
unionism.1^2
of a more militant
Similarly, women's role in organising the Union would
have aroused suspicion because women were still on the margins of both
union and political
life.
Labor's attitude was, again, ambivalent
with some men still opposed to women's suffrage.1^3
action was being
Labor'
industrial
discountenanced.
peace
had
For many
become
'the
Finally, strike
leaders of
supreme
'political
social
good'.l^^
Holland had only recently referred to Labor's Billy Hughes as a 'scab'
and
a
'low
policies.1^5
cunning
trickster'
because
of
his
pro-arbitration
Little wonder, then, that the majority
of the TLC
delegates baulked at a strike of women, 'led' by socialists just when
state arbitration was at hand.
A worse combination would be hard to
imagine.
The Union's own backers were similarly divided.
In the ASL, Holland
was criticised for spending so much time on the union.
the ASL's
paper
and
kilometres
to present
left
the
Sydney, being obliged
Union's
case.1^6
sectarianism soon reduced its significance.
The
He had quit
to cycle
ASL's
some 300
increasing
Neither the Labor Party
142. This period is covered in I. Turner, op.cit.; R. Gollan, Radical
and Working Class Politics; and V. Burgmann, op.cit. , Chs. 5, 6.
143. See R. Gollan, Radical and Working Class Politics, pp.178-180.
144. ibid., p.187.
145. V. Burgmann, op.cit., p.95.
146. ibid., p.96.
113
nor the TLC showed great enthusiasm for organising the tailoresses.
The tailoresses, then, were
industrially besieged.
as
politically
isolated
as
they
were
Numbers began to fall but the Union remained
viable for some time.1^7
One
of
its
supporters,
organising women workers.
John
Durack,
took
up
the
challenge
of
The AJTA appointed Ann Ludlow secretary for
the tailoresses.
She held this post from 1902 to 1906, by which time
664
enrolled,
women
were
membership.148
making
up
more
than
half
the
AJTA's
Although many craft unions organised the 'unskilled'
to defend their own interests, 1^9 this can only have been part of
Durack's motivation because the AJTA kept its activities to the orderfield thus avoiding overlap with
the Tailoresses' Union.150
Many
thousands of women remained outside the unions.
Little can be said of these years of unionism, for no union records
survive.
Suffice it to say that, by 1902, no closer organisation of
clothing workers was
system
would
unionism.
play
a
favoured
role
in
in NSW.
the
The State's new
AJTA's
attitude
to
industrial
inter-State
That union followed the tailoresses and pressers into the
Arbitration Court in 1903.
147. E. Ryan, op.cit., p.77;
Secretary Kenna claimed 1000 members.
148. The Co-operator, 7 October 1912.
149. J. Hagan, Printers and Politics, p.138.
150. See The Co-operator, 7 October 1912, for the nature of the Union;
and see evidence tendered to the 'Royal Commission Into the
Alleged Shortage of Labour', NSWPP, 1991-12, Vol.2, 0.14652.
114
Tailors could
wage
look at
levels were
their Award
5s per week
from different perspectives: its
better
than
Victoria's,
it made
an
attempt to control outwork and it retained an apprentice ratio of just
1:4.
This element of control was central to the retention
practices of craft.
The log was by time rather than the piece and it
was for 'making through' rather than specialisation.
reflected
notably
craft
through
of the
practice,
other
apprenticeship,
rules
sought
to
restrictions
on
If this merely
retain
the
it, most
number
of
wage-hands and, in 'Rule 22', a limitation upon the number of female
coat-hands who could be employed.151
Just as control was in dispute
between the Tailoresses' Union and employers, so the AJTA attempted to
control its end of the trade.
women workers.
In doing so, it further marginalised
It was especially keen to defend areas seen as the
height of craft.
Thus the greater tenure of coat-hand apprenticeships
for women and the relatively high wage, at 27s 6dl52 were designed to
work to exclude them.
For
tailors,
conditions.
tailors
danger
there
was
a
in
improved
Victorian
within NSW, there remained
manufacturers
unemplojmient and fiercer competition.
151. NSWIAR, Vol.2; 5, 10 June 1903.
152. ibid.
securing
wages
and
If apprenticeship and some measure of control protected
from other workers
that
trap
would
undercut
the greater
NSW
bringing
115
(v)
FEDERATION AMD EXCLUSION
Anxiety about 'inter-State competition' had led the AJTA to request a
conference with Melbourne's
wished to discuss
ventures
tailors in 1901.
The Sydney Union had
'a uniform system of prices'.153
into arbitration
could only maintain
this
The
successful
policy.
Thus,
early in 1904, the AJTA, in reply to a query from Melbourne, stated
that
members
were
unanimously
in
favour
of
'amalgamation
under
Arbitration'.154
There were to be tensions within and between the unions in NSW that
worked
against
policies
were
any hope
being
of amalgamation.
contested
all
the
Although directions
time,
the
AJTA
increasingly craft-oriented, despite its recruitment of women.
AJTA was
prepared
unionists in NSW.
to move
towards
Federal
unionism
without
and
became
The
other
Its traditional invocation of 'amalgamation' was
enlivened by delays in arbitration in NSW, limitations placed upon the
system by the High Court, and by a commitment to a national log.
The results of arbitration were relatively satisfying to both tailors
and tailoresses but
pleasing.
the processes surrounding it were anything but
The Tailoresses' Union's Award expired on 31 October 1904
amidst an increasing backlog of cases before the Court.
153. AST, Minutes, 25 November 1901.
154. ibid., 21 December 1903; 15 February 1904.
By the time
116
the hearing came on, wage reductions had taken place and the terms of
the Award were generally under threat.
Kenna
with
reductions.
Holland
-
secured
an
March 1907.155
an
injunction
to
prevent
further
The full hearing did not come on until November, and was
further put off until August 1906.
doubt
The Union - now led by Maud
The Award was, at last, renewed in
By 1905, the membership had fallen to 1000l56 and no
increasing
proportion
would
have
been
unfinancial
employers cut wages during the Court's somnolent period.
as
Tailoresses'
rates were, again, set at similar levels to those for Victoria.157
The AJTA had not fared much better.
1905
by
employers.
which
time
changes
had
Its Award expired at the end of
been
rejected
out
of
hand
by
The Award was extended for three months but, on appeal,
the Chief Justice of NSW, Sir Frederick Darby, ruled this to be beyond
the Court's power.158
Durack believed that the employers intended to
push conditions back to those obtaining before arbitration.159
employers, who had already
shown contempt
Union,160 ^ Q W railed against arbitration.
towards
The
the Tailoresses'
The President of the Master
Tailors' Association lamented that it was
155. E. Ryan, op.cit., pp.73-84.
156. ibid., p.77.
157. NSWIAR, Vol.5; 17 October 1906.
158. AJTA, Minutes, 25 September, 23 October, 4 December
January, 9 February 1906. NSWIAR, Vol.5; 21 May 1906.
159. AJTA, Minutes, 21, 29 May 1906.
160. E. Ryan, op.cit., p.76.
1905; 15
117
the misfortune of the clothing trade to be one of
the first to experience how far Labour made law
can upset ordinary working conditions.161
To employees
this no
Court's worth.
doubt
seemed
a flattering
assessment
of
the
The Master Tailors' strident opposition to the AJTA
and arbitration was coupled with ominous calls for employers to take
full
control
of
the
apprenticeship.162
for arbitration.
and
to
remove
all
restrictions
on
This barrage only increased the AJTA's enthusiasm
Delays
federal arbitration.
the Union.
trade
in NSW similarly increased enthusiasm for
Nevertheless, opinion was still divided within
President (and later. Secretary) Jack Crombie delivered a
casting vote for industrial peace when moves for a strike were made in
July 1906.163
Neither the AJTA nor the Tailoresses' Union made serious moves for
amalgamations
deteriorated.
within
NSW.
If
anything,
between
them
In August 1905, the AJTA rejected a request for help
from the beleaguered
tailoresses.164
crises in the Court, neither moved
secretary. Miss Wilcox, was
female
relations
membership
in
the
Although they faced identical
for more unity.
appointed
AJTA
In 1906 a new
for the women's
increased.165
By
section and
contrast,
the
161. Quoted, Australasian Tailors' Art Journal and Cutters' Review, 24
April 1906.
162. Ibid., 20 May, 26 June 1906.
163. AJTA, Minutes, 22, 29 June, 2 July 1906.
164. Ibid., 11 August 1905.
165. The Co-operator, 7 October 1912; compare these figures with ATS
Minutes, 15 February 1904.
118
Tailoresses' Union was finding it increasingly difficult to enforce
its Award and membership was probably in decline.166
membership
was
organisation
by
no
outside
means
or
inside
convinced
the AJTA.
of
The AJTA's male
the
need
Indeed
for
there
female
was
bitterness at 'how well' tailoresses had done in the Court.
some
President
Griffiths had been obliged to encourage the men - described especially
as the older tailors - to desist from such divisive talk.167
In May 1905 AJTA members had endorsed the principle of a federation of
tailors; now, as the log dispute dragged on, they told the Victorians
that they were
union. 168
employers
ready
to
re-form
as
the
NSW
Branch
of
a
federal
The Commonwealth's Arbitration Act was now made law and
had
proclaimed
themselves
against
a
Federal
clothing
award.169
Crombie and Hepher travelled to Melbourne in September 1907 to join
delegates from Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania to finalise 'the
much desired
federation'.
In his absence NSW Secretary Durack was
elected Secretary, Hepher was President.170
At the end of the year it
166. 'Factory Report', 1907, NSWPP, 1908, Second Session, p.22. There
are no details of the Union's membership but, by 1910, the Union
was apparently defunct. See FC 1910, Minutes, n.d.
167. AJTA, Minutes, 13, 27 February, 6 November 1905.
168. ibid., 8 May 1905; AST, Minutes, 7 May, 2 July 1906.
was perhaps caused by the AJTA's legal disputes.
Some delay
169. Australasian Tailors' Art Journal and Cutters' Review, 15 August,
15 October 1906.
170. FCT, Committee of Management, Minutes, 3, 4 September 1907.
phrase was Hepher's.
The
119
fell to Durack to write to Melbourne that the Union's registration was
'an accomplished fact'.l'l
Control of the new organisation was in the hands of the AJTA's leaders
who were instructed to unite 'kindred workers in NSW'.172
This placed
them in a difficult position as both pressers and cutters were quite
content as they were and as the tailoresses showed no sign of interest
in federation.
not secured
Their 1907 Award was reasonable whereas the AJTA had
one yet.
Crucially
their
wages
- despite
employers'
rhetoric - did not vary much from those granted in Victoria whereas
tailors' were lower in Victoria than in NSW.
There was no reason to
think that the Commonwealth Court would greatly improve women's wages
and conditions.
Finally, it was unlikely that the AJTA wanted
Tailoresses' Union in the new federal union.
foundation was
that
the AJTA now found
the
The irony of the Union's
itself
in the
long-awaited
amalgamation with tailors - and also with almost the whole range of
Victoria's clothing workers.
171. AST, Minutes, 16 December 1907.
172. FCT, Committee of Management, Minutes, 4 September 1907.