Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 93
   Enlarge and print image (64K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 93
   Enlarge and print image (64K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
93 period, dictated otherwise, as we shall see. In contrast to the commercial workers, clerical workers in Baltimore were, by 1930, showing signs of becoming a significant "new working class" sector of the proletariat. Comprising 13.1% of all employed workers, they were already more numerous than transport workers. The clerical sector actually cut across the other sectors of the economy: clerical workers worked in industrial, commercial, transport, and financial enterprises, as well as in public sector institutions. Clerical workers, however, were not distinguished by the type of enterprise that employed them, but by the fact that they do office work directly in service to the bureaucracies that were rapidly growing in the early 20th century, especially in the largest corporations and in the state apparatus. Harry Braverman has shown that the "industrialization" of office work took off during the 1920s with the application of an increasingly detailed division of labor and of office machinery to clerical labor. ^ While most clerical workers in Baltimore in 1930 probably still labored in isolated, small-scale work sites, their large numbers and some of their occupational characteristics (nearly 24% were listed as stenographers and typists) suggest that many of them were laboring under increasingly industrial-like conditions. However, if the growing clerical sector represented future directions of the working-class development, the largest non-industrial sector of the Baltimore working class (indeed, with 17.5% of the total workers employed, the second largest sector after manufacturing of the whole class), domestic and personal service, represented something quite opposite. This sector was an almost pre-industriaJ sector of the class, existing within semi-capitalistic relations. Of course, about one- third of the domestic and service workers were employed by a variety of a fully- capitalist enterprises, from industrially-organized laundries to hotels and restaurants; these workers were essentially industrial or commercial workers. But the other two-thirds of this sector, the domestic and personal service workers proper, labored within significantly different social relations. They worked for