What do you think?
Rate this book
The Working Class in American History
Dishing It Out: Waitresses and Their Unions in the Twentieth Century
Back when SOS or Adam and Eve on a raft were things to order if you were hungry but a little short on time and money, nearly one-fourth of all waitresses belonged to unions. By the time their movement peaked in the 1940s and 1950s, the women had developed a distinctive form of working-class feminism, simultaneously pushing for equal rights and pay and affirming their need for special protections. Dorothy Sue Cobble shows how sexual and racial segregation persisted in wait work, but she rejects the idea that this was caused by employers' actions or the exclusionary policies of male trade unionists. Dishing It Out contends that the success of waitress unionism was due to several waitresses, for the most part, had nontraditional family backgrounds, and most were primary wage-earners. Their close-knit occupational community and sex-separate union encouraged female assertiveness and a decidedly unromantic view of men and marriage. Cobble skillfully combines oral interviews and extensive archival records to show how waitresses adopted the basic tenets of male-dominated craft unions but rejected other aspects of male union culture. The result is a book that will expand our understanding of feminism and unionism by including the gender conscious perspectives of working women.
368 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1991
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
August 4, 2021
Cobble's book looks at the history of waitress unions and women in the restaurant industry throughout the 20th century that will change the way you think about the history of waitressing. At their height in the 1940s-50s, 25% of all food industry, including restaurants, nationwide were union members, and as the 20th century wore on and restaurants moved to eat-out, that increasingly meant women servers. Cobble shows how women fought for jobs, as generally eating out at the beginning of the 20th century was something that wealthy people did to luxurious hotels and where male waiters sought to keep women out as a detriment to their own wages. But waitress unions grew, particularly as diners and eating establishments for middle and working class people became more widespread after World War One into the 1920s.
Cobble shows us in the narrative how Waitress Unions fought hard for women-only local unions separate from the waiter local within the nationwide HERE (Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees union) and in general sought to build women's leadership away from all-male union locals. They also sought special protections based on sex and gender. The waitress unions, Cobble argues, thought of themselves as a craft union where waitressing was a skill to be developed through training, hiring halls, and division from dishwashers or cooks. That was specifically to fight against overwork that had characterized the experience of waitresses, but also to counter restaurant owners trying to hire young attractive women who were expected to put up with sexual advances (or even give in, if it would sell more food).
Eventually, those strategies would undo unionized restaurants, as by the 1960s-70s, a younger generation of waitresses and feminists (particularly college educated as opposed to the older generation where college was out of reach), unions ended up representing as much the old ways as the owner. The newer generation sought equal treatment rather than special treatment, which meant doing away with gender segregated union locals and gender segregated work within the job site. This younger generation did not mind being flexible on work, which clashed with the craft union vision of waitress unions. While these unions fought for black women to be represented, the actual membership of waitress unions were mostly white, and by their end, had an image of "granny waitresses" since they would last until their older ages while the restaurant owners wanted younger sexually appealing waitresses. By the 1980s, Cobble notes, most of these eateries had been swamped out either by union busting or national chains like McDonald's or Wafflehouse that seemed un-unionizable.
In the last decade, a new generation of militant low-wage food service workers has arisen, coupled with the Restaurant Opportunity Centers (ROC) that operate outside tradition union structures, so what existed once may come again with fresh tactics and looks at the possibilities of the past that Cobble assembled here.
Cobble shows us in the narrative how Waitress Unions fought hard for women-only local unions separate from the waiter local within the nationwide HERE (Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees union) and in general sought to build women's leadership away from all-male union locals. They also sought special protections based on sex and gender. The waitress unions, Cobble argues, thought of themselves as a craft union where waitressing was a skill to be developed through training, hiring halls, and division from dishwashers or cooks. That was specifically to fight against overwork that had characterized the experience of waitresses, but also to counter restaurant owners trying to hire young attractive women who were expected to put up with sexual advances (or even give in, if it would sell more food).
Eventually, those strategies would undo unionized restaurants, as by the 1960s-70s, a younger generation of waitresses and feminists (particularly college educated as opposed to the older generation where college was out of reach), unions ended up representing as much the old ways as the owner. The newer generation sought equal treatment rather than special treatment, which meant doing away with gender segregated union locals and gender segregated work within the job site. This younger generation did not mind being flexible on work, which clashed with the craft union vision of waitress unions. While these unions fought for black women to be represented, the actual membership of waitress unions were mostly white, and by their end, had an image of "granny waitresses" since they would last until their older ages while the restaurant owners wanted younger sexually appealing waitresses. By the 1980s, Cobble notes, most of these eateries had been swamped out either by union busting or national chains like McDonald's or Wafflehouse that seemed un-unionizable.
In the last decade, a new generation of militant low-wage food service workers has arisen, coupled with the Restaurant Opportunity Centers (ROC) that operate outside tradition union structures, so what existed once may come again with fresh tactics and looks at the possibilities of the past that Cobble assembled here.
February 12, 2010
Caution to flirts, cads, and ladies' men: "Dishing It Out," will change the way you look at waitresses for forever.
And if you think a book about waitressing falls into the hum-drum category, "Dishing It Out" demonstrates how a well-researched idea, presented with passion, can bring seemingly less-enticing topics to colorful life.
Sometimes, subjects can appear devoid of interest because of their very neglect and let us note how Microsoft Works Word Processor spell-check doesn't recognize the expression "waitressing."
But Dorothy Sue Cobble's book suggests that, to a certain degree, the rise and fall of waitress unionism traces our evolution (devolution?) as a country.
highwayscribery first came across Cobble through "Lost Ways of Unionism: Historical Perspective on Reinventing the Labor Movement," one in a larger collection of essays entitled "Rekindling the Movement: Labor's Quest for Relevance in the Twenty-First Century,", wherein she challenged the widely held view that skilled craft unions of the American Federation of Labor were less progressive than the Congress of Industrial Organizations' mass unions.
In her, "The Other Women's Movement: Workplace Justice and Social Rights in Modern America," Cobble posits that dominant feminist analysis passes over a generation of mid-century "labor women."
Picking up on a theme developed in that book, Cobble writes that, in contrast to the later wave of feminists, waitresses did not want to be treated the same as the boys, rather, "They wanted equality and special treatment and did not see the two as incompatible."
"Dishing it Out," kicks the can a little further down the path, by focusing on the specific craft.
The craft of waitressing has always been, she writes, "one of the principal jobs for women, it was distinguished by certain characteristics that enabled female servers to formulate and sustain a culture of solidarity at the workplace. Most female food servers shared share a similar racial and ethnic background. The relative ethnic and racial homogeneity of waitresses fostered group cohesion as it has for other groups of workers, men and women. In addition, more than women in other occupations, waitresses lived outside a traditional family setting and hence turned quite readily to their workplace community for friendship and support. If young and single, they often chose to live apart from their families, frequently residing with other waitresses in small apartments or rented rooms. The high proportion who were divorced, separated, or widowed lived alone, with friends, or with dependent relatives or children. Unable to rely financially on their family of origin or on a husband, waitresses were often primarily self-supporting and attached to the work force in a permanent fashion."
Cobble fleshes out how these attributes lent themselves to a sorority-like adhesion that fostered unionization. The heyday of waitresses syndicates took root around the same time the larger movement took wings, back in the 1930s and '40s and the better part of this story takes place then.
She notes that, "The separation of workers by trade provided women with a space apart from male hostility and allowed the development of female perspectives and leadership."
The self-conducting nature of craft union locals allowed for "female autonomy" and were, generally speaking, "superior in sustaining female participation and leadership."
Rather than focus primarily on moving individual women into higher-paying jobs held by men, this generation of lady unionists opted for improvements in the jobs they traditionally called their own.
"Dishing It Out," details the restaurant industry's growth and is worthy of one's precious attention.
It comes as something of a revelation that the nation was not always strewn with "public" eateries and that a long march toward the "feminization of food service" brought us the hospitality model we're familiar with today.
Less surprisingly, early 20th century mores held waitressing to be an "improper trade," running counter to the reigning Victorian sensibilities as it did. The ladies, after all, interacted with males customers and labored where alcohol was served.
(!)
Discussion of the job's sexual component and its double-edged nature make for great reading and should deepen a reader's understanding of the person catering to their needs at "Hooters."
Not coincidentally, the craft was widely held to be rife with loose women and attitudes intimated a kinship with prostitution.
The ladies, with few options, rolled with it: "[Waitresses:] acceptance of the sexual character of their work was rooted in their distinctive mores, but it also derived from their situation as service workers in an occupation in which their livelihood depended upon attractiveness and allure."
There was a kind of self-generating, autonomous effort to fight such perceptions by raising professional standards and forming unions were a way of gaining legitimacy.
"They spoke of their work as a skilled craft," says Cobble, "and they engaged in practices that have long been associated with craft unionism: organization along craft lines, emphasis on craft identity and specialization, restrictive membership rules, and union monitoring of performance standards."
As combative unionists, "waitresses could hurt business by suggesting the least expensive menu item, ignore the poor tippers, offer food and drink on the house, or simply provide lackluster, un-inspired service, even though it jeopardized their own tip income. Waitresses could also go out of their way to add that special attentive, anticipatory touch that would cement the customers patronage."
Which makes perfect (economic) sense.
The book dissects the unique and bygone arrangement whereby unions increased their members' value by cornering the labor market and parceling the work via hiring halls.
It turns out to not have been all bad for restaurateurs, "because culinary employers relied on the hiring hall for 'good and reliable' full-time workers as well as for the extras needed in emergencies"
The gals liked the hiring hall because "it gave them, rather than the employer, control over when and how much they worked. As long as they maintained their union standing, waitresses could quit a job and 'lay off' for however long they chose."
Lamentably, Cobble is obligated to tell her tale in the past-tense, waitressing unionism being more a study of history than a dissection of current events. The unions examined here were done-in by the same forces that have reduced organized labor's power globally.
But as either history or prescription for sound industrial relations, "Dishing It Out," sets the table beautifully.
And if you think a book about waitressing falls into the hum-drum category, "Dishing It Out" demonstrates how a well-researched idea, presented with passion, can bring seemingly less-enticing topics to colorful life.
Sometimes, subjects can appear devoid of interest because of their very neglect and let us note how Microsoft Works Word Processor spell-check doesn't recognize the expression "waitressing."
But Dorothy Sue Cobble's book suggests that, to a certain degree, the rise and fall of waitress unionism traces our evolution (devolution?) as a country.
highwayscribery first came across Cobble through "Lost Ways of Unionism: Historical Perspective on Reinventing the Labor Movement," one in a larger collection of essays entitled "Rekindling the Movement: Labor's Quest for Relevance in the Twenty-First Century,", wherein she challenged the widely held view that skilled craft unions of the American Federation of Labor were less progressive than the Congress of Industrial Organizations' mass unions.
In her, "The Other Women's Movement: Workplace Justice and Social Rights in Modern America," Cobble posits that dominant feminist analysis passes over a generation of mid-century "labor women."
Picking up on a theme developed in that book, Cobble writes that, in contrast to the later wave of feminists, waitresses did not want to be treated the same as the boys, rather, "They wanted equality and special treatment and did not see the two as incompatible."
"Dishing it Out," kicks the can a little further down the path, by focusing on the specific craft.
The craft of waitressing has always been, she writes, "one of the principal jobs for women, it was distinguished by certain characteristics that enabled female servers to formulate and sustain a culture of solidarity at the workplace. Most female food servers shared share a similar racial and ethnic background. The relative ethnic and racial homogeneity of waitresses fostered group cohesion as it has for other groups of workers, men and women. In addition, more than women in other occupations, waitresses lived outside a traditional family setting and hence turned quite readily to their workplace community for friendship and support. If young and single, they often chose to live apart from their families, frequently residing with other waitresses in small apartments or rented rooms. The high proportion who were divorced, separated, or widowed lived alone, with friends, or with dependent relatives or children. Unable to rely financially on their family of origin or on a husband, waitresses were often primarily self-supporting and attached to the work force in a permanent fashion."
Cobble fleshes out how these attributes lent themselves to a sorority-like adhesion that fostered unionization. The heyday of waitresses syndicates took root around the same time the larger movement took wings, back in the 1930s and '40s and the better part of this story takes place then.
She notes that, "The separation of workers by trade provided women with a space apart from male hostility and allowed the development of female perspectives and leadership."
The self-conducting nature of craft union locals allowed for "female autonomy" and were, generally speaking, "superior in sustaining female participation and leadership."
Rather than focus primarily on moving individual women into higher-paying jobs held by men, this generation of lady unionists opted for improvements in the jobs they traditionally called their own.
"Dishing It Out," details the restaurant industry's growth and is worthy of one's precious attention.
It comes as something of a revelation that the nation was not always strewn with "public" eateries and that a long march toward the "feminization of food service" brought us the hospitality model we're familiar with today.
Less surprisingly, early 20th century mores held waitressing to be an "improper trade," running counter to the reigning Victorian sensibilities as it did. The ladies, after all, interacted with males customers and labored where alcohol was served.
(!)
Discussion of the job's sexual component and its double-edged nature make for great reading and should deepen a reader's understanding of the person catering to their needs at "Hooters."
Not coincidentally, the craft was widely held to be rife with loose women and attitudes intimated a kinship with prostitution.
The ladies, with few options, rolled with it: "[Waitresses:] acceptance of the sexual character of their work was rooted in their distinctive mores, but it also derived from their situation as service workers in an occupation in which their livelihood depended upon attractiveness and allure."
There was a kind of self-generating, autonomous effort to fight such perceptions by raising professional standards and forming unions were a way of gaining legitimacy.
"They spoke of their work as a skilled craft," says Cobble, "and they engaged in practices that have long been associated with craft unionism: organization along craft lines, emphasis on craft identity and specialization, restrictive membership rules, and union monitoring of performance standards."
As combative unionists, "waitresses could hurt business by suggesting the least expensive menu item, ignore the poor tippers, offer food and drink on the house, or simply provide lackluster, un-inspired service, even though it jeopardized their own tip income. Waitresses could also go out of their way to add that special attentive, anticipatory touch that would cement the customers patronage."
Which makes perfect (economic) sense.
The book dissects the unique and bygone arrangement whereby unions increased their members' value by cornering the labor market and parceling the work via hiring halls.
It turns out to not have been all bad for restaurateurs, "because culinary employers relied on the hiring hall for 'good and reliable' full-time workers as well as for the extras needed in emergencies"
The gals liked the hiring hall because "it gave them, rather than the employer, control over when and how much they worked. As long as they maintained their union standing, waitresses could quit a job and 'lay off' for however long they chose."
Lamentably, Cobble is obligated to tell her tale in the past-tense, waitressing unionism being more a study of history than a dissection of current events. The unions examined here were done-in by the same forces that have reduced organized labor's power globally.
But as either history or prescription for sound industrial relations, "Dishing It Out," sets the table beautifully.
May 30, 2020
A long and meandering text of a particular level of stupidity. Page 29:
> Waitresses work in a bewildering variety of environments and come from diverse backgrounds. They might be "serving chicken dogs at the Vet or foie gras at [the Four Seasons), or taking drink orders in a club in stiletto heels and a satin corset."57 Sitting down to a meal, the patron is as likely to be greeted by a thin, tired, young mother of three as a robust, wise-talking, middle-aged divorcee.
And that is only half of the paragraph.
1. What's different from the males?
2. Why does the author need to quote such a irrelevant statement, which actually is rehashed by the author himself before and after the quote?
3. So the robust woman can't have three children and she has to be a divorcee to be "wise-talking"?
> Waitresses work in a bewildering variety of environments and come from diverse backgrounds. They might be "serving chicken dogs at the Vet or foie gras at [the Four Seasons), or taking drink orders in a club in stiletto heels and a satin corset."57 Sitting down to a meal, the patron is as likely to be greeted by a thin, tired, young mother of three as a robust, wise-talking, middle-aged divorcee.
And that is only half of the paragraph.
1. What's different from the males?
2. Why does the author need to quote such a irrelevant statement, which actually is rehashed by the author himself before and after the quote?
3. So the robust woman can't have three children and she has to be a divorcee to be "wise-talking"?
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews