Viewing page 52 of 59

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

108
1st resolution irrelevant
3rd resolution at cross purposes w/ 2nd
in 1950's & early 60's when unions strong, & shortage of labor weakened estates bargaining position, benefits for women did not cause layoffs; but later these benefits caused estates to stop hiring women as regular workers
better child care centers one of the benefits enforced
[[strikethrough]] another labor [[/strikethrough]] altho 45% of SARBUPRI membership female, Stoler stresses that it was for the most part a male labor union which fought for male wage increases under the guise of a family wage
p24
another labor policy which ultimately had a great effect on female workers was the estates increased use of casual workers drawn from Javanese villages that had grown up on the estate periphery.
despite opposition to use of casual labor by SARBUPRI, split came about in estate labor force as follows:

109
[[two column chart: CASUAL WORKERS | PERMANENT WORKERS]]

wages in money [[strikethrough]] & k [[/strikethrough]] only | wages in money & kind
no social security, medical services or other benefits | eligible for benefits
could not be union members | union members
lived in Jav. style villages on estate periphery | lived in barracks on estate
work thru a labor contractor | work directly for the estate
hight %age women | lower %age women

at a time when unions strong, use of increased amts of casual labor a deliberate policy on part of estates to break the unions
statistics for casual labor force from this period not broken down by sex, but from the types of tasks assigned to casual laborers probable high %age women
from 1952-56 no. of strikes by SARBUPRI