Connecting Household History and Labour History

Abstract

Labour historians have always shown an interest in working class men and women who participated in strikes, unions, and political parties. However, even when historians are receptive to the importance of family life behind public activism these scholars continue to use the "public sphere" as an approach for studying the family.1 This approach runs counter to historical logic because the daily life of those who join social movements and organizations involves far more than merely labour activism. To understand the true causes of collective resistance among workers, it is necessary to use the "private sphere" as an approach for studying labour protests as well. While this reverse perspective may not prove a panacea for all problems associated with analysing labour history, it will provide insight into the rather obscure motives of the working class for deciding whether or not to support the development of workers' movements. Furthermore, Jean H. Quataert wrote that examining working-class households makes it possible to keep "in focus at all times the lives of both men and women, young and old, and the variety of paid and unpaid work necessary to maintain the unit".

Monopolizing the Property of Skill: A Prosopographic Analysis of a Finnish Ironworks Community

“…The acceptance of patronage -and, from the point of view of the company, the offer of it -crucially limited both the scope and the need for social movements, including trade unions, in Strö mfors. 63 Another important factor was that the informal apprenticeship system seems to have been more than capable of guaranteeing an adequate workforce in such a declining, small workshop, at least until the 1940s, and even after that new employees were recruited from within the community. 64 The old system performed well enough in an industry that had already become of secondary importance for the company.…”

Between the Devil of Cheap Labour Competition and the Deep Sea of Family Poverty?' Sweated Labour in Time and Place, 1840–1914

“…It is essential to focus on the 'private' as well as the 'public' sphere. 123 In addition to the two principal elements of an excess of labour competing for work and the individual haggling over wages, several secondary factors intensified the sweating problem. These included trade swings, seasonality of demand for a product, and lack of good management.…”

Gender, work and labour history: a response to carol morgan

“…To fully understand collective labour militancy or the male breadwinner family, it is necessary to study the household as a whole. [23] If we are to take the analysis of gender relations further, we must endeavour to integrate both the 'public' and the 'private' spheres.…”

“…[49] As Marcel van der Linden notes in his call for a household-centred labour history, 'To understand the true causes of collective resistance among workers, it is necessary to use the "private sphere" as an approach for studying protests as well'. [50] We need also, as Horrell and Humphries suggest, to make a greater effort to systematically study historical breadwinning patterns based on family budgets. [51] If we adopt such a framework, we shall not only write better labour history but also better women's history.…”