Gender Inequality During Toronto's Depression-Era

The depression-era in Toronto reflected a labour market that was “variegated and uneven” (Srigley, 2005, p. 104). This was challenging to a wide cross-section of individuals seeking employment, and this labour market was particularly difficult for women. Srigley describes 1930’s Toronto as a “depressed city” for women seeking employment in even the most basic of services. The challenges set forth in a time when wages were at an all-time low; the emphasis on meaningful employment for women was as scarce as the opportunities themselves. This paper will explore these disadvantages based on how women were viewed, women’s struggle against employment discrimination, and issues related to privilege and race. The social structures, reflecting gender roles of the time, limited a woman’s ability to seriously compete with an unemployed job-seeking man. For example, a woman was expected to marry and care for the needs of the home, while a man identified his role as the “financial provider” for the household. Srigley also points to a theme of opportunity in circumstances where single women - who came from a middle-class working family - lacked the same access to meaningful employment versus those who differed in familial circumstances.

Srigley states the profile of a middle-class woman in Toronto includes a secondary education and her family owning their own home, “… but gender and class identities that she shared with white-middle class women did not translate into the same employment opportunities” (Srigley, 2005, 90). This lends to the most important theme of the article, which is gender inequality. Women were categorically denied access to jobs in an era when basic economics were inflated; however, the availability for decent wage earning was handicapped based on whether employment opportunities were categorized as “gender specific”. Roles such as clerical services, which were considered decent social standing careers, were offered to men – single or married - as opposed to the once gender-dominated realm of women. This reflects a family dynamic that viewed men as the providers versus women as the attendees of the household. Even in the most basic situation, where a single woman was seeking either higher education, such as business school, or upgrading qualifications to acquire these clerical positions, their jobs were still reserved for men first. This had a significant impact on whether the gender gap would decrease, emphasizing the minimized role of women as equal wage earners. Gender roles lead to a larger complexity regarding what type of wage-earning positions are available to women, such as clerical positions versus domestic or garment shop worker positions. The clerical position is conclusively a signifier of a higher social status. It is an office job; however, it requires assets such as typing skills, whereas traditionally, women were cast in roles in the domestic field or in garment shop worker positions. These roles were categorically the same throughout history. Women climbing the “social ladder” as it relates to equality and proper wage earning was stunted by an era of depression where women experienced low wages and menial jobs. Although the economy in Toronto suffered, men were still more desirable for companies seeking to hire. Wages were depressed, and Srigley states that, “this led to exhaustive measures by owners” (Srigley, 2005, 92). One can understand Srigley’s assertion that the need for work, even at its most basic, the desperation for earning any wage was critical in these depressed economic times. This led to owners such as Timothy Eaton, who owned the Eaton Company, instituting longer hours and decreased wages – and this was a part of the greater exploitive policies.

Job scarcity created a heightened interest in business school. Women typically would try to improve their skills by enrolling in school, specifically business school. However, here we have the same issue, which is the theme of gender inequality and oppression. This was evident when it came to job acquisition and improving working conditions, or freeing themselves from the traditional roles of a domestic worker. As unemployment rates increased, women enrolled at a higher rate to business schools. “… far more women than men enrolled in business schools. Despite high rates of unemployment, business courses continued to fill with young women receiving training in stenography, accounting and typing” (Srigley, 2005, 92). The disparity between women’s employment and male unemployment continued to grow. Job scarcity was still prevalent; however, the influx of women with business school training had a correlation between eliminating job scarcity for women and redefining gender inequality in Toronto.

With the increase of women attending business schools to increase their chances at a clerical position, the idea of “white femininity” began to create barriers when it came to race. “An exclusive emphasis on gender can lead to a neglect or misunderstanding of the confluence of factors, including race that served to privilege some women in the labour market while disadvantaging and indeed excluding others” (Srigley, 2005, 104). Although women began to improve their own socio-economic standing, it created a sub-cultural rift where privilege and race were defined. The labour market was never cohesively whole to begin with; therefore, this intersectionality of class, gender, ethnicity, religion and marital status tended to have wide consequences. During the depression, Toronto’s domestic services industry was still considered the lowest rung on the occupational ladder. Women of all races, but specifically that of non-Anglican, non-Caucasian women, occupied these specific positions. The opportunities that existed for these women in Toronto during the depression were scarce. “Breadwinning” women found it difficult to compete with unemployed males for not only positions but also fair wages. This is a trend that foreshadowed the situation that exists today for women in the corporate world.

Srigley points to these issues – gender, ethnicity and privilege. She was very effective in in explaining and developing the key arguments on these issues. She backed up her key arguments by finding evidence of her own from other journals, such as this quote she pulled from the Bureau of the Census, “In 1931, roughly 18 per cent of Canada’s male wage-earners were unemployed com pared with 7 per cent of its female wage-earners. Canada, Bureau of the Census, Unemployment Vol. VI (Ottawa 1931), 94” The depression era has influenced the dynamic on socio-economic norms. As outlined by Srigley, these influenced cross-sections of society, such as: 1) how women were viewed, 2) how women transitioned and overcame societal discrimination, and 3) the birth of feminism and empowerment. Women struggled to eliminate social status restrictions and limitations during these times. Even with job scarcity, they still mobilized in some cases, not for wage equality per se, but to compete with men in the depressed job market.