Founded in Manchester in 1866 by Peter Shorrocks, the Amalgamated Society of Journeymen Tailors rapidly united more than 7,000 workers from local societies across England and Ireland. Its campaigns targeted local wage disputes, subcontracting, and homeworking—employment arrangements that could weaken collective bargaining and push tailoring into less regulated domestic settings. The union generally pursued strikes town by town, often winning agreements on local wages, making it an important early attempt to impose collective standards on Britain’s fragmented clothing trade. Yet its labor politics were sharply contradictory: it also campaigned against the employment of women, reflecting the fear that female workers and lower-paid labor could undercut established male wages and workshop customs. Only in 1900 did the organization create a female section and rename itself the Amalgamated Society of Tailors and Tailoresses. Women were formally admitted but paid lower contributions and received fewer benefits, institutionalizing unequal treatment inside the very union claiming to defend garment workers. A 1905 breakaway by 900 London members, led by James MacDonald, further exposed tensions over control and representation. The union later absorbed workers from related trades, surviving mechanization until its 1932 merger into the Tailors and Garment Workers’ Union, but its history captures an early fashion-industry paradox: resistance to subcontracted and home-based exploitation coexisted with efforts to exclude women and preserve male control of skilled tailoring.
Preparing the daily feature…
AI concept artworkArchive Record · 1860s-1930s
The Tailors’ Union That Fought Homeworking While Marginalizing Its Own Women Members
Amalgamated Society of Tailors and Tailoresses / 1860s-1930s
Founded in Manchester in 1866 by Peter Shorrocks, the Amalgamated Society of Journeymen Tailors rapidly united more than 7,000 workers from local societies across England and Ireland. Its campaigns targeted local wage disputes, subcontracting, and homeworking—employment arrangements that could weaken collective bargaining and push tailoring into less regulated domestic settings. The union generally pursued strikes town by town, often winning agreements on local wages, making it an important early attempt to impose collective standards on Britain’s fragmented clothing trade. Yet its labor politics were sharply contradictory: it also campaigned against the employment of women, reflecting the fear that female workers and lower-paid labor could undercut established male wages and workshop customs. Only in 1900 did the organization create a female section and rename itself the Amalgamated Society of Tailors and Tailoresses. Women were formally admitted but paid lower contributions and received fewer benefits, institutionalizing unequal treatment inside the very union claiming to defend garment workers. A 1905 breakaway by 900 London members, led by James MacDonald, further exposed tensions over control and representation. The union later absorbed workers from related trades, surviving mechanization until its 1932 merger into the Tailors and Garment Workers’ Union, but its history captures an early fashion-industry paradox: resistance to subcontracted and home-based exploitation coexisted with efforts to exclude women and preserve male control of skilled tailoring.
The daily editorial is currently unavailable. There’s still an entire archive to explore.