The Michigan Historical Review 40:1 (Spring 2014): 27-48©2014 Central Michigan University. ISSN 0890-1686 All Rights Reserved Mixing It Up: Michigan Barmaids Fight for Civil Rights By Amy Holtman French In 1950, the New York Times ran an article, “Lady Bartenders? Not on your Martini!” that argued women were not as smart or conversational as men, distracted men with their beauty, and could not handle drunks as efficiently as men.1 The focus of the story, Nick, epitomized the male bartender—he could tell his patrons the score of any game, the battles of every war, and dispense advice on numerous subjects. He was a confidant of the patrons and ruler of all that went on within the bar. Nick asserted that women should not bartend: “I do not believe a woman can talk as well as a man, to begin with . . . and, physically, a woman can’t handle a drunk as well as a man.”2 At the time, most members of Michigan’s Bartenders’ Union agreed with Nick. Detroit Local 562 of the Bartenders’ Union was originally chartered before World War I. It became active again in 1934 when the local was reinstated by the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union as well as the Bartenders’ International League of America. Union officials estimated that 4,000 barmen worked in the Detroit area in the early 1940s. The union reported “growing membership” even amidst World War II. Throughout this period of growth, the union cautioned that “bartenders not only have to be brave, but they practically have to know jiujitsu.”3 1 G. Millstein, “Lady Bartenders? Not on your Martini!” New York Times, May 28, 1950, 19. Women who served alcohol but did not mix it were called waitresses, while women who mixed alcohol were generally called barmaids. To reflect vocabulary in use at the time, I use the term “barmaids” to refer to women tending bar and “bartenders” to refer to men tending bar. 2 Ibid. 3 Patron control was a bartender’s duty that the Bartenders’ Union most strongly advocated was not the place of a woman. “Average Bartender,” Michigan Hotel-BarRestaurant Review, December 1940, Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Collection, Reuther Library, Detroit (hereafter Michigan Bar Review). 28 The Michigan Historical Review The Bartenders’ Union was an active organization in Michigan dedicated to forwarding the profession of bartending.4 Members frequently mingled with judges, attorneys, and legislators—political socialization not afforded to women. Every year, the Bartenders’ Union held a ball for Detroit’s society members allowing the city’s legal elite to dine, smoke cigars, and drink with union affiliates.5 By excluding women from union ranks, they reinforced the classification of bartending as masculine. According to union representative Thomas Kearney in a 1943 radio interview on Detroit station CKLW, “to accept them [women] into membership in Local 562 would be to imply that the industry has accepted barmaids as a permanent fixture. This is not true.”6 In the absence of a law to prohibit female bartending, unionists “policed” the industry, “doing what the law ought to do but [wasn’t].”7 The Bartenders’ Union advocated for passage of a law that would expel women from the more economically beneficial profession of bartending in order to keep men as breadwinners. As Kearney, business representative of Detroit Local 562, complained, “the problem of women working behind the bar has vexed the tavern industry for a long time.”8 He declared in 1940, “I don’t care whether the law is passed by the state legislature, the Detroit Council, or simply by issuance of a regulation by the Liquor Control Commission—just so the law is enacted.”9 Kearney justified this need by invoking a fear of alcohol prohibition: “Unless a law is passed forbidding the employment of women as barmaids, thousands of women voters may return to the Prohibition column. The first argument the Drys will use against us will be an alleged corruption of womanhood through their employment as barmaids.”10 In 1945, after extensive lobbying by the Bartenders’ Union, Michigan legislators amended the Liquor Control Act of 1933 to call for 4 “Barmaid Problem,” Michigan Bar Review, April 1943. 5...
Read full abstract