About this record

This document is the file copy of a letter dated 12 July 1950 about unequal treatment of female clerks in the Commonwealth Public Service. It was sent to Bessie Rischbieth by FJ McKenna, Acting Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Department. In an earlier letter to the Prime Minister on behalf of the women’s service guilds of Western Australia, Rischbieth had urged the Commonwealth Public Service to bring in true equality of pay and opportunity for women. She argued that this would give a lead to the Arbitration Court.

In his reply, McKenna explains that the basic wage element of their salary reflects a ‘difference in needs’ between men and women. He points out that both male and female clerks receive the same pay for skill and that men only receive additional pay ‘to cover the needs of the family unit’. Therefore, he claims that both have equality of opportunity.

In 1950, equal pay for women did not exist in the Commonwealth Public Service or in almost any other Australian workplace. Women had been seeking equal pay for equal work since the 19th century and Rischbieth and the Women’s Service Guilds of Western Australia were active in the campaign. When this letter was written, the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration was holding a periodic basic wage inquiry that was to include more debate about equal pay.

The legal basis for wage inequity between men and women was established in two decisions of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, which set a precedent for later cases. Both decisions were based on beliefs about women’s and men’s different needs and responsibilities.

• In a 1907 wage decision by Justice Higgins involving the Sunshine Harvester Company (the ‘Harvester’ judgement), men were granted higher pay because all men were assumed to be married and to have three children to support. Most women were assumed to be homemakers and supported by their husbands.
• In 1919, the minimum wage for women was set at 54 per cent of the male minimum wage. Again, this was based on the idea that all working women were single and had no need to support dependants.

Although written in 1950, McKenna’s statements still reflect a belief that men and women have ‘different needs’: that men, whether married or single, were the chief providers for their households and that women should be supported by their husbands or fathers. This ignored the reality that women were the sole income earners in many families. 

The ‘differences in needs’ argument won in the 1950 basic wage inquiry (and in many later inquiries). The Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration ruled that the basic wage for women would be set at 75 per cent of the male rate. This was a disappointing outcome for feminists and women’s organisations who had made detailed submissions to the inquiry. The female clerks would have to wait until 1969 for equal pay to begin being phased in.

Mr McKenna’s letter also states that women were to be admitted to clerical and professional work grades (the Third Division) of the Commonwealth Public Service because the Court had ‘a view to the provision of equality of opportunity’. By today’s standards, this does not seem to be a great change: only single women were admitted, and once a woman married, she had to resign from permanent employment. Single women in the Third Division faced major barriers to promotion, because men were unwilling to accept their supervision. The admission of single women to the Third Division was, however, the first step towards achieving equality in the workplace.

Rischbieth was one of Australia’s foremost feminists, having been prominent in women’s issues since 1906. She had been active in the leadership of the Women’s Services Guilds of Western Australia since their foundation.