OLD-AGE INSURANCE FOR FOREWORD Most workers and most types of workers are covered by the old-age insurance system set up under the Social Security Act by the Congress in 1935. A notable exception are household employees. To extend such protection to these workers is an essential step in efforts to plug up loopholes making for insecurity in the country's economic fabric. Such a step would not mean "charity" or "relief." It would be a good investment for all concerned-the household worker, the housewife, the taxpayer. HOUSEHOLD EMPLOYMENT—A MAJOR OCCUPATION Household employment is a major occupational field for women in this country. This statement may be challenged by harassed housewives unable to secure a worker to assist with domestic duties. Or it may be met with incredulity by families, forced by the lack of such help to adapt themselves to new and less comfortable patterns of home living. But the fact that there is still a relatively large number of household workers is evidenced by census statistics. Through decades up to 1940 the census indicated, in general, a mounting number of job seekers who found in this field a means of livelihood, as more and more women faced the need for self-support, as more and more families reached income levels permitting the hiring of household help. By 1940 domestic service in homes was the largest single occupational field for women, accounting for more than 2,000,000 workers, of whom over 90 percent were women. By 1944 there had been a wartime exodus of some 400,000 women household employees to factory or other work. Some, in response to a patriotic urge or to a desire to escape to "greener pastures," entered war plants. Others seized the long-coveted opportunity to step easily into public housekeeping jobs or to go into other service or manufacturing industries concerned with civilian needs. Even so, by July 1947 there still remained the sizable number of 1,784,000 household workers, according to an estimate of the Bureau of the Census. How will the curve turn next year and in the future? Will it swing upward again as so many homemakers hope, in order to meet their urgent needs? Or will it continue downward, adding to the difficulties of these housewives and mothers? IT'S IMPORTANT Household employment is obviously a service of vital importance, because of its contribution to the health and happiness of families, the convenience and comfort of homes. Certainly workers who prepare food, launder clothes, keep households clean and attractive, care for children, old people, or invalids, and perform numerous tasks that oil the daily routine of existence are engaged in socially worth-while services, which not only promote the well-being of the household but contribute to the welfare of the community. DEMAND EXCEEDS SUPPLY It's a truism that the demand for competent household workers always exceeds the supply. This was true before the war, and even during the depression of the 1930's. In the war period the shortage of satisfactory household help worked a very real hardship on many women and their families. As war and postwar job opportunities in other industries attracted more and more of the "perfect jewels" of domestic workers, the untrained and heretofore unemployables among such applicants became conspicuous but inadequate makeshifts. WHAT'S WRONG? Why are so many homes and families suffering through inexperienced or unattainable workers? Why is there a decided tendency for competent women to go into household employment only as a last resort? Why did trained and able workers leave the field with avidity when the war offered them alternatives? It is not that the work is necessarily distasteful to women as job seekers. In fact, many say they would prefer it to factory or other kinds of employment if the conditions were different. No; the answers have deeper roots-roots whose ramifications are in the social and economic structure of our early history. The answers are concerned also with a hang-over from a past era-the social stigma, which unfortunately in the minds of many people still attaches to this field-and with the lack of standards all along the line-standards for training, standards of employment, standards of work performance, and legal standards to safeguard the workers. This report concentrates on one of the legal needs-protection through old-age insurance and discusses the economic need of household workers for these benefits. THE NEED FOR COVERAGE THE DILEMMA OF OLD AGE Household workers, because they are now outside the old-age and survivors insurance system, face the possibility of a precarious existence in the last miles of their life journey. It is demoralizing to fear the prospect of having to weather the last rainy day of all without a protecting umbrella. Certainly, household workers have as great need as other types of workers for economic safeguards, including that of old-age and survivors insurance. In the new era in which we live, much of the older form of security afforded some household workers who lived in the employer's home and were regarded as faithful retainers is gone. Patterns for household employment have altered strikingly, together with other developments in our changing civilization, typified by the greater mobility of our present-day population, the increased trend toward urbanization and smaller homes, and the growing use of labor-saving devices in the household. Many household workers now live away from their place of employment, and increasing numbers of them work on a parttime or day basis. While some employers of household workers may still assume the responsibility for their care in old age, this is generally impossible. Furthermore, such dependency is unfair to both the employer and the employee. Today, many of the latter-lacking eligibility for old-age insurance, for which, if included in the system, they would make a contribution-face the alternative of going "on relief," the cost of which must be borne by the community. True, some of these workers can and do save on their own initiative, but their savings, through no fault of their own, are frequently swept away or used up prematurely. Old-age benefits should come to household workers under the old-age and survivors insurance program as a matter of right. As do other kinds of workers, they need to provide systematically and safely during their earning years for their old age and survivors. Yet, it is especially difficult for the rank and file of household employees to save adequately, if they must rely solely on their own efforts. TEMPORARY COVERAGE First, it is of interest to point out that household workers, when they shift temporarily to covered employment, frequently make contributions under the old-age and survivors insurance program. Though |