The Pullman company stands in the
public mind as the leading exponent of tipping.
It certainly is the largest beneficiary of the custom,
as a simple calculation will show.
The company has about 6,500 porters,
who receive $27.50 a month in wages. Suppose
the porters received no tips. The company then
would have to pay living wages. Assuming that
the long hours of work would not attract desirable
porters under a straight wage system without at least
$60 a month pay, each one of the 6,500 would have an
increase of $32.50 a month, or $390 a year.
This would mean an increase in the
company’s annual pay-roll of $2,535,000!
In other words, the company saves
about two and a half millions a year through the tips
given to its porters. What part of the large annual
dividend is furnished by this saving is a secret of
the company’s books.
Some of these porters after many years’
service receive $42 a month in wages, and this would
bring down the foregoing estimate, though not to any
radical extent. The tips bring their incomes to
$100, $150, $200 and more a month! There are,
of course, many runs on which the porters derive smaller
amounts in gratuities, and the best runs are given
as a reward for long and faithful service.
WHAT THE PULLMAN MANAGER SAID
The Walsh Commission, appointed to
investigate industrial conditions in the United States,
in 1915 singled out the Pullman tipping practice for
investigation. Some of the testimony given by
the general manager of the company follows:
“The company simply accepts
conditions as it finds them. The
company did not invent tipping. It was here
when the company
began.”
“What do you say to making
tipping unlawful and paying employees
a living wage?” Chairman Walsh asked.
“If such a condition arises,
I presume we would have to pay
wages necessary to get the service.”
“Do you get your negroes
in the South?”
“Yes, we have been looking
after them in the South. The South is
a bigger field and the men there are more adapted
for the work
than the Northern negroes.”
“Well, be plain,” Chairman
Walsh said, “are the negroes from the
South more docile and less independent than those
from the
North?”
“Well, no, but the Southern
negro is more pleasing to the
traveling public. He is more adapted to wait
on people and serve
with a smile.”
“Can a man live on $27.50
a month and rear a family?”
“Really, I don’t know.
He might.”
“Does the Pullman company
have in mind the liberality and
kindness of the public when it fixes that rate
of pay?”
“Well, I should say that
tips have something to do with it. I
didn’t make the rates of pay.”
“A porter must call passengers
during the night, polish shoes,
answer bells, and look after the safety and comfort
of the
passengers at all hours, must he not?”
“Yes. He is reprimanded,
suspended or discharged for infractions
of the rules.”
“What is your attitude toward
the question of an organization
among your employees?”
“I felt that the movement
to form a federation of our employees
was a selfish one on the part
of a few.”
WHAT THE PORTERS SAID
The Commission also called several
porters to testify. They stated that they could
not live without the tips. One porter with twenty-one
years’ service behind him testified that he
receives $42 a month in wages, while the tips averaged
about $75 a month, or $117 income from the company
and the public.
Another porter receiving $27.50 a
month testified that his tips averaged about $77 a
month. He was described as wearing two diamond
rings and being tastefully dressed.
The conductors receive from $70 to
$90 a month in salary, and it was brought out before
the Commission that many do not consider it dishonest
to “knock down” on seat sales. This
is accomplished partly at the company’s expense,
and partly at the expense of patrons especially
unsophisticated travelers who buy a whole seat but
have other passengers sit beside them, the conductor
pocketing the extra payment. This practice is
limited to day runs. There is also the opportunity
to overcharge.
That the Pullman company gives the
public good service through its porters is indisputable.
The only question is whether the public should pay
extra for this service. If a porter with an income
of $117, say, receives only $27.50 from the company,
the public is paying three-fourths of his wages and
the company only one-fourth. Where the porters
have incomes of $150 to $200 a month the company pays
one-fifth to one-eighth of the amount and the public
pays from four-fifths to seven-eighths!
SERVICE INCLUDED
The price of a ticket on a sleeping
car is as much as a patron should pay the Pullman
company, and it should carry with it adequate porter
service.
A passenger enters a car in spick
and span condition as a rule. At the end of the
journey, through no fault of his own, he may be dusty,
and it becomes the obligation of the Pullman company
to discharge him in as good condition as when he entered
the car. The porter is there for this service.
Hence, to give him a tip for a “brush,”
or for any other service he may have rendered to make
the use of the company’s property comfortable,
is a superfluous payment.
The company has a school for training
a porter in which he is taught a rigid discipline
of attentions to passengers, all of which tend to
create in the passenger a sense of obligation toward
the porter. Yet not one of these attentions calls
for a gratuity if they are examined fairly.
The porter is psychologist enough
to know that to create the illusion that he has rendered
an extra service is as good for producing a tip as
actually to do so. Hence he will come around with
a pillow, or shine your shoes during the night unsolicited,
or execute some other maneuver that arouses a feeling
of obligation. The shining of shoes is outside
his ordinary duties, but he has no valid claim for
compensation unless specifically requested to perform
this service. In his mind is the constant reminder
that if the passenger does not make a donation his
pay envelope from the company will not meet his bills.
WHAT THE PRESS SAID
Among the many editorial comments
that the disclosures of the Walsh Commission evoked
is the following from the St. Louis Republic:
The most captious critic of the Pullman
company cannot deny that it merits a unique distinction.
Other corporations before now have underpaid their
employees ... but it remained for the Pullman
company to discover how to work on the sympathies of
the public in such a manner as to induce that
public to make up, by gratuities, for its failure
to pay its employees a living wage.
It began this forty years ago, when
the “plantation” darky of ante-bellum
days was still abroad in the land. It used him,
his pathetic history, his peculiar attitude toward
the white man, for the accomplishment of its purpose.
There at the end of the journey, after the traveler
had paid $2, $2.50 or $3 for his berth, stood
the porter with his whisk broom and his smile.
And back of him was the pathetic fact,
industriously circulated, that “the company”
did not pay him enough to live on, so that he was
dependent on the gratuities of passengers who had already
paid full price for accommodations and services.
We were expected to pay him simply because the
Pullman company didn’t. And we paid
him. Tens of millions of passengers have paid
him millions of dollars.
It wasn’t really philanthropy
to the porter; it was philanthropy extended to
the Pullman company, which was glad to have the fact
of its meanness in its relations to its colored
employees ill-informed of the rights
of workingmen and dependent by instinct published
to the world.
It was the Pullman company
which fastened the tipping habit on
the American people and they
used the negro as the instrument to
do it with.
It may be remarked in closing this
phase of the discussion that an act of Congress forbidding
tips on inter-state carriers would effectually reach
the Pullman situation.