not being overworked or underpaid. that is going to be one of the initial fights within the early part of the movement. page: ok. you talked about the difference between protective legislation versus blanket legislation. maybe you could give us a little more of an explanation of both of those. kris: sure. it is hard to explain. the protective legislation, the idea behind it was that women would have special restrictions in the workplace that would help them. for example, they would -- a lot of protective legislation would fight for an eight hour work day, which was the key goal. four restrictions on how much you would have to list -- lift, or the right to have bathroom breaks. not to work at night. there was protective legislation to protect women from working at night. these are very helpful to women workers. however, alice paul is

advocating for a blanket amendment, which would be at the federal level. the women that wanted those special protections were afraid if you pass a federal amendment, it would wipe out protective legislation. that is what would happen. there was that fight, women need special protections in the workforce versus a blanket set of legislations that says women's are that women are entitled to the same rights in the constitution. alice's argument to that right away is, at first she tried to be accommodated -- accommodating. that lasted around a year. then, she said no such protections. because she said if you give women such protections, you give an employee or way to discriminate against them. there's a lot to accommodate women, you become a burden to the boss, and you are the first to get the boot. there are more arguments she has, but that is the gist of the

argument. dr. williams: i think today it would be hard to see how labor unions would be against the equal rights amendment. things have changed in many ways, but the circumstances of women have changed. so many women are the breadwinners in their family. that is true in the black community. we not only have to bring home the bacon, but we have to bring it home, fry it, keep the electricity and gas on, and then washed the dishes afterwards, and still have work to do. i would think today that would not be an excuse. i work for labor unions, and i believe most of them today, while they have had negative images in the past, today they are truly working so we have a quality. i would dare say we wouldn't find unions that would be opposed to the e.r.a. today. page: they change their opinions in the 1970's. the amendment, the overwhelming

majority of women, as well as progressive allies in the middle class, opposed the e.r.a. precisely because protective legislation like minimum wage, safety laws, that were passed only for women, would be undermined. dr. muncy: you probably know this, but the early 20th century, the supreme court made it unconstitutional to pass that protective labor legislation for men, but it did let through some legislation for women. the way that much of the labor and you movement and progressive allies thought in the early going with that the protective labor laws for women were an opening wage, and once women had those protections, they could eventually be extended to men. which in some ways it is exactly what happened during the new deal. in the early going, the vast majority of people that we would

consider feminist thoughts the e.r.a. would hurt more than it would help. historians are pretty clear it would have. but the 1930's changed that with the fair labor standards act, in 1938. we have labor -- the minimum wage passed. it turns out that we still operate under the law of the act at the federal level. that is not a maximum law that for bids mandatory overtime. that law allows employers to require overtime, they just have to pay time and a half for it. for women who have children to care for, and who are primarily responsible for children, that law does not do then nearly as much good as it did men in the

1930's and 1940's and 1950's. if your child would be per -- put on the curb by the daycare provider or school at 6:00, it doesn't matter how much you are employer is paying you, you can't stay. you have to get out in time to get your child. that kind of hours law didn't operate in the way that a lot of women needed it to, and so there were state laws that helped them out. one of the classics is the michigan law in the 1940's. if you heard this, you would cry. it was a 54 hours law. after 54 hours a week, nine hours a day, six days a week, employees could not require mandatory overtime of women workers after that 54 hours. that was the kind of protective legislation that remained in place in the 50's and 60's. a lot of women workers depended on that in order to be able to

do their jobs and get home in time to take care of their children and fry the bacon. those kinds of protective laws were cherished by a lot of women workers, and their allies and families, through the early 1960's. after the civil rights act of 1964, title vii of the civil rights act banned employers from discriminating against women as well as anyone on the basis of race in the workplace. in 1969, the elc determined that title vii actually disallowed protective labor legislation. after that, the labor unions pretty much dropped their opposition to the e.r.a., if they didn't outright support it. dr. williams: i'm glad you mentioned the civil rights movement. it was the civil rights movement that helped to gain a lot of the laws we have today, when we look

at women. they didn't just a pipe to black women, or with men not just black men. it helps us with rights for the lgbt community, the handicapped, people with disabilities. the civil rights movement had a lot of impact on what we have today, and continues to have. that is why i would like to see white women and white men work more with civil rights groups, because we got the ball rolling. now we are moving on. we have other problems with voter suppression and other things. we would like to have more people working with us to pick up that load we have to work on every day, which is not just women's rights. i'm really proud to be one of the lead organizations and chief spokespersons for the equal rights amendment, but i need some help.