Same Streets
← All stories

Local cooks and waiters fight for a six-day work week

Everett's Cooks and Waiters' union moves to shorten the work week, aiming to align local conditions with Seattle's standards.

The story, cleaned up

A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.

Six days shall constitute a working week for the members of the local cooks and waiters' union if present plans of the union go through. The cooks and waiters in Seattle have enjoyed the six-day week for some time and the local union thinks that what is good enough for the boys and girls in Seattle is pretty good in Everett. It was decided to give the hotels and restaurants thirty days' notice of the change in working conditions, putting the new rule into effect March 1st. The union does not want the impression to go out that the restaurants and hotels will close one day a week. The new rule means that one day out of the seven each member will have a day off, a substitute being employed for that day.

“The cooks and waiters in Seattle have enjoyed the six-day week for some time and the local union thinks that what is good enough for the boys and girls in Seattle is pretty good in Everett.”

— Printed in The Labor Journal (Everett, Wash.), 1910
Then · 1910116 years apartNow · 2026

The transition from seven-day to six-day work weeks was a major pillar of early labor organizing, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance work hours with life outside the workplace, a theme that persists in modern labor debates.

The original page

The Labor Journal (Everett, Wash.), 1910-02-04. Library of Congress, Chronicling America.

From readers

No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.

About this story

From
The Labor Journal (Everett, Wash.), FEB 4, 1910, Page 1
Rights
Public domain
Place
47.97934, -122.21270 · placed automatically
The paper in the Library of Congress catalog ↗