Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T19:32:08.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Allies or Antagonists? Philanthropic Reformers and Business Reformers in the Progressive Era1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2012

Nikki Mandell*
University of Wisconsin–Whitewater


In the early twentieth century, amid heightening industrial tensions, many large corporations introduced welfare work to co-opt their employees' loyalties and pacify public anger. Many of the techniques and ideas of what became known as “welfare capitalism” were adapted from charity aid and settlement work. Over time, however, labor relations moved from being identified as a social reform issue—bound up with other issues on which the new profession of social work concentrated—to a business management prerogative. This article argues that professionalization played a significant role in these developments. Philanthropic reformers initially claimed welfare work as part of their professional agenda. However, in the second decade of the century, the social work profession began to narrow its field of operations. As social work's ambivalent claims on the factory and shop floor atrophied, business schools were introducing elements of industrial social work into their new management curriculums. The burgeoning field of professional labor management incorporated welfare work as one of its essential tools.

Copyright © Society for Historians of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



The author thanks the anonymous reviewers for their insightful critiques of an earlier draft of this article. I am also indebted to David Brody and fellow historians at the long-past Justice at Work Conference in his honor who offered valuable feedback on a very preliminary version of this paper.


2 National Civic Federation Review, July 15, 1913Google Scholar.

3 Beeks, Gertrude, testimony before the Commission on Industrial Relations, June 10, 1914, Industrial Relations: Final Report and Testimony…by the Commission on Industrial Relations (Washington, 1916), 3:2223–24Google Scholar.

4 Maud Nathan to Ralph Easley, Dec. 10, 1913; Mary Van Kleeck to Maud Nathan, Feb. 7, 1914; NCF folder 4, box 279, reel 261, Welfare Department, National Civic Federation, New York Public Library (hereafter NCF); Kleeck, Mary Van, “Working Conditions in New York Department Stores,” The Survey, Dec. 11, 1913, 5051Google Scholar; notice of letter of protest, The Survey, Jan. 10, 1914Google Scholar, 441; editorial critical of NCF report, The Survey, Nov. 15, 1913, 185Google Scholar.

5 Maud Nathan to Ralph Easley, Dec. 10, 1913, NCF.

6 “Stenographer's Notes—Meeting of Consumer's League, Jan. 27, 1914, folder 4, box 279, reel 261, NCF.

7 Tedlow, Richard S., Keeping the Corporate Image: Public Relations and Business 1900–1950 (Greenwich, CT, 1979)Google Scholar; Watts, Sarah Lyons, Order Against Chaos: Business Culture and Labor Ideology in America, 1880–1915 (New York, 1991)Google Scholar.

8 Beeks, “The Definition of Welfare Work,” N.D., folder 4, box 278, reel 261, NCF. The other major point of contention was wage rates; e.g. critics charged that the NCF's methods for calculating wages mistakenly excluded periods of unemployment, resulting in overstatements of real wages earned.

9 For more complete descriptions of corporate welfare work programs: Brandes, Stuart D., American Welfare Capitalism (Chicago, 1970)Google Scholar; Mandell, Nikki, The Corporation as Family: The Gendering of Corporate Welfare, 1890–1930 (Chapel Hill, 2002)Google Scholar; Nelson, Daniel, Managers and Workers: Origins of the New Factory System in the United States, 1889–1920 (Madison, WI, 1975)Google Scholar; Tone, Andrea, The Business of Benevolence: Industrial Paternalism in Progressive America (Ithaca, NY, 1997)Google Scholar; Zahavi, Gerald, Workers, Managers, and Welfare Capitalism: The Shoemakers and Tanners of Endicott Johnson, 1890–1950 (Urbana, 1988)Google Scholar.

10 There were, of course, multiple meanings of these terms, varying widely based on the objectives of those who used them to explain or legitimize their actions.

11 Friedman, Walter A., Birth of a Salesman: The Transformation of Selling in America (Cambridge, MA, 2004)Google Scholar; Benson, Susan Porter, Counter Cultures: Saleswomen, Managers, and Customers in American Department Stores, 1890–1940 (Urbana, 1986)Google Scholar; Lamoreaux, Naomi R., The Great Merger Movement in American Business, 1895–1904 (New York, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Haydu, Jeffrey, Citizen Employers: Business Communities and Labor in Cincinnati and San Francisco, 1870–1916 (Ithaca, NY, 2008)Google Scholar.

13 Blackford, Mansel G. and Kerr, K. Austin, Business Enterprise in American History, 3rd ed. (Boston, 1994), 201Google Scholar. Shelton Stromquist argues that effacing class was the defining feature and enduring legacy of progressivism. Stromquist, Shelton, Re-inventing “The People”: The Progressive Movement, the Class Problem, and the Origins of Modern Liberalism (Urbana, 2006)Google Scholar.

14 Most scholars refer to welfare work as paternalist in nature, focusing on the two-party relationship between an undifferentiated management (cast as father) and the workers (cast as dependents). In The Corporation as Family I argue that corporate welfare work's transformative agenda, grounded in the ideals and structure of the middle-class Victorian family, was dependent on and defined by the introduction of a new managerial tier, the welfare managers (fulfilling the role of Victorian mothers). Management did not act as an undifferentiated unit. The familial structure and goals of this labor management system are best understood as maternalist.

15 Tone, The Business of Benevolence, 36.

16 On reformers' networks see, for example, Carson, Mina, Settlement Folk: Social Thought and the American Settlement Movement, 1885–1930 (Chicago, 1990)Google Scholar; Muncy, Robyn, Creating a Female Dominion in American Reform, 1890–1935 (New York, 1991)Google Scholar. Sklar, Kathryn Kish, Florence Kelley and the Nation's Work: The Rise of Women's Political Culture, 1830–1900 (New Haven, 1995)Google Scholar; Baker, PaulaThe Domestication of Politics: Women and American Political Society, 1780–1920,” American Historical Review 89 (June 1984): 620–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Beeks testimony before the Commission on Industrial Relations, June 10, 1914, Industrial Relations: Final Report and Testimony, 3:2218–26.

18 Kleeck, Mary Van, “Working Conditions in New York Department Stores,” The Survey, Oct. 11, 1913, 5051Google Scholar.

19 Gaylord S. White, “The Social Settlements After Twenty Five Years,” 1911, Box: Reprints, Articles, Etc. 1899–1949, National Federation of Settlements Collections, Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis (hereafter SWHA); Beeks to Stanley McCormick, Dec. 2, 1902, F.A. Flather File, subject file 3B, box 30, Nettie Fowler McCormick Papers, Wisconsin Historical Society; “Address of Miss Gertrude Beeks…Feb. 20, 1913,” folder: Welfare Workers' Conference, box 82, NCF.

20 Briscoe quoted in Mandell, The Corporation as Family, 39. Jane Robbins, “Fifth Conference of the National Federation of Settlements at Baltimore, Maryland, May 13–19, 1915,” Box: Bulletins, Conference Reports, Reprints, 1911–1930, National Federation of Settlements Collection, SWHA.

21 Charities, Jan. 5, 1901, 4243Google Scholar. At this point Charities was the organ of the New York Charity Organization Society (COS).

22 Carson, Settlement Folk, 65–66.

23 Quotation from Nathan's article in World's Work, May 1902, in “Social Engineering and the Social Secretary,” Social Service, Aug. 1902, 34–35.

24 Beeks served as assistant secretary to the Chicago Civic Federation (CCF), precursor to the NCF. The CCF had been established to develop practical solutions to the chaos of the Great Depression of the 1890s. Its founding members included, among others, Jane Addams, Lyman Gage, Mrs. Charles Henrotin, Bertha Palmer, Albion Small, and Graham Taylor. On Addams's support for Beeks's move to International Harvester, Ozanne, Robert, A Century of Labor-Management Relations at McCormick and International Harvester (Madison, 1967), 32Google Scholar; On Southall, Delton, Jennifer, Racial Integration in Corporate America, 1940–1990 (New York, 2009), 134CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Addams seems to have played a similar role in at least one other case. See Inspect Harvest Mills,” New York Times, Aug. 23, 1912, 10, which identifies International Harvester's welfare manager Mary Goss as a “co-worker” of Jane AddamsGoogle Scholar.

25 “Warden's Report to the Trustees…Sept. 30, 1917, folder: Trustees Minutes, 1916–1924, box 19, Chicago Commons Collection, Chicago Historical Society (hereafter CHS).

26 Mandell, The Corporation as Family, 34–35. In addition to those moving from philanthropic reform organizations, many welfare workers came to this work from existing employment within the company at various levels of management, as foremen or foreladies, superintendents, and general managers, for example.

27 Recent scholarship places this homogenizing mission at the center of the progressive movement. See, for example, McGerr, Michael, A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870–1920 (New York, 2003)Google Scholar; Stromquist, Re-Inventing the “The People”; Haydu, Citizen Employers. For the connection between the Victorian ideal and welfare work, Mandell, The Corporation as Family.

28 Diner, Steven J., A City and Its Universities: Public Policy in Chicago, 1892–1919 (Chapel Hill, 1980), 6465Google Scholar. Jacoby, Sanford, Employing Bureaucracy: Managers, Unions, and the Transformation of Work in American Industry, 1900–1945 (New York, 1985), 7382Google Scholar, describes a similar network of philanthropic and business reformers in Boston.

29 Walkowitz, Daniel J., Working With Class: Social Workers and the Politics of Middle-Class Identity (Chapel Hill, 1999), ch. 1Google Scholar. Walkowitz limits his brief discussion of welfare work to the Ford Motor Company and the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, whose programs encompassed elements that were atypical of the welfare movement.

30 McGerr, A Fierce Discontent, 126–27, 133.

31 Although some social investigators did go undercover in factories and shops, these were intentionally short-term stints, not long-term commitments.

32 The American Institute of Social Service initially went by the name of the League for Social Service.

33 Early issues of Social Service covered multiple topics. The magazine moved to a one-topic-per-month format with the March 1903 issue, titled “Village Improvement Number.” A sampling includes: “Crime and Criminology,” June 1903; “Fresh Air Charities,” July 1903; “Boys Clubs and Associations,” Sept. 1903; “Social Secretary Number,” July 1904; “Proposed Solutions of the Drink Problem,” Jan. 1905; “Social Settlements,” Apr. 1905. Josiah Strong's writings similarly projected a broad social reform agenda. Addressing occupational standards, Strong credited state and employer actions as compatible and equally essential to solving the labor problem. Strong, Josiah, Studies in Social Progress in the Gospel of the Kingdom (New York, 1911), 136–38Google Scholar.

34 Social Service, June 1903, 125–26 and Oct. 1905, 114–15Google Scholar.

35 Social Service, Nov. 1900, 3Google Scholar.

36 Strong and Tolman explicitly drew inspiration and direction from the broadly inclusive social reform agenda of the Musée Social at the 1889 Paris Exposition. Social Service, Oct. 1905, 107, 113–15Google Scholar.

37 Ibid., 108–11, 135–36.

38 In 1905, AISS reported that museums of security had been established in Amsterdam, Munich, Vienna, and Zurich, as well as the original in Paris. Social Service, May 1901, 136; Mar. 1902, 99; Oct. 1905, 107Google Scholar; Strong, Studies in Social Progress in the Gospel of the Kingdom, 151.

39 The Survey, Sept. 10, 1910, 827–28Google Scholar.

40 “Philanthropy and Public Opinion,” folder 105, box 10, Paul U. Kellog Papers, SWHA.

41 Charities, Dec. 9, 1899Google Scholar.

42 For example, Charities, Jan. 20, 1900, Mar. 15, 1902, July 23, 1904Google Scholar; Charities and the Commons, Dec.15, 1905Google Scholar; The Survey, May 7, 1910, Oct. 19, 1910, Apr. 1, 1911, Oct. 21, 1911Google Scholar.

43 Charities, Feb. 6, 1904Google Scholar; The Survey, Dec. 31, 1910, Aug 19, 1911, Dec. 16, 1911Google Scholar.

44 Charities and the Commons, Aug. 18, 1906, 519–20Google Scholar.

45 The Survey, Oct. 19, 1910, May 24, 1913Google Scholar.

46 Henry Holt to Kellog, folder 104: Charities and the Commons, box 10, Paul U. Kellog Papers, SWHA. Holt's letter canceling his subscription was the only letter, among a large collection written to the editor, on private company letterhead.

47 Charities and the Commons, Oct. 1906–Apr. 1907, 754, in bound vol. 17, Memorial Library, University of Wisconsin–MadisonGoogle Scholar.

48 Ibid.; The Survey, June 28, 1913Google Scholar.

49 Wheeler, Elizabeth, “The Social Secretary of the Department Store,” Charities, Jan. 3, 1903Google Scholar.

50 Charities and the Commons, Feb. 17, 1906, 688Google Scholar.

51 The settlement preferred that the company absorb the cost of the camp and that workers not be charged at all. However, Beeks insisted that the workers would value the experience more if they paid for it, and she would not concede to this demand. Beeks to Cyrus McCormick, Sept. 5, 1901, folder IHC Welfare 1901, box 39, Cyrus McCormick Jr. Papers, Wisconsin Historical Society. Taylor, Graham Romeyn, “Health: Springfield's Sanitary Awakening,” The Survey, Mar. 18, 1911, 1009–15Google Scholar.

52 Walkowitz, Working with Class, 33–35, 40. Walkowitz makes a further distinction, noting that businessmen applied scientific method and efficiency for purposes of social control in contrast to the more progressive social ends of philanthropic reformers.

53 Wheeler, Elizabeth, “The Social Secretary of the Department Store,” Charities, Jan. 3, 1903Google Scholar.

54 Walkowitz, Working with Class, 28–31.

55 Ehrenreich, John H., The Altruistic Imagination: A History of Social Work and Social Policy in the United States (Ithaca, NY, 1985)Google Scholar; Hagerty, James Edward, The Training of Social Workers (New York, 1931)Google Scholar; Walkowitz, , Working With Class; Stanley Wenocur and Michael Reisch, From Charity to Enterprise: The Development of American Social Work in a Market Economy (Urbana, 1989)Google Scholar.

56 Rossiter, Margaret, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940 (Baltimore, 1982)Google Scholar; Melosh, Barbara, The Physician's Hand: Work Culture and Conflict in American Nursing (Philadelphia, 1982)Google Scholar; Walkowitz, Working with Class, xii; Diner, A City and Its Universities, 5, 58–64; Goebel, Thomas, “The Uneven Rewards of Professional Labor: Wealth and Income in the Chicago Professions, 1870–1920,” Journal of Social History 29 (Summer 1996): 749–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tassel, David Van, “From Learned Society to Professional Organization: The American Historical Association, 1884–1900,” American Historical Review 89 (Oct. 1984): 929–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Meiksins, Peter, “Professionalism and Conflict: The Case of the American Association of Engineers,” Journal of Social History 19 (Spring 1986): 403–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Abraham Flexner, “Is Social Work a Profession?” National Conference on Charities and Correction, 1915. (accessed July 1, 2009). Also Walkowitz, Working with Class, 29; Kunzel, Regina G., “The Professionalization of Benevolence: Evangelicals and Social Workers in the Florence Crittenton Homes, 1915–1945,” Journal of Social History 22 (Autumn 1988): 21–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shoemaker, Linda M., “Early Conflicts in Social Work Education,” Social Science Review 72 (June 1988): 182–91Google Scholar.

58 Hagerty, The Training of Social Workers, 42.

59 Walkowitz, , Working with Class, 27; Mandell, The Corporation as Family, 92; Human Engineering, Jan. 1911, 3Google Scholar.

60 In addition to the New York School of Philanthropy and the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy, the Russell Sage Foundation granted funds to the Simmons School of Social Work and to the St. Louis School of Philanthropy, which was established in 1907. The significance of this funding is apparent in records of the Chicago school. The foundation's $7,500 in support in 1908 was more than twice the school's $3,025 operating budget. “Memorandum for Research Departments of Schools by the Director of Russell Sage Foundation, December 1, 1909,” Russell Sage: Social Research and Social Action in America, 1907–1947, section 220-m-1.1, microfiche, Regenstein Library, University of Chicago (hereafter UC); “Memoranda: The Institute of Social Science 1908,” folder 1906–1908, box 19, Chicago Commons Collection, CHS.

61 Social Secretary Number,” Social Service, July 1904Google Scholar. Most of the articles in this issue seem to reproduce, without credit, talks given at the NCF's National Conference on Welfare Work, the first such conference in the nation. The newly established NCF Welfare Department challenged the AISS's claim to be the national clearinghouse for welfare work. Probably as a consequence, this July 1904 issue of Social Service does not mention the NCF or its founding of an employer Welfare Department.

62 Italics added. The School of Philanthropy, Second Year 1904–05, 2, folder: Early Annual Reports, 1898–1899, 1902, 1904, New York School of Philanthropy collection, Columbia University (hereafter NYSP-CU).

63 Italics added. “Retrospect and Prospects by the Warden,” folder: Trustees Minutes 1916–1924, box 19, Chicago Commons Collection, CHS.

64 Italics added. “Chicago Institute of Social Science…Courses for the Fourth Year…,” folder 8, Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy collection, Special Collections, Regenstein Library, University of Chicago (hereafter CSCP-UC).

65 The School of Philanthropy, Second Year 1904–5, folder: Early Annual Reports, 1898–1899, 1902, 1904; The New York School of Philanthropy Handbook, 1904–5, folder: The New York School of Philanthropy Handbook 1904–5, 1905–6, NYSP-CU.

66 “Minutes of Conferences,” folder 4, box 315, NCF; “Chicago Institute of Social Science…Courses for the Spring Quarter, 1906,” folder 8, CSCP-UC.

67 “Minutes of Twelfth Conference,” folder 4, box 315, NCF.

68 Beeks, , National Civic Federation Review, July–Aug., 1906Google Scholar; McKelway, A.J., “Welfare Work and Child Labor in Southern Cotton Mills,” Charities and the Commons, Oct. 1906–Apr. 1907, 271–73Google Scholar, in bound vol. 17, Memorial Library, University of Wisconsin–Madison.

69 “Chicago Institute of Social Science…Courses for the Fourth Year…,” and “Spring Quarter Courses,” folder 8, CSCP-UC; “Spring Quarter Courses”; quotation from Beeks to Easley, Dec. 27, 1906, folder 3, box 261, NCF.

70 Russell Sage: Social Research and Social Action in America: 1907–1947, microfiche, section 220-M-1.2, 2, UC; Pratt, E.E. and Talbot, Winthrop, “Preliminary Directory of Firms Who Have Established Methods of Industrial Betterment,” Human Engineering, Apr. 1911, 95100Google Scholar; “Annual Report of the Director for year ending Sept. 30, 1912,” folder: New York School of Philanthropy, Director/Annual Reports, 1906–14; “Examination Course #40,” Historical File, 1899–1936, NYSP-CU.

71 Yearbook, 1907–08 and Yearbook, 1908–09, folder: Yearbooks, 1907–1909, NYSP-CU.

72 “Spring Quarter Courses, 1907,” folder 8, CSCP-UC.

73 Trustees' Minutes, 1894–1936, folder: 1906–1908, box 19, Chicago Commons Collection, CHS.

74 When Taylor applied for funding from the Russell Sage Foundation in spring 1907, he included training in welfare work as one of his school's three goals. Graham Taylor to Robert DeForest, Apr. 18, 1907, folder: 1906–1908, box 19, Chicago Commons Collection, CHS; “Expert Training for Social Work,” 1908–1909, folder 9, CSCP-UC.

75 “Year Books and Bulletins,” July 1911–Apr. 1913 and July 1913–Jan. 1915, box 1, Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy, Graham Taylor Papers, Newberry Library. In 1908 the Russell Sage Foundation began awarding thousands of dollars in grants to promote uniform curriculum and social investigation research across the major schools of social work. All the schools readily accepted these funds, which had the intended effect of raising the profile of social investigation and publication. One likely consequence was that other, less directly curricular topics suffered as a consequence.

76 The school seems to have been on the verge of bankruptcy throughout its independent existence. Although Russell Sage funding allowed it to reorganize and expand its research agenda in 1908, it seems to have relied on a handful of wealthy donors for the substantial portion of its operating funds. Rosenwald and Crane were the largest of these donors, with each giving $4,000 a year in quarterly installments through much of the early 1910s, with a promise to increase this to $10,000 annually between 1916 and 1919. See for example, [Rosenwald] to Graham Taylor, Sept. 19, 1910 and Dec. 3, 1912, folder 16, box 7; A.K. Maynard to Mr. Graves, Oct. 25, 1916 and [Taylor] to Mr. Charles Crane, Aug. 22, 1916, folder 17, box 7, Julius Rosenwald Papers, UC.

77 “Year Books and Bulletins,” July 1911–Apr. 1913, box 1, Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy, Taylor Papers.

78 “To the President” report from Supervisor of Field Work, Oct. 24, 1913, folder 16, box 7, Rosenwald Papers, UC.

79 Wilson Captures Social Workers,” New York Times, Jan. 27, 1913, 1Google Scholar; Talbot, Winthrop, A Selected Bibliography of Recent Publications on the Helpful Relations of Employers and Employed (Cleveland, 1912)Google Scholar.

80 Chicago Department of Public Welfare, Social Service Directory of 1915 (Chicago, 1915), Google Books (accessed July 7, 2009)Google Scholar.

81 Mandell, The Corporation as Family, 147–51.

82 “Wartime Program of Training Courses for Social and Industrial Service, 1918–1919,” folder 9, CSCP-UC; “Organization of Courses at the School of Civics and Philanthropy…”; and Graham Taylor to W.C. Graves, June 21, 1918, folder 18, Julius Rosenwald Papers, UC.

83 “Bulletin 1918–1920 for the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy,” folder: Year Books and Bulletins, July 1918–Jan. 1920, box 1, Taylor Papers; “Wartime Program of Training Courses for Social and Industrial Service, 1918–1919,” folder 9, and “Announcements 1919–1920,” folder 20, CSCP-UC; “Organization of Courses at the School of Civics and Philanthropy” c. 1918, “Summary of Attendance at the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy…,” and “Boyd Fisher to Mollie Ray Carroll,” Jan. 29, 1919, folder 18, Julius Rosenwald Papers, UC.

84 Italics added. Bulletin, New York School of Social Work, Oct. 1919, NYSP-CU.

85 “Alumni Bulletin,” 1920, vol. 23, no. 4, folder: “Alumni Bulletins,” 1920–1934, box 2, NYSP-CU.

86 Kleeck, Mary Van and Taylor, Graham Romeyn, “The Professional Organization of Social Work,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 101 (May 1922): 164Google Scholar.

87 “Report for year Ending August 31, 1926,” folder: Annual Reports, 1919–1938,” box 2, NYSP-CU.

88 In 1919 the newly established National Association of Training Schools of Social Work had nine member institutions. Hagerty, The Training of Social Workers, 40–53; Lyon, Leverett S., Education for Business (Chicago, 1922), 14Google Scholar.

89 “Circular of the College of Commerce and Administration,” 1912, University Publications, UC.

90 “Circular of the College of Commerce and Administration,” 1912, “Annual Register: Announcements for the Year 1913–1914,” “Announcements: Commerce and Administration, May 1915,” “Announcements: Commerce and Administration: The Graduate School, May 1917,” University Publications, UC.

91 “Announcements: College of Commerce and Administration, May 1914,” and “Bulletin of Information: Training for Philanthropic Service,” June 1916, University Publications, UC.

92 Diner, A City and Its Universities, 7–8.

93 Ibid., 127.

94 Mary S. Irwin, “Welfare Work in Industries of Chicago, Dec. 10, 1918,” student paper, folder 5, Ernest W. Burgess Papers, Special Collections, Regenstein Library, UC; Henderson, Charles, Citizens in Industry (New York, 1915)Google Scholar.

95 Announcements: Commerce and Administration, “The Graduate School–The College,” May 1917, 9, and “Circular of Information: The Colleges and Graduate Schools,” Apr. 1917, 73, University Publications, UC.

96 Jacoby, Employing Bureaucracy, 101. Savickas, Mark L, “Meyer Bloomfield: Organizer of the Vocational Guidance Movement (1907–1917),” The Career Development Quarterly (Mar. 2009): 267, proposes a 1914 course on employment management at the Amos Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College as the first such courseCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

97 Thompson, James David, Personnel Research Agencies: A Guide to Organized Research in Employment Management, Industrial Relations, and Working Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin 299 (Washington, 1921), 165–99Google Scholar.

98 See note 55.

99 Mandell, The Corporation as Family, ch. 7; Jacoby, Employing Bureaucracy, ch. 3–6.

100 Some of the large American corporations that adopted welfare work seem to have pursued a similar, voluntarist adoption of social justice labor practices when they introduced fair employment programs a half-century later in the 1940s and 1950s. See Delton, Racial Integration in Corporate America.