Frances Perkins often believed that she had to compromise to accomplish her goals; what did you think of her decisions in this regard, and were those compromises effective?
Compromising is usually necessary. Perkins learned to identify the essential tenets of her goals as well as what could be modified or eliminated. She held on to the most important issues and fought.
I agree that compromising is usually necessary. I admired the way Frances could do that - gain a little and continue to work for more. In my family, I found that women were especially good at compromising to get their foot in the door and gain the momentum to achieve more. If you draw a hard line, you may not really get heard. I do think Frances’ compromises were effective.
To reach consensus, compromise is necessary. One of her earliest moments that helped her learn this lesson is when New York passed the fifty-four-hour bill that limited the amount of time a person could work in factories. At the time, it passed without including the ten thousand workers in the canneries, but resulted in protection for about four hundred thousand workers. She was widely congratulated for her work and encouraged to keep working for those who were still unprotected.
I was especially interest in Patricia Williams comments for this question–they reflected mine almost exactly. But, I’d like to go one step further–Perkins was greatly influenced in her early career by Mrs. Kelley who didn’t like compromise. When the fifty-four hour bill passed without the cannery workers Perkins was worried about Kelley’s reaction and was surprised when Kelley was actually excited. She often remembered that first compromise in her other work.
Compromise is important when making change. Mrs. Perkins has to be flexible when passing the first workers rights bill. Helping some workers is better than none. She was determined to make change and learned to adapt very well.