In “The Girl Army: The Philadelphia Shirtwaist Strike of 1909-1910”, Daniel Sidorick discusses the events of the Shirtwaist Strike of Philadelphia and he poses many questions about the event. One of his main goals is to return the Philadelphia event to its “rightful place” in history (326). The Philadelphia Shirtwaist strike has received less attention in history because it is often overshadowed by the New York strike. Sidorick argues that the Philadelphia strike was just as important as the strikes in New York and it deserves to be remembered as such. Unfortunately, the events in Philadelphia have been often overlooked because New York was a more popular area when it came to fashion and industry, even though the events that happened in Philadelphia were just as significant. He reminds us that the New York Triangle Shirtwaist Factory of 1911 is recognized frequently in our history books, yet there was a very similar fire in Philadelphia, just before the one in New York that claimed seven lives and injured dozens of others that is hardly ever mentioned.

Another goal of the article seems to be to attempt to answer the question of “why did the young immigrant women of 1909 become the girl army?” and “Why was it so important to them? (326-327). The Article states that on November 22, 1909, thousands of shirtwaist workers in New York went on strike against the industry due to terrible working conditions and low wages. I was in disbelief when I read that workers had to spend money from their own earnings to pay for things like equipment for sewing machines and drinking water in addition to the doors of the factory buildings being kept locked for most of the day (335). Workers in Philadelphia decided to support the strike in New York by starting a strike of their own. These women (and some men) demanded 50 hour work weeks, higher wages, better working conditions and a union shop to enforce all of these things (334). These women were willing to go without pay for months in hopes of securing a better life not only for themselves but for future generations as well. Many elite members of the community thought the girls on strike were “helpless” but they proved to be very committed to their cause, despite the hardships they had to face (337). The article mentions that one of the main reasons these women seemed to “go for it” was because they really had nothing to lose. They were lower class, and they barely made enough money to survive, so the lack of their very small income did not make much of a difference to them.

I think it is remarkable that these women were so willing to fight this battle, which proved to be very difficult, knowing that they may not have a place to live or food to eat because of it. This article seems to want to get across the power that can be unleashed when a community comes together to support a cause. Although, in saying that, the article does mention that one of the reasons the strike was successful was because the large population of the workforce of the garment industry at the time was white/Jewish. I wonder how different the outcome would have been if the industry was more diverse.

Some questions I would like to ask the class are: Where do you think these women got their forceful and demanding attitude that allowed them to support their cause for such a long time? How do you think this strike would have differed if the majority of the strikers were not white/jewish? Why do you think the events in Philadelphia are so often overlooked even though they were very similar to those in New York?

-Nicole Thomas