TT 990 '^^^''^ ^^v.-^-^' 'J>^.r °o s.^ -\ - , ..• A POUND LAUNDRY 5LRVICL Pound Laundry Service By 5. BACHARACH IN COLLABORATION WITH LAUNDRY LXPLRT5 AND INCLUDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE 5TARCHROOM LAUNDRY JOURNAL The 5tarchroom Publishing Company Cincinnati, Ohio, U. 5. A. COPYRIGHT 1919 THE STARCHROOM PUBLISHING CO, THE BACHARACH PRESS Cincinnati, Ohio, U. S. A. ©CI.A515098 Contents Page Preface 9 Laundry Conditions 11 Starchroom Editorials 15 Flat Work Selling Prices 23 Some Flat Work Figures 29 Pound Laundry Service 33 Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 49 Thoughts on Finished Family Work 79 Pound Laundry Service 91 Comments on Pound Laundry Service 97 A Reply to Mr, Downer's Criticism 99 The Family Wash 104 Laundry Service Prices 110 Semi and Finished Work 1 13 Rough Drying Handkerchiefs 119 Pref rerace IN the early days of 1914 the laundry trade viewed with alarm the rapid growth of popularity for soft shirts and collars. A steadily diminishing volume of men's starched work made serious inroads on profits and a lucrative phase of laundry service threatened to disappear. The war followed with an attendant dislocation of business; the influenza and labor un- rest added to the difificulties and problems and the crisis con- fronting the laundry trade was so acute that industrial success was well nigh impossible. The Starchroom Laundry Journal forcefully directed consideration of the causes and effects and editorially counselled the creation of new sources of business. In the search for bigger volume the most attractive field and which gave most promise for immediate aid was Pound Laundry Service or finished family work. In the series of articles on this subject an effort has been made to demonstrate the profit character of this proposed new department and to prove that it would mean the creation of a popular laundry service. A study of the tables or exhibits will convince the reader of the feasibility of the plan and that it is adaptable to every efficient power laundry. A conflict of judgment is revealed by the advocacy in the initial article of 13 cents per pound for finishing and the subse- quent advocacy of a level price of 15 cents the pound for a minimum bundle of 20 pounds. This latter judgment is now claimed as an adequate selling price. Operators in cities of population of 25,000 will experience no loss with the minimum lowered to 15 pounds. Acknowledgement of courtesies extended are gratefully made to The Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati, to Messrs. H. H. Gilpatrick, A. T. Downer, and the many other experts whose contributions on the subject in this book have been a real help. Cincinnati, April, 1919. Laundry Conditions A LEADING question with a great many operators in the power laundry field has centered on the stability of the business in the future. Granted that the period of re- construction, bringing with it many readjustments, will change the character of laundry patronage, what measures are possible to adapt the business to these changes and still assure stability. While many observers believe that there will be a return of. shirts and collars and that the recession in this volume is only temporary yet the gain in volume will be slow and the deficit in profits as compared with previous days will be a serious proposition. With the diminished income resulting from the sale of service for shirts and collars there is an apparent necessity for filling the gap and bringing in a volume that will earn or produce the same profits. It is generally conceded that threre are but two probable chances for increased business. One is the semi-finished work and the other is finished family work or, as The Starchroom prefers to name both of these "Pound Laundry Service." This term, it is believed, is a fitting substitute to cover both classes of work. It is a more attractive marketing title, it more definitely discloses the character of the service and is preferable to the old terms of flat work and rough dry and similar titles. In a large number of cities the semi-finished work has grown to large proportions and it is apprehended that the growth will be slow under the existing prices and which have been based on wartime conditions. These prices for semi-finished work range from 6 cents to 12 cents the pound. The average would probably be around 8 cents and which, it is judged, will mean a weekly expenditure within the limit of the housewife's budget for home expense. Obviously, the 12 cent price, bring- ing the service price of the sheet to 16^ cents is prohibitive and even with the best quality and most punctual service few housewives will pay the price. At the 8 cent price for semi-finished work, making the sheet 11 cents there is still an inclination to regard it as prohibitive but it is probably a price that is necessary because of the present high cost of laun- dering and which high cost will probably be a burden for at least a year. Whether or not this class of service can be made to grow, is to some extent, a question of locality and whether or not the prospective patrons can pay the price. The service is unquestionably a necessity and its popularity in a number of cities proves beyond a doubt that it can be established in every city of 10,000 or more inhabitants. The failure in a 12 Pound Laundry Service number of large cities to increase this business is due rather to an apathy or prejudice of the laundryowners rather than to any lack of commercial advantage in establishing this class of service. Some laundryowners have deferred establishing this service upon the theory of building up a bigger trade in bundle work and thereby escaping the managerial burden that is imposed in the laundering of the semi-finished. While it is claimed that these laundryowners are short sighted there is a great deal to say on the other side but it is felt that the controversy would neither prove anything nor add a chance to convince those who have rejected this channel of increased volume. Assuming that the semi-finished service is a factor in a city the query arises why not try to turn this volume into a larger income by adding a cost for ironing or finishing. No extra expense, as is pointed out in the several succeeding pages will be incurred in the collection and delivery, in the marking or in the washing, starching and drying. The creation of new laundry business, that is to say from patrons not now buying the service, is a matter of education, and salesmanship. It is also largely a matter of purchasing power and it is fair assumption that 90 per cent of the people now able to buy laundry service are already patrons. If this is conceded then an increase must come from the present patrons and nothing seems more feasible than to attempt to get this increase by making a speciality of finishing the work. Most of the experts that have voiced objections to the plan have concen- trated their opposition on the basis of the fluctuating cost that is bound to occur in the handling of the starched garments. The especial uncertainty seems to be focused on shirtwaists. While the present style and fashion seems to prefer the plain and less fancy waist there, is, of course, the ever present prob- ability that styles will change and the laundryowner who makes a price on ladies clothes may be confronted with fancy articles, the ironing of which will cost considerably more than the income. Every service proposition, whether it be telephone, telegraph, express company or others make restrictions and the contract with the patron extends along a certain line of enforced regula- tion. There is no reason in the world why laundry service should not have these same restrictions and it is therefore quite fair to say that the pound price includes everything that the house- wife chooses to send but that an extra charge will have to be made for finery or delicate textiles needing especial care and attention. It is quite improbable that there can ever be fash- ioned an exact or perfectly adjusted regulation and control of systems that govern the operations of utility concerns. There is, of course, a necessity that laundries operating in the same locality should conform to a certain uniformity in practice or in Laundry Conditions 13 business methods insofar as the public is concerned. Methods may differ in producing the work, a differential in price because of quality may be consistent but there should be regulations concerning the service and which should be recognized by every operating plant. The recent introduction of a five-day collection and de- livery system opens a channel in which there is promise of considerable reformation and a sweeping away of many abuses. This system, permitting three days on the work will be of especial value if the laundry is to do all of the family work and it makes possible the adequate time for giving quality work on the finished family system. If this system should become universal and the oldtime abuse of peak loads on Monday and Tuesday is removed there is no reason why every well-equipped laundry should not handle at least 100 Pound Laundry Service customers per day. If the minimum of $3 per bundle is established this would mean a very considerably increased income and, by reason of the extra production, a very satisfactory lowering of overhead charges. A careful study of requirements of patrons and a thorough knowledge of the correct business principles of laundry service should compel the adaptation of the operating organization to these needs and with the experience that has already been gained in the laundry world there is no reason why systems should not be combined to give perfect satisfaction to the patron. The one department in laundry practice which has suffered the most neglect and which is the most vitally important is the dual system of marking and assorting. Inefficient methods in the marking room are the foundation of claims and complaints and loss of patronage. At the very beginning of laundry process there has been an indifference to requirements and the average expense or the cost for this inexcusable lack of managerial efficiency has made a burden of cost of from 1 per cent to \}4 per cent on the volume of business. One-half of this expenditure devoted to inspection and to accurate marking would mean a gain in many plants of at least 5 per cent in volume. It is not alone this gain that is desirable but it would instill in the mind of the patron a better feeling of confidence and a willingness to place more trust in laundry management. The purpose of the succeeding pages is to convince the reader of the feasibility of "Pound Laundry Service" and especially that branch of pound laundry service which will offer to do all of the household work at an agreed price per pound. Economic conditions differ radically in different localities and it would be unwise to make a mandatory price of 15c per pound and which was to apply to all sections of this country. This price is within the calculation of every laundryowner and a price should be made which will adequately cover every factor of cost in production. The 14 Pound Laundry Service several exhibits are made from actual sources and the arith- metical totals are accurate. As stated in the article concerning the "summer exhibit" there is, of course, a question of cost in the handling of ladies' fancy wear which makes for a problem. There is, however, a percentage of profit in the other branches of the work which is assumed to be adequate to meet the largest amount of extra cost in this ironing department. No single difificulty seems to present itself in blocking an attempt or a trial of this department. Every laundryowner should at once establish a trade of 100 patrons and by keeping an accurate account of the costs readily determine on the feasibility of in- creasing this trade. All laundryowners are agreed that if the business is to survive and be profitable there must be greater volume. If this view is accepted then the sooner an attempt is made to increase volume the sooner will the business have the stability that the effort deserves. Starchroom Editorials Pound Laundry Service December, 1917 . THE article under this caption, and which appears elsewhere in this number, is an attempt, in a tentative way, to direct attention to a new channel for increased laundry volume. The disturbed commercial conditions, the uncertainties of a war period and the fixed resolution of the Government to go to the extreme in accomplishing its purpose, have placed the laundry business in an entirely new situation. Reports from different sections of this country indicate that the volume has diminished at least 25 per cent and, while service charges have been advanced, the laundry income is still at least 10 per cent below that of 1914 and 1915. In a business that is already handicapped by a narrow margin of profit, this is a most serious situation and there should be vigorous efforts made to establish new business and which, in our judgment, will most logically be found in a department of Finished Family Work. The proposed rate ad- vocated in the article in question, is of course, a theory. It would be absurd to expect infallibility in a calculation of this kind but it is hoped that enough argument is presented to bring out a full discussion so that the weakness or strength of such a proposition can be determined. It is quite evident that no increased volume may be expected along the regular lines and there must be some new development if more business is-to be brought into the plant. The present adjustment of list prices has not been found satisfactory and in many cities an adjustment is deemed necessary. All adjustments of whatever nature should be based on a complete knowledge of the new situation, and the new costs with probable further advancement along certain lines should be reckoned with. Readers of this periodical are invited to express an opinion concerning the Finished Family Depart- ment. Is it feasible? Can it be made profitable? If the 20 cent pound rate is not advantageous, what method of charging for the service would you suggest? Is the plant equipped to handle this extra work or would a new and special department be necessary? What is a reasonable charge to the patron and what strength can be added to the selling campaign? If the difference between Summer and Winter wear is a barrier, what adjustment in prices is possible to reconcile the difTerences of the two seasons? The exhibit of actual averages from one hun- dred pound bundles should prove a valuable basis for comparison and every laundryowner should test the proposition and deter- 16 Pound Laundry Service mine the character of the work he is receiving. Pound Laundry Service can be made very attractive and we urge the assistance of all for the proper solution of this momentous problem. January, 191S, The analysis of the list price in Mr. Gilpatrick's article, the statement in the presentation by the Carolyn Laundry, and the selling price as described by Mr. Caudle all seem to tend to verify the calculation that the 13 cent price the pound for finish- ing rough dry is based on a sound analysis. The consideration of the proposed new department should not, however, hinge solely on a pre-determined basis of selling price, but rather on the fundamental requirement of the offer of a laundry service that shall meet the needs and wishes of the public. The questions of a separate department, of marking and sorting, bundling and delivery are purely problems of method and as our laundryowners have always solved these problems our chief concern for the present is to prove that the creation of this new service is feasible, advantageous and desirable from the viewpoint of the present rough dry patrons. If it so proves there is a decided prospect that this branch of laundry service can be very considerably extended. But suppose we consider only our present rough dry patronage. Let us cite, Cincinnati for instance, with approxi- mately 60 tons the week. Let us assume that only one-half of this tonnage is converted to finished family work. Upon the calculations in the November exhibit of the Model Laundry Co. this would mean an increased annual sales income of ap- proximately $200,000. For the benefit of the skeptically in- clined, cut this in half and concede $100,000. Apply this estimate to the urban population of the United States which is the laundry patron, and it means probably $15,000,000 more income and which will materially assist in reducing the ratios of the costs of production. Our proposed plan of pound laundry service certainly means a very materially enlarged field for the business coupled with the prospect of a substantial profit. We realize the magnitude of the undertaking and the intricacy of the problems that surround its proper introduction. We believe however, it is not only feasible but imperatively opportune and that the exigencies of the present laundry situation and the necessity of securing for the business a rock-bed foundation demand immediate consideration and rapid action. Let us counsel together. Voice your thoughts, analyze your own con- ditions and give us the benefit of your experience and judgment. Millions of dollars can be added to volume when the laundry trade puts into actual practice a pound laundry service at a selling price fair to the patron and properly remunerative to the laundryowner. Starchroom Editorials 17 February, 1918. The creation of a new department of laundry service is a momentous proposition and every single factor tending to such a development must recieve scrutinizing analysis. In our initial article and exhibits the tentative character of the new theory was pointed out and a plea was made for the trade to study every aspect of such a new service and particularly to view it from its adaptability to their own plant and their own environment. What is desirable in Cincinnati or Cleveland will not always meet the same conditions in New York or Boston, and laundry service, since it is concededly a neighborhood busi- ness, must be offered to meet the want of the public from which patronage is expected. The several comments in the January number and the exhibits are illuminating and may be convincing according to the efficiency or capacity of the interested laundry- owner. The necessity of a separate department is forcefully denied by Mr. McCullough, of Spokane, and his exhibits in this number is strong evidence of the feasibility and profit of finished family wash to be handled by the existing arrangements. Mr. Hart, of New Jersey, raises a new point when he inquires if the field for rough dry is exhausted. We contend that the introduc- tion of finished family work will increase rough dry, as it will in- evitably educate the housewife to the domestic economy that is possible from sending all the linen to the power laundry. The fear of extra large ironing room costs in the Summer months is in our judgment the only objection that will require further proof to demonstrate that it will not consume all the profits. The comparisons thus far adduced are cumulative evidence of low selling prices that have heretofore eaten away profits from the other departments. Other testimony that is presented strongly points to the necessity of expanding the field of laundry service and the February exhibits blaze the way for a definite and exhaustive study of the project. August, 1919. A new method of selling price has found a number of advo- cates in the East. The proposition embraces a fixed price per pound plus one cent per piece for the contents of the bundle. It has been partly adopted in Philadelphia, where it originated, and the plan received much consideration in Boston, and was finally put into practice upon a basis of 5 cents per pound plus the additional charge of one cent per piece. We believe that an analysis of pound work bundles will bring the Boston price to between 6 and 7 cents per pound if the pound and piece price are combined. It is claimed that the method is better for the laundry, that it is more attractive for marketing and precludes 18 Pound Laundry Service the extra handkerchief burden. Mr. Chas. L. Miller, of Phila- delphia, has given the plan exhaustive consideration and has had it in eiTect for several months. The Boston group advised patrons of the proposed change by a series of publicity inserts and which are presented to our readers for consideration. The plan is offered and the reader must consider his own neighbor- hood conditions to solve the question of its advisability. August, 1918. The rapidly shifting commercial conditions have made new problems for the laundry trade. Coupled with these dis- locating influences was the soft shirt and collar, and the de- creasing volume because of the young men being called to the colors. Then followed changes in price schedules and in the necessarily hurried movement it was impossible to avoid price inequality. Quite recently we were shown a number of protests from patrons who demanded a lower rate for underwear. One letter in particular compared the 12 cent price on a 4-ounce ath- letic suit with the price on a shirt, the latter evidencing at least twice as much work. While the objection is sound, the average increase must be taken into "account and when costs reach a fixed level an equalization will ensue. Present prices in some items are regarded by many far-seeing experts as too high. Whether or not these are excessive and have acted as prohibitive has not been determined. It is safe to assume that prudent laundry management will seek to serve the many in preference to almost equal income from the few. A lessened number of patrons pre- cludes volume growth and as volume is seasonal the larger the number of patrons the more chance for the bigger business that follows a few hot days or holidays or other influencing conditions. There is, of course, nothing new in the presentation of an un- balanced laundry price schedule. From the early days of 1865 down to these troublous days of 1918, inadequate prices have rubbed shoulders with remunerative rates, and until cost systems cast a suspicion on reckless selling management the fallacy persisted. There is, therefore, no compelling reason for finding fault with war price schedules only so far as they tend to make a diminished number of patrons a menace to laundry growth and stability. A recent expression from a laundryowner, who is an acknowledged expert, recognizes the problem in this analysis of the probable danger: "Volume must be had from other sources perhaps by influencing more of the household linens into our plants. This is rather hard to do under present methods and high prices of necessity charged. To my mind, in these times, it is not so much a question of volume of pieces as it is a sufficient volume of dollars to pay all production costs and leave a margin of profit, therefore Starchroom Editorials 19 the enclosed higher list prices. This list is the will of the majority of laundryowners here and it remains to be seen whether piece volume decrease will overcome dollar volume increase. Other lines of industry have found it necessary to charge a price their product was worth and it looks as though it is up to us to do the same thing. It is a problem for every community and no doubt each one will work it out their way, but whatever we do we should do in a spirit of helpfulness toward each other and abide by the judgment of the thinking majority." While we respect the judgment of the "thinking majority," and while we do not claim irresistible logic in denial of their atti- tude, yet we believe that the theory is a menace and experience will demonstrate that it is unwise to adopt measures in the expectation that "dollar volume increase" will justify "the piece volume decrease." The increased volume will come from a decreased patronage and, as we pointed out in the preceding paragraphs, a stabilization of the business is dependent on re- taining the greater number of patrons. November, 1918, Despite the dislocation by war conditions the search for a substitute service which shall bring increased volume is still a burning question and the exhaustive exhibit at the Missouri convention by Mr. H. H. Gillpatrick and the splendid analysis at Chicago by Mr. A. T. Downer have greatly enriched the fund of information and the conclusions of these two experts bring us a step nearer to the introduction of the service. The feasibility of such an offering of this service is not in question and it is generally conceded that it can safely be done. The barrier, and to us it seems a shallow objection, lies in the question of production and the widespread fear that ironing the starched pieces is sure to demolish and extinguish all possible profit. Our readers will recall that in December, 1917, and January, 1918, a series of exhibits by Mr. S. Bacharach attempted to establish the accuracy of a price of seven cents per pound and thirteen cents additional per pound for ironing of the rough dry as an acceptable price for finished family washing. Both Messrs. Gillpatrick and Downer incline to the pound plus piece price, but it will be noted that in the exhibit by Mr. Gillpatrick the proportion of starched ladies' wear is not alarming, w^hile Mr. Downer echoes our statement that the initial pound price is established, but the matter of total pricing is questionable as no particular study has demonstrated the really accurate selling prices. Unfortunately, the business has not been standardized and there are material differences in management and which reflect considerable diversity in costs of production. Heretofore 20 Pound Laundry Service the trade has adopted the traditional usage of a selling service price regardless of its origin or its adaptability to their own conditions and this has made for unaccountable differences in comparative statements or cost exhibits. We have attacked the proposition of finished family work from the viewpoint or angle of an acknowledged efihcient plant. Our conclusions are based on the requirement of an ample profit and which should have such a margin of safety as to assure a substantially correct de- preciation, a normal interest charge on capital and a fair profit for the business hazard. We realize that neither the price we advo- cate nor, in fact, any fixed price by a conference, is universally adaptable. There is, however, a possible basic price from which the manager may build his selling price and fix it according to his own profit requirements. In the former effort in the direction of ascertaining a selling price for finished family work we sought to demonstrate that seven cents for flat work and rough dry and thirteen cents additional per pound for ironing the rough dry was a satisfactory price. From a marketing viewpoint, this plan pre- sented objectionable features. It was difficult to explain; apparently it was involved and it was not practical. A simple definite proposal, a more attractive offering, and one not neces- sitating calculation, was necessary to enlist the approval of the housewife. In this number, an exhibit by Mr. Bacharach seeks to establish a new selling service by the pound and which, in our judgment, is on a safe and logical basis. The prime necessity is more laundry volume. There is no question of the patent probability that some day in the near future the laundry will get all the household work. The sooner the right price is offered the sooner will be the arrival of that day. Moreover, we are convinced that the establishing of such a service will, beyond the shadow of a doubt, solve to a very great extent, the laundry volume problem and, more important than all else, will produce the income to maintain a better service in all departments. December, 1918. The article by Mr. Bacharach in this number, with charts showing sizes, weights and prices of different items of flat work, should merit study and should compel calculation by the laundry manager with a volume of flat work or linen supply. The figures on weights and sizes are furnished through the courtesy of the H. W. Baker Linen Co., of New York, and may be considered accurate, as the concern has for many years done a very large business in linen supplies. In connection with the information supplied by the charts. The Starchroom table of weights is again presented, and the combination furnishes a complete basis for predicating selling prices for linen supply or private trade. All of the cost exhibits thus far offered by the accounting experts show a production expense of from 4 to 6 cents a pound for Starchroom Editorials 21 flat work. An average price of 5 cents a pound would, in our judgment, be an indication of efficient management, and it is therefore apparent that a list price of less than the pound cost is an absurd economic blunder. Sheets at 6 or 7 cents, and slips at 3 cents are put out at a loss. Linen supply concerns furnishing their own towels at a selling price of 65 cents per hundred and napkins at 50 or 60 cents per hundred are treading on dangerous ground. The charts demonstrate that a list price for flat work is a decided hazard for laundry management, and the varying sizes and weights should prove that only in a pound price is there absolute safety. We have repeatedly pointed out the illogical practice of dual prices with the blunder in pricing flat work on the list at a lesser price than by the pound. If the laundry manager accepts our table of weights, the individual items of flat work on the list should be equivalent in selling price to the pound price of either 7 or 8 cents, or whichever price is the basis. There is no business reason which may be urged to justify placing the big burden of price on shirts and collars. It has long been contended and the position is correct that the profit expectation should be equalized and it is high time that flat work prices are made to stand their share of the cost burden. Leaders or attractive bargains have no place in selling laundry service, and a continuance of this unbusinesslike practice should no longer be tolerated. January, 1919. Mr. G. W. Williams at the Connecticut meeting, reported in this number, gave a tabulation of selling prices for Pound Laun- dry Service which in a measure confirms the conclusions of The Starchroom articles as to an adequate price. A total of 96 bundles brought an income of $292.33. The weight was 1658 pounds which if priced at 15 cents the pound would mean an income of $248.70. If the minimum of 20 lbs. was employed the 96 bundles would weigh 1920 pounds with an income of $288. It is interesting to note that Mr. Williams received an average of $3.04 per bundle with a weight of 1658 pounds while the Model exhibit in November Starchroom shows on a parallel basis of 96 bundles a weight of 2594 pounds which at 15 cents means an income of $389.10, or an average of $4.05 per bundle. The comparison, however, is misleading as all of the 40 bundles in the Model exhibit did not equal the minimum of 20 pounds. The exhibit shows that a pound rate of 17 cents would have equalled Mr. Williams' method of 9 cents the pound for flat and list price for soft and ladies' wear pieces. The compelling thought is the really small difference in the calculation as between a city in Connecticut and one in Ohio. Moreover, there is abundant inspiration in the exhibit from Connecticut to 22 Pound Laundry Service give the plan a tryout and whether the service is sold by a straight pound price or a combination pound and list price the laundry manager cannot lose. If there should be a small loss in either method the value of a foundation for greater volume is a very promising offset. The single tabulation of "body clothes" also shows items that are profitable on the price quoted even after the allowance of one-third. The Connecticut, the Kansas City and the Cincinnati exhibits and tabulation afiford laundry managers a definite basis for comparisons in their own plants. The very best method, however, is the tryout and it will be money in the owner's pocket whichever plan is used in the experiment. Flat Work Selling Prices By S. Bacharach AN exhaustive survey of flat work laundry prices and an analysis of conflicting prices and conditions in different localities in the country very pointedly indicate that in this department there has been the greatest uncertainty con- cerning costs and the most widespread fluctuation in selling prices. For some unexplainable reason, the earlier practice in laundry service marketing seemed to be founded on the theory that the cost of producing flatwork was very low and probably basing this theory upon the labor costs, it seemed to be generally conceived that any old price would be adequate and that all one had to do was to get volume to make money. It never occurred to some of the handlers of this work that the price might be below the cost of production and, while, as some laundryowners explain, it was a leader for bringing in other volume, no really accurate conception was ever had of the real costs. While laundry methods and especially laundry management has not been standardized, yet there has been offered sufficient data upon which to predicate a fairly accurate idea of the real cost for handling flat work. Obviously, there will be some fluctuating factors in cost and, as the writer has repeatedly maintained, the average should be regarded as a fair basis and it should be generally understood that laundering is just what the United States Census Bureau originally stated, "a neighborhood busi- ness." Environment, the facility of help reaching the laundry, the cost of labor, the routeing and all the other factors show a fluctuation which arises from either one factor or the other and which, to a degree, influences costs. There is, however, a very fixed ascertainment of the average cost for coal, soap, water, alkalis and power. Whatever differences there may be, gener- ally arise from the differences in labor cost, rent and overhead. For the purpose of a comparison of cost of production, I believe that office overhead and selling expense should, for the sake of accuracy, be disregarded. Different men have different selling methods and especially have different ideas of management. Efficiency is often achieved by some one man whose methods are totally different from those of his competitor and yet the competi- tor with careless and rather inefficient management manages either to survive on a lower selling price or with inferior methods. It is a general experience that a great many inefficient laundry- owners seem to have the traditional nine lives that is credited to the cat. Very often laundries, with bankruptcy staring them in the face, with bills unpaid and the sheriff almost at their door, 24 Pound Laundry Service have been known to live and live on for years to harass the trade and to depress and damage the selling market. Then, again, some plants have exceptionally favorable selling resources or have some one department that is an extra source of profit and are enabled thereby to sell flat work at a price which cannot be safely used by a competitor. The figures shown in the chart and representing the weight of the goods is the weight just as received from the mill. The amount of dressing in the goods is about equivalent to the foreign matter that would be absorbed by the goods by use and which they contain when offered for laundering. The sheets and pillow cases are standard qualities and represent such sizes as are extensively advertised for household use and are also in general use in hotel and hospital. There are cheaper qualities and inferior weaves which are considerably lighter in weight, but in preparing these tabulations and also in striking an average for our weight table the sizes have been taken that are more generally used and which represent at least 90 per cent of the volume offered to the laundry. Quoting again from the ex- perience of the H. W. Baker Linen Co., the bedspreads desig- nated as dimity are bedspreads used quite extensively in hos- pitals, although there are a great many sold for the household. The crochet spreads are more used in the home and in the less expensive grades of hotels and also in some hospitals. The towel situation just at the present time is in a chaotic condition and, under normal conditions, there are manufactured from 30 to 40 different grades of cotton towels. The weights that are presented for towels may be considered as along the line of an average, representing general usage and also representing the output of the linen supply companies. The grommet towels and the smaller sized service towels would make a slight differ- ence in calculating the weight of towels by the hundred, but the linen supply manager desirous of making a calculation can readily establish this difference by weighing 500 or 1,000 of the towels whose weight is in question. In the matter of table linen the 16/17 and the 18/18, 22/22 are probably the most popular cotton napkins that are used by cafeterias, lunch counters and reasonably priced restaurants. These sizes do not often come into the laundry from private trade, but are used by the linen supply concerns for the purpose indicated. I am informed that the quality is quite a good deal heavier than the average mercer- ized but it is a quality that is being used a great deal through- out the country and will be more commonly used in the future for all purposes owing to the scarcity and high price of linen. In the present condition of the business it is imperative that an absolutely accurate basis be used for the computation or the fixing of a selling price for flat work. There are, of course, two branches for the sales of flat work. The one is to the private Flat Work Selling Prices 25 consumer or the housewife and the other to hotels, restaurants, railroads, etc. In between these two classes there is the boarding house, the small tourist hotel and other patrons whose weekly volume is supposed to entitle them to a little better price than the average housewife. These differences in the market have led to a number of methods of selling and in most of which the price was a fluctuating and illogical factor. A number of experts incline to the judgment that the selling price should be upon an absolute fixed basis and that concessions, if necessary, shall only be in the way of a discount for quantity. If the price is correct, the writer can see no objection to such a discount but, unless this discount is justifiably fixed at a correct percentage, the practice is apt to lead to underselling. One of the great abuses of the earlier practice was to regard flatwork by the piece and to totally disregard the really controlling element of weight. About eight years ago the attention of the laundry world was directed to the necessity of the consideration of flat work service only by weight and, in attempting to prove the proposition. The Starchroom published, through the courtesy of the Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati, a table showing the items of^ flat work by weight and also tabulating the price that every item should sell for on a basis of either 5c or 6c or 7c per pound. The table received marked attention and very many laundryowners used the table as a gauge to fix prices for hotels and restaurants. All of these calculations and all of these efforts to better the practice were pre-war efforts and at that time there was neither expectation nor anticipation of the abnormal conditions that could be created by war. The experience of the London laun- dries in the early years of the war was not impressive to the American trade and the long distance influenced the delusion that such a crisis could never confront the American trade and the laundryowners were lulled into the primrose hallucination that the trouble would never reach our shore. In a concrete sense, the experience of the last eighteen months has impera- tively demonstrated that the laundry business is not a "hit or miss" or "catch as catch can" proposition but a real business proposition dependent upon really fixed and rigid rules of ob- servance as to costs. When the real trouble began and labor costs rose, a panic ensued and prices and additional percentages were hurriedly arranged and, of course, produced the expected rebellion from the patrons. There was a very good reason for objection by the patrons. They had been led to believe, by the unbusinesslike practice of the trade, that there was no bottom for laundry prices and that it was merely a question of cunning or cleverness to beat down the bids to almost unbelievable figures . Competitive tactics were really conducted by sharpened swords and no war, with reckless disregard of values, could parallel the cutting and slashing that this sort of competition produced. 26 Pound Laundry Service In recent months the fallacy of such practices has been made more and more obvious and there has been more and more study, observation and research to discover a fixed basis upon which selling prices could be predicated. Through the courtesy of the H. W. Baker Linen Co., of New York City, I have secured a tabulation showing the weights of flat work most generally sold to the housewife and linen supply concerns. A diagram has been made of each unit, and appended to the number of square inches of the superficial area of such unit is the weight in ounces and the selling price, if 7c per pound is accepted as an adequate selling price. If the price is 8c or 9c, the reader can easily calculate the selling price by taking the 7c price as a basis and adapting the corresponding ratios. If these units are averaged and the larger sizes disregarded it will be found that the table presented in The Starchroom eight years ago is sufficiently accurate for all purposes. The new charts are offered so that managers bidding on the work of hotel or restaurants can be guided in their selling price by the weight of the prospective loads. There are, of course, other factors which should be taken into account in fixing a price and these more especially are the cost of delivery and the volume obtainable in regard to whether or not a full load for a washer is the result. Present conditions in the laundry business do not foreshadow any immediate prospect of the return of the shirt and collar work. Whether because the present high price for laundering has driven these from use or back to the home tub or whether it is the result of the decree of fashion, the stern necessity of the calculation must take into account the absolute absence of any considerable volume of shirts and collars and the corresponding reduction in profits. The trade will be driven, therefore, to get an adequate return for flat work and this adequate price must be based on real knowledge of costs and it must be reasonable to the extent of influencing the housewife to patronize the laundry. It is con- ceded that during the past months it was necessary and absolutely imperative for the laundryowner to secure more income. This condition will be with him for some months but, in the mean- time, an effort must be made to sell a service which will be at- tractive in price and which will induce patronage rather than compel the housewife to consider the home washing machine. Newspaper reports quite recently disclosed the meeting of an association of the manufacturers of home washing machines driven by power or by water motors. The writer is reliably informed that in the past few months this business has grown by leaps and bounds and that never in the history of home washers has there been such a tremendous inquiry and sale. Obviously there is a reason for this and the reason, to some extent, lies in the inability of many housewives to meet the present selling prices for laundry service. There are necessary economic Flat Work Selling Price 27 problems surrounding the management of the laundry and these will, necessarily, require separate and individual treatment. On the whole, however, the writer believes that if volume is to be secured it can only be secured upon a fixed basis of charging for laundry service and upon a selling price that will meet the ability of the consumer to use it. In presenting the price of 7c per pound in connection with these tabulation, the writer does not take the position that this is an adequate selling price. It is simply used as a basis and there are conditions in certain cities where this should go to 8c or 9c or even 10c per pound. The question of other costs and especially the question of haul and volume are largely influential in fixing a price and the individual laundryowner must be guided by the conditions that exist in his own environment. What is done in Pittsburg or Cleveland may be totally wrong in application to Akron or Dayton. New York and Chicago are obliged to meet entirely different conditions from those in Cincinnati or St. Louis. The laundryowner is obliged to make a study of his own immediate territory and, as a result of this study, he should try to achieve the largest obtain- able volume with the shortest haul. The present ratio of delivery cost is abnormal. It has mounted to a very high percentage and means a cost which is entirely unreasonable in proportion to the responsibility and value of the labor performed. There must be a corrective treatment for this factor of cost as there is an indication of a still larger and growing cost in this direction and which is a menace to the business. The way to control delivery costs and, in fact, the way to put the proposi- tion on a better business basis is to fix on a rigid treatment of sell- ing prices. Competitive tactics and shallow knowledge of costs must yield to real recognized cost ascertainment and the price be fixed accordingly. In the judgment of the writer, 7c or 8c per pound for flat work and rough dry combined will yield a reason- able margin of profit. If all the other items on the list are fixed on a proportionate basis there will be no trouble in attracting volume at the 7c or 8c price. If, on the contrary, a fancy price or an illogical price is to be made on certain items it is most surely going to drive those items from the laundry. A very large amount of effort and labor has been expended on these tabulations and the laundryowner will find in them a large amount of valu- able information and which, if correctly used, must be of con- siderable assistance in reaching a judgment as to the selling price. The table which appeared in The Starchrck>m a number of years ago is again reprinted because it represents an average which is a fairly accurate exhibit of the averages that would result from the tabulations shown in the charts. Some Flat Work Figures By W. B. Haggerty. SO MUCH has been printed in The Starchroom relative to correct flat work prices that the writer prevailed on J. A.Chip- perfield, owner of the Twentieth Century Laundry, New York City, to weigh some restaurant work going through his plant for the purpose of ascertaining just what the income per pound would be for this work, which is now being done under the classified list of the Twentieth Century Laundry. Mr. Chipperneld, manages one of the successful flat work laundries in New York City. For those who are not familiar with conditions in the big city it will be well to state there are 24 laundries in that city who do practically nothing but flat work. Some of the laundries do private house flat work, but very few of them cater to this trade. The Twentieth Century has a private house list which is higher than is the list for hotels and restaurants, for instance private house work bundles have a minimum of $1, and the list for this work is as follows: Table Cloths 5c each Sheets Pillow Slips Roller Towels ^ 3c each Aprons Tops Bath Towels 2c each Chamber Towels ) ^^qq hundred Napkms \ Bath Mats) 10c each Spreads ) Also Lace Curtains and Blankets. Minimum Charge $1.00 for each lot. When no Pillow Slips are sent Sheets 4c. each. For extra large pieces. Linen Sheets, etc., Club Cloths, and any special work, an additional charge will be made. Our liability in the event of damage or loss is lim- ited to 20 times the charge for laundering. Higher adjustment values will be accepted on notice and upon payment of increased charge for such addi- tional liability. 30 Pound Laundry Service **Send It To The Twentieth Century" The prices charged for hotel and restaurant work are some- what lower, as is the case in all cities, but the classified list has to a great degree helped solve the uncertain system of doing a restaurant or hotel job by the hundred pieces. The prices obtained for this class of work are as follov/s: Sheets 3c each Pillow cases 3c each Chamber tov/els per 100. . 60c to $1 Bath towels 2 and 3c each Roller towels 3c each Scarfs 2c each Bolster cases 3c each Tops 2c and 3c each Table cloths 3c each Napkins per 100 50c to 75c Spreads 10c each Mattress covers 10c each Felts 10c each Bath mats 10c each The following table of figures show the number of pounds for each customer as it came in; also shows the amount which the Twentieth Century received on the classified list price, and also the amount which would be received if the w^ork was on a pound basis. The average for the 34 different accounts here is 5.86 per pound, which is entirely on restaurant work. The table follows: Number Amount of of Classified Pounds List 229 S9.41 12 .39 66 4.58 72 3.76 16 1.06 18 1.03 29 1.91 30 1.85 18 1.13 144 6.01 11 1.00 31 1.75 129 3.10 13 1.69 306 9.42 Some Flat Work Figures 31 Number Amount of of Classified Pounds List 61 3.28 4.71 20.66 32 1.49 23 1.86 23 1.66 27 1.36 47 2.10 19 1.06 11 1.09 54 2.94 99 3.68 54 2.32 88 3.70 38 2.22 51 3.12 153 9.27 183 11.34 33 2.51 183 11.34 35 2.36 Total 2626 $126.11 While there are several lots of weight exceeding 100 pounds, the average is 77 pounds and the average price for the 2626 pounds is .048, or nearly 5 cents the pound. In view of this showing it is difficult to understand how some of our W'estern friends can quote hotel flat work at 3 and 4 cents a pound and expect to realize an adequate profit. The ratio of large and small pieces was not accurately established, but for the purpose of securing an average, 5813 pieces were counted resulting as follows: Table cloths, 101 ; tops, 582; towels, 301 ; napkins, 4,829. Mr. Chipperfield has made a study of the flat work business and has been getting higher prices than is the case with some of the flat work plants in New York, this being brought about by his decision many months ago to put his hotel and restaurant jobs on a classified price. He admits his prices are not high enough yet and maintains sheets should go to five cents and spreads to fifteen cents. It might interest all to know that the delivery cost at the Twentieth Century is down to a little over 10 per cent. This of course takes in both private, hotel and restaurant work. Mr. Chipperfield stated, however, the cost for private house delivery was just under 20 per cent. The system employed in the Twentieth Century on its delivery is so perfect that the 32 Pound Laundry Service load for each route runs through the plant on schedule and is delivered to the private trade at exactly the same time and day each week. The work is scheduled to be through the laundry four hours ahead of the time for the drivers, and this allows taking care of all washovers. The result of this schedule elimi- nates the necessity of holding up the driver, and very few bundles are sent out short any pieces. When this is done, a slip is put in the bundle notifying the customer what pieces are short and these are delivered the following week. r See Page H for analysis, POUND LAUNDRY SERVICE Price to patrons, 7c the pound, all Flat Pieces Ironed, all other pieces Roughdry; 13c additional on the pound for Finishing the Roughdry Exhibit of Actual Averages based on 100 Bundles WINTER SEASON, NOVEMBER, 1917 The C<.mt>ilalion larran^emenl b> S. Bachardthj is bv courtesy nf The Model Laundry Co.. Cincinnati. Ohio Bath Mat Bags, Pound Bed Tick Bolster Slips Blankets, Cotton Bibs Covers Comfort Draperies Doilies . . . Handkerchiefs, Silk Napkins Pillow Slip Pads Quilts. 0. R AGS ttucs Spreads Sheets Scarfs Tray Cloths Table Cover Table Pads Table Cloths. Towels, Roller Towels, Hand Towels, Bath Wash Rags Total Aprons Bands Belts Bath Robes Bibs Coats Combination: [ Corsets Chemisettes Chemise /Collars, Lace.. 'CmBioH Covers Caps Cords Chair Cover Corset Covers Doll Pes UkAPERlES Dk.iwers, White Ukl SSES, Ch i)KI-.S!iES Drissisg Sacs F J.VCKETS ■iVlOHT Shirts I Night Dressy N'RCKTIES OWKKM IS IcM thaa the propotcd price for finithed fafnily work. SUMMARY (In (he 100 bundles there were 1228 handkerchiefs, weighing 27K pounds. At 7 cents the pound or a total selling price of S1.92y, cents. The handkerchief factor is excluded from the calculation for reasons stated elsewhere in this article.) Pounds Present Selling Price at 7c the lb. 'lassified Pound Weight of Each Bundle Ounce Weight of Each Pie 777 $54. J9 $54.39 481 S33.67 $96.20 M 4,1 3i2 $23.24 $66 H 159U $111.30 1216.99 15|»i 'Full List Price (For purpose of compari .'\VERACE Piece on List Price .54} $89.16 3H $136.72 $1.36 .08,'o 23i $136.73 SI Hi $36>.61 *The list selling price used in this calculation appears in this number i 1 article by S. Bacharach, entitled "Laundr>' Service Pr d Pound Laundry Service By S. BACHARACH MORE than five years ago there was apparent the necessity for a more scientific basis for laundry service charges. Keen observers of the laundry situation discerned the conflicting results in balance sheets, noted with alarm the meager margins and realized the imperative necessity of placing the business on a correct economic basis. After searching analysis and investigation no justification, from a business view-point could be discovered for the varying prices of flat work. It was evident and in fact painfully plain that many managers were offering a service at prices below their real cost and persisting in the fallacy simply because of a mistaken policy in competitive tactics. As the full scope of this abuse came into consideration it was apparent that losses in the flat work department were being equalized by unreasonable advances for service in articles that were already yielding a substantial and satisfactory profit. A continuation of this policy would bring prohibitive and un- popular prices with resultant diminishment of volume and the flat work cancer still busily eating away the shadowy income. It was speedily found out that absence of a knowledge of costs was a fundamental detriment and this coupled with a reckless spirit of misguided competition created a situation that obviously demanded drastic treatment. Commercial diagnosis is an achievement, especially if the seat of the disease is located. To prescribe a proper remedy, to cure the ill, to make an at- tenuated profit a husky balance is a greater achievement, and the discovery of such a method is the purpose of this article and which is descriptive of plans now in the making. What shall be done to bring to the laundry a greater volume of business? How shall we increase income at a cost that will mean increased profit? Instead of curtailing volume by prohibitive prices how shall we speed up to get more business on a popular price? These and similar queries have doubtless been in the minds of hundreds of managers during the acute stress of the war period. There have been many attempts to find a solution, much effort to place matters in better shape and it is now pro- posed to initiate a discussion that may bring out the high lights and perhaps disclose a remedy. In the judgment of the writer, the logical channel for more business and the feasible point of attack is the project of "Finished Family Work." While this proposal has been continuously presented in The Starchroom, it is regrettable to point out that it has not re- ceived the consideration that its importance deserves. 34 Pound Laundry Service The disinclination to grapple with this method of laundry service is perhaps due to the rather intricate questions involved, somewhat to the lack of an understanding of costs and also because of the very great diversity in men's and women's wear and which may largely influence the character of the rough-dry work. It has been the contention of the writer for a number of years that the scientific method for the sale of laundry service was by the pound. In conjunction with Mr. W. W. Riley, who prepared a very elaborate table showing the weights of the pieces in fiat work, the feasibility of this method was exploited and it was especially pointed out that it should be the favored method for hotel and restaurant fiat work. Subsequently, a number of articles appeared pointing out the value of a more amplified service for the household and which should include a standardized charge for the finished family work. In 1915 a report appeared in The Starchroom of a discussion in Cincinnati and in which this question was argued pro and con. Through the courtesy of a number of laundryowners, in- formation was compiled showing the work received from 3,012 patrons who had sent 191,956 pieces and which weighed 48,191 pounds. It was proved at that time that 40 per cent of this weight was rough dry, or unfinished, and of this 40 per cent there was approximately 3,855 pound.'' of starched work and which was principally women's wear. Since that calculation was made there has been a very considerable change in the style of women's wear and a large number of starched pieces then in use are now absent from the bundles. There has been an increase in the use of light-weight underwear in the Winter season and also a decrease in the weight of the fiat work. How- ever, these changes would not affect the ratio that was pre- viously obtained by more than 10 per cent and are really not material in the proposed new calculation. The feasibility of introducing Finished Family Work as a laundry service was proposed to the Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati, and, through the courtesy of President Charles S. Riley and his staff, an investigation covering 100 pound bundles was made possible. For a number of years costkeeping, down to the most minute factor, has been made a science at the Model Laundry and the staff in charge of the executive departments is unusually keen and not prone to overlook a single iota of evidence that goes to make up costs. The table which follows this article has been prepared by these men at a very great expense of time and trouble and may be regarded as completely accurate. The facts disclosed and the method of tabulation make a basis for comparisons and the necessity of making these comparisons should be apparent to every laundry manager who is seeking a method to increase laundry volume. It is proposed to submit this information to laundry Pound Laundry Service 35 manager? in different parts of the country and in an effort to get a like report and which information, when compiled, may afford a basis upon which to establish a standard system for the whole country. This is a consummation that will materi- ally help the business and will go a long way in establishing a standard from which to gauge costs. The basis of the present investigation at the Model Laundry Co. plant was 100 pound, of rough dry, bundles. The total weight, before washing, wa? LSOC pounds or practically an average of 16 pounds to the patron. In the tabulated classification of articles shirt waists appear but it is planned that the pound laundry service at 20c a pound will necessarily exclude starched shirts, collars and shirtwaists. Dividing the entire lot into three classifications, there was found 776K pounds flat work, 480^ pounds soft work and 332^ pounds of starched v/ork. The number of pieces were flat, 3510; soft, 1634; starched, 1049; a total of 6193. These figures exclude 1228 handkerchiefs, weighing nyi lbs., which were in the hundred bundles but which are disregarded because the cost of the operation was not material in the calculation and also because no conclusion has been reached as to the advisability of an extra charge for hand- kerchiefs or an extra charge if the handkerchiefs sent exceed a certain limit. This entire lot of 1590 pounds is at present priced to the patron at 7c per pound, making a gross income of $111.30. Let us now proceed to consider how this lot will work out if treated on a method of finishing the soft and starched work and which the writer believes should be priced at 13c a pound extra or a total of 20c per pound. Let us eliminate the fractions and call the Flat 777 pounds, the Soft 481 pounds and the Starched 332 pounds. The income will be as follows: 777 pounds at 7c $ 54 . 39 481 pounds at 20c 96.20 332 pounds at 20c 66.40 $216.99 Present Income: 1590 pounds at 7c 111.30 Excess Income $105 . 69 The problem now confronting us is to ascertain the extra expense or the cost for handling the finishing and which makes this excess income from the 100 customers. It should be remembered that our 7c price is already included and we are to deliver to the ironing room the soft and starched work. What is it going to cost to iron or finish the 481 pounds of soft and the 332 pounds of starched work? A number of investi- 36 PovNn l.AiNDKv Skkvice gations discloses tliat the cost of the ironing room on tlie soft work, and which cost inchides the extra labor, padding, heat and overhead, will be approximately 2c a px^und. This will make a cost of S'^.o2. At this point it will be well to include the com- mission to the driver and which, on $105.6^ will be $10.57. There will also be an extra cost in paper or boxes and a slightly increased cost in the sorting. In my judgment, this will not exceed SIO. This makes a total of S30.10 and takes care of all of the costs with the exception of the ironing of the starched work. It must be conceded that this is the whole problem and around the cost of this character of the work revolves the feasibility or the undesirability of the proposition on the 20c basis. In the exhibit it will be found that the aggregate list prices for this 332 pounds of starched work is SU^o.To. Every fair-minded student of laundry prices will admit that our list price for the starched pieces in women's wear is a joke. No consideration whatever has been paid to a distinction between large and small, or fancy or plain pieces. A waist is a waist and a skirt is a skirt, and the top limit has been placed in the schedule in the fear that possibly there might be a loss of 5c or 10c or 20c in doing an article. Styles have completely changed in the last five years. An exhaust i\e review of fashion plates and the personal report of several women investigators prove that fancy wear has gone out of style and that plain and easily ironed pieces largely predominate. In addition to this, there have been advances made in the methods of ironing and the system of pressing in the modern laundry makes a big saving in what was formerly a large cost. Percentage paid to ironers of women's wear ranges from 14 per cent to 25 per cent and, in every instance that has come under the observation of the writer, a very considerable saving could be elTccted by team work with the presses. If the price list with its abnormal charge is eliminated and the basic of charge is made on real work performed, it is believed by the writer that a maximum of 10c a pound will cover the ironing cost of the starched work. This will make a total cost of S6vVv^9 on the additional income of $105.69, or a gross profit of $42.30. Let us be extremely liberal and split this profit in half and .*how a profit of $21.15 on this extra income of $105.09. It will require very little argument to show that this is a larger ratio thaiv the best managed plants can show on their total volume. It will bo noted that the exhibit of the Model Laundry Co. is for the \\'inter season and for the month of November. There is a vast difierence in the pound work of the Summer months as compared with that of the Winter and it is conceded that in the Sinnmer months the large amount of light weight underwear and the scarcity of heavy weight and woolen pieces will make a considerable dilTerence in this calculation. How- POUND LAUNDRY SERVICE Price to patrons, 7c the pound, all Flat Pieces Ironed, all other pieces Roughdry; 13c additional on the pound for Finishing the Roughdry Exhibit of Weight and Pieces of 100 Bundles SUMMER SEASON, AUGUST, 1917 See page 37 for flnal)'sis The Compilalion, (arrangement by 5- Bachai i by courtesy of The Mode! Laundrv' Co.. Cit PIECES 1 No. PIECES Weight Pounds SELLING PRICE nil Soil Suicl ToMi FI.1 Soli Sluth ToiJ Po™d,(3 7 m. IfMnil, F.@ IJto. TOTAL . 8 31 8 5 12 7 44 8 31 8 5 12 7 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 42 37 12 27 12 81 3i 53 37 80 61 21 46 44 35 87 29 49 22 36 39 46 32 25 37 55 52 11 102 107 28 46 40 30 54 51 48 30 36 35 32 43 3 25 3 8 14 9 25 8 10 28 20 51 26 9 11 17 12 20 6 19 28 31 6 12 11 IS IS 10 25 20 8 19 5 18 9 12 18 IS 30 2 11 45 11 14 3 8 10 11 8 19 14 16 30 14 7 21 32 10 7 8 25 19 16 4 15 11 7 17 31 26 18 19 1 7 12 12 9 8 11 24 3 14 22 56 76 18 43 31 100 69 69 66 122 97 102 86 60 67 136 51 76 36 80 86 93 42 52 S9 77 84 52 153 145 55 66 52 60 75 72 74 56 90 40 57 110 17 13 to 10 10 35 10 14 18 21 23 21 18 IS 16 33 11 16 10 20 21 20 10 14 14 16 20 10 30 26 17 12 11 15 15 17 19 11 20 16 15 $115 99 1 $64 87 BwB which appeared in the December number of The Starchroom was by actual survey. The.Xug- ust exhibit is compiled from the TftlmBq 5 45 I 1362 6 351 7 396 1 1 296 62 347 13 97 8 3 263 635 44 63 139 5 45 1 1362 6 351 7 396 1 1 296 62 347 13 97 8 3 263 635 44 63 139 patrons lists which had been re- DnntiHt tiined but which did not contain the separation of soft and starch- ed pieces by weight. In the absence of the itemized weight of each classification in the Pads bundle the total weiglit of flat pieces is presented and whicli weight is based on an actual calculation from the table of ounce weights of llat pieces and which table has been proved substantially accurate. De- ducting the flat weight thus ascertained of 1158 pounds from the total weight of 1 657 pounds for the 100 bundles makes a weight of 499 pounds for the combined soft and starch pieces and which, at the additional price of 13c the pound, produces a total additional income of $64.87. 4260 4260 The executive stalT of the 6 212 218 tention to the item of dresses in the column of starch pieces. In the November exhibit there 2 22 4 13 24 4 18 at the regular selling list price Caps 5 did not exceed 30c each. In the .August exhibit the dresses 24 24 are increased to 178 and in the es these Iv from Coats 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 52 S3 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 ToTU 47 13 42 36 32 3i 42 15 64 28 35 30 49 47 50 40 44 44 20 119 104 43 23 24 52 15 35 28 100 48 89 27 31 93 76 25 44 40 76 42 40 38 21 22 U 56 25 18 25 S3 4« 54 28 35 3J 24 23 45 43 11 18 16 1 12 30 30 14 22 4 11 11 5 14 17 16 8 55 7 17 8 33 IS 7 4 8 29 S 22 1 10 4 U 15 12 23 30 8 1 11 5 26 14 11 10 14 10 4 12 10 6 10 8 9 28 13 16 21 7 5 10 17 35 8 58 4 25 19 17 20 4 8 6 15 22 10 2 13 16 48 16 5 46 39 16 9 22 12 14 24 12 11 12 3 12 5 8 8 10 10 4 13 13 100 28 72 62 33 51 82 S3 87 78 52 53 81 65 60 64 78 95 36 232 115 85 SO 74 87 26 47 42 144 7S 121 34 51 I4S 176 51 S3 97 130 70 56 83 63 44 39 79 41 56 42 91 52 69 52 52 53 38 50 65 15 10 13 14 12 12 13 13 17 22 14 14 22 IS 15 17 17 24 10 57 26 19 11 16 16 10 10 10 26 26 25 12 12 21 30 12 17 25 22 12 13 21 11 10 10 16 16 10 10 17 IC 13 IS 10 18 II 15 16 would run approximate 20 174 9 47 2 1 85 i ' 29 221 2 1 91 7 3 SOc to SI. This radical differ- ence should not prove discon- certing and there should be a 6 7 suspension of judgment until more proof is adduced as to the character of this item and also Doll Pes as to the cost hazard that it may present. The exhibits are only, 21 108 178 129 178 and one in Summer and, ob- DlESSES, Ch viously, do not refute the claim that this evidence does not present adequate information 10 3 2' 10 5 , iCnioNAs many laundryowners that a I 21 52 44 6 40 15 ■'■■58' 9 1 21 110 44 6 40 24 4 141 4 141 SeuiFs S«Aii B 3 1 4 Sbau P slips. The flat weight of 1 158 ^AWLS 91 2 315 264 203 294 2 315 264 Socks ' 1 1 starch in the .'Xugust week weigh Atbaters nVsLE Covers ■ TU>i£s a total i>f 2990 pieces and which 1 Undbrdrawers ' uwdershirts Wisre 90 ' 100 \ 154 3 90 100 157 Several exjjert laundryowner* and who have made a study of piece prices present labor coat figures in this number of The Starchroom which would seem to minimize the cost hazard that is pointed out by some of the critics as being especially dan- gerous in the ironing of starch pieces in the Summer season. Laundr>-owncrs who desire to compile statistics of a parallel nature may, without a>st, secure from The Starchroou Pub. LISHINC Co. printed tabular forms with blank sp.ices and 35 75 8 199 77 7 234 152 15 ^W*APPE« j 1 Totals 1571 1419 2990 IGrand Total 7250 ; _126C_ 1-71 1410 7250 1657 alre.idy presente,! ^ 8>^ 10 'A 32 13>^ \iy, 30 2\y2 19K 9^ 4^ 5 \A 2>^ 4^ IK 7 14X 20>^ 30 10 ^4 4>^ 3K 2y2 7c lb. Price 005 019 ,026 ,032 ,037 ,043 .002 .14 .062 .058 .131 .094 .085 .042 .02 .021 .006 .011 .019 .002 .006 .015 .002 .005 .006 .03 .064 .089 .131 .043 .073 .028 .019 .015 .006 .011 20c lb. Price .015 055 075 094 125 006 ,40 ,168 ,159 .375 .268 .243 .121 .053 .062 .018 .031 .055 .006 .018 .043 .006 .015 .018 .087 .178 .256 .375 .125 ,2C9 .081 .055 .043 .018 .031 Piece Price .06 .06 .06 .07 .12 .15 .03 .30 .15 .15 .18 .24 .18 .18 .14 .14 .10 .10 .12>^ .03>^ .06 .12 .06 .06 .02>^ .10 .20 .25 .40 .25 .25 .12 .12 .12 .06 .06 46 Pound Laundry Service ARTICLES Dresses, Child's — white, heavy.. white, light white, light. . . . colored, heavy, colored, light. . Dresses, Lady's — fine white coarse white . . . . colored, house. . Dressing Sacque — outing flannel . colored Jackets Night Shirts — heavy light outing flannel Night Dresses — light Neckties Overalls heavy outing flannel, outing flannel. light, coat light, pants heavy, coat heavy, pants Pajamas — outing flannel, coat. . outing flannel, pants. Pajamas — muslin, coat mUslin, pants Pants — work Portiers — heavy light Sweaters — wool, coat cotton, coat Socks — light heavy Stockings — light heavy Sash Curtains — long, heavy . . . long, light.... short, heavy. . short, light. . . Skirts — lady's top, white lady's under, white. . . . lady's outing flannel. . . ladv's colored Ozs. 7c lb. j 20c lb. Price I Price 2 sy 14K 19 8 5K 14 11 15 10 12 15 18K 19 25y2 7 6 4>^ 4>^ 14 19 4>^ sy 2 sy 6 ey 11 024 006 008 024 015 064 083 058 035 024 .061 .048 .065 .031 .043 .052 .065 .001 .062 .081 .083 ,111 ,30 ,026 ,019 ,019 .061 .083 .002 .005 .004 .009 .035 .019 .015 .008] .037 ,026 ,028 048 .068 .018 .025 .068 .043 .178 .237 .159 .10 .068 .175 .137 .187 .09 .125 .15 .187 .003 .168 .230 .237 .318 .087 .075 .055 .055 .175 .237 .006 .015 .012 .028 .10 .055 .043 .025 .106 .075 .081 .137 Piece Price .20 .20 .20 .15 .15 .75 .40 .30 .17 .17 .30 .12 .12 .12 .15 .15 .15 .15 .06 .17>^ .ny .17 y Aiy .10 .10 .10 .10 .30 .30 .25 .30 .30 .03ea .03ea .03ea .03ea .15 .15 .07K .07>^ .35 .25 .20 .20 Pound Laundry Service 47 ARTICLES Skirts — child's under Under Waists — child's, cotton child's muslin Under Vests — lady Under Shirts — child's, light child's, heavy men's, light men's, heavy men's, fleeced men's wool men's, wool men's, B. V. D lady's, light lady's, heavy Under Drawers — child's, light child's, heavy lady's light heavy cotton wool men's, light men's, light men's, heavy men's, fleece lined . men's, wool men's, B. V. D.... Vests — men's white men's white Work Shirts — blue, collar negligee plaited flannel flannel Wrappers — light outing flannel, heavy Waists — boy's, white boy's, colored lady's, white, light lady's, white, light lady's, white, heavy lady's, colored lady's, middy small middy W'ght Ozs. iy2 iy2 2 10 12 16 12 14 S% 2>y2 5 5>< 6>^ 7 9 10 16 ny2 3 6 13K iy sy 13 14K 7 ley sy 4 2 ly 3. 4 W 7c lb. Price on Oil .006 .008 .023 .037 .043 .052 .07 .052 .061 .015 .023 .036 .015 .021 .023 .028 .03 .039 .043 .07 .082 .052 .013 .026 .06 .031 .037 .042 .056 .063 .03 .072 .025 .017 .008 .012 .025 .017 .04 .015 20c lb. Price .031 .031 .018 .025 .065 .106 .125 .15 .20 .15 .175 .043 .065 .103 .043 .062 .065 .081 .087 .112 .125 .20 .324 .156 .037 .075 .165 .09 .106 .121 .162 .181 .087 .206 .071 .05 .025 .034 .071 .05 .115 .043 Price Piece .15 .06 .06 .06 .08 .08 .09 .09 .09 .12 .12 .07 .09 .09 .08 .08 .09 .09 .12 .09 .09 .09 .09 .12 .07 .20 .20 .13 .13 .17 .20 .20 .25 .25 .12 .12 .30 .30 .35 .20 .20 .20 FLAT PIECES ARTICLES Bed Ticks Bolster Slips Blankets — single cotton H . single wool double cotton H double wool Comfort DOILIE Handkerchiefs , Napkin Pillow Slips Quilts Rags Spreads — large, light large, regular small, light small; regular Sheets Scarfs Tray Cloths Table Cloths, wght.& piece price p. yd. Roller Towels Hand Towels Bath Towels Wash Rags W'ght Ozs. 44 8| 40 32 56 56 96 124 2 4 9 2 4K 48 1| 16 50 21 22 3 H H 1 7c. lb Price .192 .037 .175 ,14 ,245 ,245 ,42 ,542 ,002 ,001 ,006 ,008 ,019 ,21 ,005 ,218 ,091 ,096 ,013 ,014 .037 ,025 ,013 .032 .004 Piece Price .13 .05 .15 .30 .30 .60 .40 .40 .02 .02 .01 .01 .03 .20 .01 .15 .15 .08 .08 .06 .05 .05 .03 .03 .02 .03 .01 HOTEL WORK (Flat) Pound Rates Weight taken from 12 pieces of each article and based on that average weight. ARTICLES Bolster Case Napkin Pillow Case Sheets Spreads Table Cloths, yd Roller Towels Hand Towels Bath Towels Tray Cloths All Pieces Leaving out Spreads Leaving out sheets and spreads — only small pes Ounce 5 c lb. rate 4c lb. rate 3c lb. rate Weight Each 3yi mills 2yi mills \}i mills Piece per ounce. per ounce. per ounce. 8|- .027 .022 .016 l>^-2 .006 .005 .003 4K .014 .011 .008 22 .068 .055 .041 50 .156 .125 .093 8| .027 .021 .016 51 .018 .014 .01 H .009 .007 .005 I'A .023 .018 .014 3>^ .01 .008 .006 .358 .286 .212 .202 .161 .119 .134 .106 .078 Piece Price .01-02 .03 .06 .15 .03 yd .03 .02 .03 j03 .44 Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners DOMESTIC LAUNDRY Birmingham, Ala. I have read your article asking for opinions as to the advis- ability of laundryowners throughout the country undertaking to handle "finished family wash" on a certain definite basis outlined in the article entitled "Pound Laundry Service" in the December number. Your inquiry or series of inquiries is not easy to answer even if your subject is not new. I will attempt to answer it by asking and answering (as best I can) these questions: 1. Is the laundry industry in bad situation? 2. If so, can the laundryowner help the situation by any bavsic change rather than by careful, economical manage- ment, intense application and efficiency in detail? 3. Is a pound price basis a fair price basis? 4. Would the installation of a cheaper rate bring more business into the laundry? 5. If so, would it be profitable? 6. What shall we, then, conclude? In answer to No. 1, I would say that the laundry business is in bad situation. Our business is primarily one which prospers in "normal" times — times of peace. We have lost custom through the departure of patrons who have entered government service, we have lost custom by reason of the laxity of the public in matters of dress in these chaotic days, we have lost custom because of the necessity for economy in the average household and, finally, we have lost custom because clothing is not fashioned as it once was. We are going to lose more custom because of all four reasons specified. On the other hand we are confronted and have been confronted for a long time with increased costs in the various necessities in the operation of our business. This in- creased cost cannot be met in entirety by economy in the plant or by increase in the price we charge for our service. Finally, we, like all other industries, are facing a most serious labor problem which, like Banquo's ghost, will not down. 2. Can the laundryowner help the situation by a basic change in his method of doing business? (The writer believes that there are some basic changes which can be made which will better conditions but these do not come within the scope of your 50 Pound Laundry Service inquiry.) I would answer "No." The situation is one not caused by the laundryowner. As a whole we have been oper- ating successfully and profitably to ourselves as well as satis- factorily to the public. We must bide the time when "piping peace" will once more secure our business on the ground of prosperity. We must take what steps we can to permit our business to "live through" — that is, we must get good prices, watch our credits, do good work and give as good service as possible and operate as economically as we can. 3. Is a pound price basis a fair price basis? Yes and No. Unquestionably it is the best basis for flat-work and "rough-dry." These two laundry service features take into consideration just washing and ironing the flat work and just washing, starching and drying the "rough-dry." It is quite apparent that a pound price for this service is a well balanced proposition. On the other hand when it comes to ironing or pressing wearing apparel it is just as apparent that weight has little, perhaps nothing, to do with the cost of the work. I cannot admit the fairness or efficacy of a pound price for ironing. 4. Would the installation of a pound rate which is cheaper than the present rate bring more business to the laundry? By and large, I doubt it. We have no way of knowing except as experience has taught us generally. Experience as a whole has convinced me that raising or lowering a price affects the volume of business in that article practically not at all — ^and that a raise in price is sometimes followed by an increase in volume of pieces of the article raised. 5. I do not think that this new business obtained (?) by a forty-six per cent cut in starch work prices would pay. Your laundry would immediately suffer a decrease in revenue on that work of this class that it is now getting at 100 per cent prices. If the volume did not result that cut would serve no purpose. If the volume did come, what with the labor problem as it is and is to be; what with the added overhead because of the necessity for new equipment for this purpose; what with the added cost because of the careful management of detail in getting the work in, through and out of this new department, the expense would nullify the profit. 6. The conclusion is — "Why work around a circle?" A careful analysis of the chart accompanying "Pound Laundry Service" brings out one fact which is predominant over all others. It is this: the proposed basis of charge is nothing more than a reduction of 33 1/3 per cent on soft work and 46 per cent on starch work prices from that of our present list. If we wish to make this cut why not take our list and make just such a reduction and not attempt "camouflage" where it is quite unnecessary? Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 51 Mr. Editor, it would be "all wrong." If war-time conditions carry the laundry industry into desuetude let us go down with colors flying, continuing to do our best and realizing that our ruin is one of the incidents of the great conflagration but let us not make a radical, almost unthinkable move that will "surely kill the laundry game." At least, that is my opinion. Percy W. B rower. LAUNDRYOWNERS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION LaSalle, lU. There is no question but there is a crying need for the development of some new business. While the pound plan of doing flat work as well as semi-finished family work, impresses me as the most logical way of doing this work, I am not fully converted to the theory of ironing the starched pieces on a pound rate basis. Furthermore, I believe the plan that will prove most popular with the housewife is the plan where nothing will be eliminated, or in other words, where there are no exceptions. When you tell a woman that you will do her entire family washing for so much a pound, and then tell her that you will not do her handker- chiefs, she is entitled to kick; and when you tell her that you will do her entire family washing, but that you will not do her shirt waists at the rate contemplated, she also has a right to kick. Therefore, it seems to me that the plan which will make the greatest hit with the housewives, is that plan which does not contemplate any exceptions whatsoever. The thing that the housewife wants to know is how much her washing is going to cost her. She is not particularly inter- ested in the method through which the laundryowner arrives at this bit of information, but she is interested in knowing. In your plan, as I understand it, we contemplate doing one part of the work at 7 cents a pound, and another part of it at 13 cents a pound. Just how are you going to explain this System to the housewife, so she will be able to understand. The big argument in favor of flat work by the pound and semi-finished family work by the pound, is that it is easy to explain, but it seems to me that when you come to divide the family's weekly wash into classifications, that the housewife will not understand it. W. E. Fitch, General Manager. 52 Pound Laundry Service MATTMILLER LAUNDRY Chicago, 111. You are quite right in asserting that an acute situation exists in the laundry industry and extreme measures are necessary to turn the tide and avert a crisis. For some months past I have given a great deal of time to the study of "Finished Family Washing" with a view to off- setting if possible, with new business, the decrease in the volume of bundle work and so far have worked out a plan which I believe is fundamentally correct in its primary details, at least. In the first ]3lace I have decided that there are two principal factors which govern the cost of producing the F. F. W. product. These are the weight of the flat work and the time consumed in ironing the wearing apparel. I, therefore, found it necessary to handle each washing separately in order that I might be able to turn the complete bundle of wearing apparel over to a team of two operators, whose equipment consists of two ironing boards and one press. By keeping an accurate record of the time put in ironing the wearing apparel for each bundle and knowing the weight of the flat work, we have no difficulty in arriving at our cost on each washing which is the basis for our selling price. My only criticism of the plan proposed in the Starchroom is that it is impossible to set a selling price on the wearing apparel By The Pound because the cost is not in proportion to the weight as is the case in flat work. Also, I object to the re- strictions put on waists, etc. In answer to other questions would say that the method proposed for charging might be inadequate in some cases and unobtainable in others owing to the fact that your basis is not correct. I am deeply interested in this subject and extend you a most cordial invitation to visit me the next time you are in Chicago or possibly if you think the matter sufficiently important, arrangements could be made so that I could run down to Cincin- nati and attend a conference with some men who are as much interested as I am. George Mattmiller, Jr. TOLMAN LAUNDRY Washington, D. G. I have carefully read the article in the December "Starch- room." I think it is very good, and that you are on the right track. In way of criticism, I would ask the following questions: How would a laundry keep track of a customer who would want rough-dry one week and the next week wanted their body clothes starched and ironed? Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 53 Would the body clothes be wrapped separately from the flatwork when the flatwork was ironed? Would the price appear on the list of rough-dry, and then another price on the list for body clothes? I find one total on one list meets the public's approval. We are charging 8 cents for rough-dry. I think the public would be more satisfied with the pound rate. Also the hotels. Would you itemize the body clothes that are to be rough- dried on the list? Would you itemize on the list the goods that are to be ironed? In charging family work, I find that the women complain of the detailed price list. For instance, we charge 15 cents for a certain article, and 12 cents for another article. The housewife would think the 12 cent article required more ironing and more detailed attention than the 15 cent article and they would criticise the price. Whereas if it was charged as a bulk they would not criticise this detail. * * * F. W. Mackenzie. WALLACH LAUNDRY New York City. After having gone very carefully over your article which appeared in the December Starchroom, I have come to the conclusion that the proper handling of starch work connected with the Pound Work Department of a steam laundry, is becom- ing increasingly important. The basis of cost on which it is being done, or has been done by others, is really the point of the entire matter. We are of the opinion here that the only possible and feasible manner in which starch work can be ironed under the finished family work plan of pound work, is by an additional charge per pound, as you suggest; to cover costs in handling we are now proceeding to find out the most feasible manner. Our opinion is that this work must be paid for the same as it is received, namely: by the pound. What that price shall be is as yet uncertain in our mind, but our position will be as follows: We will take the entire rough-dry out of a bundle of pound work and have it completely ironed by machine by one operator, everything it contains big and small, and will hold it together through the entire operation of ironing as a unit. We will weigh these goods to the operator and will pay the operator on the basis of so much per pound for everything. We believe that this is the only way in which finished family work from the pound department should be handled. It will give a definite cost per pound completely through the department. Inasmuch as there are many large pieces which will weigh con- siderably, an average price can perhaps be obtained for the operator and a basis of the proper charge to the customer can be 54 Pound Laundry Service worked out. We do not know whether twenty cents per pound is the right price, it may be enough, and it may not . Before very long we will have definite figures which we shall be glad to let you have if you wish them. We are much interested in this matter. It is one of the great necessities due to present conditions tTiroughout the country, and we must meet it. Jos. G. Wallach. * * * ROYAL LAUNDRY Richmond, Va. With careful interest I have read the article on "Pound Laundry Service," and it looks unusually good and has a big and brilliant future. If we had more floor space, we would go into it, as we realize the possibilities. To the party or parties who prepared the presentation of the proposition, unlimited praise should be given. The marking or listing, assorting and ironing, requires extended study, as cost and delivery service enters primarily into its success. We are awaiting, keenly, further suggestions, and will scan subsequent issues of the "Starchroom" which, critically by the way, has shown a most energetic and initiative spirit. To the continued success of the "Starchroom" and S. Bacharach, we will not drink, as Virginia is now bone-dry, but we wish to ally ourselves with other laundrymen, in extending to them a most Happy and Prosperous New Year. M. B. Florsheim. * * * STANLEY LAUNDRY SUPPLY CO. New York City. The writer has been reading your article in the December issue of the Starchroom on "Pound Laundry Service," and wishes to express himself as heartily in favor of a campaign along these lines to bring more volume of business into the Laundry or at least to prevent a further decrease in volume. The writer always has believed that when the laundryowner wakes up to the tremendous volume of business that is in his community that is unscratched, there will be a determined effort made to get it, and the only way that it can be got is along the lines of "finished family work." It will be necessary, in my opinion, for a "direct to the family" system of advertising along educational lines, to be made in each community. It is only in a few cities or at least sections of the country, that any real amount of this work is being done. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 55 Here and there we find cases where a very big success has been made in pound work, but there are whole sections of the country where practically nothing has been done by the trade towards educating the housewife up to the point where she can see economy in sending everything in the house to the laundry. It was thought a few years ago when the wet wash project started that this would be a step towards bringing all of the family laundry work into the laundry, and that the wet wash business would gradually work itself into a finished proposition, but in very few, if any cases, has this resulted. Here and there a plant went to the trouble of putting in tumblers and flat-work ironers, and in many cases considerably improving their business, but either through (as you say) a fear of getting into trouble through too much detail or lack of know- ledge as to a fair method of pricing the work, they got no further. If through your journal or through National or Local organization work, the general laundryowner can be made to see the wisdom of this plan of yours, it will result in great universal good, and will benefit not only the laundrymen but the general public as well. Would it be too far fetched a suggestion if you were to get up a set of circular letters explaining to the housewife the whole proposition for she will see its advantage to her, and sell these to the laundryowner in complete sets for them to distribute to their customers, also for publication in their local papers? In this way they would secure all data for a good advertising cam- paign for a trifling sum. It seems to me that the laundryowner, in order to get this idea properly to the public, should be willing to spend some money in advertising. Of course in cities where they have got a good local organi- zation with a treasury fund that amounts to anything, the organization could buy the data, pay for the general publicity, and distribute to its members copies of the material for circulars or letters to be sent by mail or postage to their own clientile. I realize of course that before any of this work can be done, a general list must be got up and accepted (with of course the necessary corrections to suit local conditions) by the committee of laundryowners selected for the purpose. In my opinion a campaign of this kind should not be made with merely the idea of just getting a few of the leading laundries- in the different sections to take it up, but should be done with the idea of getting practically the whole fraternity to wake up to the possibilities that there are in the laundry business, thus benefiting the whole trade. Another thing that should be brought to the attention of the comparatively small laundryowner is that to go out and get this business does not require a great outlay of capital for 56 Pound Laundry Service new equipment. The business itself as it comes, will easily pay for the added equipment needed. In fact, it is only through some such plan as this that what we term an average laundry, can hope to exist in the near future. F. W. Johnson, General Manager. HILLER LAUNDRY East Orange, N. J. Your article inviting criticism of the "Pound Laundry Service" plan as set forth in your issue of December 15, has been read. To you and to the Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati must be given great credit for the painstaking and exhaustive manner in which you have placed before the laundryowners, data by which to reckon the possibilities of "Pound Service" as applied to "Finished Family Work." Much to my regret I cannot agree with the conclusions you reach as to the profit in the proposed plan; nor am I quite sure that there is a demand for the service outlined. May I take up the latter objection first? A sentence in your article as the text — you say: "An exhaustive review of fashion plates and the personal report of several women investigators prove that fancy wear has gone out of style and that plain and EASILY IRONED pieces largely predominate." It is my belief that wearing apparel — or much of it — dried in the present day efficient tumblers, is not ironed by the cus- tomer but is used as returned "rough-dried," surely a misnomer for the very satisfactory condition in which we take the flannel underwear and unstarched garments from the machines. The few starched clothes that women wear now-a-days ARE EASILY IRONED and with the modern electric or gas irons can be finished when convenient. About the most difficult starched piece to be ironed is the shirt waist and that you propose to return "rough-dried." So I am strongly of the opinion that in these days of high living cost, compelling economies in all directions, a woman will not pay 13 cents a pound extra for the difference between ironing and tumbling of the "soft work" and I think the majority of them will prefer to save the extra 13 cents a pound by ironing their own starched pieces. Of course, communities differ but I am sure that my con- clusions are correct regarding Newark, N. J., a very busy industrial city of 500,000 people. I don't feel quite so confident of myself when expressing an opinion as to the profit in the "20 cents per pound" for ironing. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 57 You know that while we do a comfortable amount of shirts, collars and finished work, I have specialized in "rough-dry" for the last twelve years and am not very familiar with the possi- bilities of the steam presses although we have them, of course. Another text from your article: "It must be conceded that this (ironing of the starched work) is the whole problem and around the character of the work revolves the feasibility or the undesirability of the propo- sition on the 20 cent basis." I have made an analysis of my own from your figures which compels me to arrive at a different conclusion as regards the profit in ironing the starched work at 13 cents extra per pound — thusly: For 332 lbs. of starched work at 13 cents you receive $43 . 16 Deduct driver's commission of 10 per cent 4.32 Additional income from starched work $38 . 84 Pieces of starched work 1049 Deduct waists not ironed 178 Starched Pieces to be ironed 871 You will receive an average of 4 46/100 cents each for these pieces from which you must pay for labor of ironing, heating machines, padding machines, extra sorting cost, extra sorting space, more careful wrapping and it will take more space, I think than "rough-dry" in the delivery vehicle. And then find a reasonable profit! ! Of the 871 starched pieces to be ironed there are 694 of what I call the larger pieces of apparel as follows: Aprons 198 Combinations 11 Chemise 20 Corset Covers 51 Drawers 51 Child's Dresses 87 Dresses 53 Dressing Sacques 10 Night Dresses 31 Pants 11 Skirts 77 Work Shirts 94 694 58 Pound Laundry Service I can't give you figures as to the cost of ironing the above with 177 pieces not enumerated; but if anybody were to ask me to do the work with all its expenses for $38.84 and find a profit — Oh! Boy. Can we make up on the "soft pieces" ironed at 13 cents a pound extra? Possibly, I'm not sure. The proposition follows: 481 lbs. of "soft work" at 13 cents $62.53 Deduct driver's commission 6.25 Income from "soft work" $56.28 Pieces of "soft work" 1634 Deduct waists not ironed 31 Soft pieces to be ironed 1603 1603 pieces for $56.28 gives you 3 51/100 cents average. Among the pieces are : Combinations 165 Night Shirts 36 Night Dresses 43 Pajamas 37 Pants 13 Skirts 61 Under waists 100 Under shirts 112 Under drawers Ill Work Shirts 101 779 Of course, the 682 socks and stockings for which you will receive 7 cents a pair for ironing will help out but I have doubts — serious doubts as to the profit you figure. Dear Mr. Editor, have the possibilities of "family rough dry" been exhausted so soon that we must cry for other fields? You say that a serious condition confronts the laundry- owners throughout the United States — that volume is steadily diminishing, production costs are increasing and an undoubted emergency exists. I have heard this from salesmen and from competitors but will I be accused of braggadocio if I tell you that conditions are just opposite in the plant of the Hillier Rough Dry Laundry Company? Without any effort in the canvassing or advertising line, we are doing "rough dry" washing for between 400 and 500 more weekly customers than we did last year — our best year up Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 59 to now — we are getting 7 cents a pound — 1 cent extra for all handkerchiefs and 2 cents extra for the limited number of pieces we are asked to starch. Our bundles average close to 15 9/10 lbs. as in Cincinnati. We get cash upon delivery. I mention all this, not in a bragging spirit for, "pride Cometh before a fall" but as an encouragement to others. Why are we busier than ever before? I think I know — but that's another story. * * * John H. Hart. McEWEN'S LAUNDRY Nashville, Tenn. I read with much interest your article in the December Starchroom on "Pound Laundry Service." Heretofore the price charged for this service has been guess work; in fact, the price charged on the regular laundry list, is more a habit than in accordance with what the service costs. Yours is a scientific way of looking at it, and it is fairer to the customer, and also to the laundryowner. I find in most laun- dries that some customers are paying too much for their pound work, and others too little. It is too easy now for the customer to manipulate the weeks washing in their own favor, and some- times the laundries do the same thing for their gain, which is hardly fair to the customer. Your system, after it is tried, will rot only give the proprietor a greater profit, but will be more satisfactory to the parties sending in the work. After the first of the year we hope to try it in our plant. * * * O. W. Staley. PILGRIM LAUNDRY Philadelphia, Pa. Have carefully studied the article in the December number and the more I think of it the more favorable some such proposi- tion appears. I have been unable yet to do any experimenting as to cost and thus cannot say with any degree of accuracy how the prices you have mentioned would pan out. It does appear, however, that in order to make a year around uniformly satis- factory proposition a different price should be charged for the finishing of rough dry, from June to October, than what might be equitable from October to June, owing to the fact that the materials worn during the cooler months would be considerable heavier in weight than what might be employed in the warmer season. This is just a thought since you ask for opinions. You cover the matter so thoroughly and your analysis is so good that I am very much impressed with the possibility of the plan. As you stated, there are certain charges or costs that are already 60 Pound Laundry Service taken care of whether the work is sent home rough dried or some additional revenue is obtained by completely finishing the job. Your wash-room supplies, which are at present a very heavy item of expense would be no more if this rough dry work was finished complete. It would appear to me that, if necessary, more expense in the way of labor and investment on equipments could be employed in the pressing or finishing of this rough dry work, and still leave a reasonable margin of profit and at the same time make a price to the customer which would be at- tractive. I am going into the cost of finishing soft and starched work to see if we are able t6 arrive at a conclusion which might cor- respond, or nearly so, with the figures that you have so kindly worked out. Would it not be well and probably a profitable venture for certain men in different parts of the country to go over this matter and determine what they could do, and then, perhaps, meet at some point convenient for all and compare notes on their findings? One thing we must take into consideration just now, and that is ways and means to permit our labor to earn salaries that will attract able, intelligent and efficient operators. I wish personally to thank you for your efforts in the direc- tion of proposing something new, and to my mind tangible in the way of increased revenue from each customer, at the same time giving the patrons of the laundries a long time desired possi- bility. L. O. Miller. CAROLYN LAUNDRY New York City. We have examined your article on Pound Laundry Service and inasmuch as you particularly request that we let you have whatever information we have before January 5th, we are giving it to you herewith, rather incomplete and not at all decisive. We kept 100 bundles of our finished family work entirely separate and here is the information: These 100 bundles weighed 1620 pounds, of which 740 pounds was flat work, the remaining 880 pounds being composed of work to be finished, both starched and soft, also socks, hand- kerchiefs, etc., and a number of shirts, for we include soft shirts in the finished family work, just as we also take them in the pound work. Just what percentage of this 880 pounds was soft and starched we are unable to say, for we did not go that far. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 61 At your suggestion of 13c per pound, the extra income would have been $114.40, whereby at our system of charging, the extra income was $120.30. Our method of charging is based primarily upon the cost of operation which is easily attained, for we pay our operators on a piece work basis. The actual cost of ironing the soft work by machine was $4.18, machine ironed starched work $12.42 and the hand work $10.44. The costs for the socks and handkerchiefs was $3.10 and the cost of folding the work was $12.00, the folding cost being extra, for our operators do not fold their own work. The cost of folding is to a certain extent approximated, for it took the entire time of one folder who gets a flat salary of $10.00 per week and some time of another folder, whom we have ap- proximated at $2.00. The actual cost of boxing was $6.80, of assorting $6.00 and ironing the shirts $3.96. All of the above totals a primary cost of $58.90 to which we add the driver's commission of $12.03, making a total actual cost of $70.93. The above total does not include the cost of departmental super\dsion or other departmental costs in the way of steam, power, machine covering, floor space, etc., which for the time being will have to be approximated. Just what that approxi- mate cost would be is very difficult to arrive at. You are at perfect liberty to use this information as you see fit and to state any conclusion or opinion that you may deduce. In our opinion these cost figures are very close to those which you state in your article in The Starchroom. There can be no doubt that most of these costs can be shaded considerably in quantity production. In our opinion, this cost does not leave a sufficient margin, unless the producer is to do as you suggest, that is to say figure the finishing of the family work as a separate and distinct propo- sition and not to bear its proportionate share of all business costs, general overhead, etc. If the family work proposition is to be developed and not regarded as a separate proposition, it certainly would have to bear its proportionate share of all business costs. For instance: With the 100 bundles that we have here, it would be all right if we could regard the extra income separ- ately, but in our opinion, the proposition ceases to be 1620 pounds at 7c per pound and 880 pounds at 13c, but becomes a separate proposition of 1620 pounds giving an income of $227.80, and this sum of $227.80 is to bear its proportionate share of all business expenses. We realize and appreciate that it figures the same with our method of charging, but you undoubtedly recollect that 62 Pound Laundry Service we told you that in our opinion, we were not charging enough and today we are charging more than we ever did before, but still it is not enough. If the laundry industry is to do the family work and take it out of the house, the industry will have to do it at a price that will provide a profit and the public will have to be educated to pay the right charge for the service. In our establishment even at the list prices which prevailed before we went into the finished family proposition, the family ironing department was always the least profitable. The percentage of labor cost as compared with the income of the department was always higher than in other departments and the floor space occupied for the amount of income was larger than in both the shirt and collar departments, but not as great as in the fiat work ironing department. Of course, there can be no doubt that with thought and study, the cost of production in the family ironing department can be materially reduced, but we do not think it can be re- duced sufficiently even with great quantity production to allow the producer to put it out at the low price at which we are all trying to give this work to the public. We again suggest a conference. E. LiCHTENSTEiN and P. Mendelson. UNITED LAUNDRIES COMPANY Cambridge and Boston. The article in the December S'tArchroom has aroused my keen interest. Undoubtedly the near future will see exploited in serious fashion a finished list for families. In New England this has been done half-heartedly and with indifferent volume and profits, because straight starched and flat work were easier to handle and did not require a campaign of education. With the diminution of volume which now con- fronts us, our Bureau is studying the question and soon I hope may have some definite conclusions as to the best method of pricing. It is a pleasure to compliment you upon the progressiveness of your magazine. M. M. Johnson. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 63 STAR PALACE LAUNDRY Rochester, N. Y. I have read your very interesting article and I am heartily in accord with the thought of it. We have been working on this plan for some few weeks and in fact we are just getting off to some kind of a start on it. The enclosed copies of letters which we have sent out at different times to a selected few of our customers and the instructions to our drivers show in con- crete form how we are presenting it to our trade. We are at- tempting to put this over as a sort of second or "Grade B" finished bundle. We are not ironing the socks or underwear, only folding it carefully after the tumbler and the majority of the starched work is ironed on press and finished when necessary by the same operator on the hand ironing board and then folded. We figure to pay to the operator for the ironing and folding complete of this work approximately five-eighths of the charge which we receive from the customer. You will see that we £ire pricing it somewhat cheaper than you are. It was our thought that if we could get this work started at a minimum cost, the price could later be advanced if necessary, and we could appeal to a greater percentage of people who do not want the very finest grade of a finished all ironed bundle. We figure to pay a definite piece rate to the operator ap- proximately according to the enclosed ironing labor schedule. You will find on this sheet a summary of seventeen bundles and it will give a general idea of what we are doing, or at least what we are trying to do, because this is just in the initial stage and I was very surprised to find that the subject matter of your article somewhat compared so closely to a scheme which we are trying. You will note that we are charging one cent additional for all handkerchiefs. That is our present plan in our Pound Washing Department and we believe it would be unwise and unnecessary to make any change from that. You will also note that we are accepting waists in this bundle and I believe that the bundle should be so priced as to be able to accept everything which a housewife desires to send in an all ironed bundle. We might add that the operator who ironed these trial bundles earned at these piece prices a rate of approximately $12.50 a week. This agreed favorably with her wages, working at a 20 per cent basis figured on our list prices. You will also note that we have made the stipulation that the flat work in these bundles shall weigh at least fifty per cent of the entire weight. We have done this, not because we feel that there will be a large percentage of bundles in which the wearing apparel will outweigh the flat pieces, but 64 Pound Laundry Service only to provide a way whereby we can eliminate a bundle where a customer is trying to send in a very large percentage of thin starched pieces to be ironed. Geo. B. Caudle. Ironing First *First Flat Rough Total Ironing Labor Veight Price Weight Weight Price Charge Cost 11 .73 4 7 1.29 .56 .12 16 1.11 10 6 1.59 .48 .20 16 .96 11 5 1.36 .40 .20 11 .67 7 4 .99 .32 .23 14 .84 8 6 1.32 .48 .17 11 .66 5 6 1.14 .48 .18 8 .48 4 4 .80 .32 .12 13 .78 8 5 1.18 .40 .14 *20 1.30 15 5 1.70 .40 .13 12 .72 9 3 .96 .24 .13 19 1.27 12 7 1.83 .56 .22 18 1.12 12 6 1.60 .48 .32 7 .44 3 4 .76 .32 .23 10 .76 5 5 1.16 .40 .13 8 .53 5 3 .77 .24 .05 12 .80 5 7 1.36 .56 .38 14 .84 5 128 9 92 1.56 .72 .37 220 14.01 21.37 7.36 3.32 * Unusual. * 6 cts. pounc 1 and 1 ct. for hdksfs. Based on the following ironing labor — piece prices. Soft Shirts 3c Undershirts yic Underdrawers yic Combinations ^c Socks (darned) Ic Stockings (darned) . . . . Ic Dresses 5c Skirts 4c Underskirts 3c Waists 4c Boy's Waists 3c Underwaists Ic Chemise Ic Drawers Ic Night Shirts Ic Night Dresses Ic Corset Covers Ic Aprons l>^c Pajamas l^c Rompers 3c The plan of Star-Palace Laundry to which Mr. Caudle refers in his comment: No. 1 Dear Madam: We have gone a step further with your washing this week and we are returning it with the body clothes ironed. We are Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 65 after a little information and we have taken this means of giving you a completely finished bundle this week at no additional charge to you, in order to have the benefit of your opinion as to what an extent there would be a demand among our trade for such a bundle. If this service is worth something to you we wish that you would talk it over with our representative when he calls next week and give him an idea as to what value you would place upon it. Yours very truly, Star-Palace Laundry. ROUTE MEN— ATTENTION ! The above letter is a copy of the letter sent out this week with the sample bundles which you have delivered to a selected few of your Pound Wash customers. It is somewhat self- explanatory, but in order to talk intelligently next week to the customer about this class of work we want you to know the following: This is an attempt to put before the housewife a bundle which is completely finished in a sort of "Grade B" all-ironed bundle. It is meant to compete with the washer- woman's ironing or the home ironing and while it is not quite so carefully ironed as our present All-ironed Bundle, we have the thought in mind that if such a bundle can be presented to the customer at a nominal charge over and above the Pound Washing price that it will be attractive. If we are given any encouragement regarding this bundle, the aim is to make an additional charge on the number of pounds of wearing apparel to be ironed and it will probably be necessary to require the bundle to have a number of pounds of flat work equal to the number of pounds of wearing apparel. The estimated charge per pound for this service is 8c. In other words on a 12 pound bundle of Pound Wash consisting of 6 pounds of Flat Work and 6 pounds of wearing apparel the charge would have been 72c to have the flat pieces washed and ironed and the wearing apparel washed, starched and dried. The new additional charge will be 48c or 8c a pound for the 6 pounds of wearing apparel, making a total of $1.20. Of course, this is only a tenta- tive price and it may have to be readjusted. What we are after at present is to get an expression of opinion from the customer whom w^e approach as to what value they place on this type of a bundle and after we have their judgment we will try and give you the necessary information to enable you to secure these bundles if v/e decide to adopt it- Star- Palace Laundry. 66 Pound Laundry Service No. 2. Dear Madam: Last week we took the liberty to return your family washing with the wearing apparel ironed and folded, and we are anxious to secure your opinion as to whether there is a demand among housewives generally for such a type of a finished bundle. This ironing is somewhat of a "Grade B" quality, it is not up to the standard of our All-ironed family washing list, but of course, the aim is to so price such a bundle that it will attract the majority. We believe that if the public is not too critical we can do the additional work necessary to accomplish this result for approximately an additional charge of 8c a pound for the wearing apparel. Most bundles would approximate half again as much as we charge for Pound Washing as we usually return it to you; and of course, we would expect a customer to send all classes of goods. We trust we may have the courtesy of a reply, giving us your opinion. Would you please either talk with our representative or write us about it? Thanking you for your attention, we are, Yours very truly. Star- Palace Laundry. No. 3. Dear Madam: On Nov. 20th, you indicated to us your approval of our completely finishing your washing on the plan which we out- lined to you at that time. We have since provided facilities for a limited amount of this class of ironing and we are finishing your bundle this week. If that grade of ironing has your approval for some few weeks we may at that time make some general announcement regarding it. The charge for this service as previously suggested will be 8c a pound additional for the body clothes and it will be necessary for the bundle to contain at least as many pounds of flat pieces as wearing apparel. For example, a bundle of Pound Washing weighing ten pounds, costs 7c a pound plus Ic each for handkerchiefs. On this "Grade B" completely ironed bundle in addition to this charge of 70c, if there are five pounds of wearing apparel the additional charge would be 40c and the complete bundle will consequently cost $L10, plus Ic each for handkerchiefs. Yours very truly, Star-Palace Laundry. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 67 CROWN LAUNDRY Louisville, Ky. Refering to your article on "Pound Laundry Service" I want to express my thanks for the very interesting form sheet of the Model Laundry Co. I will not presume to criticise or comment on this in any way other than to say that it is very coincise and interesting to any one in the laundry business who cares about cost of production. I submit a sheet* containing some rough figures which I compiled several years ago, for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not there was any profit in doing laundry work at fifty cents a hundred, or a penny a piece. You will note that at that time we were charging only 5 cents per pound for the family washing. You will see by com- parison that at 5 cents per pound we were getting 2 cents per piece. (We are novv charging 7 cents per pound in Louisville.) We are not making any effort to secure work on the lines of finished family washing. We much prefer the Rough Dry work at 7 cents per pound. Although I have no data to go by other than that of the Model Laundry, yet it appears to me that 20 cents per pound for the finished work should produce a fair profit. I doubt if work would be obtainable in Louisville at that figure. As matters now stand here, it is almost impossible to secure help to turn out the work we have. *See page 76. W. A. Haas. ACME LAUNDRY, Fort Worth, Texas. Allow me to comment on the article appearing in your De- cember magazine entitled "Pound Laundry Service." The article is extremely interesting and should be studied- carefully by the entire fraternity. As to the application of the same in this plant, I fear the charges per pound are entirely too high. However, this is a matter that will require a great deal of research and study on the part of those engaged in the industry who have awakened to the realization that this line of business must be the foundation of the industry. An application of the 20c per pound for Finished Family Work would give us an increase of 39 per cent on the prices now charged by this plant, and I must be candid in stating that I do not be- lieve that the competition would permit that large a percentage of an advance, nor do I believe that it would bring us the volume 68 Pound Laundry Service of business that is necessary to make the Finished Family Wash department the success that we know in the end it must be. This, I conclude, covers your inquiry as to what prices we are charging for Finished Family Wash. The bundles are re- ceived and handled in the Rough Dry Department on the 6>^c basis. If the customer desires the work finished, we charge 4>^c for each starched piece and 2}4c for each unstarched piece, turning the bundle over to one operator, whom we pay 2^c per garment for the starched pieces and Ic for garment for the unstarched pieces. 1 have before me, at this writing, 28 bundles averaging 8 pounds. The wearing apparel was handled by eight operators in two hours for each operator. The average bundle consists of : 2 ladies dresses 3 shirt waists 2 middies 1 combination 4 aprons 3 unions 2 child's dresses 3 starched scarfs The productive labor cost us 40>^c, for which we received 76c. These prices are bound to seem low to you, but our audits show that this department is making a very satisfactory margin of profit for the business. I am positive that the system advanced by you is the ideal one, but it will require a great deal of research and study for us to bring about a uniform charge for Finished Family Wash and the same will finally resort to the Cost Sheet of the power plant, showing an agreed percentage of profit for the work. I trust your article will create a great deal of interest among the fraternity and that it Vvdll be our good fortune to have another article from your pen in the next issue of your commendable trade paper. C. A. Wheeler. CRYSTAL LAUNDRY CO. Spokane, Wash. Referring to "Pound Laundry Service," which appeared in the December number of The Starchroom, I note that you did not give any definite costs in your compilation of figures. Is it necessary for Cincinnati laundries to make a charge of seven cents (7c) a pound for flat work and twenty cents (20c) for finished wearing apparel to realize a profit? Do they hope to build and retain a Finished Family Work business at that Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 69 price? Can the progressive laundryowner of the future afford to operate with a 100 per cent unnecessary investment and force the public to pay the freight or the overhead? Did it ever occur to you that a very large percentage of our laundries are doing that today? These are some of the questions which present themselves during the analysis of your Family Work treatise. We are not at the present time doing any of this work. Our local laundries did not take kindly to it and in order to hold the association together and accomplish some results along other lines which we considered vital to the industry we discontinued our finished family work. Not without the feeling, however, that we were losing one of our most profitable classes of work and we expect to be able, in the near future, to again take it up. Figures compiled by us at different periods during the two years we handled this work showed a very substantial profit at a price which did not exceed thirteen cents (13c) per pound or 73c per dozen pieces for wearing apparel and for flat work 5^c per pound, or 24c per dozen pieces, making an average rate for the bundle of about 9c per pound or 45c per dozen pieces. We did the work at accompanying list price but did not show prices on list we sent home; we simply told the customer about what the work would average per pound or dozen, then figured it at list price with very sati^actory results. I also submit a test cost report of 100 bundles. Our productive overhead has always been extremely low compared to other laundries with which we have made com- parisons. This is due to the fact that necessity made our original investment modest, since when we have always tried to apply the principle of simplicity in any changes or improvements made. My observations lead me to believe that in the majority of cases there had been too much time and money spent in preparation of new departments and systems as well as ex- pensive equipment for the handling of Finished Family Work. There is not an article of apparel in the family use but that can be handled and has been handled in our regular departments. When we create new departments and systems we create new costs. I believe that the listing and marking and the proper distribution of the finer and delicate pieces to the proper de- partments for laundering should be specialized and that the sorting, bundling or packing and delivering should be done with the utmost care, but I have never been convinced that a separate department and separate equipment is essential to good quality or service and I do know that an overburden is unnecessary building and equipment charges is a material handicap. The time is here when we must dispense with all unnecessary expense entering into production. Labor is high, materials 70 Pound Laundry Service are high and a heavy overhead makes it doubly hard for us to compete with domestic sources. New equipment does not mean everything. The individual and not the machine is the im- portant factor in production and the big element in competitive productive costs is a satisfied organization. Efficiency figures do not mean very much unless they extend over yearly periods. We make a vigorous effort to keep old help. At our annual bonus distribution at Christmas the records showed 90 per cent of the employees in the service one year and over 50 per cent five years and over. We also operate machines that some consider obsolete, but we believe it pays. We have one battery of four body ironers and the junior operator in service on that battery has been with us five years. Now if A can do as much work in a given time on a body ironer that has been practically charged off as B can on a pair of presses that cost $500.00, it is going to take B a long time to get on a competitive base with A. Although this line of reasoning may not always be sound we find that in the majority of cases it pays and pays big with us. Your prices seem extremely high to me and I assume that it's in your overhead. Would be glad to hear any criticisms on our cost sheet. Will admit that conditions are different today. This exhibit was taken two years ago, but 10 per cent increase would cover the old cost. Frank T. McCollough. CRYSTAL LAUNDRY COMPANY Finished Family Price List. Handkerchiefs 1>^ Night Shirts 10 Drawers 5 Ties 2 Undershirts 5 Dresses 15 up Hose and Socks 3 Skirts 10 up Ladies' Vests 3 Chemise 10 Pants 10 Ladies' Drawers 10 Union Suits 10 Waists 15 Bath Rugs 5 Waists, Boys' 8 Child's Underwear 3 Aprons 5 Blankets, Double Wool 50 Corset Covers 5 Blankets, Single Wool 25 Night Dresses 10 Quilts 25 Combination Suits 10 Shirts, not starched 10 Child's Pieces str 5 up Pajamas 10 Flat. Napkins 1}4 Table Covers 5 Towels 1)4 Spreads 10 Towels, Bath 2 Blankets, Single Cotton 10 Rags 1)4 Blankets, Double Cotton 20 Sheets 3 Bar Aprons 3 Slips 2 Doilies 5 up Rollers 3 Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 71 These bundles weighed 1446 lbs., or 14.5 lbs. per bundle, and consisted of 3566 pieces. Test Cost of 100 bundles of Finished Family Work: No. 1 Handkerchiefs 424 Drawers 42 Undershirts 36 Hose— Socks 128 Ladies' Vests 21 Union Suits 73 Bath Rugs 14 Child's Underwear 42 Wool Blankets 4 No. 2 Shirts 35 Night Shirts 32 Ties 36 Dresses 41 Skirts 43 Chemise 16 Drawers, Muslin 23 Waists 45 Waists, Boys' 21 Aprons 114 Corset Covers 30 Night Dresses 61 Combination Suits 16 Child's Pieces 164 Pajamas 9 Collars, Soft 7 Caps 6 No. 3 Napkins 241 Towels 558 Towels, Bath 161 Rags 440 Sheets 253 Slips 264 Rollers 13 Table Covers 95 Spreads 16 Bar Aprons 8 Doilies 30 Pads 4 Sales price for this work was $129.55 or $1.29>2 per bundle. The average rate per lb. was 9c and the average rate per dozen pieces, 43.6c. This work is segregated into three classes as per above, Class 1 consisting of all flannels, quilts, blankets, etc., socks and handkerchiefs; Class 2, all wearing apparel, which is either ironed on machines or by hand; Class 3 is flat work. Classes 1 and 2 weighed 707 lbs. and consisted of 1483 pieces at sales price of $90.09, an average of 12^c per lb. and 72 Pound Laundry Service 73c per dozen pieces. Class 3 weighed 739 lbs. and consisted of 2083 pieces, sales price of $39,46, an average of 5.3c per lb. and 23c per dozen pieces. Our productive labor in marking and sorting on all classes, is figured on the piece base, which is 32c per 100 pounds. On washing and extracting, Classes 1 and 2 are based on loads washed — all machines are practically the same size — and on Class 3, productive labor and supplies are figured on the pound base. Classes 1 and 2 cost us 12c per load labor and 8c per load supplies — Class 3 costs 13c per cwt. labor and 9c per cwt. supplies. Starching on Class 2 is figured on an hourly base, 25c per hour with an added allowance for lost time. Drying and finish- ing on Class 1, same as starching. Ironing Class 2, both machine and hand is based on following list, plus 10 per cent of productive labor for forewoman: Hand Machine Dresses 7c 3yic Saques 3c 1 yic Skirts 6c 3c Skirts, Duck 10c 5c Chemise 3c 1 }4c Waists 6c 3c Waists, Boys' 3c l^^c Corset Covers 2c Ic Drawers 3c 1 >^c Combination Suits 5c 2Kc Night Dresses 3c 1 Kc Night Dresses, Fancy 5c 2>^c Child's Pieces, starched 3c l^c Child's Pieces, not starched Ic Kc Aprons Ic }4c Aprons, Bib 2c Ic Shirts 2c Ic Shirts, Wool 3c l^c Night Shirts 2c Ic Pajamas 4c 2c Ties, Belts, Ribbons Ic He Coats, long 5c 2Kc Coats, short 3c iKc Vests 5c 2>^c Caps Ic He Pants 5c 2Kc Jackets 3c 1 He Sash Curtains, small Ic He Sash Curtains, large 2c Ic Lace Curtains, Large 5c 2>^c Drawers, linen Ic He Undershirts 1 c Ironing flat work or Class 3 is figured on towel base, which costs $0,097 per 100 towels. In our Costkeeping system, we have three general classes of expense as adopted by the Laundryowners National Associa- tion, as follows: Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 73 A — Marking and Sorting B — Washing C — Starching D — Flat Work Ironing E — Wearing Apparel Ironing 17c per bundle. LAUNDERING EXPENSE Productive Labor Supplies Overhead — 1 — Water, Light and Energy 2 — Rent and Building Depreciation 3 — Liability Insurance, Fire Insurance and Taxes. 4 — Repairs to Equipment and Equipment Depreciation COLLECTION AND DELIVERY EXPENSES Drivers' Wages and Commission Agents' Commission Delivery Equipment, Repair and Depreciation Barn Expense, etc. GENERAL EXPENSES Executive Salaries ] Clerks' Salaries I cSims^''^^"^^ ^90% of Collection and Delivery Bad Debts j Advertising, Etc. J We note, however, that our overhead per cent to productive labor is much smaller than the exhibits shown at the Congress held at Sherman Hotel, Chicago, in April. Total overhead per cent to productive labor is 31.5 — A is 6.6 per cent — B is 86 per cent — C is 59 per cent — D is 30.5 per cent — and E is 19 per cent. Below is shown table of cost covering our finished family work for week ending July 3, 1915: LAUNDERING EXPENSE Class 1 — Labor Supplies Overhead Total Total Marking and Sorting $2.51 Washing and Extracting 1.32 Ironing 1.38 Class 2— Marking and Sorting $2 . 24 Washing and Extracting 2.16 Starching and Drying 1 . 25 Ironing 26.87 Supplies Overhead Total $0.50 $0.17 $3.18 .88 1.14 3.34 .00 .26 $0.15 1.64 $0.80 $3.19 1.44 1.86 5.46 .50 .74 2.49 .00 5.11 31.98 Class 3 Marking and Sorting $6.67 $0.50 $0.44 $7.61 Washing and Extracting 95 .67 .83 2.44 Ironing 4.33 .00 1.32 5.65 $8.16 $43.12 15.70 $66.98 Collection and Delivery Expense — 100 bundles at 17c 17.00 General Expense — 90% of Collection and Delivery 15 . 30 Total Cost $99.28 Sales Price 129.55 Profit $30.27 Percentage of Profit on Finished Family Wash List Price 23.36% 74 Pound Laundry Service TROY LAUNDRY COMPANY, Portland, Oregon. I agree with you that flat work can be handled on the pound basis, but am not prepared to say that 7c per pound is the correct figure. Under the present piece price system when sheets are being handled for 4 and 5c each, it is very hard to convince the customer th'at they should pay 8 or 10c for the same service in pound work and results in the heavier pieces of flat work being held out and sent in the finished work bundle. It seems strange that after all the effort which has been put forth in finding out the cost of the different articles contained in flat and finished work, that we cannot agree upon a standard price per piece. It is only too true that many of our plants are operating at a loss in the flat work department and carrying the burden of this loss in our finished work department; nor can I understand why it is possible for us to handle hotel, restaurant^ and bulk business at the low price at which it is being handled, and place the burden on the family work. There should be a reasonable difference between bulk work and family flat as there is a differ- ence in the cost of handling in favor of bulk work, but not the difference of 40, 50 or 100 per cent as is noticeable in many of the prices charged for this class of work. Regarding the price of 13c per pound for finishing the wearing apparel in the rough dry, I do not believe that this system will prove to be a satisfactory solution of our troubles. It is im- possible to establish an iron-clad rule which v/ill prevent our customers from sending all, or any part of their laundry work in rough dry, and when you undertake to limit them to certain pieces you fail to accomplish the purpose for which this class of work was originally intended, that of securing the entire family work. My idea is to handle finished work on a piece price system based on the actual cost of production; to this must be added a reasonable profit. The price should be made as low as possible to be consistent with good business principles and so that it will be attractive to the customer. Our present system of estimating our profit on a certain volume of business is not sound, as a careful analysis will show that many of the pieces handled in this volume were handled at a loss, while others show an unreasonble profit. This results in the higher pticed and profitable articles being withdrawn or their use discontinued on account of the high cost. Many of the prices charged for the different articles on our price list are open for just criticism. They are not founded on the cost of service but have been advanced from time to time to meet the increased cost of production, regardless of Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 75 whether these different articles were being handled at a profit or not. I feel that every effort should be made to work out a piece price system, whereby every article sent to the laundry would be charged for on the basis of the actual cost of handling the same. If it were possible to work out a price along these lines I feel that it would prove to be much more satisfactory than the present system of piece work for one class of work, and pound rate for the same class of work under another name. John Tait. * * * KELSO LAUNDRY CO. Rochester, N. Y. I have traveled a good many miles wherever I heard of a laundry handling Finished Family Work, but have yet to find a laundry that I would care to pattern after in this respect. Every place I have visited they are "trying it out" or have just changed the price, but in traveling from city to city I have be- come thoroughly convinced that the coming idea, or probably not the coming, but the idea today, is to follow the system of feeding everything through the flat work ironer and give the customer the pressed article, and advertise that we are not giving them a first-class ironed job except on sheets or all flat work, and a fairly good job on underwear and all work of that description, but when it comes to shirt-waists, skirts, dresses and aprons, have it thoroughly understood that they will be pressed flat and dried. I have studied the matter sufficiently so that we have just installed an ironer with the 120" drum, and hope to start in with this class of work in about a week's time. I visited a laundry in Syracuse recently, which up to two years ago was doing nothing but wet wash, and now they are not doing any wet wash, but are handling about 600 washes a week — all ironed, or all fed through the flat work ironer. Every- thing goes C. O. D. and no bundles less than 75c — 7c per pound for all the work. I am satisfied as far as taking all of the work out of the house is concerned, that a great many customers who would feel that they could afford to send the work to have it all ironed, feel that it is costing them double, as the people who send the work out, have women come to their house and work about one-half day on ironing, and the other half on scrubbing or cleaning, and if they send all their work to the laundry to be completed, then they are compelled to hire a woman for an entire day, and this they do not want, and the work that is fed through the machine is all dried, and it is only a question of dampening some of the pieces over and putting them in a presentable condition, and at the same time give the woman the entire washing at 6c or 7c per pound. 76 Pound Laundry Service We hope to charge 6c a pound with a minimum bundle of 12 pounds. I think that in three months from now I can show you about 300 washes a week. This will naturally cut down the number of wet washes, which are now running about 1100 washes per week. I wish that I could give you more encouragement on the all-finished idea, but cannot at the present time. J. E. Kelso. Exhibit of Pieces Contained in 1 00 Bundles' Spring Season, March 1915 IN the table submitted by Mr. W. A. Haas, of Louisville, Ky., the articles are classified in each of the 100 bundles but as the variance from the table in our December number is not great, these itemized contents are not present. The 100 bundles weighed 1814 pounds, divided into 1142 flat and 672 rough-dry. This is a very different ratio from the Model exhibit which shows in 1590 pounds, 777 flat and 813 rough-dry. Mr. Haas sought to ascertain the price per piece in comparison with the price of 5 cents the pound. This calcu- lation shows 1814 pounds at 5 cents selling for $90.70 or a 2-cent price per piece on 4598 pieces selling for $91.96. The exhibit in our judgment, proves that in 1915, before supply prices soared, the 5-cent pound price was a fallacy. (Editor.) SUMMARY. LIST Total Flat Pieces Total Soft Pieces Total Starch Pieces Total Pieces Bundle No. Total Pounds Aprons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 30 Bags, Pound 20 Bath Mat 38 Bed Tick 35 Bibs 10 Blankets, Cotton. . 2 2 18 Bolster Slips 10 Comfort 14 Covers 19 Doilies 11 Draperies 19 Handkerchiefs 705 705 10 Silk 47 *See Page 67. Comment and Criticism from Laundryowners 77 LIST Total Flat Pieces Total Soft Pieces Total Starch Pieces Total Pieces Bundle No. Total Pounds Napkins 617 617 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 11 Pads 34 Pillow Slips 349 349 11 Quilts 18 Rugs 22 Rags 19 Scarfs . . 18 290 56 134 18 290 56 134 18 Sheets 13 Spreads 13 Table Cloths 13 Table Cover 12 Table Pads 19 Towels, Bath 241 884 55 26 83 241 884 55 26 83 26 Towels, Hand 12 Towels, Roller. . . . 16 Tray Cloths 33 Wash Rags 27 16 13 Total 3460 3460 16 10 Aprons 3 119 122 Bands 15 Bath Robes 10 Belts 13 Bibs 10 Caps 24 Chair Cover 12 Chemise 16 Chemisettes 17 Coats 21 Collars, Lace . . 12 Combinations 18 115 133 26 Cords 16 Corsets 19 Corset Covers 3 53 56 23 Cushion Covers .... 25 Doll Pes 28 Draperies 15 Drawers, White. . . 5 4 32 37 27 Dresses 81 11 Dresses, Ch 10 Dressing Sacs 19 Fancy Pes . . . 11 Gloves 22 78 Pound Laundry Service LIST Total Hat Pieces Total Soft Pieces Total Starch Pieces Total Pieces Bundle No. Total Pounds Jackets 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 oo 14 Kimonos 14 Neckties 11 Night Dresses 52 40 92 21 Night Shirts 15 Overalls 17 Pajamas 30 Pants 20 Portiers 19 Ribbons 25 Ruffle 11 Sash Curtains 4 44 48 15 Scarfs 28 Sham B 19 Sham P 10 Shawls 15 Skirts 28 75 50 39 67 75 50 10 Socks 19 Stockings 34 Sunbonnet 24 Supporters 28 Sweaters 15 Table Covers 31 Tidies 21 Tray Cloth 16 Underdrawers 81 109 81 109 18 Undershirt 21 Underwaist 23 Vests 12 Waists 22 41 89 32 3 111 73 3 23 Work Shirts 17 Wrapper 16 . . 14 Totals 495 643 1138 12 14 15 12 10 11 10 22 1 5 100 Total 1814 Thoughts On Finished Family Work' By A. T. Downer Copyright by Laundryowners National Association THE laundry industry at the present time is facing a serious decline in shirt and collar work, and their decline must be compensated for by a corresponding, if not greater, increase in family work in general. With a knowledge of the changes which are so rapidly taking place and are upsetting all of the old business conditions and necessitating the remolding of the laundry industry, it was deemed necessary to make an analysis of the present method of handling finished family work. The time alloted makes it impossible to more than touch upon many subjects which should be treated in greater detail. A preliminary investigation rapidly brought to light the fact that the subject divides itself into three topics: Charge to the Customer Payment of the Employee and Production. It is necessary to first establish the underlying and funda- mental principles of each topic. It is my purpose to treat each of these topics separately, and in taking up the first we find that the underlying principle involved is HOW we are to charge the customer — not for a moment thinking of HOW MUCH. Let us first consider the various methods now in vogue for charging for this class of work. We find seven possible ways — (1) THE PIECE CHARGE. The piece charge is so familiar that there is little to say regarding it, excepting that in the past some laundryowners have felt that it enabled the customer to tell in advance the approximate cost of her work and to send such articles as were convenient, with no restrictions as to what they should be. Criticism: This method has virtually been discontinued in the case of Flat Work and Rough Dry, as it tended to keep down the volume of business from each customer instead of influencing her to send the entire Family Washing. It was also objectionable in that the dift'erence in size, design, and weights of various articles, particularly sheets, resulted in the customer who had a lighter and smaller article paying more in proportion than the person having a larger and heavier one. In the latter instance it is a fact that the customer was securing something that she was not paying for. Averages as used under the piece charging method do very well from the view-point of ♦Address delivered before L. N. A. convention. 80 Pound Laundry Service the laundryowner, but are absolutely unfair to the customer. It is almost impossible to properly establish a flat price price without weighing each individual article and carefully considering its design. (2) THE DOZEN CHARGE. There is absolutely noth- ing in favor of a dozen charge, except that it affords a fine oppor- tunity for the customer to try and beat the laundryowner, leading to constant controversies as to what shall be allowed in (3) COMBINATIONS. There seems to be no real basis for favoring combinations, other than that the customer has a very rough estimate — and it is indeed rough — on which she may anticipate what her charge will be. Criticism: The estimate on the part of the customer as to what her charge will be is an uncertainty. She may elect to have her work done under a certain combination, but the laun- dryowner finds that her bundle belongs to another combination and consequently there is a dispute. We find in this method the same faults as in the Piece and Dozen charges, with the principal objection that it is based on averages. (4) THE SINGLE POUND CHARGE. Criticism : The finishing of the hand-ironed articles under the single pound charge is unfair to both the laundryowner and customer, as it is based on an average rate which does not take care of the variations due to design and seasons. Such a rate is unfair to the customer because the heavier, plainer goods worn by the poorer person are naturally ironed more quickly than the more elaborate and lighter weight goods of the well-to-do. Again, one customer is getting something for nothing, and another one is paying more than she ought to. Another objection is that of restricting the customer in the sending of certain articles, the cost of handling which the pound charge could not consistently cover, i. e., silks, lace curtains, etc. The principle argument in favor of the pound charge is that a definite quotation may be made to a customer by weighing her bundle. (5) THE DOUBLE POUND CHARGE. This method has the same advantages and disadvantages as those of the Single Pound Charge. (6) THE POUND AND HOUR CHARGE. The Pound and Hour Charge is based upon an initial charge per pound plus an hourly charge for hand ironing. This method of charging is used in both the Bulk Washing with Individual Bundle Ironing and the Individual Bundle methods of Production. There are numerous variations as to what production charges are covered by the pound charge and by the hour charge, i. e., Starching, Folding, Sorting, Packing, etc. It is generally customary. Thoughts on Finished Family Work 81 however, to cover in the Pound charge all costs, including general overheads, etc., up to the hand ironing or finishing de- partment, and the Hour charge is supposed to take care of the labor and overheads of that department. Criticism: While the initial pound charge has been generally accepted as correct from the view-point of both the customer and the laundryowner, the hourly charge for ironing has a serious objection in that operators vary in thier capa- bilities and speed, and also the productive ability of the indi\ idual varies from day to day. For instance, if an operator is in fine physical condition, she produces a maximum amount of work. If she is not feeling well, her production is curtailed in accord- ance with her condition. It has therefore been found necessary to adjust the number of hours charged to the customer by adding to the time taken by the expert operator, and deducting from that taken by the very slow operator, in order to arrive at an average charge which would be maintained from week to week. One large producer of this class of work said that the customer should pay the varying charges as you were selling her the labor of ANY ironer from that department, and that she must accept the variation as she would, were she obliged to change washer- women in her home. I cannot agree in this thought, as we can give greater satisfaction to the public at large if we can standardize our charges in so far as is possible. The elements of guess work and uncertainty must be removed. In the Bulk Method of Production it is sometimes custom- ary to show the customer an hourly charge, which is arrived at on a time basis per garment and not from actual timing of the operator. In this case it amounts really to a Pound plus Piece Charge. It is necessary to trouble customers with a multiplicity of restrictions, i. e., Starched Shirts, Collars, Lace Curtains, and Woolen Blankets, are not as a rule taken under this method of charging. (7) THE POUND PLUS PIECE CHARGE. The Pound Plus Piece Charge is a step in the right direction, as the initial charge per pound has already been accepted by the laundry- owners of the country, and has proven satisfactory to both the customer and the laundryowner, as demonstrated in the Pound Charge for Rough Dry and Flat Work. Added to the Pound Charge is a Piece Charge, which in some cases has been built up as a result of timing the ironing of garments; in others, established because the "other fellow has already done it," but in all cases, with but few exceptions, without any particular study as to just what costs that particular charge should carry. 82 Pound Laundry Service Payment of the Employee. The second phase of our subject — that of the Payment of the Employee — has but three divisions. First, and most generally used, is the weekly or hourly method. This method is not good in that there is no incentive toward maximum pro- duction, and in that the customer is in most instances not given a full value for the charge made, neither does the laundryowner receive a maximum return on his investment. Second, the Flat Piece Price. This method of payment is fairly good, and tends toward a much larger per capita produc- tion than in the case of the weekly or hourly payment, but it does not provide adequate reward for those who are striving to still further increase their production, and thereby enable the laundryowner to make some proportionate division of savings on overheads as in the Piece Plus Bonus method. A Percentage of the Piece Price is no more nor less than a flat piece price, and carries with it the same objections as does that method of payment. Third, the Piece Pins Bonus method is better than the or- dinary flat piece work rate, as it affords an opportunity to further increase production, and while it is in a sense a species of profit-sharing, it is not at all satisfactory from the view-point of the operator in that the inefficient operator has no opportunity of receiving any share of the bonus. Having considered the Charge to the Customer and the Payment of the Employee, we are brought to the third topic of our subject — Production — which, after all, is the foundation of the other two. Under Production we find three possible methods: (1) The Bulk method, in which all goods are marked for identification purposes, segregated for proper washing, and carried through the plant in large lots, each class of goods going through its own department, and finally being assorted and bundled. (2) Bulk Washing With Individual Bundle Ironing: In this method the goods are marked in, segregated for proper washing, are washed and extracted, the Flat Work going to its separate department. The starched pieces are separated from other clothing or hand-ironed pieces and starched. The goods are next sorted into individual bundles, and carried through the ironing department in that form. (3) Individual Bundle Method: In this process the goods are not marked. The identity of each bundle is preserved throughout the entire process, with the exception that it is generally customary to make three or four divisions of the goods for washing purposes, as in wet washes, afterwards assembling Thoughts on Finished Family Work 83 them again before ironing. They are then carried through the ironing and bundling departments, still maintaining the indi- viduality of each customer's bundle; therefore, sorting is un- necessary. The foregoing facts having all been considered, in an effort to suggest a remedy for the evils of our great industry — though applying the suggestions for the present to Finished Family Work only — let us think of what are the foundations of our operating costs. Omitting for the moment the marking, con- sider the next operation — washing — and it is found that the greater cost in the wash-room is not labor, but materials and overhead, the overhead probably being the largest of any de- partment. The operating costs are based almost entirely upon pounds of goods requiring pounds of water and materials. The number of pieces is scarcely worthy of consideration, for a pound of handkerchiefs or other thin goods occupies the same space in a machine as does a pound of heavy bedspreads, and the mechanical effort in loading and unloading a given number of pounds is approximately the same. This condition applies also to the number of gallons of water and the amount of materials used, so we must admit that the costs of the wash room are based on pounds of goods. The next largest department is that in which flat work is ironed and knit underclothing, etc., is dried in heated tumblers. Here we find that the first cost to be considered is the evapora- tion of water from the goods in process. So we have pounds of goods, from which must be evaporated pounds of water by pounds of coal. Again, as in the wash room, this cost is based on pounds of goods. In these two large departments, having found that the costs are based on pounds of goods, we must therefore charge the customer on the same basis for this portion of the work. Because of the attending evils of either flat piece or pound charges as indicated we must add a small initial piece charge — say one cent each — as is now being done in some localities in charging for semi-finished work. By adding this fiat piece charge we have reasonably covered all ordinary handling charges. Up to the point of entering the finishing department for articles of clothing, etc., we will be able to have but one method of charging for both Semi-Finished and Finished Family Work, merely adding in the case of the latter a proper piece charge, therefore avoiding confusion by having a multiplicity of schemes. At this point our trouble begins, for in charging for Finished Family Work we find many costs which are not attached to other classes of work. Those in mind are as follows: 84 Pound Laundry Service Office increase (piece work records, etc.) Marking increase (taping delicate fabrics, etc.) Washing increase (bagging or hand washing.) Starching charge. Separation of goods for finishing. Inspecting and folding. Sorting increase. Packing charges. Lost time. Extra supervision. Insurance against damage. It is noted that among these we find several which are at- tached to the ironing or finishing, and, coupled with the labor of finishing the articles, can be justly taken care of in no other way than through a sliding scale of piece charges. Here we reach the point wherein our industry has been weak. We have in some instances built up charges for laundering on what seemed to be costs, but how have we arrived at them? If we admit frankly our weaknesses, we will find that most of us have es- tablished our charges to our customers by rule of thumb or made up a list which somebody else had used for a long time. These lists have been corrected from time to time because of an insufficient profit, but never scientifically. Conditions are much better today than they were a year or two ago, because of the efforts of our National Association to promote cost finding among its members. Much valuable information has been brought out, and a reference to the findings of the Department of Accounting and Cost Finding of the Service Bureau of the L. N. A. will bear out most of the state- ments made. Having arrived at these conclusions, I will attempt to suggest a logical procedure for handling this branch of our in- dustry. The first step would be to establish an itemized work- ing chart containing a complete list of all articles in general use, each article to have a number of classifications with descriptions according to its various designs. For instance, perhaps fifteen of shirt waists and as many of shirts, etc., so that in using the chart A reasonably close identification of a garment in its class may be made. After establishing this chart, timing tests must then be made in a number of plants, timing operators from the very slowest to the very best. After perhaps several hundred operators have been timed on the same type of article, we can establish a definite, positive average time which will admit of no dispute by operators who are incompetent or by the customer who is incapable of judging. Having once established the time actually consumed in finishing a certain garment, we have a definite base on which to pay the employee, and on Thoughts on Finished Family Work 85 which to build up the charges to the customer. The time for finishing the various articles having been once standardized, a chart may be furnished by the L. N. A. to its members, from which each concern may build up its selling price in accordance with local conditions. No standard price can ever be fixed, because of variation of labor costs in different localities. Over- heads, too, vary, and the quality of work desired would differ greatly in accordance with the class of people being served. Then, again, one man is catering to customers who seek price rather than quality, and the other fellow is dealing with those who demand nothing but the best. Each man must work out his charges, based upon his own peculiar conditions, but this is not the difficult task which it would seem, once the foundation is established. Probably not all of you realize the foundation upon which the many costs arising in our industry should be based. Have you ever considered reducing the cost of operating your plant to a productive hour basis? Other industries use this basis. Why should not we? To illustrate. Supposing that you have ten operators working in the finishing department, and these ten people work nominally nine hours a day — that would give us a total of 90 possible productive hours per day, which divided into the total cost of operating this department, including all overheads, will give us the operating cost per hour for that •department. After determining the fraction of the hour neces- sary in which to finish the article, the charge to the customer may be positively and logically made. In this connection I would suggest that the overhead be computed on each class of goods going through this department, as it would seem to me that the more elaborate garments should carry a larger percentage of overhead charges than should those comprising the great bulk of the work. Accepting the fact that the predetermined time required for finishing the article is the basis on which we are to establish our charge to the customer and the payment of the employee, we must, in paying the operator, forget old methods and keep pace with the times, for the "hand-writing on the wall" reads that the broader forms of Socialism are rapidly developing, and, quoting from our soldier boys — "Two days in the trenches makes a man a Socialist." We are rapidly reaching a point where we will be forced to pay our employees on a profit-sharing basis. Do not forget for a moment that labor is not satisfied with profit- sharing in its present form, i. e. — handing it a sop after legitimate and water stockholdings have had their dividends, with "labor coming in for what is left." It is easy enough to make such statements as this, but how about the remedy? What can we do? Here is a method that has been developed in the case of operators on Finished Family Work in my own plant. These 86 Pound Laundry Service figures which I will give you were worked out on a pre-war basis and have been in use in our plant for the last year with the greatest of success, having stimulated ironers, who on a fiat piece work basis were never able to earn more than $12.00 or $13.00 per week, to a point where they are now making $20.00 and $21.00 at the same rates. A girl was guaranteed $8.00 a week as a minimum, on the basis that at that wage she was at least holding her own and carrying her proportion of overheads of that department. In order to allow her to share immediately in her saving of overhead expense through increased production, she was given When she reached $9.00 a week, 2 per cent or $0.20 When she reached 10.00 a week, 3 per cent or .35 When she reached 11.00 a week, 4 per cent or ,50 When she reached 12.00 a week, 5 per cent or .65 When she reached 13.00 a week, 6 per cent or .85 When she reached 14.00 a week, 7 per cent or 1,05 When she reached 15,00 a week, 8 per cent or 1,30 If she can be induced through a profit-sharing scheme to build her wages to $16.00 it naturally follows that she has increasd her production by 100 per cent on the same overhead. Does it not follow that she should share in a splitting of this overhead? It is not by any means necessary to give her a major portion of her savings, neither is she entitled to it, but if this can be done, we have solved the problem of profit-sharing for at least one branch of the business, and, I think, for others. It has been said that the time of a laborer's reward must be in accordance with his scale in life, or in other words, that the man who is digging a trench (not a war one, if you please) is all brawn and little brains, consequently he must be rewarded im- mediately. The other extreme is the multi-millionaire who is willing to take his profits once in five years, just so that he gets them, and the rest of us are graded between these two extremes. These finishers of ours are quite close to the first class, as their work is almost entirely with their hands, consequently they must be rewarded almost from day to day. By this we have accomplished our aim, and proven that we have increased production and received the earnest co-operation of every employee in the department, because we have allowed every operator to share in profits as soon as her wages advanced beyond the minimum. We have removed the objection of only a few skilled operators receiving bonuses and less-skilled ones receiving nothing. To digress a moment, let me suggest that the possibilities of this thought are great. Many of you know Percy Mendelson. (I trust you will pardon me for being personal, but I think a man Thoughts on Finished Family Work 87 should always have credit for his ideas.) In presenting this thought to Percy Mendelson and his partner (our genial friend — Ed Lane), they listened very carefully to a presentation of this scheme for paying the operator, when Mr. Mendelson suddenly turned to Mr. Lane and said, "Ed — drivers." The possibilities of applying a sliding scale of this sort to the payment of drivers instead of a flat commission are great, for there are many in- justices to drivers in a flat commission basis. Those of you who have not established piece work methods in your plants should do so, and the old contention that a plant is too small to be placed on a piece work basis is absolutely incorrect, for the whole question is merely that of production savings versus clerical costs. Having covered two phases of the three fundamentals in- volved in the handling of Finished Family Work, we are brought to the question of production, and to refresh your minds I will again say that there are three possible methods — Bulk, or Quan- tity Production; Bulk Washing with sorting into individual bundles either before or after starching and carrying them through the finishing room as individual units; or the straight individual bundle method, starting without marking, then washing goods in multiple pocket wheels. The individual bundle method is in vogue in many establishments, and while it seemingly saves much expense, is a delusion and a snare. We laundryowners have been too prone to consider direct costs only, ignoring many indirect ones which are vital. One of the most glaring instances is that of the psychological effect upon the customer of our being unable to positively identify her goods, as is the case when they are not marked. Just imagine a woman's opinion of your organization if you have to say to her when she claims an article is lost — "Well, the only thing I can do about it is for you to come down to the laundry and pick out your skirt" — and the chances are you cannot even do that, for the skirt may have been sent to some other customer. The evils in this case are far reaching. Here also we are brought in direct contact with the thought of quantity production. Just consider what a difference in cost there is between individual bundle washing and bulk washing. In making comparisons of these methods, tests have been made which brought out the fact that the average weight of white goods handled in a 36"x96" six-pocket washer, washing under the individual bundle system, was only about 100 pounds of white goods to a load, whereas in a 42"x70" two- pocket washer, which has approximately the same cubic capacity as has the 36"x96" six-pocket washer — a perfectly safe load would be at least 300 pounds of white goods. The comparison is obvious, as the amount of water and materials in either case would be very nearly the same. 88 Pound Laundry Service In the ironing or finishing departments it is a conceded fact that work handled in bulk can be segregated and the ordinary garments which require little or no finishing handled by one group of operators who are unskilled, leaving the finer lingerie to experts. In the individual bundle method we compel a girl who should be allowed to earn $20.00 to $25.00 a week to do so much of the lower grade work that she is unable to obtain a suitable compen- sation for her greatest skill, and is brought down nearer to the level of the ordinary and unskilled operator. Why should we in the laundry business not finish our product along lines similar to those used in the manufacture of machinery — one department handling but one class of goods — another a little higher grade, and so on. The ideal laundry of the future is one where there is no special shirt, flat work, or family work department, but just a great big laundry in which there are several channels through which each class of goods travel in a steady stream. It is up to us to study new production methods, and help the laundry machinery people develop new machines. For in- stance, let us get away from the old hand ironing of skirt or other rufifles. Why cannot a machine be devised with a pointed iron similar to our ordinary flat iron — working back and forth with a reciprocal or cam motion — possibly lifting from the board on the reverse stroke — the point of the iron facing the operator so that she may stretch a ruffle between her hands with the gathers toward her, and pass it along from one side to the other with the iron constantly in motion, poking up into the gathers, and heated to a temperature which it would be impossible to use in a hand iron? If you men could see the skill which is developed by mill operators who are scalloping and binding the scallops of a bed- spread, this little scheme for ironing rufifles would seem like child's play in comparison, for with a little automatic machine which cuts and at the same time overcasts, if we may call it such, the scallops of a bedspread, the operators through practice become so skillful that they start at one corner of the spread, and without any guide or measure cut the scallops of a uniform size and form a perfect scallop at each corner. Again, if a suitable double-shoe flat work ironer, somewhat similar to the one which was brought upon the market t few years ago, and having two rolls of say 12-inch diameter, could be brought out, ironing both right and wrong sides at one opera- tion, I believe that we could iron very many of the plainer articles upon it so well that no hand finishing would be necessary, and the speed with which the goods could be finished would be far greater than even that of the garment press. Why cannot team work be used in handling shirt waists as well as in handling shirts? Thoughts on Finished Family Work 89 Picture a rugged but unskilled operator, with a specially devised garment press equipped with a pneumatic treadle, handling other plain garments which have buttons on them. This study of production in detail is a big one, and it is high time that we laundryowners co-operated with the research men of the laundry machinery companies and studied with them in an effort to produce machinery which will enable us to turn out well-finished family work to the public at a price which they can afford to pay, for in the past our prices have been pro- hibitive. Of course, under present war-time conditions little can be done, as our energies are all devoted toward winning the war, but it would be wise to think of these affairs now in preparation for the future. With the surface of the immense field of finished work barely scratched, we have a possible volume to look forward to, the magnitude of which one can scarcely grasp, and as our business is one of selling service and labor, why not sell each customer all we can? One owner of a large plant said that he felt we should make the customer do as much for us as we could in separating various classes of work before send- ing to the laundry, but to me this thought is altogether wrong, for our great desire today is not to increase the number of our customers, but to get from each customer the largest amount of money possible. So if we can teach the customer to allow us to do all of her work for her, and sell her our services not only for the washing and finishing of her goods, but for the labor in segregating, we have sold her just so much more and it is up to us to see that we get a profit on this extra labor. In studying costs of production let us be frank with our cus- tomers and with ourselves, "lay the card on the table," and ask the customers just what they want and what they are willing to pay for. How many women want to pay for the privilege of opening a bureau drawer and seeing garments which are beautifully finished in every part? An investigation shows that there are a mighty few — probably not over 2 per cent — the other big 98 per cent insisting that the parts which show must be perfectly finished, but that those which do not and generally are the portions which require the greatest amount of hand labor, should be finished but moderately well. One of the best illustrations that I can bring to mind is that of the night dress. The top or yoke must be perfectly finished for obvious reasons, but less care may be used in finishing the lower portion, of the garment. Another illustration is that of the skirt, the bottom and rufifles of which must also be perfectly finished, while the gathers may be ironed flat on a garment press, avoiding just so much hand work. As most of us are building our busi- ness on volume rather than the small amount which must be handled by artists, we are not going to cater to the 2 per cent 90 Pound Laundry Service of the people, as we can well afford to leave this class of business for the small home or hand laundry, where each person is an expert, for but mighty few of the larger plants have ever been able to find a profit in handling any ultra-quality work. In building up our business it is for each man to select the group of people to whom he may cater and develop his plant accordingly. Here again we may quote from a certain machinery house which has specialized in developing machinery for semi-finished work. Using their statistics we find that the incomes of only 5 per cent of the population of the average city are over $3,000 a year; that about 9 per cent are from $1,000 to $3,000 and that the other 85 per cent are under $1,000. In the latter group we find our big volume, and it does not take long to decide to which group we are going to cater for our real profits. Every one of us knows that it is hard to make a profit on any kind of hand work. In the larger metropolitan districts it is of course possible to specialize and cater to the smaller percentage because that percentage represents a greater number of people who want ultra-quality work, but the real profit for most laundries is not within these smaller groups. As was stated in the beginning, radical changes are necessary, and these thoughts, gentlemen, while seemingly impracticable, are but an effort toward an ultimate end — a large per capita sale. Make motion that each organization appoint a special com- mittee for research and study of the Finished Family Work branch of the Industry. See page 91 for analysi aundry Co., Cincinnati. O. 1 Numb Cost Weight Pieceng Flat Ironing u Q 3 o Total •00 ce JS u M 3 "O •on 1— 1 GO s s 3 O u O Pi en •o G 3 O 04 C 3 O o 5 O a! « 4-> (« o U "3 O ■oc 8 3 (/5 u O *-> o Cost } 21 40 41 75 fO.77 $0.03 sS0.06 $0.09 v$0.86 ) 16 35 101 56 .62 .04 .07 .11 .73 5H 9 22>^ 23 50 .22 .02 .06 .08 .30 5 13>^ 29>< 45 62 1.68 .04 .07 .11 1.79 5K 31>^ 57 80 144 2.21 .05 .08 .13 2.34 3 10 23 32 53 .74 .03 .05 .08 .82 3K 7'A 21 36 46 .74 .03 .06 .09 .83 5}4 uy2 31 62 36 1.41 .03 .08 .11 1.52 OK 18>^ 29 52 60 1.38 .03 .04 .07 1.45 5 21 36 54 90 1.18 .03 .04 .07 1.25 6 lOK 26>^ 30 33 1.01 .04 .12 .16 1.17 9}4 10 49>^ 68 39 .40 .03 .07 .10 .50 7K 9K 17 24 31 .95 .03 .06 .09 1.04 2 4 16 43 8 .23 .03 .04 .07 .30 61^ 14 3oy 41 59 1.60 .04 .09 .13 1.73 6 16 32 59 67 1.36 .04 .04 .08 1.44 6y2 6y 13 15 17 .67 .02 .03 .05 .72 1 11 22 31 76 .90 .03 .06 .09 .99 8>^ i>^ 10 9 4 .15 .02 .02 .04 .19 1 13>^ 34>^ 53 58 1.77 .03 .05 .08 1.85 9 19>^ ssy 96 88 .97 .02 .06 .08 1.05 6 6 12 15 33 .40 .02 .02 .04 .44 2 4 16 15 16 .22 .02 .02 .04 .26 9K 4y2 14 29 11 .69 .02 .02 .04 .73 \iy2 37^ 47 53 ■1.71 .02 .06 .08 1.79 5 iQy 353^ 71 94 1.22 .02 .05 .07 1.29 6^ 6 121^ 16 26 , .50 .01 .03 .04 .54 2K 3^ 16 52 10 .36 .02 .07 .09 .45 6^ 5 11>^ 28 13 .29 .01 .03 .04 .33 6 22 38 44 67 1.02 .03 .08 .11 1.13 2y2 iiy 30 62 88 .85 .03 .10 .13 .98 2 9 31 47 46 .52 .03 .10 .13 .65 1 10>^ siy 66 38 .46 .04 .12 .16 .62 9K 9y 19 22 75 .34 .02 .04 .06 .40 6y 16>^ 43 15 .41 .02 .04 .06 .47 5 9 24 43 28 .29 .02 .05 .07 .36 7K 17 44>^ 57 43 2.26 .02 .04 .06 2.32 1>^ 6 17>^ 47 22 .43 .02 .04 .06 .49 9 6 15 27 19 .96 .02 .04 .06 1.02 1 24>^ 45K 7C loe 1.68 .02 .08 .10 1.78 8 483 1081 1796 1955 55.57 SI. 07 $2.28 $3.35 $38.92 1 See page 91 for analysis. POUND LAUNDRY SERVICE SELLING PRICE 15c THE POUND (Minimum Service 20 Pounds) Exhibit of Actual Service to Forty Patrons, Summer Season, July and August, 1918 This Compilation, arranged by S. Bacharach. is by courtesy of The Model Laundry Co., Cincinnati. O. Number - Selling Price Time of Time of Cost Cost I Weight Pieces Rough Dry Ironing Flat Ironing Rough Dry Ironing Flat Ironing ^ V LIST OR PIECE PRICE Ui V c u a) E 3 « b <« •o c 3 O Oh .a ■oo 3 O in •o C 3 c 3 O 4-* « fa XI 3 O S o ^ 68 39 107 7.42 4.77 5.94 3.52 2.77 6.29 ,. 30 1 . . 1 30 .. 18 .. 32 .. 50 .08 .32 .40 .03 .07 .10 .50 13 TA 9H 17 24 31 55 2.55 2.42 2.04 4.08 1.53 5.61 .. 30 .. 12 2 15 2 57 .. 16 .. 24 . . 40 .08 .07 .80 .95 .03 .06 .09 1.04 4 [ 12 4 16 43 8 51 2.40 1.64 1.92 1.33 .84 2.17 .. 20 .. 14 .. 12 ...46 .. 14 . . 18 . . 32 .05 .09 .09 .23 .03 .04 .07 .30 > 16K 14 30>^ 41 59 100 4.57 3.95 3.66 6.28 1.16 7.44 .. 46 .. 10 4 30 5 26 .. 18 . . 36 .. 54 .10 .06 1.44 1.60 .04 .09 .13 1.73 . 16 16 32 59 67 126 4.80 4.32 3.84 5.74 1.12 6.86 .. 50 .. 6 3 45 4 41 .. 14 .. 18 . . 32 .12 .04 1.20 1.36 .04 .04 .08 1.44 6M 6K 13 15 17 32 1.95 1.75 1.56 2.10 .46 2.56 .. 10 2 2 10 .. 8 . . 12 . . 20 .03 .64 .67 .02 .03 .05 .72 < i 11 11 22 31 76 107 3.30 2.97 2.64 5.97 .77 6.74 .. 40 2 30 3 10 . . 12 . . 18 . . 30 .10 .80 .90 .03 .06 .09 .99 1» 3 21 13K 10 34K 9 53 4 58 13 HI 1.50 5.18 .89 4.17 1.20 4.14 .64 6.59 .60 1.47 1.24 8.06 25 ...25 6 . . .. 6 1? .. 9 21 . . 15 33 .15 1.44 .15 1.77 .02 .03 .02 .05 .04 .08 .19 21 . 50 .. 40 4 30 .13 ?0 1.85 2 1 19 19/2 38>^ 96 88 184 5.77 5.23 4.62 7.36 1.33 8.69 .. 50 .. 7 2 30 3 27 10 24 . . 34 .13 .04 .80 .97 .02 .06 .08 1.05 2 2 6 6 12 15 33 48 1.80 1.62 1.44 2.07 .42 2.49 ,. 40 .. in 50 1 40 .. 6 12 18 .10 ,05 .25 .-10 .02 .02 .04 .44 2 3 12 4 16 15 16 31 2.40 1.64 1.92 1.37 .84 2.21 .. 20 .. 3 . . 30 ... 53 . . 6 . . 9 15 .05 .02 .15 .22 02 .02 .04 .26 2 4 9}4 4^2 14 29 11 40 2.10 1.57 1.68 2.95 .67 3.62 10 .. 4 2 . 2 14 . . 8 . . 9 17 .03 .02 .64 69 02 .02 .04 .73 2 5 20 iiy2 37^ 47 bJ 100 5.62 4.90 4.50 7.26 1.40 8.66 , 46 .. 24 4 30 5 40 . . 10 . . 24 . . 34 .13 .14 1.44 1.71 02 .06 .08 1.79 2 6 15 20^5 35K 71 9^ 165 5.33 5.15 4.26 8.40 1.05 9.45 . . 40 .. 10 3 45 4 35 .. 10 . . 21 . . 31 .10 .06 1.06 1.22 02 .05 .07 1.29 2 7 6>^ 6 12K U ) 2t ) 42 1.88 1.66 1.50 2.53 .46 2.99 . 5 1 30 1 35 . . 4 . . 12 . . 16 .02 .48 50 01 .03 .04 .54 2 8 12K ^^>'= ' 16 5^ ! 11 ) b2 2.4C 1.57 1.92 1.74 .88 2.62 . . 6 1 . . 1 6 . . 10 . . 27 . . 37 .04 .32 36 02 .07 .09 .45 2 9 614 16 1 12>^ 2 22 3 21 4 9y, 15 10 56 15 57 271/ 58 111/ ?9 9 40 21 5 22 ny 9 10>' 91/ 6y 9 ^ 17 ^ 6 6 24> 113^ it i 1. i 41 1.73 1.46 1.38 2.27 .46 2.73 .. 30 .. 20 . . 20 1 10 . . 4 . . 12 . . 16 .08 .10 .11 .29 ,01 .03 .04 .33 3 38 4^ 1 6 111 5.7C 5.52 4.56 9.42 1.12 10.54 1 15 .. 20 1 35 3 10 . . 10 . . 25 . . 35 .18 .12 .72 1 02 03 .08 .11 1.13 3 ; 30 6. i 8} i LSI ) 4.5C ) 4.38 3.60 6.08 .88 6.96 1 .. .. 50 1 20 3 10 .. 10 40 50 .14 .29 .42 85 03 .10 .13 .98 3 3 3 ■5 •- 31 2 31>^ ^ 19 i \6y: 24 44>^ 173/ 15 ^ 451/ 4 ' 6 2 ' 4 4 ! 5 ^ 4 2 7 4< 3 3i 2 7 3 1 3 2 7 4 7 2 7 1 ) 9. ? 10- 5 9' 5 5{ 8 7 3 10( 2 6< 9 4 6 17 5 4 . 65 [ 4.7^ ? 2.8! 5 2.4' I 3.6( ) 6.65 ? 2.6. 5 2.2 5 6.8 3.34 - 3.57 ) 2.5(5 ^ 2.0C ) 2.85 5 5.32 ? 2.0( 5 1.8: 3 6.3- 3.72 3.78 2.28 1.98 2.88 5.34 ) 2.10 i 1.80 ^ 5.46 3.07 5.48 4.44 2.79 2.77 8.00 2.35 2.05 10.44 1.54 1.47 .67 .70 1.05 1.93 .81 .63 1.47 4.61 6.95 5.11 3.49 3.82 9.93 3.16 2.68 11.91 .. 50 1 .. . . 40 .. 20 . 20 .. 40 .. 44 ;; 50 ■ • 6 .. 10 .. 7 .. 40 .'. 20 1 15 1 . . .. 40 1 . . .. 40 6 .. 1 . . 3 . . 4 30 2 5 2 .. 1 26 1 30 1 7 7 20 1 44 3 .. 5 40 .. 10 .. 10 .. 6 .. 6 .. 10 .. 6 .. 6 .. 8 . . 10 .. 40 .. 50 .. 15 .. 15 . . 21 . . 18 . . 18 . . 18 . . 30 .. 50 1 . . .. 21 .. 21 .. 31 . . 24 .. 24 . . 26 . . 40 .12 .14 .10 .05 .05 .10 .11 .04 .06 .04 .24 .40 .32 .20 .30 .20 1.92 .32 .96 1.44 .52 .46 .34 .41 .29 2.26 .43 .96 1.68 .03 .04 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .10 .12 .04 .04 .05 .04 .04 .04 .08 .13 .16 .06 .06 .07 .06 .06 .06 .10 .65 .62 .40 .47 .36 2.32 .49 1.02 2 7u lu .12 .12 1.78 598 483 1081 1796 195 5 375 1S162.1 5S138.4( 5$129.72 S202.9C » S42.91 $245.81 21 12 8 22 92 7 121 41 6 38 13 18 19 56 ?3.20'S3.20S29.17.1 S35.57S1.07S2.28S3.35, $38.92 Pound Laundry Service By S. Bacharach For the purpose of establishing the feasibility of selling Pound Laundry Service at \S cents the pound, attention is directed to the analysis of Pound Laundry Service to forty patrons, and which is exhibited in the first twelve columns of the accompanying chart. The remaining columns are only an index of operating cost and are not subject to analysis in our pages as the editorial policy of this periodical precludes publicity of complete actual operating cost details. Comment or rejoinder dealing with summaries and which do not disclose complete cost of any single classification or unit and which give only general deductions will be welcomed and our readers are invited on this basis to participate in The Starchroom open forum. — The Editor. IN December of last year, the writer pointed out in a Starch- room article that the necessity of the laundry business was greater volume. How shall we increase revenue by more business and without any considerable increase in operating expenses? Partly due to war conditions and partly because of a mistaken conception that the problem was involved, there has been no real effort to try out the proposed recommendation of Pound Laundry Service. The convention held in Chicago under the auspices of the L. N. A., the several excellent contributions on the subject by Mr. H. H. Gilpatrick and the recent scholarly analysis by Mr. A. T. Downer, have all tended to prove feasibility but there has been no acceptance of a fixed price, no concerted movement for a universal system, and no definite plan for the introduction of a new phase of service, and which the v/riter believes is the solution of the volume problem and a very great and undoubted betterment of the business. Present indications point to the coming of a readjustment and reconstruction period, which will involve the whole world but which from the viewpoint of trained observers will not affect nor seriously influence the laundry business. Labor will perhaps still be limited, supply commodities be high priced and other war conditions adversely prevail, but present prices, even though somewhat lowered, are safe for any possible commercial condition that may arise. It would seem therefore that laundry experts should come to some agreement on the principles and the prices which shall govern a Pound Laundry Service, and which shall be so elastic and comprehensive that the housewife may send all the linen and apparel to the power laundry. 92 Pound Laundry Service In December, 1917, I sought to rivet attention to the obvious anticipated slump, and said at that time, "there is a menace and a possible acute depression in the coming months if laundry volume is not increased." The record of the past eleven months justifies the prediction and there is as much need now as there was then of instituting a service which, by reason of price and popularity, will create a substitute for the disappearing volume of shirts and collars. The feasibility of the plan proposed in The Starchroom has only been denied because of a refusal to accept the price that was tentatively offered. Mr. Downer, in his L. N. A. address, divides the subject into three parts: the charge to the customer, the payment of the employee and pro- duction. The latter two divisions need not enter into the dis- cussion, because the price necessarily will protect operating cost and the methods to be employed are so debatable and the divers- ity so great between the efficient and the inefficient manager that the required education would be impossible of speedy diffusion. If some efficient manager makes a success of any phase of laundry operation or service, he will speedily find imi- tators, and each one will adapt his plant or his methods in conform- ity with his own limitations. It required no special conference and no agreed methods for the introduction of the present rough dry business and which, like Topsy, "jest growed." It was correct, however, in principle, the methods were perfected by a species of evolution and the price advanced from 3 and 4 cents the pound by stages, because conditions changed and the higher price became reasonable. In the face of this conclusion, the appointment of special committees for research and study of Finished Family Work is not essential, and the way to add this department is to add it. The admirable and exhaustive presentation by Mr. Downer on payment of employee is, in my judgment, not an issue at this time, but I want to record a belief that his idea of a bonus system is not practical in any laundry department. Mr. Downer favors the pound plus piece charge as a step in the right direction, but I cannot find that it has been generally accepted by the laundryowners of the country, nor does it appeal to me as a correct basis for a service charge However, this branch of service and this charging method must be deferred for a special analysis, as it does not fit in my proposed charge for Pound Laundry Service, and which title I suggest as preferable to "F. F. W." or "Rough Dry." Mr. H. H. Gilpatrick, in his paper at the Missouri conven- tion, commits himself very strongly to the pound method, but thus far cannot reconcile such a pound price with a piece price. He thinks there might be an inequity to the customer and, as an illustration, makes comparisons showing the great disparity in contents of bundles that bring parallel prices. I cannot regard this objection as having any weight especially Pound Laundry Service 93 as this same "inequity" is an elementary characteristic of the business. We charge the same for a 14-inch shirt or collar as we do for the 17-inch. There is a difference of 6 to 8 ounces in differing sizes of underwear. On the Gillpatrick flat work list the sheet is 5 cents irrespective of whether it is 90x108, weighing 33 ounces, or 54x99, weighing 18^ ounces. Here is a difference of ironing 9720 square inches as against 5346 square inches. It is impossible to fix varying charges for varying sizes and the law of average is always an acceptable base, and when applied it works neither injustice nor inequity to patron or to the laundry- owner. For the purpose of comparison, the address by Mr. Gill- patrick is reprinted in this number. His exhibit of over 300 bundles is the basis for the claim that 7 cents the pound and 13 cents additional the pound for ironing rough dry is inadequate. I am ready to concede this, but it will be remembered that the exhibits I offered were for November and August, and in the conclusions regarding the excess of starched pieces in August I made it plain that such a condition might be a hazard. But I am not so sure that we cannot afford this apparent loss of 12 5^ per cent in a summer week from the Gillpatrick revenue if we can establish a simple, easily sold, all-the-year-round service. However, it will be unwise to accept the exhibits of a single week on which to base deductions and possibly our cost experts may have to survey a number of plants and compile the results of a number of weeks. Through the courtesy of the Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati, I have had access to a number of inside details regarding the operations which would influence a new service by the pound, and I am more than ever convinced that the project is feasible, will be popular, assures a satisfactory profit and opens new channels of effort that will result in materi- ally strengthening the business. For a number of reasons, I have, however, decided to advocate a different method of pricing Pound Laundry Service. The method of one price for flat and an additional price for rough dry ironing is involved; it lacks simplicity, it is not attractive and would therefore make a difficult marketing proposition. The housewife demands some- thing definite and, knowing her budget, she is insistent on know- ing what is going to be the cost. When you put on a price with the "up" attachment, it excites a restlessness and a distrust. She asks the routeman and she phones and she wants to know just for the same reason that none of us like to give out a con- tract without knowing the maximum cost. I am not persuaded that an indefinite price or an open door opportunity for an ascending price even on fancy wear is a good thing. A fair price and a public price is an undoubted aid to marketing and an understood and accepted schedule takes away a load of useless explanation that is a burden forced upon routemen, 94 Pound Laundry Service phone girls and office attendants. Although I believe that the price I previously advised will cover all contingencies, I now claim the price should be a straight 15 cents the pound and the mini- mum bundle from the household should be placed at 20 pounds. This minimum may be difficult to establish on some routes and it may compel a housewife to send every other week, but it is a substitute for the private laundress at a parallel price and certain rules and regulations will be acceptable to the patron and the plan lends itself to a system that will go far toward reducing the present abnormal cost of collection and delivery. The question of a minimum is, however, a debatable phase of the problem, and while I can see an opening for a lower minimum I am presenting the present price and minimum for immediate adoption by such far-sighted managers as can visualize a really good thing. Mr. Gilpatrick, by his price method, shows a revenue of $623.40 for 4,526 pounds. At 15 cents the pound this would mean a revenue of $678.90 or an increase of nearly 9 per cent. If you can sell the equivalent of Pound Laundry Service at the Gillpatrick list price, I believe it is a certainty that the housewife will be attracted to the simpler and infinitely surer basis. I shall resist the temptation to controvert some of the deductions that arise from a comparison of the varying sizes and weights of the garments. The power laundry is a mechanical proposition employing scientific methods and labor saving apparatus. The correctly informed insider knows the cost of operation and the separate cost of items and there is nothing in these comparisons to indicate or reflect any possible phase of danger in costs. The one and the only uncertain factor is hand ironing and the mod- ern press has to a very great extent eliminated that. I was told recently by Mr. D. H. Benjamin of an experience in a very high grade plant that specializes and caters to a selected patronage, and charges stiff prices. The fancy ladies' wear, probably of the expensive sort, was less than 25 per cent of the pound bundles and, what is most interesting, all but 10 per cent was ironed on the press. It is inconceivable that such a ratio would mean a menace and especially when it is remembered that the ironing board of the press can be made any desired form or shape. In the Gilpatrick 4,526 pounds, 1,047 pounds was called the starched division and in this was included 2.491 handkerchiefs, 92 night shirts and 328 night dresses. These items should not be calculated as starched pieces, and their total weight deducted from the 1,047 shows 689 pounds of starched pieces, and which is somewhat above the weight shown in other surveys. The revenue on piece basis was $275.51, or 40 cents the pound, and which of course is a very handsome price, while on the 15 cent basis the revenue is $103.35, a difference of $172.16. For the flat and soft work the revenue at 15 cents on 3,837 (4,526 minus Pound Laundry Service SUMMARY. Forty Patrons — Pound Laundry Service. 95 < ■o !1 1^ Selling Price Weight — Pounds 598 483 1081 Pieces 1796 1955 3751 Average Revenue per piece 4>^c Average weight to patron 27 lb. Pound Laundry Service at 15c the pound $162.15 Pound Laundry Service at 12c the pound 129.72 Pound Laundry Service at 7c the pound, plus 13c the pound for iron- insf rouefh drv 138.46 List or Piece price for 3751 pieces 245.81 Rough Dry Comparison 7c the pound 75.67 113.18 102.37 91.56 R. D. the piece 10>^c lb. 6c the pound, plus Ic the piece 9>^c lb. 5c the pound, plus Ic the piece 8>^c lb. A comparison by proportioning the Gilpatrick exhibit to forty patrons is not useful, as the Gilpatrick exhibits show an average of only 15^ pounds to the patron as against 27 pounds in the Model exhibit. 689) pounds is $575.55, while the Gilpatrick revenue was $347.98. In other words, on the 15 cent basis there is a loss of $172.16 on starched pieces and a gain of $227.57 on flat and soft, or a net gain over the piece price of $55.41. If there is an operating loss in doing 689 pounds of starched pieces for $103.35 and if it exceeds $55.41, then the piece price brings more revenue; 96 Pound Laundry Service but it would, in my judgment, be more than offset by a higher operating cost. Through the courtesy of the Model Laundry Co., of Cincinnati, I am able to present a tabulation of 40 bundles of Pound Laundry Service. The customers represent an average classification and range in their individual incomes from $2,500 to $25,000 the year. These 40 bundles are selected because they come near to the average trade to be expected. The tabulations of ironing time, shaking, and other operatnfg expenses are interesting and the hand ironing especially will provide an index to the extra costs, or rather the feared bugaboo of extra costs, that have disturbed some of the experts. I be- lieve the chart very forcefully tells its own story. The columns show a 15 cent and a 12 cent price, and both are calculated, because there has been a difference in judgment in a number of conferences as to the most logical marketing price. I am convinced that 15 cents is correct and I am sanguine it will be popular. The average bundle, it will be noted, is a little over $4, but 13 patrons are below the required 20 pound mini- mum. While this is a disturbing factor, it is not serious, because a 15 pound minimum would also be a very desirable advantage in collection and delivery. The chief and paramount value lies in the simplicity of the plan and the further comfort that it works neither inequity or disadvanatge to either patron or laundryowner. Comments on Pound Laundry Service By A. T. Downer. IN the interest of the laundry industry in general and the L. N. A. in particular it seems advisable to make a few comments on the article, "Pound Laundry Service" by Mr. Bacharach in The Starchroom for November. In the first paragraph, fifth sentence, Mr. Bacharach states: "Present indications point to the coming of a readjustment and reconstruction period which will involve the whole world but which from the viewpoint of trained observers will not affect nor seriously influence the laundry business." The writer cannot share in the opinions of the "trained observers" and the present economic and political tendencies make it imperative that every business man, including every laundryowner, be particularly observant and keep abreast of the times. An editorial in The Starchroom for October on "After Demobilization" warns the laundry managers to be alert to grapple with these new condi- tions. In referring to the writer's address at the L. N. A. convention Mr. Bacharach states that the payment of the employee and the methods of production "need not enter into the discussion, because the price necessarily will protect operating cost." How in the name of consistency can a price that will protect operating cost be established without considering very carefully all the elements entering into the cost of producing laundry work. How is the price reconciled with the "fair price and the public price" as stated in the fourth paragraph, fourteenth sentence? The rapid progress made by laundries in cost and general ac- counting have brought to light many interesting facts, particu- larly the relation of price to customer with the costs and methods of production and it is the opinion of the writer that the three must be considered in order to arrive at a price fair to the public and laundry. Mr. Bacharach makes the interesting statement in the second paragraph, ninth sentence — "In face of this conclusion the appointment of special committees for research and study of Finished Family Work is not essential and the way to add this department is to add it." Mr. Bacharach bases this on the fact that the present rough dry business "just growed" and every laundryowner probably realizes now that while there was a growth, there was little or no profit and that the starch business had been carrying the load. The progress of other industries is attributed in no small measure to the work of special committees, in fact practically every organization is dependent 98 Pound Laundry Service upon committees for successful operation. Is the laundry industry to be one of the lamentable exceptions? Is it not a sign of egotism and decadence on the part of the laundries not to give the other industries the benefit of the doubt, if there be any doubt, as to the success of committees on research and study? Mr. Bacharach in the first paragraph believes the solution to be the "acceptance of a fixed price," a "concerted movement for a universal system," and a "definite plan." How can this "concerted movement" be brought about successfully without the work of a committee or committees? Are Mr. Bacharach's ideas the result of a research of two or more minds, or are his views the result of his own exclusive thinking? The conclusions arrived at as read in Chicago in the "Thoughts on Finished Family Work" are the results of the combined brains of some twenty-five live laundryowners. Further, Mr. Bacharach in the second paragraph, twelfth sentence, states that the pound and piece method "must be deferred for special analysis as it does not fit in my proposed charge for Pound Laundry Service." Does the pound and piece charge become incorrect because it does not "fit" in his method? Did Mr. Bacharach before he discarded the pound and piece method consider the handling in the laundry of the articles that make up the average bundle? What would be his method of paying for marking sheets and handkerchiefs, by the pound or piece? Again, what would the method be in the ironing, sorting, and bundling departments? It seems clear to the writer that the weight element in these departments is not as important as the piece element and the charge to the customer should therefore include this extra handling cost on a piece basis. Mr. Bacharach makes another surprising statement in the second paragraph, tenth sentence, to the effect that he wants to record his belief that the writer's idea of a bonus system is not practical in any laundry department. The writer knows from personal experience that this method is and has been successful in the Winchester Laundry. To repeat, the method of paying the employee is, in the opinion of the writer, of paramount importance, and must be considered in arriving at a fair charge to the customer and any system that does not give it proper recognition will be confronted with many difficult situations. A Reply to Mr. Downer*s Criticism By S, Bacharach. THE preface to Mr. Downer's article, expressed in his opening paragraph, may be interpreted to present a dubious impHcation as to my loyalty "to laundry interests in general and the L. N. A. in particular." If I understand the purpose and the aim of the L. N. A., criticism and debate on laundry methods is welcome and so long as constructive intent is the basis of such criticism there can be not the slightest objection. I am, therefore, at a loss to know why it is advisable to make the comments for the "L. N. A. in particular." In the several points that Mr. Downer attempts to make there is, of course, some basis for his criticism but especially is this true as he had selected particular phrases and which are largely explained and modified by the surrounding text. In regard to the coming reconstruction period I am still of the opinion that so far as the laundry trade is concerned it will not be a serious or vital factor. Prices of commodities and labor may still be excessive and occasion managerial problems, but there is bound to be a return of patronage and with the new prices that have been established for laundry service I cannot see much reason for pessimism. It is necessary for the laundry owner to continually keep abreast of the times no matter what the situation may be nor what struggles may portent in the in- dustrial world. The editorial on "After Demobilization" is consistent and it has been the invariable policy of The Starch- room to warn its readers of impending difficulties and to guard against surprises. The payment of employees and the method of production are, to a certain extent, standardized in the laundry business. We are approximately near the exact ascertainment of costs and we have the experience of efficient laundry managers on which to shape a fairly accurate calculation of entire costs. It would seem inconsistent to disregard this were it not for the fact that the table I presented is an exhibit from the actual working of an efficient laundry and, in addition thereto, it presents a separation of the work received so that the laundryowner who has a cost system can make the necessary comparison. By the expression "the fair price and the public price" was meant that there should be a fixed, unchangeable price, that is, unchangeable by reason of different contents, and that this price should be fair. In other words, I proceeded on the theory that a popular price and which would not include an unjustifiable profit would bring the big volume and thereby warrant the popular price by cutting 100 Pound Laundry Service down overhead and administrative ratios. Mr. Downer is perfectly correct in his conclusion that cost and general account- ing has made rapid progress in the laundry trade and I do not in the least deprecate either the necessity or the value of this work. I agree with him that these must be considered in order to arrange a price. In regard to the appointment of special committees I am still of the opinion that we require neither research nor com- mittee deliberation. There is a very considerable latitude as to the value of committee work and I would be the very last one to wish the laundry trade to be a "lamentable exception" in any progressive step taken in the industrial world. I am not willing, however, to concede that we are on the same base as the commodity manufacturer, the jobber, or any other com- mercial pursuit. Ours is an intrinsically service proposition and the cost or production effect on our business is reflected in the varying changes in costs of materials and labor. Volume may diminish as it did diminish during the past year but the equilibrium is restored by the use of emergency prices. The public has paid the price with willingness and the greater per- centage of objection has come because of interrupted service. The project of Finished Family Work has been presented to the laundry world in a great many aspects for the last five years. The L. N. A. a few years ago had a congress in Chicago and this subject of Finished Family Work was specially con- sidered. There also have been a number of papers on the subject at different conventions and a great deal of discussion. It would seem to me, therefore, that after these many efforts to explain the proposition that further progress is not a certainty if we adopt a policy of continuing the discussion. I believe there is a very great deal of logic in the experience that has come to us because the pound laundry service proposition "just growed. It was tried and it was found that it added to laundry volume and laundry profits. In the experimental days the propaganda in its favor made few converts. From its birthplace, in Central New York, I believe, it jumped to Rochester, N. Y., and re- ceived real, scientific consideration under the laundry manage- ment of J. E. Kelso and the late D. M. Cooper. Without the special consideration of discussion of any group of advisers these men took their own initiative and the new department became a pronounced success. At that time and, in fact, at all times, the peak load and the delivery problem baffled laundry manage- ment. They tried week-end deliveries at a special discount and tried other inducements to get away from the big cost of carrying a large organization for the very large percentage of work that came in the early days of the week. In those days a great many laundryowners visited Rochester and the laundries Reply to Mr. Downer's Criticism 101 doing pound work became a sort of kindergarten in this new science, and thereafter it "just growed." I recall the first experiment in Cincinnati. I think the year was around 1897 or 1898 when Mr. W. W. Riley, of the Model Laundry, established the department. Realizing that it was a new proposition, he circulated a very handsome booklet and ofi'"ered the service at 4c a pound. "We'll send for the family washing on Thursday, Friday or Saturday of each week, just as you desire. The wash will be returned the following week completed; washed, starched and the fiat work ironed, at a cost to you at the rate of 4c the pound." This was the introductory offer and it made a success. From Cincinnati, to Dayton, to Cleveland to Indianapolis and other contiguous cities the in- novation grew in attractiveness and it was not many years be- fore a number of these cities were doing from 50 ton to 100 ton per week. I entirely agree with Mr. Downer on the educational value of committees and meetings and especially conventions. I consider the L. N. A. the biggest and the best educator in the business and, if not a single department instituted under its direction was a success, it would yet be invaluable because it creates the necessary atmosphere and it creates the situation for an interchange of opinions and an absolutely sure trade educa- tion. This is of primary importance although a single unit which represents the whole trade is almost of equal importance. But business cannot always await full evolution or complete educa- tion by purely academic efforts. There must be experiment and necessarily, there must be initiative. Laundryowners have been quite content to lose money in certain departments without a shadow of investigation and without a single atom of justification. In my effort, and es- pecially in the preparation of the tabulations, I have sought to show that the plan is feasible and if the owner will accept this view then the advantage from the profit viewpoint must come within the scope of individual ability and plant capacity. We are doing rough dry at 7 or 8 or 9 cents a pound and the tabu- lations have attempted to prove that a price of 15c a pound for finishing 20 pounds is an absolutely sure business proposition and a certain profit maker. "A concerted movement for a universal system" and "a definite plan" meant to me an accept- ance of my proposition and a tryout by the laundryowner, who, from the evidence offered, would dare to accept the initiative. I realize in the completest sense that the conclusions read by Mr. Downer in Chicago represented the combined opinions of a number of men and it was my intent, even though my language may have been inadequate, to express an admiration for the effort even though 1 could not concur and felt that in some 102 Pound Laundry Service spots the logic was weak. Neither the tabulations which I have presented nor the arguments which I have advanced are wholly mine. I have visited a great many laundries, talked to a great many managers, collated a large number of figures, and in every respect the matter I presented is an assembling of the thoughts and experiences and conclusions of a number of men who are considered to be trained observers and efficient managers. In regard to the pound and piece price, it does not become incorrect just because I refuse to consider it at this time in con- nection with pound laundry service. My aim has been to present a proposition that would appeal as a marketing proposition and I felt that the greater the simplicity of the plan the greater the probability of success and the more enthusiasm I could get from the routemen and salesman. If, in the maintenance of such ideas, it creates the impression of egotism, I wish to disclaim such an erroneous idea because I am willing at all times to sur- render any conviction if I find the other fellow has a better thought or a better plan. I neither condemn nor favor the pound plus piece plan. In reality it means, after all, only so much per pound and I do not think that it possesses as many advantages for the attraction of patrons as does the straight-out pound service marketing proposition. The method of production, paradoxical as it may sound, is not a consideration that constitutes a barrier. We are now doing rough dry at so much per pound and I assume an income for the work that means a profit. The only addition that is imposed by Finished Family Work is the ironing of the soft pieces and of the ladies' wear. There is an extra cost for sorting and an extra cost for bundling and there must be perhaps some change in the method of loading the truck or wagon. With my minimum of 20 pounds at a price of 15c per pound, each customer repre- sents a $3 income. W^ith a moderate sized equipment to take care of perhaps 100 bundles a day, and with deliveries arranged on a five-day schedule, I believe and, in fact, the tabulations that I have presented prove, that the only uncertainty so far as cost is concerned is the varying and perhaps hazardous cost that may arise from handling the ladies' wear. So far as a practice of paying for marking, sorting, etc., is concerned I would prefer to leave that to each individual manager and which, as Mr. Downer knows, is the present practice. There is no uniformity in laundry payrolls and I do not think there ever will be, simply because of the fluctuating con- ditions in different localities. Our laundry cost experts will tell us the maximum wage for each department, based on a certain volume, but even this maximum wage and even this labor cost will be dependent on other costs as to whether or not we are going to make a profit. I have found cost comparisons very often misleading because of the fluctuating conditions of which Reply to Mr. Downer's Criticism 103 I speak. Differences of 1 or 2 per cent in ratio mean considerable when the weekly volume is $2,000 or $3,000, but suppose we leave the matter of wage to the judgment of the individual manager and suppose we go on the broad basis of developing an entirely new department by just one or two new factors. We are now doing everything that is included in Finished Family Work and we have departments already created which know just how to handle this work, and though we may need a few additions in equipment or a change in the delivery system I can see no real reason that will preclude this initiative. In regard to labor wage and bonus and welfare work, there is a difference of opinion. In a great many laundry depart- ments we use unskilled labor and I apprehend that an unusually high wage for this class of labor will lead to an excessive elevation in the general average of wages in a laundry. I believe in a perfectly ventilated shop, in restrooms, and in every sanitary convenience that can preserve and benefit the health of employees I believe they should receive the maximum wage consistent with loyal effort, and this wage in its adequacy should command quality work without the payment of a premium. Welfare work is undoubtedly beneficient and sometimes advisable. It has, however, certain limitations and when faulty judgment violates or exceeds these limitations it produces a condition that handicaps the plant. Neither welfare work nor bonuses present, in my judgment, any obstruction to the immediate adoption of Finished Family Work at a price of 15c the pound and the mini- mum at 20 pounds. I have been urged to consider a minimum of 15 pounds on the theory that the initial price, like the initial price in rough dry work, should be attractive. I cannot concede this because I believe that the $3 minimum and the 15c price is a very attractive marketing proposition and that the housewife is receiving a service of inestimable value to her. My method of presentation is perhaps susceptible to ad- verse criticism because necessarily these conclusions are pic- tured in what might be considered an arrogant spirit. If such an impression is gleaned it is inaccurate and I am simply trying to put forcefully the deductions of a number of men and a number of managers who have impressed me with their logical sincerity and the conviction that the plan is right and that the way to add this department is to add it. The Family Wash* By H. H. Gilpatrick JUST four years ago, at our state convention, held in Kansas City, I find in my records my first attempt to talk on the subject of family washing. After reading my article in The Starchroom of May, 1914, I thought possibly I might use the same article on you this time and save some work. But I discovered that, while my ideas now are much the same as then, we have made much progress in this line of work since that time. The conditions which confront us today are such that make it absolutely necessary for us to develop the family work. The first thing I would call your attention to is the splendid effort of all laundryowners to take advantage of the change in the method of charging for family flat work. It is surely going to be a blessing to us to know that we have arrived at that stage in our business when we can all have a standard system for selling our work, and the pound basis for family flat has solved the problem. This class of work is distinct in itself and should be fostered and developed. At the price we get now we can see a profit. It has taken extreme conditions of supply costs, etc., to jar us loose from the old piece price and cut rate policy, but it is very gratifying to see the results of the many educative talks along this line. I think it will be a long time before we get away from the pound price on flat work. The good old rough dry department is established among us, and is doing wonders. The demand for this class of work is enormous, and our laundries are sending out a very creditable brand of this work, which by the way, is one of our best profit producers. I contended at first that the family finished work was another step for the laundryowners to take, and, as I have stated before, has nothing whatever to do with either the family flat or rough dry. I think it is a mistake to try to make family finished cus- tomers out of rough dry customers. Then there are thousands of families who want rough dry and will pay a good price for good work, so I believe we should make an efibrt for the finished family work with the class of families who would not be satisfied with rough dry. Besides, I doubt if we can make the profit out of finished family work that we can out of rough dry. During the last four years we have been studying and work- ing with the finished family work, we found that there are great volumes of this work to be had, and our efforts along this line have proven very satisfactory. The patron who gives us their ♦Address before Missouri Convention. The Family Wash 105 family work is the best satisfied customer we have today. The fact is we have always had about all we could do. I find that it is very desirable for them to put up the en- tire family washing in one bundle, including shirts, collars, curtains, rugs and blankets. We always separate the shirts and collars and put them in the finished work, but everything else we keep in the family department. But the big idea, as I see it, is to educate the public for the family finished bundle, as this is what they want, and give them a satisfactory laundered cur- tain, and charge the right price for it; also a blanket, quilt or rug. These items are not priced any different from our regular prices on our lists, but when we deliver them the entire washing, it relieves them of any thought of a washing at home and that is what we are after. During our recent labor troubles, when we had our wagons off the streets for two weeks, we were surprised to see that our family customers were the most loyal of any. It is a fact that they brought to our office over 200 family bundles each week and called for them, all of which goes to show that we would have a hard time losing them as long as we do satisfactory work. Again, let me say to you that we must do all the things that make up the family bundle — do all curtains, rugs, blankets, quilts, and finish the entire bundle. If we do this and do it well, we will not need to worry where our shirts and collars have gone. It is true some of them are in the rough dry, but let them be there, we get everything else with them. We have our finished family department in a separate building from our laundry, and everyone in this building belongs to the family department. This is not absolutely necessary, but where you can do so, I think it very desirable. I find that our family department runs along with less friction and worry than any of the other departments. I always have claimed that we should not mark this work, as you all know. But I have changed my mind in this respect, as I find it more advantageous to have it marked, and it is more economical. At first we kept each bundle separate, giving individual service. We now use the Rose label machine, and handle it in lots, sewing tape on each article, except the flat work, which we still keep separate. I made this change and did not ask anyone, and to my surprise we have had no complaints whatever. We have small lots of four bundles in a lot, and still use the small wheel to wash with. There is one thing I think very desirable for this work, that is to use a small diameter wash wheel, as it does beautiful work and is easy on the clothes. One thing we must keep in mind, and that is we have a class of goods in this department very different from any other, and the best we can give them is not too good. 106 Pound Laundry Service Let me say again that this class of work has come to stay, and is going to be something for us to work with to keep up our volume. Our family finished department is now doing about $34,000 per year, curtains about $6,000; rugs and blankets about $2,500, a total of $42,500 business to take the place of some of the lost shirts and collars. I have taken a cost of the family finished department for one week, in which we had 322 bundles averaging $2 each, and the week's business was $670.43. I have an accurate cost on operation, and I can say to you truth- fully that it shows a profit of 21 per cent. This is a conservative figure, and when taken along in connection with our regular work, it is a big factor in reducing our overhead expenses, and incidentally increase our general profits. When I look back and see the development of the laundry business in recent years, I can see no reason why the family work of all kinds should not be developed and secured in very satisfactory volumes, as the public wants this service and will pay for it. And don't forget, when we are satisfying the lady of the house and relieving her of some of her worries, we are ac- complishing something which will be a permanent benefit to our industry. Our system of charging for family work is the same as we started out with — ^that is, charging by the piece for everything, and keeping the list at the laundry. This has proven very satis- factory, and we have raised our price quite a little from time to time and have had no trouble. I am strong for the piece price for family finished work, on account of the great difference of prices when it comes to ironing them. I think the pound price for flat and rough dry is ideal and is an aid to development. These two classes of work are satis- factory on a pound basis. The washing and fiat work ironing can be equalized easily as to the various prices, without any great loss. Now, when we talk of doing family finished work by the pound, we have a hard problem. While I would like to be able to do so, I cannot see how we could be fair either to our patrons or ourselves. In the first place I think we should include every- thing taken from the home in our family bundle. It has been suggested to charge extra for shirt waists, which as we all know could not possibly be done by the pound. I think we will make a mistake to put a special price on any article. We must have some system of charging that will keep the bundle intact. It is my belief that those who have figured on ironing by the pound have used rough dry as a basis, so I have taken the trouble to weigh one week's run of family finished work — over 300 bundles, showing weight of flat work, soft work and starched work. I wish to say here that I am in favor of a pound basis, but I believe it will be a hard proposition to keep from making one The Family Wash 107 PRICES CHARGED BY GILPATRICK LAUNDRY No. Ladies' List. Price No. Gentlemen's List. Price Dresses 25 up 25 up 15 20 up 15 up 20 up 8 5 3 10 5 up 5 15 5 5 3 5 8 up 20 20 Union Suits 10 Wrappers Undershirts 5 Waists Drawers 5 Skirts Pajamas 10 Shirts, Common Night Shirts 10 Kimonos 8-10 Drawers . Handkerchiefs 1 Ruffles . Neckties 3 Hose Socks 3 Night Dresses Coats Aprons Pants Corset Covers Children's List. Child's Dresses Child's Skirts Dressing Sacques Vests 10 up 15 up Sup 5 5 Napkins, Sanitary Collars, Soft Child's Aprons Child's Drawers Child's Sleepers Child's Rompers Child's Waists Collars, Ladies' Union Suits Princess Slips 10 up 10 Combination Suits Suits Child's Underwaists. . . . Chuld's Suits 3 Handkerchiefs 1 Child's Pants 5 Doilies 3 up 5 up Dresser Scarfs FLAT WORK LIST Towels, Hand. Towels, Bath . . Towels, Roller. Napkins Table Cloths . . Table Felts ... Sheets Pillow Slips ... Bolster Slips . . Pillow Shams . . 1 2 3 1 10 up 20 up S 3 5 Counterpanes . Sash Curtains. Rugs Tea Towels . . . Lunch Cloths. Blankets Quilts Rags Dish Towels . . 15 up 5 up 5 up 1 5 up 108 Pound Laundry Service customer pay the tariff on another's bundle. This, as I believe would not be so great in rough dry or flat, but on the finished article, it is something I cannot grasp. However, I am willing to be shown. In my division of the work I called soft work everything that was dried in the tumbler and did not need any ironing. For the starched work I included handkerchiefs and night shirts and night dresses along with the starched work, as they are done by the same woman on the hand board. The total weight of these 300 bundles was 4,526 pounds, for which we received, at our piece price, $623.49, or 13 4/5 cents per pound for all. The flat work weight was 2,780 pounds. Our price was $170.42, or 6yi cents a pound for all flat work. Total starched work, 1,047 pounds, for which we received $342.42, or 32^ cents a pound. Total soft work 699 pounds, for which we received $110.65, or 15^:( cents a pound. For both soft and starched work we received $453.07, or 25 7/10 cents a pound. Now, if we charged 7 cents a pound for all, 4,526 pounds at 7 cents equals $316.82; and 13 cents for all soft and starched work, 1,746 pounds at 13 cents equals $226.98, a total of $543.80 against $623.49, would be a loss of close to 13 per cent. These figures show me that we could not do the class of work we have in our family department at those prices of 7 cents for flat and 13 cents for the finished product, and I am sure we could not ask them to pay 32^ cents a pound for the starched work. In this bunch of work we had 1,347 ladies' handkerchiefs, 1,144 gentlemen's handkerchiefs, 92 night shirts, 328 night dresses, 130 shirt waists, 244 gentlemen's union suits, 279 pairs of socks, 224 pairs of hose, 212 doilies and dresser scarfs. Night shirts weighed J/2 lb., night dresses ^ lb., ladies' handkerchiefs 60 to the lb., gentelmen's handkerchiefs 26 to the lb., ladies' union suits }i lb., gentlemen's union suits }4 to l}4 lbs. each, hose 4 pairs to the lb., socks 8 pairs to the lb., ladies undervests 7 to the lb.; B.V.D.'s union suits X lb., child's drawers, muslin, 10 pairs to the lb., child's dress }{ lb., child's U. waists 12 to the lb., child's waists >4 lb. Our price list which we have raised recently will bring more money on this work than the 7 cents and 13 cents lb. price. The worst drawback in the pound price with the finished work, as I see it, is the discrimination of one customer against the other. One bundle might contain 5 gents union suits, and each weigh one pound, at 20 cents, that would be $1; another might have 5 B.V.D. union suits which only weight >4 lb., so he would get them for 25 cents. We get 5 cents per pair for children's drawers, and it takes 10 pairs to weigh a pound, so we would lose 30 cents. As I said before, I am strong for the pound price, but I can't reconcile myself to its use for finished work, as the ironing cost enters into it and we could not afford to do some clothes by The Family Wash 109 the pound on account of their light weight, and we also could not take others on account of their heavy weight, although one might be as easy to do as the other. I will say in conclusion, get busy and develop family work of all kinds and show some of us the best way to charge for same, as the receipts are what we are all after. Laundry Service Prices By S. Bacharach. A GREAT many inquiries have been made seeking informa- tion concerning a standardized price for laundry service. There is no standard that has been adopted nationally and in every city there are changes along certain lines and this is especially true in regard to flat work, and in the practice govern- ing its pricing and delivery. The subjoined list represents the price list in a large city and in the preparation, or rather in the adjustment of charge, there has been expended a vast amount of research and labor. In the judgment of the writer, there are a number of items that are prohibitive and will tend rather to diminish volume than to bring a profit. The modern laundry with labor-saving equipment can do a wholesale business in many articles and by special methods on a big volume can very mater- ially reduce costs and the increased income will reduce the ratio of overhead and administration expense. This evident factor has not received the correct nor the economic considera- tion it deserves. This list is furnished for the information of the reader but it should not be regarded as the ultimate adjustment in laundry service charges. Measures are being perfected to prepare this list in an amplified index form and in shape for a vest-pocket memorandum book. In the meantime, laundryowners will do well to compare it with their own prices, note the differences and seek to discover a basis for a reasonable and patronage- compelling laundry service charge. SHIRTS. Shirts — Continned „ £. , ► an Fine Plaited, White. .20 .25 Soft Shirts 15 .20 t^ t>. V irr oa Negligees 13 .18 Fine Plaited Colored . 17 20. WORK Shirts 13 ... ^^^ ^«^^- Drawers ^ „ Attached 25 Plaited Bosoms with OR without cuffs. . .17 .20 MEN S WEAR. Plain Bosoms with or Night Shirts without cuffs 15 .20 .12 .20 Tango, White or Underdrawers Colored 17 .20 .07 .09 .12 .15 Silk 20 .25 Undershirts Flannel 20 .25 .07 .09 .12 .16 Plaited Bosoms C. & Union Suits C. Attached 20 .25 .14 .18 .24 .30 Plain Bosoms C. & C. Pajamas, per suit Attached 20 .25 .20 25 Laundry Service Prices 111 Men's Wear — Continued Hose (Golf .10) .06 ... .08 Handkerchiefs .02 05 Ties . 06 up Ties and Socks . 10 up Vests (Dress . 30) .20 Pants, Overalls . 18, 2 for 35 Pants, Palm Beach 30 Pants, Duck 30 Pants, Riding 30 Pants, Flannel 30 Coats, Bar, Dental, Doctor . 15 Coats, Long 30 Coats, Long 45 Coats, Childs 15 up Coats, Palm Beach 30 Coats, White street wear . . .30 Chemisettes 06 Shirt Sleeves per pair with cuffs 08 COLLARS AND CUFFS. Regular Stiff Collars.. .03 up. Regular Stiff Cuffs 03 Soft Collars 03 >^ Buster Brown 03^ Ladies Special Collar . . .05 up. LADIES WEAR. Aprons, Bar 6c, Butcher 6c Aprons, Bungalow, 10 and 15c Aprons, Nurses Bib 9c, Shoulder 12c Aprons, Regular 7c, Small Ccl. 6c, Small White 6c Aprons, Good Sam. Hosp. 7c Single Bib 2c. Combinations 18c up. Corset Covers 10c, Silk 15c Chemise 12>^c, 2 for 25c, Sn.K 20c. Under vest 06 White Drawers 12 Dresses, Childs 10 up Dresses, Nurses, Colored.. . .30 Ladies' Wear — Continued Dresses, Nurses, White 40 Dresses, Fancy 35c, for Skirt or 35c up for Waists. Dressing Sacques 17 up Kimonos 20 Silk 25 Night Dresses 15 Silk 25 Skirts, Childs 12 Skirts, Colored 20 Skirts, White 25 Skirts, Top 30 Skirts, Top 35 Skirts, Top 40 Operating Gowns 20 Sweaters, Thin Body 20 Sweaters, Heavy Coat. . . .30 up Sleeves, Ladies 06 Corsets 25 Overalls, Single 18 Suit 35 Gloves, Canton Flannel 06 Gloves, Ladies 10 Hair Cloths 06 Cushion Covers 06 Cushion Covers, Large or Ruffles 12 Shrinking Goods — Per yd 04 Double Width, per yd 05 Flannel, per yd 06 Flags, Cotton, sq. yd 06 3^ Flags, Wool, sq. yd 08 f^ Flags, Silk, sq. yd ll}4 SPECIAL PRICES. Masonic Aprons 03 L. M. Prince Coats 20 Good Sam. Aprons 07 Separate Bibs 02 Overalls Comb. Suit so Bibs 03 Gaiters 15 Sun Bonnet 15 Surplice 20 Bolster Sham 20 Pillow Sham 20 112 Pound Laundry Service Special Prices — Continued Princess Slips 25 up Envelope Chemise 15 Hand Work Collars 03 >^ FLAT WORK LIST PRICES. Aprons, Men's, Plain 05 Bolster Cases 05 Blankets, Wool, Double 30 to . 60 Blankets, Cotton, Double 20 to .40 Bed Ticks 15 to .30 Bath Mats, per lb 07 Comforts 40 up Doilies 03 to . 10 Handkerchiefs 02 Napkins, Plain 01 up Pads, per lb 07 Pillow Cases 03 to . 06 Quilts 25 up Rags 01 up Rugs, per lb 07 Scarfs 05 up Sheets 06 Spreads 15 Table Cloths, per yd 03 Towels, Roller 03 Towels, Hand 02 Towels, Bath 03 Tray Cloths 05 up Wash Rags 01 Pound Work, per lb 07 (Because of the varying sizes the following articles are laundered upon a basis of 7c per lb. — Bath Mats, Pads, Rugs.) LADIES' CLOTHES. Wrappers 30 Waist, Boy, No Collar 12 Waist, Boy, With Collar 16 Waist, Colored 17 Waist, Colored 25 Waist, Regular 35 Waist, Regular 30 Curtain, Regular Lace 85 Curtain, Sash 05 Curtain, Sash 15 Curtain, Sash 20 Curtain, Sash 25 Curtain, Sash 30 Coats, Ladies 35 up Child's Union Suits 14 Child's Night Shirts 08 Child's Rompers 15 Caps, Dust or Cook 06 Hats, White Canvas 15 up Semi and Finished Work W. W. Williams, Hartford, Conn. I HAVE been requested to talk to you this afternoon on two subjects which, at the present time, seem to be uppermost in the minds of the thinking men in the laundry fraternity. While I do not agree with your president that he was justified in asking me to talk to you on such important matters, still I am willing to assist in any way that I can in the reconstructive work which our National Association has undertaken in conjunction with our Government. Personally I am not competent to handle these subjects as thoroughly as their importance deserves. However, my willingness to do my best comes from an earnest desire to better the conditions which are confronting our industry. I have labored long and earnestly to change conditions in the business with which I am connected in order to meet the rapidly changing conditions which have come and will continue to come about for the next few years, and I feel that if I am able to impart this information to you gentlemen in such a way that you will be at all benefitted by it I, in turn, will receive my reward for having bettered the general opinion or esteem in which laundries are held by the public at large. Therefore, my effort to impress upon you the importance of studying these changed conditions is not to place myself upon a pedestal but rather to get you to do likewise. I believe I can convince the most skeptical, if you will devote the time to come to our place of business, that what seemed impossible of accomplishment only a year ago is very easy to put into force today. Our business has suffered severe and, I may say, unjust criticism on account of our lack of ability to impress the public with the importance of our industry, and, therefore, when we have attempted to inaugurate reforms, we have been met with opposition from our customers, and, standing, as we have in many cases, aloof from our competitors, we have not had the moral courage to withstand the bombardment of criticism, and we would adopt the easiest way out which was to go back to the old methods. I refer especially now to the week end collections and de- livery service. This service has been not alone sanctioned but authorized and endorsed by the United States War Industries Board,^ and then only after thorough investigation of the subject had been made by them. The proverbial Monday wash-day should be no more and, in fact, if we are to place our business upon a profit making basis, it cannot continue to exist. The cost of our collection and 114 Pound Laundry Service delivery service, or I might say our entire outside service, has increased by leaps and bounds until it is now impossible to cheapen that by employing cheaper methods of transportation, cheaper employees, therefore, the only avenue left is for us to utilize this branch of our service to its utmost and to attain as near 100 per cent efficiency as is possible. We have adopted and put into force the following system of collecting and delivering: All ivork collected on Monday is delivered on Thursday. Our Tuesday collections are delivered Friday. Our Wednesday collections on Saturday. Our Thursday collections on Monday. Our Friday collections on Tuesday, and Our Saturday collections on Wednesday. This is not deviated from in any particular even though the work may be ready to deliver two days in advance of the specified time. You must realize, in order to thoroughly understand the great benefit derived from this system, that we do not and will not attempt to collect as much work on Monday as we formerly did, neither do we collect as much work on Tuesday as we formerly did. As part of Monday is devoted to the delivery of v/ork and part of Tuesday, and in fact every other day in the week, therefore, it does not need any wonder-worker with figures to show you that a delivery clerk, working under these uniform conditions six days per week, can handle considerably more work than under the old system. The difference of what they are now handling as compared to the old conditions, I am perfectly willing to give to any man who is interested enough to come to our plant and make a study of it. Now, let us leave the outside and step inside for a moment. Can you men, who for years have been running your plant at a high rate of speed for four or four and a half days per week, contemplate what it would mean to you if your business were distributed evenly throughout the six days of the week, starting upon Monday exactly where you left off Saturday, and every day in the week likewise. Have you ever stopped to figure what it would mean to you in the reduction of the number of employees on the inside? Can you believe what it would mean to you in the improved quality of your work, that you would not have to rush for four days per week getting ninety per cent of your work through your plant at express train speed? Can you not imagine what a difference this would make to you in the all important matter of claims and shorts? Do you not realize that it gives you ample time to complete every bundle before it leaves your plant? I will venture to say that the majority of you men within hearing of my voice agree with me that all I have said is true. Semi and Finished Work 115 I will also venture a further prediction that there is not ten per cent of you men present who have the moral courage to go back home and put ten per cent of what I have told you into effect — because you will tell me nothing new but the same old story — that it is different in my city than it is in yours. Now, I am going to say just a few words on the Finished Family Work. We all know that the shirt and collar branch of our business has suffered numerous losses attributable to different reasons. Hundreds of thousands of our young men, who were the best patrons of this branch of our industry, have gone into the service — some of them never to return — all of them divorced from the custom of wearing the starched shirt and collar, so that it is a question, on their return, as to whether they will cling to the soft garments or take up again with what we consider the more stylish apparel of their former days. It is a problem which we cannot solve, neither can we sit idly by and continue to run our establishment with the hope that this branch of our business will revive. The Rough Dry field has been exploited to such an extent that little need be said on that question. The finished family wash and ironing, however, while it is a new problem in our in- dustry has been given more solid thought, and there has been more time and earnest endeavor put into the question of the proper method of handling and pricing this branch of our work than anything else that our industry has ever undertaken. If you will but read the articles which are so freely and generously placed at your disposal on this subject in our trade papers and in national bulletins it will help yovi immensely if you are interested in developing this work in your plant; there- fore, I am going to tell you only how we are handling it and what we have accomplished and the troubles we ran up against as far as we have gone. In the first place, women's wearing apparel has changed to such an extent that many articles can no longer be handled in the customary manner, and it becomes more of a dry cleaning propo- sition than a laundering one. Aside from this, the old time and well known fancy ironer has disappeared from our midst and apparently there are no recruits to fill the ranks, so that when we are considering enlarging this branch, we must first be sure that we are in a position to return the apparel to the customer in a satisfactory condition, or in other words return it to her as she expects to have it returned to her. Machinery and appliances have been placed in our plant that assist greatly in the handling of this work, but the human element is still a vital necessity, and we must be sure of our supply. The method of pricing washings so it will be uniformly sat- isfavtory to the customer is a problem that is not yet worked out. In the short space of one year's time we have increased this 116 Pound Laundry Service department 150 per cent, and we are making an initial charge of 9 cents per pound upon receipt of the bundle, and then pricing each article individually with a price that we would be willing to do each article for if it was brought into the laundry separ- ately, and we then make a net discount on the prices charged for the wearing apparel of 33 per cent. The price of 9 cents per pound is the charge for ironing the flat pieces and washing and starching the personal apparel. We have found in a great many cases that these prices are prohibitive to the average family. We also have found that we are not making any more profit on this department than we are entitled to make. Nevertheless, the department has grown to such an extent that we felt justified in refusing to take on new customers because of our inability to secure women who could handle this work as it should be done — and right here let me interject one thought: Is it not a fact that 7 per cent of the criticisms and complaints against the average laundry are correct and are justified? Why do we not more often place ourselves in the place of our customers? Why do we not take a bundle that is ready for delivery and take it into a far corner of our plant and open it up, and with a fair and open mind examine each piece, and place ourselves in our customers' shoes, and give an honest opinion to ourselves of that work.? We are offering ourselves as the medium through which the housewife can escape from the slavery of the wash tub. She entrusts to us everything that is dear to good housewives, and do we prove worthy of the trust? Can we not with just the exercise of a little bit of common sense, and without the expendi- ture of any great amount of money, adopt means and methods of handling this work sanely, so that it would be returned to her as she would like to have it? Would this not help more than anything we could do to get the public to agree to pay a reason- able charge for this work? Would this not help more than any other advertisements that we might use to increase this branch of our business? Think it over, and see whether the fault is not largely our own. Before I finish I want to say a word on prices. We believe and we have demonstrated that if you will conduct your business in a manner to gain the respect of your trade you will have no trouble in getting prices that are sufficient to pay you the profit that you are entitled to, and, in conclusion, I want to say that the efforts I have put forth here this afternoon are, after all, con- trolled by selfish motive, because I believe sincerely and thor- oughly in the industry in which I am engaged, and which furn- ishes me a living. I believe that the higher plane on which this industry is placed by each individual will reflect upon the in- dustry as a whole. This is true of everything. If a murder is committed in your home-town that unconsciously reflects upon the entire community of which you are a part. If any of the Semi and Finished Work 117 members of our craft are exalted in the eyes of their fellow- townsmen, that reflects to the credit of our industry. Therefore, my motives are selfish, but my desire is to be of service to our industry, and to any man connected with it. Gentlemen, our doors are open and our time is yours. To substantiate these statements I have just made, I will give you some figures from our last week's business, if you so desire : Rough Dry Washings. 572 Washings. 8167 Pounds. 2246 Handkerchiefs. 11515 Pieces of Flat Work. 7714 Pieces of Wearing Apparel. 8167 Pounds at 9 cents $735.03 Plus 2246 Handkerchiefs at 1 cent. ... 22 .46 $757.49 8167 Pounds at 7 cents $571.69 Plus 19,229 pieces at 1 cent 192 . 29 $763.98 Difference in favor of 7 and 1 6 . 49 Comparison — Between Rough Dry at 9 cents per pound and seven and one price: Finished Family Business. Finished Family Business: Number washings done 96 Amount charged for same $292 .33 Average amount for each wash 3 . 04 96 washings weighed 1,658 lbs., at 9c. 149.23 Amt. charged for ironing body clothes 143 . 10 $292.33 List price of body clothes 215 . 20 Rec'd for ironing body clothes 143 . 10 This lot of washings contained : 2,504 pieces of flat work, 1,069 pieces of body clothes. If this work had been done by the lb. the price would have been 17c per lb. 118 Pound Laundry Service If done by the dozen, it would have been 97c per doz. Example. Washing weighs 20 lbs. at 9c $ 1 . 80 Body clothes 1.37 Total cost of washing $ 3.17 Body Clothes List Price. 1 Skirt $0.50 1 Waist 25 1 Drawers 15 1 Undershirt 15 1 Dress 1.00 $2.05 Less 33 1-3 per cent 68 $1.37 Net Rough Drying Handkerchiefs New York City Laundries Discontinued Two-Cent Extra Charge and Do Not Iron in Pound Work. By W. B. Haggerty. ABOUT six weeks ago the bundle work laundries in New York City advanced the price of pound work from 9 cents to 1 1 cents, this raise taking efTect just prior to the holidays Under the old price handkerchiefs were finished at two cents apiece extra, but under the 11-cent price a new system of only rough drying the handkerchiefs was instituted, with no charge but the pound price. In no case are handkerchiefs ironed in the pound work bundle. According to all reports, the system has proven a success, and the belief is prevalent among the owners that it will work to the advantage of both customer and laundry. It is contended there is a little profit in handkerchiefs at two cents apiece when handled in the pound work department, but it is hardly possible any laundry can show a profit at one cent extra for handkercniefs at present day costs. It is extremely difficult to attempt to point out costs of handling handkerchiefs, as many laundries have customers who are constantly demanding rebates for lost "kerchiefs," and, according to the customers' claims, the costs vary considerably. Then there is the unknown losses that occur which are never reported. Where the latter case results a dissatisfied customer is created and the home process of washing is reverted to, with the result that an already educated com- mercial laundry customer is practically eliminated. The system used in rough drying the handkerchiefs is to count them going and coming, using a 10x12 net, washing, extracting and put in dry tumbler. The customer has not shown a disposition to insist on handkerchiefs being ironed and is delighted with the new system, as it has always been hard to explain to the housewife why it costs 80 cents to wash and iron a pound and a half of handkerchiefs while the charge for seven or eight pounds of other articles is only 80 cents. One of the prominent owners said the new system has a tendency to hold the customer, and no doubt would prove a factor in creating new customers, who heretofore felt they could not afford to send the work to the laundry every week, as the 50 cent or $1 charge for handkerchiefs was too high and out of proportion, and in many cases the handkerchief charge was higher than the rest of the wash. Another owner declared he could not recall one claim coming in for lost handkerchiefs since the new system was installed, but previously the claims were the regular order, some of them, no doubt, just ones. 120 Pound Laundry Service The washing of handkerchiefs at home is the most disagree- able part of the entire wash, while the ironing of them is the least disagreeable. So, it is natural to assume, laundryowners point out, that if a woman has to wash the handkerchiefs be- cause of the high cost in the laundry, she feels she might just as well do the entire wash. In placing this plan before readers of The Starchroom I am giving the opinion of laundryowners who have various ways of charging for handkerchiefs. There are some laundries ironing handkerchiefs without any extra charge, but they are fast getting away from that system. This plan surely should appeal to that class. Other laundries charging one cent extra can well afford to give this method careful consideration, as the best authorities claim it is impossible to handle handkerchiefs under present prices and make a profit at one cent extra. The laundry charging two cents, as was the case in New York, may not take so kindly to the proposition, as they may show a slight profit. However, when such laundries as the Stancourt, Wallach's, Carolyn and the Park, after trying the system find it works out to the advantage of all, there is excellent opportunity for this class of laundryowners in other cities to weigh the matter carefully before passing it up. The writer is fully convinced the doing away with an extra charge for hand- kerchiefs will make new pound work customers in any com- munity. I have heard successful laundryowners claim they would prefer not to have the handkerchiefs come in at all, and these men were getting two cents extra. If this idea is borne out by laundryowners in general, then I say rough dry them and let the customer iron them at home, as the detail of netting the handkerchiefs is very small. The writer is a great believer in building a future in any line of endeavor, but it is hardly within his vision to cope with the method employed by many laundryowners who are weekly picking up and delivering three collars at three cents each. The three-collar-a-week customer may some day be a better customer, but this is not the age for the laundryowner to conduct a service to any customer at a permanent loss, and these small bundles should be brought to the laundry and called for by the customer. On the other hand, there is another class of strictly collar customers who might be interested in trying out the pound rate system when told just what ten pounds or fifteen pounds, in- cluding the entire family wash, will cost. This set figure cannot be given where a separate charge is made for handkerchiefs. We should like to gather more data on this system of rough drying handkerchiefs and would welcome facts from laundries in any section of the country doing this class of work. 267 90 '^ ' • . «> J.N' iV^^ \.^^ V ^' ^^'% V . . ^ - • • " Jt^ * AOt ^^.-^ Ao, .^^'\ -