1. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; text of speech from Karen Nussbaum, 1976, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 1, folder 3, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University. She acknowledged that affirmative action had succeeded in part because 9to5 had won job posting, career counseling, salary reviews, and promotional opportunities for women in various businesses. Also some firms were increasing minority hiring for clerical positions.

2. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, “Enforcement Research Committee Report” concerning affirmative action, n.d. [early 1980s], 88-96-89-M104, Carton 4, folder 144, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

3. Ellen Cassedy, interviewed by Ann Froines, SEIU District 925 Legacy Project, Walter P. Reuther Library, Wayne State University, 6 November 2005.

4. Histories about the labor activities of female office workers in the 1970s include Dorothy Sue Cobble, “‘A Spontaneous Loss of Enthusiasm’: Workplace Feminism and the Transformation of Women’s Service Jobs in the 1970s,” International Labor and Working-Class History 56 (Fall 1999): 23–44; Cobble, The Other Women’s Movement: Workplace Justice and Social Rights in Modern America (Princeton, 2004); Dennis A. Deslippe, “Rights Not Roses”: Unions and the Rise of Working-Class Feminism, 1945–1980 (Urbana, 2000).

5. Lisa Genasci, “An Advocate for Working Women: Profile: Karen Nussbaum,” Los Angeles Times, 16 August 1994, http://articles.latimes.com/1994-08-16/business/fi-27681_1_karen-nussbaum.

6. Anthony Chen, The Fifth Freedom: Jobs, Politics, and Civil Rights in the United States, 1941–1972 (Princeton, 2009); Nelson Lichtenstein, State of the Union: A Century of American Labor (Princeton, 2002).

7. Turk, Katherine, Equality on Trial: Gender and Rights in the Modern American Workplace (Philadelphia, 2016)Google Scholar; Kessler-Harris, Alice, In Pursuit of Equity: Women, Men, and the Quest for Economic Citizenship in Twentieth-Century America (New York, 2001)Google Scholar.

8. Executive Order 11375 added “sex” to the list of protected classes outlined in 11246, and women became a category of workers entitled to affirmative action guidelines. Yet the guidelines had been created with black men in mind. Mayeri, Serena, Reasoning from Race: Feminism, Law, and the Civil Rights Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 2011).Google Scholar

9. President Lyndon B. Johnson, Commencement address at Howard University, “To Fulfill These Rights,” 4 June 1965, LBJ Presidential Library, http://www.lbjlibrarnet/.

10. Dobbin, Frank, Inventing Equal Opportunity (Princeton, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar Dobbin argued that personnel took charge at a time of declining union power. And “what personnel made popular gradually became lawful” (5). The courts have fostered the spread of similar equal-opportunity policies across firms and industries by upholding the “best practices” of prominent employers. See also Benton Williams, “AT&T and the Private-Sector Origins of Private-Sector Affirmative Action,” Journal of Policy History 20, no. 4 (2008): 543–68.

11. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; Minutes of Executive Board, 17 November 1975, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 1, folder 6, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

12. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News 1, no. 1, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

13. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records; text of speech from Karen Nussbaum, 1976, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 1, folder 3, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University. Carton 1, folder 18, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

14. Laird, Pamela Walker, Pull: Networking and Success Since Benjamin Franklin (Cambridge, Mass., 2006).Google Scholar

15. For statistics, see Claudia Goldin, Lawrence Katz, and Ilyana Kuziemko, “The Homecoming of American College Women: The Reversal of the College Gender Gap,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 4 (Fall 2006): 133–56.

16. And women in college were encouraged to study nontraditional subjects since the opportunity to pursue different lines of work was becoming available.

17. McColloch, Mark, Whit- Collar Workers in Transition: The Boom Years, 1940–1970 (Westport, Conn. 1983), 86, 138, 148Google Scholar; Alexander, Rodney and Sapery, Elisabeth, Shortchanged: Minorities and Women in Banking (New York, 1973), 24.Google Scholar

18. Laird, Pull.

19. Graham, Hugh Davis, The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy, 1960–1972 (New York, 1990), 413.Google Scholar

20. Boustan, Leah Platt and Collins, William J., “The Origins and Persistence of Black-White Differences in Women’s Labor Force Participation,” in Human Capital in History: The American Record, ed. Boustan, Leah Platt, Frydman, Carola, and Margo, Robert A. (Chicago, 2014), 212.Google Scholar

21. Goldin, Claudia, “The Quiet Revolution that Transformed Women’s Employment, Education, and Family,” American Economic Review 96 (May 2006)Google Scholar: 13. Also, universities with public funding were required to encourage women to take part in nontraditional majors.

22. The Index of Segregation decreased from 67.68 in 1970 to 52.98 in 1990. Changes in the sex composition within occupations—principally due to the entry of women into traditionally male jobs—accounted for two-thirds to three-quarters of the decline in segregation. While in 1970, 71 percent of men and 55 percent of women worked in jobs where individuals of the same sex comprised the overwhelming majority (80 percent or more) of workers, by 1990 this was true of only about two-fifths of men and one-third of women. Francine Blau, Patricia Simpson, and Deborah Anderson, “Continuing Progress? Trends in Occupational Segregation in the United States over the 1970s and 1980s,” Feminist Economics (Fall 1998): 29–71. And the gender wage gap narrowed between 1970 and 1990, from almost 60 cents to 72 cents to a man’s dollar. U.S. Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States, “Number and Real Median Earnings of Total Workers and Full-Time, Year-Round Workers by Sex and Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio: 1960–2013, https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/incpovhlth/2013/table5.pdf.

23. Cobble, Dorothy Sue, “Introduction,” in The Sex of Class: Women Transforming American Labor, ed. Cobble, (Ithaca, 2007), 2.Google Scholar

24. Blau, , Simpson, , and Anderson, , “Continuing Progress? 29–71.Google Scholar The percentage of women who worked as secretaries actually increased: 98 percent in 1970 to 99 percent in 1980 and 1990. Typists went from 95 in 1970 to 97 percent in 1980, then to 94 percent in 1990, and bookkeepers from 81 percent in 1970 to 90 percent in 1980 and 1990.

25. Jolls, Christine, “Accommodation Mandates,” Stanford Law Review 53 (2000): 292–95.Google Scholar By 1990, seven jobs remained more than 95 percent female: secretaries (98.7%), dental hygienists (98.4%), prekindergarten and kindergarten teachers (97.8%), childcare workers in private households (97.3%), dental assistants (97.1%), receptionists (95.7%), and childcare workers other than private households (95.6%).

26. From the U.S. Census in 1972 and 1992, data reported was that .8 percent of black working women and 1.0 percent of white working women in 1972, which inched up to 2.3 percent of black working women, were in the skilled trades and 2.1 percent of all white working women. See MacLean, Nancy, “The Hidden History of Affirmative Action: Working Women’s Struggles in the 1970s and the Gender of Class,” Feminist Studies 25, no. 1 (Spring 1999): 57.Google Scholar

27. And it has remained between 76 and 78 cents since 2001. U.S. Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United States, Number and Real Median Earnings of Total Workers and Full-Time, Year-Round Workers by Sex and Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio: 1960–2013, https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/incpovhlth/2013/table5.pdf.

28. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Table 11: Employed Persons by Detailed Occupation, Sex, Race, and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity, 2016,” Current Population Survey (2017), https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm.

29. Male-dominated occupations are defined by the Department of Labor as those occupations comprising 25 percent or fewer women. Hegewisch, Ariane and Williams-Baron, Emma, “Fact Sheet: The Gender Wage Gap by Occupation 2016 and by Race and Ethnicity,” Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2017.Google Scholar

30. Other histories explore fair employment practices before affirmative action fully materialized. Jennifer Delton argues that corporate actors, not just civil rights activists and policymakers, promoted equal employment opportunities based on race long before the affirmative action directives of the 1960s and 1970s. Delton, Jennifer, Racial Integration in Corporate America, 1940–1990 (New York, 2009).Google Scholar Anthony Chen traces the roots of affirmative action policy to the 1940s, exploring debates about the role of government in job discrimination. Chen, Anthony, The Fifth Freedom: Jobs, Politics, and Civil Rights in the United States, 1941–1972 (Princeton, 2009).Google Scholar

31. MacLean, Nancy, Freedom Is Not Enough: The Opening of the American Workplace (Cambridge, Mass., 2006).Google Scholar

32. Deslippe, Dennis, Protesting Affirmative Action: The Struggle over Equality After the Civil Rights Revolution (Baltimore, 2012).Google Scholar Deslippe addresses affirmative action in higher education as well as in the police force.

33. Turk, Equality on Trial.

34. Women and minorities may have benefited from government prohibition of “push discrimination,” but they had more challenges when trying to access the networks that could pull them into positions of power and status. Laird, Pull.

35. Harragan, Betty Lehan, Games Mother Never Taught You: Corporate Gamesmanship for Women (New York, 1978), 38.Google Scholar

36. Ibid., 40.

37. McDowell, Edwin, “Betty Harragan, 77, Advocate of Women’s Workplace Rights,” New York Times, 14 July 1998.Google Scholar

38. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, Men and Women of the Corporation (New York, 1977)Google Scholar; Elias, Allison, “Learning to Lead: Women and Success in Corporate America,” Business and Economic History—Online, vol. 13, 2015.Google Scholar

39. The Department of Treasury, for instance, monitored its own contracts with private banks. Dean J. Kotlowski, Nixon’s Civil Rights: Politics, Principle, and Policy (Cambridge, Mass., 2002); Nathan Glazer, Affirmative Discrimination: Ethic Inequality and Public Policy (New York, 1975).

40. Murray, Pauli, “Economic and Educational Inequality Based on Sex: An Overview,” Valparaiso University Law Review 5, no. 237 (1971): 237–80.Google Scholar

41. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, The Evolution of a Problematic Partnership: The Feds and Higher Education (Washington, D.C., 1981): 41–43; Max Frankel, “Johnson Signs Order to Protect Women in U.S. Jobs from Bias,” New York Times, 14 October 1967. They lobbied the Department of Housing, Education, and Welfare (HEW), the government agency that held university contracts.

42. U.S. President’s Task Force on Women’s Rights and Responsibilities, “A Matter of Simple Justice” (Washington, D.C., 1970), 18.

43. Bender, Marylin, “Tokenism for Women? Three Companies Name Them Assistant Secretary,” New York Times, 20 February 1972.Google Scholar

44. Kotlowski, , Nixon’s Civil Rights, 243–44.Google Scholar

45. Hugh Davis Graham, The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy, 1960–1972 (New York, 1990), 412–13. Employers should issue numerical targets and conduct statistical analysis not just for minorities but also for women. Historian Hugh Davis Graham rightly observed that the directive “was officially promulgated to a non-observant nation,” meaning its potential significance was overlooked or even underestimated by many employers and employees.

46. Jean Tepperman papers, Tepperman interview with organizer of Black Employee Committee at Houghton Mifflin, #25, 1974–75, MC366, Box 1, folder 7, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

47. Greenwald, Carol S., Banks Are Dangerous to Your Wealth (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1980), 10–11.Google Scholar

48. Interview with former in-house counsel of MNE in the 1980s, 21 January 2016.

49. See Snider, Patricia J., “External Data for Affirmative Action Planning,” in Affirmative Action Planning, ed. Milkovich, George and Dyer, Lee (New York, 1979), 5–14.Google Scholar

50. Ibid., 6.

51. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; text of speech from Karen Nussbaum, “Women at Work,” 23 May 1978, 88-M96–86-M104, Carton 2, folder 47, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

52. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, “Enforcement Research Committee Report” concerning affirmative action, n.d. [early 1980s], 88-96-89-M104, Carton 4, folder 144, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University. Although most women in 9to5 were white women, 9to5 recognized that women of color faced discrimination “both by sex as well as race . . . [and we] need to united all discriminated women if we ever plan to eliminate sex discrimination.” The median annual salary for black women in Boston insurance companies was only $3,672 in the early 1980s.

53. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News 1, no. 1, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

54. King, Mary C., “Black Women’s Breakthrough into Clerical Work: An Occupational Tipping Model,” Journal of Economic Issues 27, no. 4 (December 1993): 1097–1125.Google Scholar

55. Jean Tepperman Papers, Tepperman interview with African-American Boston College clerical who began work in 1968, #30, 1974–75. MC 366, Box 1, folder 8, Schlesinger Library.

56. Newman, Jerry and Krzystofiak, Frank, “Toward Internal Availability: Intra-Organizational Roadmaps,” in Affirmative Action Planning, ed. Milkovich, and Dyer, (New York, 1979), 32–33.Google Scholar

57. Bender, “Tokenism for Women.

58. Davis, Susan, “Law and Revised Order 4: Showdown on Sex Discrimination,” Chicago Tribune, 4 February 1972Google Scholar.

59. “Management: Therapy for Sexists,” Time, 2 September 1974.

60. Boyle, Barbara, “Equal Opportunity for Women Is Smart Business,” Harvard Business Review (May–June 1973): 85.Google Scholar

61. Ibid., 91.

62. Ibid., 92.

63. See chapter 3 of Allison Louise Elias, “Standardizing Sex Discrimination: Clerical Workers, Labor Organizing, and Feminism” (PhD diss., University of Virginia, 2013). Publishing activities are discussed in chapter 3. In publishing houses more so than in other industries, women clerical workers were able to win tangible victories. As discussed in chapter 3, a particular committee of 9to5, Women in Publishing (WIP), worked to improve career opportunities for women in the field. Because publishing women cared as much or more about promotional tracts as they did about salaries, what became known as affirmative action guidelines allayed some of their concerns. They wanted notification of internal job openings so that they could increase their mobility; they wanted job descriptions so that they could more clearly define promotional opportunities; and they wanted in-house and external training so that they could advance in their careers. For college-educated, white women, like those working in publishing, what became the policies of affirmative action were supposed to facilitate opportunities for upward mobility.

64. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; 9to5, Attachment to Demands to SSA, 27 January 1977, 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1033, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

65. P. C. Krist, executive vice president of Mobil, Women at Work Exposition, October 1979, Box 93, folder 3, Women’s Action Alliance Records, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

66. Polaroid Corporation Corporate Services Division, “Affirmative Action Plan,” July 1979 to July 1980, HR-18, I.388, Baker Library, Harvard Business School, Cambridge. For employee complaints about external hiring, see Minutes from Employees Committee (EC)-Personnel Policy Committee (PPC) meeting, 15 April 1976, and Minutes from EC-PPC meeting, 20 May 1976, HR-5, I.377, Baker Library. See 31 March 1977 meeting, HR-5, I.377, for Employees Committee slide-show presentation on the problems of external hiring.

67. Fogel, Helen, “Order 4 Opens Doors for Women in Industry,” Chicago Tribune, 13 February 1972.Google Scholar

68. Kleinman, Carol, “Local Companies Swing into Action on Female Equality,” Chicago Tribune, 13 February 1972.Google Scholar

69. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; Honeywell Affirmative Action Plan, 1974, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 3, folder 92, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

70. Ibid. Overall, women constituted 87 percent of its office workforce.

71. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; Dorothy G. Curnane, manager of personnel and EEO coordinator, “Affirmative Action Program,” Cabot Corporation of Boston, 1 May 1976, 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1037, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

72. Evelyn Ray, EEO compliance at Norton Simon, Women at Work Exposition, October 1979, Box 92, folder 31, Women’s Action Alliance Records, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

73. Vanderkam, Laura, “The Most Powerful Women in Business—Then and Now,” Fortune, 28 May 2013Google Scholar; Robertson, Wyndham, “The Ten Highest-Ranking Women in Big Business,” Fortune, April 1973.Google Scholar Historian Pamela Laird has noted that these female executives had the requisite social capital necessary to assume positions of formal organizational leadership, although they still faced constraints related to their gender. Laird, , Pull, 247–48.Google Scholar

74. McColloch, , White-Collar Workers in Transition, 86.Google Scholar

75. Ibid., 136–38.

76. Ibid., 122.

77. Ibid., 117–22.

78. Ralston, Mary, “Myths That Hold Back Miss, Ms., and Mrs.,” Wisconsin Academy Review 20, no. 2 (Spring 1974): 30.Google Scholar

79. Boyle and her receptionist quoted in Ralston, “Myths That Hold Back Miss, Ms., and Mrs.,” 30.

80. Churchill, Neil C. and John K., Shank, “Affirmative Action and Guilt-Edged Goals,” Harvard Business Review (March–April 1976): 112.Google Scholar

81. Ibid.

82. Ibid., 113.

83. Ibid., 116.

84. Leonard, Jonathan S. “The Impact of Affirmative Action on Employment,” Journal of Labor Economics 2 (1984): 447.Google Scholar Only 26 of the establishments were barred from bidding on government contracts and 331 had to provide back pay totaling $61 million. In his 1985 article, Leonard indicated that establishments seemed to be randomly chosen, citing that an OFCCP officer explained that because he had a summer cottage on the beach, in the summer he reviewed establishments near the ocean. Leonard, “Affirmative Action as Earnings Redistribution: The Targeting of Compliance Reviews,” Journal of Labor Economics 3 (July 1985): 374, 387.

85. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; text of speech from Karen Nussbaum, 1976, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 1, folder 3. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

86. Greenwald, , Banks Are Dangerous to Your Wealth, 7.Google Scholar

87. Alexander, and Sapery, , Shortchanged, 5.Google Scholar

88. Greenwald, , Banks Are Dangerous to Your Wealth, 9.Google Scholar

89. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; Letter from Ruth Olds, banking chair, 9to5 to Weldon J. Rougeau, director of OFCCP, 18 December 1979, 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1028. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

90. Ibid.

91. Greenwald, , Banks Are Dangerous to Your Wealth, 10–11.Google Scholar

92. Ibid., 17.

93. Alexander, and Sapery, , Shortchanged, 34.Google Scholar

94. Jean Tepperman papers, Tepperman interview with associate editor at Houghton Mifflin, #26, 1974–75. MC366, Box 1, folder 7. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

95. Alexander, and Sapery, , Shortchanged, 34.Google Scholar

96. Greenwald, , Banks Are Dangerous to Your Wealth, 20.Google Scholar Greenwald conducted studies on affirmative action in 1976 and 1978, charging banks with discriminatory hiring and employment practices. This survey focused not only on numbers of women and minorities in certain job categories but also on whether women and minorities with comparable experience and education were receiving the same pay as were white men.

97. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Chronology of Events, n.d. [1979], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

98. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Anson Smith, “Legislator Wants Look at Bank Study,” Boston Globe, 9 February 1979, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

99. Ibid.

100. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Letter from William Proxmire, Chairman of Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee to the Honorable Ray Marshall, Secretary of Labor, 4 January 1979, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

101. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Press release, 9to5’s Claims Substantiated by Greenwald Survey, Contact: Anne Serino, Joan Quinlan, 3 January 1979, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

102. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Chronology of Events, n.d. [1979], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

103. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Press release, 9to5’s Claims Substantiated by Greenwald Survey, Contact: Anne Serino, Joan Quinlan, 3 January 1979, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

104. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Letter from Weldon J. Rougeau, Director of OFCCP to Joan Quinlan, 9to5, 29 January 1979, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 4, folder 119. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

105. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; 9to5, “Statistical Study of Boston Area Employment,” November 1973, 79-M16–81-M121, Box 5, folder 127. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

106. The report gives 6,200 dollars as the official CSA poverty line. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; “Office Work in Boston: A Statistical Study” n.d. [1978/1979], 79-M16–81-M121, Box 5, folder 127. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

107. Statement of Karen Nussbaum at Women at Work Exposition, October 1979, Women’s Action Alliance Records, Box 92, folder 31, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

108. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; 9to5, “Claim Against Boston’s Insurance Industry: A Study of the Treatment of Women Office Workers in Insurance,” September 1974, 79-M16–81-M121, Box 5, folder 127. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

109. Until 1978 the OFCCP (originally named the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, or OFCC, until 1975) only supervised the various agencies that conducted compliance reviews in each industry. Bernard E. Anderson, “The Ebb and Flow of Enforcing Executive Order 11246,” American Economic Review 86, no. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the 108th Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (May 1996), 299.

110. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; Letter from Janet Selcer, 9to5 Staff, to Insurance Committee Members, 30 July 1974; Attachment to letter, “Boston Insurance Companies and Affirmative Action Requirements,” 1974, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 105, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

111. For instance, when Everette Friedman, SSA chief compliance officer, was planning to review Prudential in Boston, Prudential fought to keep its records confidential. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86, Letter from Janet Selcer, 9to5 Staff, to Insurance Committee Members, 30 July 1974, and attachment to letter, “Boston Insurance Companies and Affirmative action Requirements,” 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 105. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University; 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5 chart, Insurance Committee Activity with the Social Security Administration, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

112. In addition, Frank B. Hall and Marsh & McLennan maintained that they did not have to submit information to the SSA. Both claimed that they did not have more than $50,000 in federal contracts, which was the minimum required for a company to be subject to affirmative action guidelines. Despite delays and disputes, the SSA scheduled reviews at Blue Cross Blue Shield and Travelers Insurance; eventually 9to5 convinced the SSA to review both John Hancock and Liberty Mutual. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5 chart, Insurance Committee Activity with the Social Security Administration, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University. John Hancock review mentioned in 9to5, Women’s Insurance News 1, no. 2, n.d. [Summer 1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Liberty Mutual mentioned in 9to5, Women’s Insurance News, n.d. [Summer 1977], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111.

113. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5 chart, Insurance Committee Activity with the Social Security Administration, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

114. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5 Boston, Finance Committee, “Claim Against Boston’s Insurance Industry: A Study of the Treatment of Women Office Workers in Insurance,” September 1974, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

115. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5 chart, Insurance Committee Activity with the Social Security Administration, n.d. [1976]. 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

116. Ibid.

117. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Marsh & McLennan Newsletter for Women Employees, vol. 1, no. 1, October 1975, 88-M96-89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111, Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

118. Ibid.

119. Ibid.

120. Ibid.

121. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Records, 1972–80; 9to5, Committees Three Month Plan, Insurance, 1976, 79-M16–81-M121, Carton 1, folder 7. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

122. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; 9to5, Planning Committee, 3 Month Plan, July, August, September 1976, 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1024. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

123. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; “How to Evaluate Your Company,” n.d. [1976], 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1034. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

124. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News, vol. 1, no. 1, n.d. [1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

125. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972-1986; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News, Vol. 1, No. 2, n.d. [Summer 1976], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

126. However, at Liberty Mutual an employee relations manager refused to speak with 9to5 about job postings; Liberty remained one of the last major Boston companies that refused to alter its posting practices. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–86; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News, n.d. [1976/1977], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

127. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972-1986; 9to5, Women’s Insurance News, n.d. [Summer 1977], 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 111. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University. For more on campaigns and potential campaigns in specific offices see 9to5, Minutes of the Women’s Insurance Forum Steering Committee, September 15, 1976, 88-M96–89-M104, Carton 3, folder 110.

128. 9to5, National Association of Working Women (U.S.) Additional records, 1972–85; 9to5, Attachment to Demands to SSA, 27 January 1977, 82-M189–86-M213, Carton 16, folder 1033. Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe Institute, Harvard University.

129. Laird, , Pull, 291–96.Google Scholar

130. U.S. Department of Labor, “A Report on the Glass Ceiling Initiative,” 1991.

131. Broderick, Renae and Milkovich, Carolyn, “Breaking the Glass Ceiling,” Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies, Cornell ILR School (October 1991), 9.Google Scholar

132. Catalyst, Women in Corporate Management: Results of a Catalyst Survey (New York, 1990), 28.

133. Ruth Blumrosen, Rutgers law professor, Equal Pay Workshop, Women at Work Exposition, October 1979, Box 91, folder 32, Women’s Action Alliance Records, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

134. Deslippe, , Protesting Affirmative ActionGoogle Scholar.