|
Post by maryland on Aug 28, 2014 16:15:59 GMT
No, I don't know anyone that had a full time housekeeper. We knew people with a good amount of money, but not enough to afford a full time housekeeper. Like the Bradys! Loved that show!
|
|
|
Post by stampbooker on Aug 28, 2014 16:40:35 GMT
I think if you can offer room and board (an extra room and bathroom or a MIL suite or something) you could hire live in help for about the same price as many pay for daycare.
Julie
|
|
scrapaddie
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,090
Jul 8, 2014 20:17:31 GMT
|
Post by scrapaddie on Aug 28, 2014 16:51:44 GMT
Now, yes, you would have to be rich, although having a full time au pair might be the closest to it these days and would be just about affordable for a professional couple who both work, but back in the fifties and sixties I don't think it was uncommon for middle class families to have full time help in the home. My DH's grandparents owned a pharmacy, and had a full time maid. Their home had an annexe - the maid's quarters. I can remember my dad telling me that it was fairly common for the local bank managers to have a full time housekeeper. So whilst I think you would have had to be comfortably well off with a good professional salary to afford a full time housekeeper, I don't think it was the preserve of the upper classes and the fabulously wealthy.
I was born in the early 50's... Anyone who had a maid was RICH!!!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 11, 2024 0:32:06 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 17:00:15 GMT
Now, yes, you would have to be rich, although having a full time au pair might be the closest to it these days and would be just about affordable for a professional couple who both work, but back in the fifties and sixties I don't think it was uncommon for middle class families to have full time help in the home. My DH's grandparents owned a pharmacy, and had a full time maid. Their home had an annexe - the maid's quarters. I can remember my dad telling me that it was fairly common for the local bank managers to have a full time housekeeper. So whilst I think you would have had to be comfortably well off with a good professional salary to afford a full time housekeeper, I don't think it was the preserve of the upper classes and the fabulously wealthy.
I was born in the early 50's... Anyone who had a maid was RICH!!! So I guess those of us that had family that had this are lying? I am thinking it might have been regional like one pea stated. But trust me again I am not lying. My grandparents were not rich.
|
|
|
Post by anonrefugee on Aug 28, 2014 17:48:38 GMT
No but my grandma did. She had a full time housekeeper. Even after she retired my grandmother continued to pay her a weekly stipend to help support her. And get this -- they also had someone who *ironed* full time. Back then I think even sheets and t-shirts were ironed. I would say they had money but they weren't rich rich. My mom prided herself on no housekeeper - but she had an ironing lady! I remember the big basket leaving the house...
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Aug 28, 2014 17:55:10 GMT
Even in the 50s and 60s it was extremely regional. I know many in the south had housekeepers. It was much, much less common in other parts of the country. For the middle class to afford a housekeeper, you need a large pool of very low income working class. If you have a large pool of economically disadvantaged people with few other opportunities you'll find the middle class with maids and drivers. I grew up middle class in the 60s and 70s and knew very few people that had a cleaning lady, let alone a FT housekeeper. Most of the moms were SAHM and it was only when they started entering the workforce in the 70s that a few hired help. My parents would never have spent money on something like that and, with 5 kids, had an inhouse cleaning service. When my mom went to work, chores were rearranged and even my dad took on some of the household stuff. My mom thinks it is great that most of her kids have cleaning services and my dad is completely disgusted with us because he just sees it as spending money friviously on something we are too lazy to do ourselves.
|
|
akathy
What's For Dinner?
Still peaing from Podunk!
Posts: 4,546
Location: North Dakota
Jun 25, 2014 22:56:55 GMT
|
Post by akathy on Aug 28, 2014 17:58:35 GMT
I grew up in the 50s and 60s and no one in my area had housekeepers. Some we considered rich had cleaning ladies come in once a week or monthly.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 28, 2014 18:00:02 GMT
This article uses stats from the 1930s, but addresses the regional nature of domestic help. It's really not surprising. Reduced opportunities - both education and work, resulted in a large pool of people who could make extremely, low wages. It doesn't address the midwest - but with a huge demand for farm labor a viable alternative for uneducated workers, I doubt there were many domestic servants there. link
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Aug 28, 2014 18:28:58 GMT
Out of curiosity, I found the study from the article I linked to. It actually looked in detail at 6 different cities between 1934-1936 and the percentage that hired a domestic servant or outsourced laundry: Lansing, Michigan 33% Portland, Maine 33% Indianapolis, Indiana 34% Denver, Colorado 45% Los Angeles, California 42% Jackson, Mississippi 81%
|
|