Strike Outcome
The strikes in my comparison were met with defeat. In the following section I will address how the independent strike variables facilitated the defeat of the strikes. In Snyder and Kelly’s sample, the authors found that non-violent “offensive” strikes concerning material issues (not related to the unions), with 400-600 participants were the most successful. Strike duration and issue complexity did not have a great influence upon the success of strikes in their sample. In the following section, I will focus on how strike size and violence affected the outcome of the strikes in my comparison. I will also take into account the issue of strike duration, as it appears to have influenced the outcome of the strikes in my comparison.
Strike Size
In their study of strikes in Italy, Snyder and Kelly found that the strikes which involved 400 to 600 workers were the most successful. This suggests that the workers increase their bargaining position by increasing the strike’s rank and file. However, in the largest size category (1500+) of their sample, the authors found a relative lack of increased success rates. Snyder and Kelly attributed this to official intervention on the side of the employers, which was a greater factor in the larger strikes within their sample. While larger strikes may indicate better organization on the side of the workers, official intervention counteracts the workers organizational advantages.277 The strikes in Homestead, Pullman and Mingo County fall into Snyder and Kelly’s largest size category of 1500+ strikers, and were defeated by official intervention. The following paragraphs will analyze the how the intervention by the State and Federal authorities helped end the strikes.
Homestead
Four days after the battle with the Pinkertons, at Frick request, Governor Robert E. Pattison ordered 8,000 National Guardsmen to Homestead, initiating a military occupation which lasted ninety-five days.278 The strikers were receptive to the military presence, hoping that a resolution would be forthcoming, and the union urged to be respectful towards the guardsmen. However, it soon became apparent that the military was there to enforce company policy and protect the strikebreakers. Under the protection of the National Guard, Frick began to import strikebreakers and reopened the mill on July 15. The mission of the militia was apparent by the words of General George R Snowden: “Philadelphians can hardly appreciate the actual communism in these people [in Homestead]. They believe the works are their’s [sic] quite as much as Carnegie’s”.279
The Courts agreed. Indictments for murder, riot and conspiracy were handed down to 167 residents of Homestead. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania brought further charges against the union’s advisory committee, stating that the organizers “intended to raise and levy war, insurrection and rebellion against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania”.280 The Justice also argued that the strikers were not participants in “a mob driven to desperation by hunger as in the days of the French Revolution,”, but they were “men receiving exceptionally high wages…resisting the law and resorting to violence and bloodshed in the assertion of imaginary rights.”281
Pullman
Intervention by the Federal Government was initiated by Pullman and the General Managers’ Association. After the national ARU voted to begin a sympathy boycott, the Pullman traffic out of Chicago was brought to a stand still, and the boycott spread to the western and southern states. An example of its effect on the railroads is the drastic decrease in tonnage hauled. During the last week in June, the 10 trunk-line railroads out of Chicago hauled 42,892 tons of eastbound freight. During the first week of July, the amount dropped to 11,600 tons.282 The majority of the national press viewed the strike and boycott tantamount to blackmail. An editorial in Harper’s Weekly stated that the boycott is “morally” no better than “the brigand who demands ransom for his prisoner, with mutilation or death as the alternative.”283
At the time of the strike, Chicago had a population of 1.8 million people within an area covering 186 square miles. Within the city limits there were 3,000 square miles of train tracks. In addition, there were several yards, shops, signal towers and switching systems that would need protection in case of rioting. On hand for safeguarding the property was a regular police force of about 3,000 and in reserve 500 substitutes.284 Prior to the boycott, the GMA made arrangements with the Mayor of Chicago that members of the police force would be used on incoming and outgoing trains in order to arrest troublemakers. The mayor made it clear, however, that this arrangement would go into effect as long as the police were not used as strikebreakers.285
The GMA appealed to the federal government for assistance. The association sought to transform the conflict from a dispute between the worker and employer, to one between the worker and the U.S. Government. United States mail cars were attached to the end of trains hauling Pullman cars. By removing the Pullman cars, the strikers would inevitably hinder mail delivery. The GMA requested assistance from the U.S. Marshall in the form of special deputies. On July 1, approximately 3,600 deputies were selected by the GMA, paid for by the railroads and served as U.S. officers and railroad employees.
In conjunction with the deputies, the GMA requested Federal military assistance; as early as July 2, the garrison outside of Chicago was instructed to make preparations for intervention.286 Illinois Governor John P. Altgeld was not consulted and he protested the intervention of Federal troops.287 President Cleveland argued that the troops were sent to protect federal property and interstate commerce, to prevent mail obstruction and to enforce the injunctions. The ARU declared on several occasions that it had no interest in stopping mail delivery, and offered to pull the mail trains, as long as Pullman cars were not attached. However, the managers were unwilling to concede, and saw the situation as a boon for Federal intervention and a way to break the strike. By July 10, 2,000 federal troops were stationed in Chicago, and established their headquarters in the Pullman building.
The judicial system was another tool utilized to break the strike and the rail boycott, which had spread to the western and southern states directly affecting 50,000 miles of railroad.288 The U.S. Attorney General Richard Olney cited the Interstate Commerce Act and the Sherman Antitrust Act as a justification for the injunctions, which granted the railroads complete protection within a given jurisdiction.289 The first omnibus injunction was issued in Chicago on July 2.290 By obstructing the mail and interstate commerce the strikers were charged with conspiracy. The injunction claimed that the Pullman cars were indispensable to the successful operation of the trains; even if this were not the case the railroads could not refuse to pull them, lest they violate contractual obligations with Pullman.291
The blanket injunction forbade the interference with “mail trains, express trains, or other trains, whether freight or passenger, engaged in interstate commerce, or carrying passengers or freight between or among the states”.292 A crucial element within the injunction was the provision that prohibited any striker or union representative to induce any employee to leave their jobs, or keep anyone from accepting work on any railroad. Essentially, picketing became a crime. The injunction removed “trial by jury”, as the judge who initiated the injunction could punish the violators for contempt of court.
The New York Times referred to the injunction as a “Gatlin gun on paper”; and the Chicago Times wrote that it was “a menace to liberty…a weapon ever ready for the capitalist”. The New York World wrote that it was “so outrageous a stretch of federal power” and that it is “infinitely more harmful and dangerous than the stupid strike against which it is directed.” Furthermore, the paper argued the American people “will never consent that the power of the Federal Government shall be placed at the disposal of railroad managers when they quarrel with their employees, while the government recognizes no reciprocal obligation to secure the employees in the enjoyment of their rights and privileges.”293
The strikers were placed in an impossible situation. If they obeyed the injunction, and waited for its legality to be tested in a court of law, the strike would be broken in the interim. Conversely, if the strikers ignored the injunction, they would be arrested and punished for contempt of court, breaking up the ranks of the strikers. For this purpose, the injunction became a valuable tool for breaking strikes.294
A special grand jury was convened on July 10 to determine if the strikes constituted an insurrection against the government. To the jury, the judge defined insurrection as any open and active opposition to the execution of the law. Since the law forbade obstructing the mail and interstate commerce, such actions, therefore, were acts of insurrection. The grand jury returned indictments against Debs and three other officials of the ARU, charging them with conspiracy to obstruct the mail, the interruption of interstate commerce, and with intimidation the citizenry in the free exercise of their rights and privileges under the U.S. Constitution.295 The offices of the ARU were raided and all documents seized by the Federal authorities. Debs and the union officials were arrested and released on bail.
Representing Debs and the ARU, the Mayor of Chicago sent the GMA a proposal to end the strike, with the provision that the workers be re-employed at their previous positions without prejudice. The GMA refused to meet with the union, and believed that the strike would be defeated by the troops and the courts. On July 17, Debs and other union officials were arrested for contempt of court, and the unionists decided to remain in jail to test the legality of the injunctions.
In order to enforce the injunction and stop the Chicago rioting, over 14,000 armed agents; including the police, Illinois National Guardsmen, deputy sheriffs, U.S. soldiers and deputy marshals. Similar to Homestead, these agents were used to import strikebreakers and re-open the rail lines. The intervention by the officials was successful in breaking the strike and the American Railway Union.
Mingo County
The strikes in Mingo County were also defeated by the intervention by the officials. The use of the mine guards to repress union activity, the State and Federal declarations of martial law and the dispatch of troops into the area, assisted the coal companies’ attempts to stifle labor conflict within the region. The attempts were overwhelmingly successful. Following President Harding’s declaration that the conflict was the equivalent of a civil war and the miners’ defeat at the battle for Blair Mountain, the UMWA was crushed and the miners returned to work without a union or room to bargain with the operators.
Strike Duration
Snyder and Kelly did not find a distinct relationship between duration and outcome. In their sample, single-day strikes were slightly more likely to fail, but so were the longest strikes in their sample.296 However, the defeat of the Homestead and Pullman strikes can be partly attributed to the hardships the workers faced during an extended strike period.
Homestead
In mid-October, the local newspaper, the Homestead News, which had previously been in support of the strike, began to editorialize that the strike was lost and abandoned. Financial assistance for the strikers was depleted and many were leaving the town to look for new employment. By October 13, the mill had replaced the striking workers with almost 2000 new workers. It became apparent to the strikers that the operation of the mill could be achieved without them. Afraid that their jobs were being taking over by strikebreakers, several of the workers held a meeting and voted to ask for their jobs back. The union members voted to reopen the mill, by a vote of 101 to 91.297
On November 20, the strike was declared over and the workers returned to work without a contract. The intervention by the state and the company forced the union to surrender. From the end of the strike until 1900, steel production in Carnegie’s mills tripled and for all intensive purposes, the union was dead.298 A year after the strike, the AAISW lost 5000 members; 6000 in 1894; and by 1895, union membership was less than half of its pre-strike levels.299 Tonnage rates were slashed, and work hours increased; one-third of the labor force worked twelve-hour shifts. Workers were reassigned at the discretion of management, breaks in the workday were eliminated, and new technology replaced an estimated five hundred jobs in Homestead by the turn of the century.300
Pullman
In Pullman, the workers entered the strike facing dire economic conditions, but as the strike wore on they began to face starvation. The Pullman Company declared on July 19, that the factory would reopen as soon as they had a sufficient amount of workers. On August 1, 800 men had applied for work, 300 of whom were guards who had been protecting company property. Federal troops were able to reopen the Union Pacific tracks and the ARU was forced to end the strike in the west. The railroads dismissed workers who had been active in the strike. Southern Pacific forced its workers to sever their ties to the ARU and agree to yellow dog contracts.
The Pullman strike ended August 2. The company announced it would not rehire any strike committee members; moreover, labor organization was prohibited. The Strike Commission declared that by doing so, the company “secures all the advantage of the concentration of capital, ability, power and control for the company in its labor dealings, and deprives the employees of any such advantage or protection as a labor union might afford. In this respect the Pullman Company is behind the age.”301
Although the strike was defeated, the Pullman experiment was nearing its end. Three years following the strike, George Pullman died, as did his dominance over the town. A decision by the Illinois Supreme Court in 1898 condemned paternalism and declared the establishment and operation of the town to be in violation of the corporate privileges of the Pullman charter.302 In 1907, the town was annexed to Chicago.
Mingo County
In the coal fields of Mingo County, the strike was not defeated by time; rather, it was the intervention by the U.S. military at Blair Mountain, which persuaded the workers to go home and back to the mines. By all accounts, it appears that the miners would have continued to fight if the President had not intervened. David Corbin argues that the maintenance of gardens and livestock by the miners relieved some of the economic pressure caused by an extended strike period. In 1924, the West Virginia Coal Operators Association estimated that over 50% of miners planted gardens, and raised cows, pigs and poultry. A 1923 investigation by the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Labor found that over 70% of the miners’ families in Raleigh County kept a garden and livestock.303
The surrender of the miners at Blair Mountain ended 17 months of intense conflict. At least 21 people were dead, and the West Virginia UMWA was in tatters.304 Its organizing efforts and the strike cost the union $8 million305, and its membership declined drastically. In 1921, the UMWA membership in the state had been approximately 50,000; by 1932, it had fallen to a meager 600.306 During the remainder of the decade, the UMWA experienced a national decline in its membership. The union would not begin to breathe life again until the New Deal of the 1930s.
A Senate investigation found both sides of the conflict guilty of acts of violence. On the miners’ side, the behavior of the union was found “absolutely indefensible”; people were killed, property destroyed, and marches that bordered on “insurrection”.307
The coal companies were admonished for paying off the local police, and preventing the union from entering the area.308
Although they were successful in defeating the union and the strike, the coal operators entered a period of stagnation and decline. As the demand for coal fell, so did the prices. Mines began to close, and the miners suffered wage cuts and layoffs. As the decade dragged on, the once powerful bituminous coal industry joined other labor intensive industries in the South, such as textiles and agriculture, and became one of the nation’s most depressed sectors of the economy.309
Conclusion
When comparing the cases an obvious pattern begins to emerge; the violence displayed by the workers was the result of official intervention. The employers’ repeated denial of arbitration; the repressive use of private guards to import strikebreakers and to enforce the policies of intimidation; and the intervention by the State and Federal Government via injunction and the military intensified the conflict, and resulted in the subsequent defeat of the strikes. The government did not enter the fray to arbitrate the disputes in order to establish a peaceful settlement favorable to both sides; instead, it acted in collusion with the employers and sought to defeat the strikes. The following paragraphs will be an overview of the cases and my conclusions.
I discussed several labor conflict theories, which involved the social, economic and institutional aspects found within industrial conflict. The social response theory argues that conflict is a social group’s response to rapid social change. The theory does not take into account the influence of such factors as economic and working conditions, and the level of official repression against the workers. In both Homestead and Pullman, the workers were responding to the immediate threats to their well-being. In Mingo County, the miners were reacting to the dominance of the coal companies and their efforts to repress the union.
In their study of the interindustry propensity to strike, Kerr and Siegel divided the working class into two groups: the “isolated mass” and the “integrated worker”. The industries comprised of the former had the highest propensity for strikes. This group included the maritime and coal mining industry. In this paper, I addressed the miners’ mobility in the region and their ability to find new work when working conditions became unsatisfactory. For this reason, I do not believe that Kerr and Siegel’s theory can be applied to the coal mining region of southern West Virginia. As far as the workers in the “integrated” communities of Pullman and Homestead, Kerr and Siegel ranked the rail and steel industries in the lowest and medium categories respectively.
I also addressed the concept of “relative deprivation” as argued by James C. Davies. I do not believe that the concept can be applied to the strikes in my comparison. The strike at Homestead was in response to proposed wage cuts and the elimination of established work rules and the union. Davis argues that conflict is more likely to occur when an extended period of rising expectations and fulfillment is reversed. If we interpose the word “threatened” for “reversed” than the theory can be applicable. Moreover, when the workers went on strike the proposed cuts had not yet taken effect; therefore, the “expectation-fulfillment gap” was not present at that time. The theory is also not applicable in the case of Mingo County due to the conflicts focus on union related issues and the dominance of the coal operators.
The theory can be applied to the Pullman strike. After the industry began to feel the strain caused by the economic crisis, Pullman imposed drastic wage cuts, while maintaining high housing costs. Although, dormant grievances influenced the dispute, the strike was triggered by the widening of expectation-fulfillment gap.
In the introduction I discussed Snyder’s study of institutions and industrial conflict in Italy, France and the United States. The author argues that economic models of labor conflict do not fully explain labor’s position within the three countries prior to the Second World War. First, employers were unwilling to negotiate with the unions. This was the case in the disputes in my comparison, but management was also unwilling to negotiate when third parties were involved. Second, the theory that strikes are a result of failed contract negotiations can be applied only in the case of Homestead. However, Frick’s determination to oust the union makes the concept of failed contract negotiations carry less weight in explaining why the strike occurred. Since Pullman and the coal miners did not have a working contract prior to the strike the theory is not applicable. However, if we consider the Washington Agreement as a contract, allowing for the right to organize and wartime wage increases, we can consider the conflict in southern West Virginia a result of the companies’ not honoring the agreement.
I addressed Shorter and Tilly’s theory that strikes are a struggle by the workers to gain space within the political power structure. It does not appear the strikes in my comparison were mass mobilizations with the objective of gaining entry into the polity. The strikes at Homestead and Pullman were largely concerned with immediate material issues and in the former, defending the union. A case can be made, however, for the conflict in southern West Virginia. Shorter and Tilly argue that strikes were not tests of economic strength, but were emblematic demonstrations of a groups “political energy and resoluteness” aimed at the political power structure.310 The “mine wars” directly challenged the power and authority of the coal companies, and were an attempt by the miners to gain a political voice through joining the union in order to have a say in their working and living conditions.
In their study of strikes in France, Shorter and Tilly found that the larger the strike the better the odds for government intervention as mediators. In all of the cases, the government did not intervene to mediate; rather, it acted as a force to break the strike through military occupation; and through judicial intervention via injunction and indictment.
In the second section I analyzed the contextual variables which surrounded the strikes. The Homestead mill formed part of the Carnegie industrial monopoly. Carnegie supported the union as a means to shut down the competitors who could not pay high labor costs. After this was accomplished, Carnegie used Frick as a way to oust the union. The opportunity came when the union refused to agree to the management’s proposals; Frick saw this as a means to restart production using non-union labor.
At Pullman, the economic crisis of the mid 1890s hit the industry hard, and the company responded by cutting wages and hours. Believing that Pullman the employer and Pullman the landlord were separate entities, the company maintained the high rent levels within the town. Similar to the coal mining company towns, Pullman’s dominance within the town in the form of politics, the denial of the workers’ ability to own property, over-arching rules and the repression of any attempt at organizing was a constant source of tension among the workers. However, it would take the economic crisis to spur the workers to act upon quiescent grievances.
In southern West Virginia, the ever-present tensions between the coal miners and operators came to a fruition following the First World War. The federally mandated Washington Agreement was largely ignored by the coal companies, and the years following the war were fraught with heightened displays of violence between the miners and the operators who sought to repress any union influence upon the industry.
In the third section I used the methodology of Snyder and Kelly to measure the independent strike variables to see what influence size, duration, and type of issues had on labor violence. I found that the three strikes corresponded with the arguments put forth by Shorter and Tilly, and Snyder and Kelly. Both studies found that strikes that were large and long in duration were more prone to violence. In Snyder and Kelly’s sample, the strikes comprised of 1500+ workers were more likely to become violent. In all of the cases in my comparison, each establishment had well over that amount; in Homestead there were approximately 3800 workers on strike; in Pullman there were around 3100, and if we include the boycott, 18,000 rail workers just in the Chicago area; in Mingo County, there was an estimated 11,000 miners involved in the conflict. Therefore, the strikes fit the authors’ theory concerning strike size.
In regards to duration, the theory of Shorter and Tilly, and Snyder and Kelly can be applied to the three strikes as well. Shorter and Tilly found that the median duration of violent French strikes to have been 31 days, versus 6 days for non-violent stoppages. Homestead lasted 141 days; Pullman 83 days; and in Mingo County, the conflict lasted a long 17 months.
Snyder and Kelly found that multiple-issue strikes significantly increased the chances for strike violence. Again, the pattern fits. At Homestead, the workers went on strike over the reduction of prices on which wages were based, the reduction of tonnage rates, and the proposed change of the new contract’s expiration date. It can also be argued that the workers struck to defend the union’s presence at the mill. At Pullman, the workers went on strike to restore wages to the pre-depression wage levels, to reduce the amount charged for rent in the company town, and to demand an investigation into workshop abuses. The strike also involved union related issues, after members of the grievance committee were dismissed by the company. In Mingo County, grievances from past labor disputes were unresolved. When the UMWA made the official strike call, it sought to end the mine guard system and the right to organize. Specific events often spurred work stoppages, such as the “Matewan Massacre”. All of the strikes contained multiple issues and follow the argument of Snyder and Kelly.
I also used the arguments of Taft and Ross concerning the role of the unions, and how union related issues fuelled labor tensions. The influence of the unions on the workforce varied. In Homestead, the AAISW represented only a small portion of the workforce, but for three years prior to the strike it had established work rules and a functioning contract between management and labor. The strike was a result of the breakdown of contract negotiations and Frick’s attempts to oust the union. During the strike the management refused the union’s request for arbitration, and decided to use the courts and military to end the strike.
In Pullman, the company suppressed union organization within the town, and early strike activity in the shops; and the company continuously refused to negotiate with the workers. The workers began to join the ARU after their wages and living conditions began to decline. The union members in the Pullman shops urged the ARU to support a strike, but the ARU cautioned them to wait until it was stronger and the economy improved. After members of the grievance committee were dismissed by Pullman, the workers decided to strike. At the union convention in Chicago the following month, the union voted to initiate a sympathy boycott of Pullman cars if the company did not address the workers grievances. The company refused and the strike became a national issue. As in Homestead, the GMA and Pullman refused to negotiate, and used the injunction, the military and time, to defeat the union.
In Mingo County, the conflict was largely based on the right to organize, and union recognition, which the miners gained through the 1917 Washington Agreement. After the UMWA began a massive organizing drive in the non-union counties of Mingo and Logan, violence exploded in reaction to the guards and the companies’ attempts at repressing union activity. Negotiations between the miners and the companies were non-existent and similar to Homestead and Pullman, the military was used to break the union’s influence in the region.
In the fourth section, I discussed the types of violence displayed within the individual strikes in order to gauge the levels of hostilities within the disputes. Snyder and Kelly argue that strike violence might occur due to random precipitating events, and the longer the strikes last, the greater the chance for such events. At Homestead, violence was triggered by such an event and duration was not a factor. The battle between the Pinkertons occurred 5 days into the strike. In Mingo County, violence appears to have been an almost constant factor in the regions disputes. Strike duration did not influence the appearance of violence, but may have increased the feeling of animosity between the conflict’s participants. In Mingo County, violence figured almost constantly in the disputes in the region. The July 1 call for a strike by the UMWA came a month after the “Matewan Massacre”. Strike duration did not trigger the violence, but may have increased the level of animosity between the participants in the conflict.
The participants in the violence varied. At both Homestead and Mingo the striking workers took part in acts of violence. In Pullman, the U.S. Strike Commission reported that the Pullman workers were not violent during the strike. However, when considering the situation in nearby Chicago, the situation becomes muddied. It appears that the riots were done by opportunistic “bystanders”. However, Chicago officials and media representatives testifying before the Strike Commission reported not to have seen any railroad workers engaging in the mob violence. Moreover, there were reports that some of the strikers encouraged the mobs not to destroy company property.
The type of violence displayed within the three strikes differed as well. At Homestead the strikers protected and even repaired company property. However, once the Pinkertons arrived to assist the importation of strikebreakers, all bets were off. The violence displayed in the Homestead strike was focused on the Pinkertons and strikebreakers. The strikers did not assault the state militia or company officials. In Mingo County the violence displayed by the miners was directed against company officials, guards, strikebreakers, local police and company sponsored militias. In addition, company property was destroyed when attempts were made to reopen the mines. Violence was not reported in Pullman, but riots did occur in Chicago after the arrival of the military.
In the fifth section I examined how the individual strike variables facilitated the strikes’ defeat. Snyder and Kelly argue that the larger the strike, the greater the chance for official intervention, and this was a consistent pattern within the three strikes. At Homestead, Frick hired the Pinkerton detectives once it became apparent that the union would not agree to management’s proposals. The company was unwilling to sit out a long strike and sought to restart production using new workers. In order to do so, however, Frick believed force was necessary, and hired the agents to protect the strikebreakers. After the Pinkerton’s were ousted from the union controlled town, Frick appealed to the Governor for military assistance, and it facilitated Frick’s efforts to restart production with non-union workers, removing any bargaining position which the union may have possessed. The intervention by the courts also weakened the union, after several members were charged with murder, riot and conspiracy. The final nail in the strike’s coffin, however, was time. When the workers voted to end the strike, they had been out of work for almost 5 months, and the financial assistance was exhausted, and strikers began to leave the town to find work elsewhere.
The Pullman defeat was caused by several factors. First, as a result of the boycott, the General Managers’ Association saw a drastic reduction in the haulage of freight on its rails. In order to get the trains moving and to protect company property, the GMA transformed the conflict from “worker versus employer”, to “worker versus the U.S. Government” in order to break the strike. The Government intervened through the use of the injunction which made the strike illegal, and dispatched military troops to enforce the injunction and protect strikebreakers and company property. The union and strike were weakened after the arrests of the union leaders; and similar to Homestead, the managers were able to resume operations using the military and marshals to protect the strikebreakers.
Also similar to Homestead, the duration of the strike weighed heavily on the workers at Pullman. The workers entered the strike in dire financial conditions, and during the strike received assistance from local charities, but such relief could only go so far. Moreover, Pullman was able to reopen the shops using new workers making the continuance of the strike a wasted effort.
Unlike Homestead and Pullman, duration was not a factor in the outcome of the conflict in Mingo County; rather, it was the intervention of the U.S. military at Blair Mountain which forced the miners to go home and ended the period of conflict. The miners fought with the coal companies for over 17 months. However, the miners equated the conflict as a fight for democracy, and were unwilling to take arms against the government. The miners were able to sustain a protracted period of conflict due to the maintenance of gardens and livestock, and it did not become an urgent economic necessity to return to the mines, as it was for the workers at Pullman and Homestead.
In the three cases the workers entered a strike over different issues, under varied economic conditions within different industries. All of the strikes were large and long in duration, and displayed episodes of violence. By examining the historical background, and the individual strike characteristics, a discernible pattern begins to emerge.
Table 7.1: Determinants of Strike Violence
Homestead Pullman Mingo County
-
Duration and Size
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Economic Conditions
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
Entry into Polity
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
Official Intervention
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
In table 7.1, I have listed the possible explanations for violence within the three strikes. First, I have addressed the issue of strike duration and size. While the variables of size and duration fit the pattern argued by Shorter and Tilly, and Snyder and Kelly, it is not a factor in the evolution of hostilities within the three cases. In the case of Homestead, violence appeared only 5 days into the strike; while in Mingo County, violence appears to have been an almost constant factor. The case of Pullman, however, is challenging when measuring the outbreak of violence and duration. Although it was reported that the Pullman workers and the striking members of the ARU in Chicago did not participate in the riots, for the sake of comparison rioting occurred approximately 50 days after the Pullman workers walked out, and 5 days after the boycott was initiated.
The theory of relative deprivation in response to declining economic conditions is not a viable explanation for the outbreak of violence within the three cases. The Homestead strike occurred prior to the economic depression of 1893-1897, and the coal industry in southern West Virginia was still riding the wave of wartime production and profits. It can be argued, however, that the economic recession of the 1890s did play a role in the spate of violence in Chicago; unemployment and insecurity resulting from the economic crisis may have fueled the tension around the city, as argued by Almont Lindsey.311
Shorter and Tilly argue that strikes are direct challenges to the political power structure. In France, striking workers sought to contest the allocation of resources and authority within the workplace and national polity. Unions became the avenue for workers to gain a voice in national politics, as was the case in other Western European nations. Although the unions were significant factors within the three strikes, and the workers utilized the unions as a way to achieve their objectives and support during the disputes, the workers were not striking to establish a presence within the political establishment. However, the “mine wars” of southern West Virginia were a fight against the “Kaiserism” displayed by the operators, and the miners sought to end the companies’ dominance in the region and on their lives. The workers saw the UMWA as the only avenue for the miner to gain a voice against state’s economic and political power structure.
In all three cases, the strikers were labeled as “insurgents” fighting for “imaginary rights” with the intent of levying war against the system. Despite the rhetoric of the courts and the company officials, the workers did not use violence to bring down the political status quo. The demands of the workers were focused more on immediate issues, such as wages and the right to organize; therefore, the strikers did not resort to violence to significantly alter the political power structure.
The most significant pattern that exists within the three cases is that violence appeared as a result of company policies and government intervention. The workers at Homestead were aware of Frick’s past use of Pinkerton detectives to break strikes and import new labor. Because of the strikers’ protection of company property during the dispute, it is apparent that the workers were protecting their jobs. Once the Pinkerton’s arrived to protect and import strikebreakers the striking workers resorted to violence to defend their status within the company.
The violence in Mingo County was a direct result of the coal operators’ policy of using private guards to repress union activity and to maintain control over the lives of the workers. Both sides of the dispute engaged in violent activities; the coal operators sought to maintain their position in a highly competitive market threatened by outside influences in the form of the UMWA and Federal regulation. The miners sought to maintain their right to organize as established by the Washington Agreement, and end the company- enforced mine guard system, and dominance within the towns. The violence displayed by the miners was in reaction to the aggressive policies of the coal companies and can be considered a case of self-defense. The pattern continues in the case of the Pullman strike; violence erupted after the State and Federal authorities intervened at the request of the General Managers’ Association. The appearance of troops heightened tensions within Chicago resulting in mob activities.
Had the State and Federal Government chose to intervene as arbitrators instead of strikebreakers, perhaps the violence could have been averted. Within the three cases, the government consistently sided with the powerful and influential employers. Unlike their Western European counterparts, the American working class did not have significant allies within the political power structure. The economic model of liberal capitalism that defined the “Gilded Age” and the corporate magnates that fostered the system precluded any serious attempt by labor to establish a viable base of support within the government at that time.
The attitude of the government towards labor did not relent until the passing of the National Labor Relations Act in 1933. Otherwise known as the Wagner Act, it was a step by the Federal Government to reverse its historical opposition to organized labor; it guaranteed the workers the right to organize and collective bargaining. The act also created the National Labor Relations Board to arbitrate labor-management disputes and to penalize unfair labor practices by employers.
In this paper I have compared three episodes of strike activity in the annals of American labor. All of the strikes were examples of anti-worker campaigns instigated by a capitalist system that went to extreme measures to repress a working class willing to take up arms to defend its right and general welfare. The denial of union recognition and arbitration by the companies and governmental authorities made the worker nothing more than replaceable cogs in the machine.
By using the comparative method in this study, it is possible to discern patterns in the workers’ response to official intervention during labor disputes. The type of violence displayed during strikes is an area worthy of further examination. Why did the workers at Homestead and Pullman go to great lengths to protect the mills, while the miners repeatedly destroyed company property to keep the operations closed? Such questions promote further discussion in the history of labor relations in the United States.
County Map of West Virginia
Bibliography
Bemis, Edward. W. “The Homestead Strike”. The Journal of Political Economy. Vol.2, No. 3. (June 1894), pp.369-396
Brandes, Stuart. American Welfare Capitalism. The University of Chicago Press; Chicago, 1976
Brody, David. Steelworkers in America. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1960
Corbin, David. Life, Work and Rebellion in the Coal Fields, the Southern West Virginia Miners 1880-1922. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1981
Davies, James C. “The J-Curve of Rising and Declining Satisfactions and a Cause of Some Great Revolutions and a Small Rebellion”. Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. Ed. Graham, Hugh D. and Gurr, Ted R. The New American Library: New York, 1969
---“The J-Curve and Power Struggle Theories of Collective Violence”. American Sociological Review, Vol. 39, No. 4. (August 1974), pp.607-610
Feierabend, Ivo, et al. “Social Change and Political Violence: Cross National Patterns”, Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. The New American Library; New York, 1969, pp. 606-668.
Fish, Peter G., “Red Jacket Revisited: The Case that Unraveled John J. Parker’s Supreme Court Appointment”. Law and History Review, Vol. 5, No. 1. (Spring 1987), pp.51-104
Fishback, Price V. Soft Coal, Hard Choices: The Economic Welfare of the Bituminous Coal Miners, 1890-1930. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1992
---“The Economics of Company Housing: Historical Perspectives from the Coal Fields”, The Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 8, No. 2 (April 1992), pp. 346-365
Friedman, Gerald, “Strike Success and Union Ideology: The United States and France: 1880-1914. The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No 1 (March 1988), pp. 1-25
Gurr, Ted R. “A Comparative Study of Civil Strife” Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. The New American Library; New York, 1969
Grant, Don S. and Wallace, Michael, “Why Do Strikes Turn Violent?” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 96, No. 5. (March 1991), pp. 1117-1150
Laurie, Clayton D., “The United States Army and the Return to Normalcy in Labor Dispute Interventions: The Case of the Coal Mine Wars, 1920-1921”. West Virginia History, Vol. 50 (1991). West Virginia Division of Culture and History. http://www.wvculture.org/history/journal_wvh/wvh50-1.html
Lewis H.G. Unionism and Relative Wages in the United States. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1973.
Lewis, Ronald L. Black Coal Miners in America: Race, Class and Community Conflict, 1780-1980. University Press of Kentucky: Lexington, 1987
Lindsey, Almont. “Paternalism and the Pullman Strike”. The American History Review, Vol. 44, No.2. (January, 1939), pp.272-289.
---The Pullman Strike, University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1942
Lynch, Lawrence R. “The West Virginia Coal Strike”, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, No 4 (December 1914) pp. 626-663
Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich “Comparative Historical Analysis: Achievements and Agendas”, Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. Mahoney and Rueschemeyer. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2003
Montgomery, David. The Fall of the House of Labor: The Workplace, the State, and American Labor Activism, 1865-1925. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1987.
Nelson, Daniel. Managers and Workers: Origins of the New Factory System in the United States, 1880-1920. University of Wisconsin Press: Madison, 1975
Rees, Albert. Real Wages in Manufacturing, 1890-1914, National Bureau of Economic Research, No. 70 Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1961
Skocpol, Theda. “Doubly Engaged Social Science: The Promise of Comparative Historical Analysis”. Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. Mahoney and Rueschemeyer. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2003
Shorter, Edward and Tilly, Charles. “The Shape of Strikes in France”. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 13, No. 1 (January 1971), pp. 60-86
--- Strikes in France, 1830-1968. Cambridge University Press: London, 1974
Snyder, David. “Institutional Setting and Industrial Conflict: Comparative Analyses of France, Italy, and the United States”. American Sociological Review, Vol. 40, No.3 (June 1975), pp. 259-278.
Snyder, David, Kelly, William R. “Industrial Violence in Italy, 1878-1903”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 82, No.1 (July 1976), pp.131-162
Supple, Barry. “The Political Economy of Demoralization: The State and the Coal Mining Industry in America and Britain between the Wars.” The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 4 (November, 1988), pp.566-591
Taft, Philip and Ross, Philip. “American Labor Violence: Its Causes, Character and Outcome”. Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. The New American Library: New York, 1969, pp. 270-376
U.S. Census Bureau, 62nd Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1940. United States Coal Production, 1821-1939, No. 791, p.784
Warne, Colston E., editor. The Pullman Boycott of 1894, the Problem of Federal Intervention. D.C. Heath and Company: Boston, 1955
Weiss, Robert P., “Private Detective Agencies and Labour Discipline in the United States, 1855-1946”, The Historical Journal, Vol. 29, No.1. (March 1986), pp. 87-107
West Virginia Office of Miners’ Health Safety and Training. State of West Virginia Website. http://www.state.wv.us/mhst/results.cfm
Wheeler, Hoyt. “Mountaineer Mine Wars: An Analysis of the West Virginia Mine Wars of 1912-1913 and 1920-1921”, The Business History Review, Vol. 50, No. 1. (Spring, 1976), pp. 69-91
Wolff, Leon. Lockout, the Story of the Homestead Strike of 1892: a study of Violence, Unionism and the Carnegie Steel Empire. Harper and Row: New York, 1965.
Wright, Carol D. “The National Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, 1892-1901” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 16, no. 1 (November 1901), pp.37-68.
Yellen, Samuel. American Labor Struggles. Harcourt, Brace and Company: New York, 1936.
Share with your friends: |