BUS 372 week 1 discussion 1&2

Learning Objectives

After completing this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe the atmosphere surrounding union opposition and resulting court cases.

• Discuss each of the early labor unions, major strikes, and key players in labor relations.

• Relate the growth of industry to major strikes in the steel and textile industries at the

turn of the 20th century.

2An Overview of Labor History

Mary Evans/Everett Collection

Introduction

The U.S. economy was formed around farms and small towns. If you were to view the United States in

the early 1800s, you would see country roads, large farms, and towns erected at crossroads, serving the

needs of farmers. Although there were factories, these were rare and usually located only in the larger

cities. Early manufacturing took place in small shops run by craftsmen who were experts in one trade,

such as barrel making or stitchery. Thus, America’s early industry was centered on individual trades and

skilled workers.

These workers were called master craftsmen. Not only were they proficient at making specific

products, they were also multitalented businessmen. Consider, for example, Bostonian Paul Revere, who

trained in the art of silversmithing and then became a shop owner, a teacher to his apprentices, a

capitalist, an employer, and a highly skilled artisan.

Master craftsmen sat side­by­side at the bench with their workers, together making the products of the

shop, be it boots, silverware, horse bridles, or copper bowls. At first, slaves or indentured servants made

up the group of workers, but as slavery decreased in the Northeast and indentured servants completed

their terms, craftsmen searched for other types of help. Soon a strata of workers developed that became

known as apprentices or journeymen. These were the men who worked in the trades but would never

be shop owners unless they started their own business.

The work environment in these shops was intimate. The boss knew each worker—his strengths and

weaknesses, and certainly his personal life. Problems could be addressed directly and quickly if the

master craftsman chose, which led the workplace to have a give­and­take quality. Workers felt

somewhat empowered by the fact that management was present, understood the conditions of work,

and could be responsive to issues that arose.

This work environment also featured two distinct tiers: owners and laborers. Lines were clearly drawn

regarding the rights of the owner to make fundamental decisions about the work environment while

labor remained powerless, except about whether to leave the job and seek other employment. Work for

laborers was a “take it or leave it” environment, and for those unwilling or unable to secure work

elsewhere, the shop, its rules, and culture were nonnegotiable.

As the 19th century progressed, a notable change occurred that essentially put an end to this way of life.

The United States underwent a great industrial boom, commonly referred to as the Industrial

Revolution (1820–1840). The Industrial Revolution made small workshops obsolete and unprofitable.

A confluence of factors contributed to this new reality. Workers were plentiful and relatively cheap to

employ; America had bountiful natural resources; tradesmen from Europe came to the United States

with skills, inventions, and creativity; and as the population grew, the demand for goods increased

tremendously. Small shops could no longer keep up with demand, and when they did, were too slow and

costly. The 1800s also saw the rise of expanding transportation systems that made the export of goods

to Europe possible and highly profitable. Additionally, transportation within the United States improved,

which fostered domestic trade. Factories, too, began to expand; as a result, they employed a completely

different type of worker than an apprentice or journeyman.

With the advent of factories, a new class of worker emerged: the unskilled worker, who could operate

machinery or do repetitive tasks that required little skill. One of the earliest such industries was

spinning yarn, which by 1860 involved more than 1,700 mills with 6,400 spindles and 16,000 looms; the

industry had an annual output of $90 million and employed more than 60,000 laborers (Foner, 1998).

Immigrants streamed into the United States during this time, providing inexpensive and often unskilled

labor. As the factories grew, more workers were needed, and women and children soon became part of

the workforce.

As large factories replaced farms and small shops run by artisans with thousands of workers, work

became more impersonal; the lines between owners and workers grew even more distinct than before.

Gone were the days of sitting at a bench as an apprentice and learning a trade from a master craftsman.

With each of these changes, workers found that the give­and­take quality of the small shops was gone,

and they had no relationship with the owner of the business.

2.1 Initial View of Unions as Illegal

When businesses expanded from small shops to larger factories, owners turned their attention to

competing with other businesses without necessarily considering their employees’ welfare. As the

employer became distanced from the worker, the expansion of the workplace and lowered wages

(brought about by increased pressure on employers to compete nationally) led employees to feel

disenfranchised and unappreciated. The conditions became ripe for workers to consider ways in which

they could effectively demand better wages and conditions of employment. From this initial

consideration came the idea of banding together and forming a union, much as their ancestors had done

back in their countries of origin, before coming to the United States.

Commonwealth v. Pullis (1806)

In 1806 U.S. courts had to consider for the first time whether or not a union in America was in fact legal

and whether workers could go out on strike. The organization that struck was the Federal Society of

Journeymen, commonly called Cordwainers. One of the first unions in the United States, it had formed

in 1794 and consisted of workers who made shoes, boots, and other leather footwear (Foner, 1998). In

1805 there was a general pay cut throughout the industry, and in response the organization went on

strike. The master craftsmen who employed the workers took them to court and charged them with the

crime of conspiracy based on an old English law that prohibited workers from acting collectively, or in a

conspiracy, to seek better wages (Dau­Schmidt, 1993).

Because today’s Americans are accustomed to modern laws that protect union activity, charging strikers

with such a crime may seem incomprehensible; yet it was done, and done successfully. The state of

Pennsylvania (the “commonwealth” in the case) brought criminal charges against the strikers, including

one named Pullis as the defendant, in the case Commonwealth v. Pullis. The state charged that the

“defendants conspired and agreed that none of them would work at the shoe making craft except at

certain specified prices higher than the price which had theretofore customarily been

paid” (Commonwealth v. Pullis, 1806).

In other words, the accusation of criminal conspiracy was based on the idea that the workers demanded

a wage higher than the market was willing to pay them. The workers were also accused of conspiring to

keep other craftsmen from working except at the same higher rate they demanded. Both actions were

considered illegal and conspiratorial. The defendants were found guilty and ordered to pay fines and the

cost of prosecution. These fines subsequently bankrupted their union.

The threat of being charged with a crime and successfully convicted put a chilling effect on many

workers’ desire to form a union. Commonwealth v. Pullis reflects the early climate in the United States

regarding opposition to unions. Scholars who look back on the decision note how forcefully the workers

were shut down in trying to unionize. It is one thing for courts to find civil or financial liability, but

convicting workers of a criminal act was an onerous and foreboding result (Swartz, 2004).

In a social context the decision also highlights how little equality was offered to workers. Instead, the

American system was much like that of Britain, with distinct class systems. Prohibiting union activity

prevents individuals from earning more money and thus rising above their station in life. Further,

keeping workers from unionizing by threatening them with criminal charges would make any worker

hesitant to question an employer, thus eliminating any hint of democratic decision making in the

workplace. In short, Pullis had a chilling effect on labor activity for the next four decades (Conrad, 1997).

The outcome of cases such as Commonwealth v. Pullis considerably dampened enthusiasm for

organizing. Knowing they would go to jail or pay hefty fines for union activity likely curbed or entirely

halted such behavior from workers. Some writers who comment on this era note that most of the

strikers who were convicted were never sent to jail, but instead ordered to pay fines (Lambert, 2005).

The criminal charges brought against them were to frighten other workers and set an example.

Whatever the philosophy of the time, by declaring it illegal to act or conspire together to protest one’s

wages, the decision of the court made workers wary about participating in union activities.

This decision remained “good law” for some 40 years. This means that other courts would also follow or

abide by the decision that union activity was illegal. It was not until 1846 that a Massachusetts court

ruled that the decision in Pullis was wrong, replacing it in the case of Commonwealth v. Hunt with exactly

the opposite view: that union formation was legal and not conspiratorial.

Commonwealth v. Hunt (1846)

In the 40 years since the Pullis decision, industrialization of the United States had continued at a steady

clip. As more workers were thwarted in their attempts to organize and conditions in factories worsened,

public opinion increasingly changed about the need for unionization, which was reflected over several

court decisions. Finally, in the case of Commonwealth v. Hunt, the Supreme Judicial Court of

Massachusetts stated unequivocally, and for the first time, “that trade unions are per se lawful

organizations” (Perlman, 1922, ch. 7). This means that once formed, a labor organization will be

presumed to be legal, thus opening the door for labor to organize without the threat of criminal charges.

The court stated, “This doctrine that working men may lawfully organize trade unions has been adopted

in nearly every case since Commonwealth v. Hunt” (Perlman, 1922, p. 151).

More changes were on the horizon for America’s workers. In 1861 the Civil War began. In addition to

heralding dramatic social and legal changes, the war served as a major catalyst to further industrialize

the country. Initially, the war accounted for an immediate and drastic need for troop supplies such as

food, clothing, weapons, cannons, and horse bridles. As the war progressed, steel production increased

dramatically, as did the need to expand roads, canals, and thoroughfares to transport troops and

equipment. Commerce rapidly expanded, with dramatic and significant effects. The Commonwealth case

provided an important basis for union formation in the times that were to come, when industry would

become ever larger and impersonal and workers would strive for decent working conditions.

2.2 Early Labor Unions

This section introduces some of the earliest and most significant labor organizations formed after the

Civil War ended in 1865, and into the 20th century (see Table 2.1). As you read, note that although each

of these organizations is a union, there are nevertheless fundamental differences in their purpose, the

economic sectors they serve, and their ultimate ability to survive.

Table 2.1: Early labor unions and associated activities

Era 1866

–1874

1869

–1940s

1881

–1886

1886

–present (as

the AFL­

CIO)

1876–1942 1905

–present

Name of

union

National

Labor

Union

Knights of

Labor

Federation

of

Organized

Trades and

Labor

Unions

American

Federation

of Labor

Amalgamated

Association of

Iron and Steel

Workers

(evolved into

the United

Steelworkers)

Industrial

Workers of

the World

Founders Formed by

William

Sylvis

Formed by

Uriah

Smith

Stephens;

succeeded

by Terence

V.

Powderly

Samuel

Gompers

Goals of

the union

To

implement

an 8­hour

workday

To

implement

an 8­hour

workday

and a ban

on hiring

children

under age

14

To

implement

an 8­hour

workday

To work

toward large

organization

with power

to

implement

legislation

To obtain fair

wages for its

workers

To unite

workers in

the textile

mills from

many

backgrounds

and

nationalities

Era 1866

–1874

1869

–1940s

1881

–1886

1886

–present (as

the AFL­

CIO)

1876–1942 1905

–present

Major

strikes

Great

Railway

Strike in

1877

Reading

Railroad

Massacre

Battle of

the Viaduct

Great

Southwest

Strike of

1886

Haymarket

Square

Riot in

1886

Homestead

Strike in 1892

Lawrence

Textile Strike

in 1912

The National Labor Union (1866–1874)

The National Labor Union was not the first union in the United States, but it was the first to achieve a

national identity, become somewhat recognizable to the common man, and enjoy a continuity of more

than a few years. It was formed at the end of the Civil War by William Sylvis, a Pennsylvania native and

iron molder. His goal was to form a union for everyone, no matter their occupation or whether they

were skilled or unskilled.

As you will see later in this chapter, most unions would eventually be formed around a specific type of

work or occupation. The National Labor Union, however, was aimed at “uniting workers across

occupations and achieving economic and social reforms, including the eight­hour working day” (William

H. Sylvis Historical Marker, 2011, para. 5). It fought for better wages and shorter hours, but more

significantly, it also entered the political arena. Sylvis was especially interested in issues of the day that

included prison labor and land reform laws.

The idea that a union would accept members of all occupations and engage in political activity was

radical in the 1800s. Nevertheless, the union attracted a large constituency. In 1869 the Chicago Tribune

approximated it had about 800,000 members, whereas Sylvis estimated it was 600,000. It is likely that

both estimates are exaggerated, but nevertheless, the organization did represent a large portion of the

nation’s labor force. At its height, it likely had between 200,000 and 400,000 members (Grob, 1954).

Although the union was successful for 7 years, by 1874 it was totally defunct; the reason most often

given is that it tried to represent too many different and varying interests.

The Great Railway Strike (1877)

©Corbis

The Great Railway Strike of 1877, which

began in response to a pay cut,

demonstrated the need for a cohesive

organization of workers.

Watch This

For more information about the

Great Railway Strike of 1877, watch

https://www .youtube.com/watch?

v=dHE3u5KkEZw

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=dHE3u5KkEZw)

During the Civil War, industry could barely keep up with

the demand for rifles, railroad tracks, cannon balls, and

the like. But by the beginning of the 1870s, the war had

been over for 5 years; demand was down and the

country underwent a major economic contraction. In

addition to the war’s end, many people had invested

heavily in the further development of railroads. Towns

and cities vied for the opportunity to have rails come

into their communities and issued bonds to finance

them. Many railroads were overbuilt, meaning there

were too many lines running through the same places.

There was not enough business or demand to support

the availability of lines throughout the country, which led

to the longest depression in the nation’s history: It lasted

for 65 months, from 1873 to 1879 (Barreyre, 2011).

It was during this economic downturn that the Great Railway Strike of 1877 occurred. Workers

formed a wildcat strike that had an enormous effect on how unions would be thereafter viewed. A

wildcat strike is organized by the workers without the blessing of union leadership. The strike began

when the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad announced a pay cut of 10% for all of its workers. As soon as the

workers went on strike, the railroad responded by hiring new workers to take their place, which

infuriated the strikers. In retaliation, they refused to let the new hires work; they stopped the trains by

stepping onto the tracks or blocking their passage. Commerce ground to a halt as the strike spread and

the rail cars sat idle on the tracks.

The strike started in Martinsburg, West Virginia, and spread to

Wheeling, West Virginia, then to Baltimore and Chicago.

According to Harper’s Weekly, a newspaper of the time, strikers

blocked 1,500 freight cars and 13 locomotives on the side tracks

in Martinsburg and in Pittsburgh. “At midnight fully 1400 men

had gathered in the two yards, and 1500 cars were standing on

the sidings, 200 of which contained perishable goods” (The Great

Strike, n.d., para 3). As the strike escalated and trains came to a

halt across the nation, the strikers were viewed with disdain by

the public. Maryland governor John Carroll called for military

action to quell the strikers, as described in an excerpt from Harper’s Weekly:

The next day was a bloody one in the history of the strike on the Baltimore and Ohio road. The

blockade at Martinsburg had been raised, and trains were again running both ways under the

protection of the national troops. But on the afternoon of the 20th, word reached Baltimore

that all the freight trains leaving Martinsburg that day were stopped at Cumberland, and the

crews taken from them by the strikers. Governor Carroll at once issued a proclamation and

ordered out the State militia. The sound of the fire­bells summoning the men to their armories

created the wildest excitement. Baltimore and other streets of the city had been crowded

during the day with throngs of citizens, anxiously watching the bulletin­boards at the different

newspaper offices and discussing the situation. As the alarm pealed forth, the crowds made

their way toward the armories of the different regiments. That of the Sixth is at Front and

Fayette streets, and in a neighborhood which is inhabited by the poorer classes, and much of

the rough element frequents it. Within half an hour after the call had been sounded, a crowd

Courtesy Everett Collection

This portrait shows the founders of the

Knights of Labor, one of the earliest,

largest, and most sustained labor unions

of the 1800s.

numbering at least 2000 men, women, and children surrounded the armory and loudly

expressed their feelings against the military and in favor of the strikers. At half past seven the

streets leading to the armory were crowded with a struggling, shouting, and cursing mob. The

sight of a man in uniform endeavoring to get into the building was the signal for an outbreak,

and he was rushed upon, seized, and thrown over a bridge into Jones’s Falls’ stream which runs

through that section of the city. Others were thrown over the heads of the surging mass, and

were glad to escape with slight injuries. At this juncture someone threw a block at the soldier

on guard at the door of the armory. (The Great Strike, n.d., para 4)

The uprising became known as “The Great Strike” and demonstrated the need for a cohesive

organization if any goals were to be accomplished. As one historian pointed out:

Far from seeking to destroy modern civilization, labor leaders were busy in the aftermath of

1877 building new, more inclusive institutions of civil society. The aggressive crowd

actions—and even more, the myriad instances of unity across lines of skill, trade, ethnicity,

religion and sex—made it clear to many labor leaders that new forms of organization and

action for incorporating the unskilled laborers and factory hands were both necessary and

possible. (Stowell, 2008, p. 95)

Perhaps one of the greatest effects of the strike was the expansion of the Knights of Labor, the labor

organization that dominated the late 1800s.

The Knights of Labor (1869–1940s)

Part secret society, part fraternal organization replete

with a secret handshake and initiation process, the

Knights of Labor was one of the most successful

attempts at union formation of this era. Formed by a

group of six garment cutters in Philadelphia in 1869, the

organization sought to protect all wage earners, no

matter their craft.

The driving force for the Knights was Uriah Smith

Stephens, a tailor who molded much of the organization

on the Masons (or Freemasons), which began as a

fraternity of men who were stonemasons. As the

fraternity grew, more types of workers were admitted.

Members made pledges, prayed, sang songs, had secret

handshakes, and swore an oath to the Knights. When

later taken over by Terence V. Powderly, who focused

the agenda much more on worker’s rights, many of the

original rituals disappeared. Powderly instead concentrated on getting an 8­hour day for all workers and

prohibiting children under age 14 being hired for factory work. By 1882 it was no longer a secret

organization; by 1886 it was the most powerful labor force in the country, with more than 700,000

members (Phelan, 2000).

In the 1880s the Knights had a strong toehold on John Mundell and Company, Philadelphia’s largest shoe

manufacturer. When the company tried to re­hire workers at a reduced wage, the workers refused. The

company relented but took the pay cut out on the women in the factory, who went on strike. The men

Watch This

For more information about the

Knights of Labor, watch

https://www.youtube.com /watch?

v=htNWwcZSupE

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=htNWwcZSupE)

Watch This

For more information about the

Haymarket Square Riot, watch

soon joined them, and none of Mundell’s 700 workers reported to work. Not only did this result in

women being admitted to the Knights as members, but the strike was successful and the workers’

demands were met (Montgomery, n.d.).

The Knights gained further momentum with the Great Railway Strike of 1877. Sixteen citizens were shot

by the state militia in Reading, Pennsylvania, in what came to be known as the Reading Railroad

Massacre. The strike next spread to Illinois in July 1877, with the Battle of the Viaduct in Chicago. It

then spilled into St. Louis, Missouri, where it was finally quashed by federal troops. The success of these

strikes led to increased membership in the Knights of Labor and confidence in their cause (Ohio History,

n.d.).

In 1886 the Knights organized the Great Southwest Strike, which took place predominantly in

southwestern states. The Knights began their strike against the Wabash Railroad, owned by financier

and railroad developer Jay Gould, a famous industrialist of the time. The strike against Gould failed,

however, which began a downturn in the Knights’ power.

Like the National Labor Union before it, the Knights had a progressive agenda in that they welcomed

laborers and farmers, African Americans, and eventually women. The framework had no provision for

grouping workers by occupation, however, and this turned out to contribute to its subsequent downfall.

Nevertheless, the significant role the Knights played in American labor history cannot be understated.

This organization bridged the gap between the craft union era and the heavily industrialized state that

grew into a world power. The Knights flourished as an organization, attracting huge numbers of

members and gaining great power, prestige, and notoriety. The organization led the labor movement

into the next century, and although it did not survive, it set the bar for the organizations that followed

(Weir, 2006). The Knights’ numbers diminished to fewer than 100,000 members by the 1890s, down

from a high of 800,000 in 1869.

Federation of Organized Trades and Labor

Unions (1881–1886)

Unlike the Knights of Labor, which wanted to be all­inclusive,

master craftsmen sought a union that admitted only skilled labor.

The resulting organization was the Federation of Organized

Trades and Labor Unions (FOTLU). This group was created in

1881 and was the precursor to the modern­day American

Federation of Labor.

As part of its initial agenda, the FOTLU announced that on May 1, 1886, a nationwide strike would take

place to declare that workers should have an 8­hour day. The movement gained momentum throughout

the United States, and in Chicago alone a reported 80,000 workers marched up Michigan Avenue in

support of the concept. After May 1 all workers who were not granted an 8­hour day were to cease

working until their employers met this demand (Adelman, 2010).

On May 3 the strike turned violent at the McCormick Reaper

Plant in Chicago when police killed picketing workers. In protest

to this violence against the strikers, union activists rallied the

next night at a place called Haymarket Square. Reportedly, there

were only about 200 workers at the rally when 176 policemen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=_

OQxncb2ihQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=_OQxncb2ihQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Courtesy Everett Collection

carrying Winchester repeater rifles attacked them. Someone in

the crowd retaliated by throwing a dynamite bomb, which killed

seven policemen and four workers. Outraged, Chicago declared

martial law, and authorities undertook a house­to­house search

to find the person who threw the bomb. Eventually, eight men

who were later described as a cross­section of union activists

were rounded up and put on trial for murder (Adelman, 2010).

Despite the fact that there was much doubt about whether they were even at the Haymarket Square

Riot, the eight men were convicted of murder and sentenced to death by hanging. The incident gave

antilabor governments around the world the opportunity to crush local union movements (Adelman,

2010). As for the 8­hour workday, it was not until 1938 and the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act

that this now commonly accepted standard became law.

The American Federation of Labor and Samuel Gompers (1886–Present as the

AFL­CIO)

Despite limiting itself to skilled workers, the FOTLU, like its predecessors, began to unravel. Issues

contributing to its downfall included what role politics should play in the organization, the country’s

economic downturn, and the Haymarket Square Riot. Aware that their strength lay in organizing,

workers were highly motivated to form an organization that could represent them collectively.

As a result, a collection of trade unions met in 1886 and created a new union, the American Federation of

Labor, or the AFL, the precursor to today’s American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial

Organizations (AFL­CIO). By 1904 the AFL had 1,750,000 members and consisted of 115 national and

international unions composed of 28,000 local unions in 38 states (Hearings, 1912). The following is a

list of the initial national unions that formed the AFL:

Typographical Workers

Iron and Steel Workers

Molders

Glass Workers

Cigar Makers

Carpenters

Central Labor Councils of 11 Cities

42 Local Unions

46 Local Assemblies of the Knights of Labor

(LeBlanc, P., n.d.)

The AFL is one of the best­known craft unions. It sought to unite

skilled craftsmen, rather than skilled and unskilled, in order to

Samuel P. Gompers served as the

first president of the American

Federation of Labor.

Watch This

For more information about Samuel

Gompers, watch this video

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=rnNIcHpNfgU&list=PLHZi3eLSKGhSPLHlHMIWeBxaHhl9TKvEF)

demand a higher wage. Its first president, Samuel Gompers, who

held that position until his death in 1924, brought together

craftsmen such as masons, cigar makers, and hat makers who

each had their own local unions but joined together in a national

union of skilled workers. Gompers reasoned that skilled workers made a better union because they were

in high demand and were paid the highest wages (Digital History, 2013).

The election of Gompers as president in 1886 at age 36 was the culmination of a remarkable personal

journey. Born in England, Gompers and his family immigrated to New York City where a young Samuel

became a cigar maker. In those days there was no factory. Instead, the process of making cigars took

place in tenements, apartments, and rooms that anyone could find in which to sit and roll cigars. The 16­

hour workdays and poor working conditions made this particular job one of the many that took place in

so­called sweatshops (Yellowitz, 1989).

How did Gompers advance from being a laborer to a labor leader? The cigar shop in which he worked

was large, and he was highly respected by his fellow workers. They elected him to a local union, the

Cigar Makers Union Local 144, and from there he was sent as a delegate to the FOTLU, where he quickly

emerged as a leader. After the Haymarket Square Riot and the dwindling of union membership in the

FOTLU, Gompers worked with other labor leaders to reorganize and begin a new union. He was known

as a street­smart and savvy individual but also as a pragmatist who wanted to unite trade unions under

one umbrella in a new organization.

The initial objective of the AFL was to help more trade unions

form, combine the power of all the trade unions into one

organization, and then have that large and powerful organization

work to implement legislation. The New York Tribune, a leading

newspaper of the time, summed up the AFL this way: “An

amalgamation has been formed which will result, it is hoped, in

the establishment of an organization fully as powerful, better

disciplined and more conservative than the Knights of

Labor” (The American Federation, 1886, para. 1). Samuel Gompers succeeded where others before him

had failed: He was able to unite a disparate group of workers into one organization that worked for the

common man. His legacy lives on today, and he is still widely regarded as one of the most progressive

and able labor leaders ever (Yellowitz, 1989).

Courtesy Everett Collection

Violence erupted during a labor strike at

the Homestead Steel Works in 1892.

2.3 Growth of Industry and Worker Unrest

As the United States moved forward into the 20th century, the country experienced enormous industrial

growth. The steel industry became a world leader in production under the direction of Andrew

Carnegie, and other industries such as cotton mills flourished, too. But with the expansion of industry

and the prosperity that followed, the gap between wealthy owners and poor laborers became even more

pronounced, leading to tension, strikes, and occasional violence.

The Rise of Steel and the Homestead Strike (1892)

While the Knights of Labor and the AFL were thriving and the craft industry was expanding, great

strides were also underway in another sector—the steel industry. In the 1860s a new process for

making steel called the Bessemer process made it possible to manufacture steel at much lower costs. A

leading industrialist of the day, Andrew Carnegie, figured out how to use the Bessemer process to

manufacture steel rails for the railroads. Up to this point, there were no cheap or expedient ways to

make rails, and his innovation led to the creation of huge steel mills under the name of Carnegie Steel,

located in Pittsburgh.

Carnegie played a formidable role in American history. As the leading businessman of his time and the

wealthiest of his era, he is viewed by some as an American success story. In the context of labor

relations, however, Carnegie’s reputation is mixed, with some regarding him as an enemy of labor, while

others respected the business he built and the jobs he provided to so many workers.

Carnegie did not come from wealth. His parents were

poor and he worked at a young age. Among his earliest

jobs was being a runner, or messenger. In the late 1800s

one of the only means of communication was the use of

messenger boys, who ran notes from one person to

another. In his role as a runner, Carnegie made a point of

learning every man’s name to whom he delivered

messages. In this way he quickly learned about the

businessmen of Pittsburgh. Over time he befriended

many of them, and they taught him about

business—specifically, the railroad business.

He used these connections to advance from telegraph

boy at a telegraph company to general manager of the

railroad by his early 20s, all the while absorbing

information about investing and finance. He saved money and invested wisely, based on stock tips from

the men he had befriended while a runner. After the Civil War ended, he acquired enough money to

purchase a highly profitable petroleum enterprise and soon was part owner in a steel­rolling mill, which

expanded into his vast steel holdings.

One of Carnegie’s holdings was the Bessemer Iron Works in Pittsburgh, which he merged with

Carnegie Steel. After making a substantial part of his fortune, Carnegie went to live in Scotland and

turned over the daily minutiae of running the mills to Henry Clay Frick. Carnegie admired Frick’s harsh

approach to labor issues and trusted him implicitly (Standiford, 2005).

Like Carnegie, Frick was born into a relatively poor family. Although his grandfather was the founder of

Old Overholt, a rye whiskey distillery in Pennsylvania, the money did not benefit Frick’s generation, and

he worked for much of his childhood. As a teenager Frick learned how to convert the vast deposits of

coal in the mountains of Pennsylvania into coke, a product needed to make steel. When Frick met

Carnegie in 1881, it was an especially fortuitous time since Frick had at his disposal vast quantities of

coke, which Carnegie, the owner of steel mills, was in need of. They sealed a deal whereby Frick became

the provider of all the coke for Carnegie’s mills. Carnegie and Frick soon became partners and had an

interesting, complicated, and powerful partnership for the next 20 years (Standiford, 2005).

Over time, Carnegie made Frick the general manager of Carnegie Steel; when Carnegie began to spend

more time in Scotland, Frick ran the mills. Carnegie considered Frick a genius at management and

approved of Frick’s methods, even when they were cutthroat (PBS, 1999). Steel mill employees worked a

14­hour day and had just one day off a year, on the Fourth of July. For this they earned 14 cents an hour.

Carnegie and Frick’s steel mills were the most competitive and the most productive, making fortunes for

both of them.

As the steel business expanded and more workers were hired, a new union formed in 1876 in

Pittsburgh. It consisted solely of men who worked in steel and was called the Amalgamated

Association of Iron and Steel Workers. It brought together workers in the iron and steel industry who

believed that banding together, no matter their job in the mill, would empower them against

management (Wright, 1893).

By the 1890s the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel workers had an estimated 13,000 to 24,000

members. The men who formed the association were already established at the Homestead Steel

Works, located in Pennsylvania, when Carnegie purchased it in 1883 and added it to his vast empire of

holdings. Given Carnegie’s strict antiunion policy in his mills, the union and Carnegie seemed destined

for conflict.

Prior to Carnegie’s acquisition of Homestead, Amalgamated had successfully negotiated a contract in

which workers were paid on a sliding scale directly correlated to the price of steel: The higher the price

of steel, the more the workers earned. When times were good and prices and demand were up, the

workers insisted on a larger share of money. They entered into such a contract, and it was effective for

three years.

The contract was set to expire in 1892, and Carnegie seemed determined to break the union once and

for all. He put Frick in charge of the dispute and went to Scotland, keeping in touch only by telegraph.

Frick made clear that the sliding scale arrangement was to be abolished; he refused to recognize

Amalgamated and would not bargain. The workers began to strike in one segment of the plant after

another. They refused to allow replacements to go into the plant to do their jobs. These replacements,

known disdainfully as scabs, were effectively chased out of town.

Frick was prepared for Homestead to shut down. He erected a large fortress around the plant, which

later became known as Fort Frick. The “fort” had searchlights, barbed wire, and high walls with cutouts

where rifles could be placed to shoot from inside the walls. Frick presented his wage offer but refused to

meet to discuss any of its terms, essentially locking out the union from negotiations. At stake was the

issue of whether wages should control the price of steel or the price of steel should control wages.

Next, Frick had the workers evicted from company housing. Women were carried out into the streets by

the sheriff. Frick then fortified the steel mill by hiring 300 guards to protect the plant from the strikers.

Watch This

To learn more about the Homestead

Strike, watch

http://www.aflcio.org/About/Our­

History /Key­Events­in­Labor­

History/1892­Home stead­Strike

(http://www.aflcio.org/About/Our­

History/Key­Events­in­Labor­

History/1892­Homestead­Strike)

The guards were not located at Homestead, however; they had to be brought to the plant. Frick made

arrangements for the guards to come down the river via barge.

It was well known that guards had been hired and were in the process of traveling to the plant by river.

More than 10,000 strikers gathered on the river banks to await their arrival. As the barge pulled up to

the dock, gunfire erupted. It was never determined who fired the first shot, but seven guards and nine

strikers were killed and many others seriously injured. After an all­day melee, the guards tried to

surrender and were escorted off the barges by the strikers, only to be attacked by the mob onshore as

they walked the gauntlet. The strike continued.

Eventually, after numerous attempts by different factions, the

state militia finally arrived at Homestead and quelled the riot.

With an armed force in charge, the company was then able to hire

replacement workers to get the plant up and running, and the

strike came to an end. From Carnegie and Frick’s perspective, one

could conclude that the strike was a success: The Carnegie Steel

Company remained without a union for the next 40 years (Brody,

1969).

Some of the strikers were arrested, and 16 were tried for

conspiracy and murder. The union spent its time, energy, and

finances defending those members; the strain on its coffers and

the loss of jobs resulted in the union’s ruination. In the end only one of the workers was convicted of a

crime and sentenced to serve time.

The lingering effects of the violence and the bad impression it left on the American public, however,

remained long after the strike was over. Shortly thereafter, Carnegie instituted lower wages and longer

hours. Frick, however, may be considered a casualty of the strike. He and Carnegie worked together at

arm’s length for some years and eventually had a falling out in 1899, at which time Carnegie bought him

out for some $32 million. Frick went on to found United States Steel, as discussed in the next chapter.

The reputations of both Carnegie and Frick, however, were forever tarnished by the events of the

Homestead Strike (Standiford, 2005).

The Early 20th Century and the Lawrence Textile Strike of 1912

Steel was not the only major manufacturing enterprise in the United States. Another large and

flourishing industry located predominantly in the northeast consisted of textile mills. The mills were

large, impersonal places to work with dangerous machinery and poor working conditions. Workers got

sick from inhaling dust and cloth fibers, caught limbs in the poorly maintained machinery, and generally

suffered from debilitating conditions and long hours.

Unskilled workers were allowed to run the machinery, and as a result, the mills employed thousands of

women and children who toiled for $6 per week that often included 6 or 7 working days. When their

long workday was over, workers returned home to a crowded and dirty tenement building where there

was little food to sustain them.

One of the largest employers of the time was the American Woolen Mills in Lawrence, Massachusetts.

The intolerable conditions at places like the American Woolen Mills made joining a union appealing to

the workers, and rising from the conditions of the time was the Industrial Workers of the World

(IWW), whose members came to be known as Wobblies (Green, 1993). The IWW was considered by

many to be a radical organization because it adhered to the belief that militant action was necessary to

improve the lives of its members, and it was determined to represent the mill workers.

One daunting problem facing the IWW’s attempts at unification was the varied backgrounds of its

members, who were immigrants from widely diverse places such as Poland, Italy, and Ireland. It was a

daunting task to organize workers who spoke a variety of languages, practiced different customs, and

held strong but varying beliefs about unionization.

Nevertheless, the IWW was successful in organizing a significant number of the workers and planned a

strike when the state of Massachusetts passed a law requiring that the workweek be reduced from 56 to

54 hours, which went into effect on January 1, 1912. In response to the decreased hours—which meant a

corresponding cut in wages—the mills deducted money from their workers’ wages to represent the

fewer hours worked. The first to notice the reduction in their wages were the Polish women working in

the Everett, Massachusetts, cotton mills. They walked out of the plant, leaving the mills idle. Soon both

men and women went on strike, and within a week there were 20,000 strikers; it was estimated that

more than 25 nationalities were represented in the strike, which included workers of German, Italian,

Polish, Scottish, and Lithuanian descent (Lawrence Textile Strike, 2014).

The women estimated that the pay cuts translated into two to three fewer loaves of bread a week,

resulting in the now famous phrase shouted by the strikers, “We want bread and roses too.” The

immediate reaction was to send in the militia to quell the strike; workers were attacked with water

hoses from the rooftops of adjoining houses. Workers contacted the IWW to assist them with the strike,

and the IWW sent Joe Ettor and Arturo Giovannitti, who came to unite the workers and form a

democratic means of representing them.

A Closer Look: Bread and Roses Today

The rallying cry of the women at the American Woolen Mills may seem a distant historical

incident, but “bread and roses” is alive and still part of American labor culture.

A movie by that name, released in 2000, depicted the struggle of workers in Los Angeles who

worked at night cleaning downtown office buildings. The dichotomy between rich and poor was

just as evident for the janitors as it was for the women in the mills.

The workers eventually formed an alliance named Justice for Janitors, which is an example of a

ground­up organization that succeeded in attaining its demands. The story is especially intriguing

because the workers used unconventional methods such as “house­visits, face­to­face organizing,

member­intensive organizing and strategic analyses of the political and economic contexts, and

organizational renewal of moribund locals” (Milkman & Voss, 2004).

One important tenet of the union was its belief in respecting the language and culture of each of the

groups working in the mill, no matter what country they came from. Rather than division, the IWW

sought to bring the workers together in a bid to gain better working conditions. Women played a

significant role in the Lawrence Textile Strike, not just because they were the key workers at the mill,

but because they insisted on a nonviolent approach, often marching at the front of strike parades in an

attempt to keep violence down.

National attention was drawn to the strike because the women sent their children out of town by train to

protect them. The children were sent to New York City, where they took place in parades and otherwise

drew attention to the strike. As a result, the next time the strikers tried to send more children on the

trains, the militia showed up and tried to wrest the children away from their mothers (Kornbluh &

Thompson, 1998). This resulted in massive publicity and eventual hearings in Congress. After the

hearings commenced, the mill owners backed down and granted concessions to the strikers. The strikers

received what they originally asked for: wage increases between 5% and 25%, compensation for

working overtime, and no retribution against the strikers.

At the congressional hearings on the strike, one woman’s testimony stood out. Her name was Camella

Teoli, and she was just a teenager when she appeared before Congress. Some of her testimony is as

follows:

CHAIRMAN. Camella, how old are you?

Miss TEOLI. Fourteen years and eight months.

CHAIRMAN. How many children are there in your family?

Miss TEOLI. Five.

CHAIRMAN. Where do you work?

Miss TEOLI. In the woolen mill.

CHAIRMAN. What sort of work do you do?

Miss TEOLI. Twisting.

CHAIRMAN. How much do you get a week?

Miss TEOLI. $6.55.

CHAIRMAN. What is the smallest pay?

Miss TEOLI. $2.64.

CHAIRMAN. Do you have to pay anything for water?

Miss TEOLI. Yes.

CHAIRMAN. How much?

Miss TEOLI. 10 cents every two weeks.

CHAIRMAN. Now, did you ever get hurt in the mill?

Miss TEOLI. Yes.

CHAIRMAN. Well, how were you hurt?

Miss TEOLI. The machine pulled the scalp off.

CHAIRMAN. The machine pulled your scalp off?

Miss TEOLI. Yes, sir.

CHAIRMAN. How long ago was that?

Miss TEOLI. A year ago, or about a year ago.

CHAIRMAN. Were you in the hospital after that?

Miss TEOLI. I was in the hospital seven months.

CHAIRMAN. Did the company pay your bills while you were in the hospital?

Miss TEOLI. The company only paid my bills; they didn’t give me anything else.

CHAIRMAN. They only paid your hospital bills; they did not give you any pay?

Miss TEOLI. No, sir.

CHAIRMAN. But paid the doctors bills and hospital fees?

Miss TEOLI. Yes, sir.

Mr. LENROOT. They did not pay your wages?

Miss TEOLI. No, sir. (Camella Teoli testifies, n.d.)

In the News: From Lawrence to Bangladesh—Is It Any Better for

Factory Workers Today?

Based on the article, Despite Low Pay, Poor Work Conditions, Garment Factories Empowering

Millions of Bangladeshi Women, by Palash Ghosh. International Business Times (March 25, 2014).

The intolerable conditions at the American Woolen Mills in Lawrence, Massachusetts, that

eventually led to the successful strike by the Wobblies took place in 1912, more than 100 years

ago. Textile mills in the United States have now been replaced by mills overseas, with Bangladesh

second only to China in terms of production.

Bangladesh has close to 6,000 garment factories and exports the majority of goods, generating

more than $20 billion in annual revenues. The entire country depends on these exports to prop

up its immensely poor population. It was under this sort of economic pressure that in April 2013,

the dilapidated conditions at the Rana Plaza factory on the outskirts of Dhaka led to its collapse. It

is considered the deadliest garment factory accident in history: 1,129 workers were buried alive

and another 2,515 injured (Ghosh, 2014). Read the following article about this calamity and then

answer the questions below: http://www.ibtimes.com/despite ­low­pay­poor­work­

conditions­garment­factories­empowering­millions­bangladeshi ­women­1563419

(http://www.ibtimes.com/despite­low­pay­poor­work­conditions­garment­factories­empowering­

millions­bangladeshi­women­1563419) .

Discussion Questions

1. To what lengths should employers go to ensure the health and safety of their workers?

Are there any aspects of health and safety for which employers should not be

responsible?

2. How would you as a manager handle a situation in which employees were placed in an

unsafe environment and the owners of the business did not care?

3. Do you think that managers and/or owners should be personally liable for deaths and

injuries that result from workplace catastrophes?

4. How do you think union representation benefits workers in such circumstances?

5. How could the formation of a union in an unsafe factory lead to better working conditions

for the employees?

By the end of the 19th century, the labor movement had come a long way. From the shopkeepers in the

beginning of the century to the AFL and IWW at its end, labor had experienced great strides in

organizing successful unions and affecting changes in working conditions; but it had also experienced

violence and had yet to universally achieve better working conditions, wages, and hours for all workers.

Americans were starting to become more outraged at the treatment their fellow workers received both

at the hands of the factory owners and by police sent in to stop the riots. Their disbelief led to anger and

demands that working conditions change, setting the stage for the significant legislation about to be

passed by Congress and state governments.

Labor History

Summary & Resources

Summary of Chapter Concepts

• The 1700s and 1800s featured rural farms and master craftsmen who ran their own shops.

Master craftsmen ran businesses in which they knew their employees, understood their needs,

and treated them as individuals.

• The Industrial Revolution took place during the mid­ to late 1800s, during which there was an

influx of cheap labor, a massive expansion of railways, the start of numerous factories, the

requirement to arm soldiers for the Civil War, and later, the importance of meeting the needs of

a growing population.

• As travel and commerce began to cross state lines, so did competition, making businesses more

cost­conscious. This often resulted in lower wages, which caused worker disgruntlement.

• Commonwealth v. Pullis held that workers who joined together to strike were engaging in illegal

conspiracy. This antiunion decision was not overturned for some 40 years until the decision in

Commonwealth v. Hunt, which held that trade unions are per se lawful organizations.

• The first major union in the United States was the National Labor Union, which was founded for

any workers, skilled or unskilled, and sought an 8­hour workday and better wages.

• The Great Railway Strike in 1877 shut down the nation’s railroads and resulted in extensive

damage to railroad property; it ended only when the militia was called in to quell the strike. This

strike demonstrated the need for a cohesive, strong organization.

• The Knights of Labor reached a force of 700,000 workers, who were socialistic in outlook. They

also focused on achieving an 8­hour workday and on prohibiting children under age 14 from

being hired for work. The group dwindled in membership in part because its acceptance of all

types of workers blurred its focus.

• The fall of the Knights of Labor occurred as the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor

Unions was rising. This group limited its membership to only skilled workers but was decimated

by the Haymarket Square Riot.

• The American Federation of Labor emerged as a powerful successor to FOTLU. Under the

leadership of Samuel Gompers, it became an amalgamation of 38 trade unions and quickly

reached a membership of close to 2 million.

• The late 1800s also featured the rise of the steel industry and the emergence of Henry Clay Frick

and Andrew Carnegie. Despite their brilliance in building the steel industry, Carnegie and Frick’s

actions during the Homestead Strike raised serious issues about their treatment of workers.

• In the textile industry a strike in which women demanded “bread and roses” became a national

event.

Chapter 2 Review Quiz

Chapter 2 Flashcards

Choose a Study Mode 

Key Terms

Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers

A union made up of workers in the steel industry in Pittsburgh in the late 1800s.

American Federation of Labor

An amalgamation of trade unions founded by Samuel Gompers in the early 1900s.

apprentices

Young men who trained in a shop to learn a skill.

Battle of the Viaduct

An uprising that was an offshoot of the Great Railway Strike of 1877 and occurred in Chicago, Illinois.

Bessemer Iron Works

Part of the large steel holdings of Andrew Carnegie.

Andrew Carnegie

A steel magnate and head of Carnegie Steel during the Homestead Strike.

Carnegie Steel

The name of the steel plants owned by Andrew Carnegie.

Commonwealth v. Hunt

A law case that held that forming a labor union is per se legal; it overturned the decision in

Commonwealth v. Pullis.

Commonwealth v. Pullis

A law case that held that forming a labor union is an illegal and criminal conspiracy; it was overturned

by Commonwealth v. Hunt.

conspiracy

When two or more people join together and plan a crime.

cordwainers

The name given to early shoemakers.

Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions (FOTLU)

A union that formed in the 1880s and admitted only skilled labor. It declared the strike at the

McCormick Reaper Plant that led to the Haymarket Square Riot.

Henry Clay Frick

An entrepreneur who was a colleague of Andrew Carnegie and who ran the Homestead Steel Works

during the Homestead Strike; the violence and death during that strike are attributed to him.

Samuel Gompers

A union activist and one of the founders of the American Federation of Labor, the precursor to the

AFL­CIO.

Jay Gould

A financier and railroad developer to whom a great economic crash is attributed in the 1880s; it led to

the Great Southwest Strike.

Great Railway Strike of 1877

A particularly bloody and violent strike that took place against the nation’s railroads in 1877 and led

to the formation of the Knights of Labor; also known as the Great Strike.

Great Southwest Strike

A strike organized by the Knights of Labor in 1886.

Haymarket Square Riot

A riot that took place as a result of a strike by FOTLU on the McCormick Reaper Plant in 1886.

Homestead Steel Works

One of Carnegie’s steel plants; the site of the Homestead Strike.

Industrial Revolution

An era in U.S. history spanning the years 1820 to 1840, during which there was a tremendous growth

in industry.

Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)

A union based on socialist principles that arose out of the Lawrence Textile Strike of 1912.

journeymen

Apprentices in a workshop; young men who learned a trade by assisting in a shop.

Knights of Labor

One of the earliest, largest, and most sustained labor unions of the 1800s, which sought to be inclusive

of both skilled and unskilled labor and worked to implement an 8­hour workday.

master craftsmen

Skilled tradesmen who often started as apprentices in a shop.

National Labor Union

One of the earliest unions formed (1866–1873) that represented workers and sought an 8­hour

workday.

Terence V. Powderly

The successor to Uriah Smith Stephens as president of the Knights of Labor.

Reading Railroad Massacre

Part of the Great Railroad Strike of 1877; a shooting in Reading, Pennsylvania, that resulted in 16

casualties.

scabs

A derogatory term for workers who replace people on strike.

Uriah Smith Stephens

The founder of the labor union the Knights of Labor.

William Sylvis

The founder of the National Labor Union.

wildcat strike

A strike organized by the workers without the permission or blessing of union management.

Wobblies

The name given to the members of the Industrial Workers of the World; the term has no clear origin

or explanation.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What were the driving forces that led people to sacrifice so much to form unions? Was it worth

it? What benefits were derived? What sacrifices were made?

2. Compare and contrast the first unions. What did they have in common? What are some of the

distinctions between them? What unions had conservative philosophies? Which ones were more

liberal?

3. Violence played a large role in the formation of the early unions. To what do you attribute this?

What part did the unions play in creating situations that engendered violence? What part did the

government play?

4. How did the economic boom and depression in the 19th century contribute to both the

development and destruction of unions?

Research Projects

1. Watch the film The Homestead Steel Strike of 1892 at http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=1NljbZAGk0w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NljbZAGk0w) .

a. After watching the film, describe the strike from the viewpoint of the steel workers and

then from the viewpoint of the Pinkerton guards.

b. Some commentators have stated that the strike was both a victory and a defeat for

organized labor. In your opinion, what does this mean?

c. Martha Frick Sanger, great­granddaughter of Henry Clay Frick, appears in the film. What

position does she take about her great­grandfather’s actions in the strike?

d. What is your opinion of the strike after watching the movie? Has your opinion changed

since reading the chapter?

2. The labor movement has many heroes, from Samuel Gompers to the Wobblies. Much

information and research about early labor leaders is available on the Internet and YouTube.

Choose one person or organization that you find particularly interesting and write a brief

biography and description of this party’s accomplishments on behalf of labor.

3. Andrew Carnegie and Henry Clay Frick are often portrayed as enemies of labor. Is this portrayal

accurate? Choose one of these men and investigate if this assumption is really true. Some good

places to start include “Where a Tycoon Made It Just to Give It Away

(http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/travel/21footsteps.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) ”; “Carnegie

vs. Frick Dueling Egos on Fifth Avenue

(http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/02/realestate/streetscapes­the­frick­mansion­carnegie­vs­frick­

dueling­egos­on­fifth­avenue.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C%7B%222%22%

3A%22RI%3A15%22%7D) ”; and “Henry Clay Frick: Blood Pact

(http://www.pittsburghquarterly.com/index.php/Historic­Profiles/article­template.html) .”