Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • FANTASIA, R: Cultures of Solidarity

    Transféré par

    bernardaf
    10 vues19 pages
    Segundo capítulo del libro

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formats disponibles

    PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    Segundo capítulo del libro

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    10 vues19 pages

    FANTASIA, R: Cultures of Solidarity

    Transféré par

    bernardaf
    Segundo capítulo del libro

    Droits d'auteur :

    © All Rights Reserved
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 19
    CULTURES OF SOLIDARITY Consciousness, Action, and Contemporary American Workers RICK FANTASIA 19 Xx 4 alte and Conloumens in hetion ‘will be examined, As will show, anilitaney was manifested in the ‘eontext of extreme opposition i the 193, and. opposition his ‘ontinued to shape its expression since then. The lotion of, and the possiblities for, worker spobiization and effective action today ly shaped by previous stgles, processes, and og this changing terrain that contemporary eultures of solidarity eas he properly situated Chapter Two Corporate Action and the Bounds of Solidarity Chapter + introduced the coucept of “cultures of solidarity” as a social encasement forthe expression of working class solidarity an femergent cultural form embodying the values, practices, abd Inst tutional manifestations of mutuality. 1 deserbed certain elements ‘of amas stitke during the 1g30® in Minneapolis ip oder wating the eaotowrs of such solarty, not hecause that decade represents the exclusive historical domain of solidarity, Dut because its depth snd scape then were of sch proportions a to exemplify cass con seiousness in-an almost ideal-typical vay. Although the task of ‘iystration is thus made stmpler, and the “eownpeling nyt” has somet ‘de to setion fas In thy syncs of Sorel) here ds 4 danger in extracting events from their proper contest, For many, the 19308 have served asa vantage point fo ‘whieh to view subsexjuent labor relations, nt fen with hte ree: on of the real processes ont of ehh the events of the 19308 led. ‘This has led a generation of sells to lament and pom ‘what went wrong” with the American working cls alter thet tunultuos era, wihout seriously considering the formidable con straints imposed on workers therattewpts to aet in concert The sim ofthis book is to tvestgate recent expressions of soi arty and collective ation among American workers th rs served as a use tnd the romplex processes uf their forinati ‘Quity it is crue) he reangaiae that “elas struggle” isa 8 * onporte Acton al the Bown f Seti alle. “Labor history” asa chronicle of events and processes must also be informed by’ a "management history” of enmterprocesses fand events in arder to make sense ofthe actions ofeach relation tothe other. "This chapter will trace the expression of solidarity historically in the contest of its opposition, Irom the turn of the century to the present. Instead of heralding heroic actions and extesoetlinary dis ‘ays of worker solidarity as others have done esewhere, however, T focus here on the breadth of opposition placed in the path of ‘emergent solidarity, opposition that has permeated the industrial landscape throughout the twentieth century ‘The diversity of strate ses employed, the level of organization al cooperation achieved, and the massive esousces devoted by employers to weakening and breaking solidarity ae, sn part, testimony tothe historical poteney of working-lass loyalties. Bin rather than sip cheonicling the strategies of employers, [wll atteragt to show how those strategies have progressively narrowed the scope of industrial action for work crs since World War Il, resulting ly limited range of possibilities for working-class activism today: That i to say, in frder to chart the terrain that contemporary cultures of solidarity ‘must negotiate, I will trace employer strategies and docement the ‘weight of the opposition encountered by workers as one way of examining how contemporary manifestations of working class so arity have heen shaped and conditioned by previous enxporat Initiatives "Twill begin by describing the context of eorporate activity ont of which the CIO breakthrowgh was achieved in 1937. In important ways, the character of employer activity, loth eoercive and pater= nals, helped dictate the complexion of wionism ss well asthe workers’ repertoire ofeollective ation inthe early C1O period. fn im, capital responded by embarking on a sustained, and largely successful, attempt to weaken the labor movement by severely narrowing the scope and the potential for collective action. The strict limitations imposed during the war years, and later codified by the Taft-Hartley Act, resulted in the postwar labor movement being instittionalized in its present enfeebled condition. More important forthe cise studies that fllo, the fori and content of contemporary expressions of collective action and consciousness Coporate Action athe Row Sllrity ” ‘ontinwe to be shaped by dl tunderstood inthe light of ‘Overall, th effort to Inca solidarity has as rch history as the attempts to forge i. Much ofthis history lnvalves struggles over “unionization (both the destrtion of existing sion and the sup pression of nascent ones), but the lacus solidarity has ote Dished beyond the wnion-as-nstitation. luongh solidar trays been part ofthe ethos and practice ofthe liar movement, the Centrality and primacy of mutual solidarity af the basis of social power has sometimes been diluted, dellected, or barterad away to Varying degrees among different segments of the movement. In Fecognizing that unions themselves have not abways embodied the Iighest expressions of solidarity, eflorts to organize unions, however limited andl uneven, from the nineteenth century to the present have had to rely on, or have at Teast heen informed by, the values andl practices of mutual solid ‘Concomitantly, corporate action bas been largely designed to delimit or destroy labor's solidarity, with the open shop asan impor tant focus of activity. Though complete freedom from unionism has not aways been necessary to guarantee largely wnbridled manage- tment power (as we will ee from the 19408 and beyond), ant ‘onionisim has represented "frst line of defense” against the expres- sion of elas loyalties among workers is Wistorical legacy sad can ony be mily Factory Relations” ‘and the Open Shop ‘The process of molding an ethos of work discipline, obedience, and timecthrft ut of agrarian sensibilities and proctices during. the Industral Revolution in England took place over many generations and met with a god deal of resistance The American counterpart to this process employers seeking to shape an indusrions factory ‘workfiee from an immiggant population of largely rural heritage took place throvghout the fatter hall of the nineteenth century, fathering impetus at the turn of the century. At the time when Frederick W. Taylor's theories of “scientific management” were fining currency among industrial planvers, the need fora plant, Acie, and disciplined workforce was more apgarent than ever As Corpo Actin athe Boe felarty Davidl Montgomery notes, paternalistic corporate wellare pro ais were initiated to “hasten the cultural transformation of the innmigrants fy promoting the atitides of thrift, sobrlety, adapt Init Tan aitiative’ that would allow exnployers to assign thes easily to industrial asks." Professionalization of corporate person ‘nel managers coincided with this process to conteol general worker {iscontent more ellectively and forther Facilitate he “Americnizs tion of Aliens."> “The lassie example of this effort was the Ford Motor Company's “sociological department,” eae of frty men, each equipped with a car, an interpreter, and adriver, who visited auto workers Aetermine their “eligibility” for Fons unprecedented daily wake fof five dollars. In an officially commissioned biography of Henry Ford, Allan Nevins ad Frank Hill describe these investigations © Eady worker was © furnish detailed information on his mart status, the namber and ages af his dependents, his nationality, religion, hone ownership stats, amount of wortgage or ren, evel fof debt (and to whom, whether money was sent home, whether boarders were kept, amount of savings and life insurance, family let, health, reereation, snd 30 forth In addition, each investigator made « eaeral assessment of the workers “habits,” "home cond tion," and “neighborhood, Henry Ford's own testimony to congressional investigates re veals combination of compassion, sell-righteousness, and a pro Fond paternal “The company maintains comps of go se, od judges of san sate, ho expan opgactnty, tea Aerie ways aid tons, English language, sts ofetzenship, he woe al Help he tmnaophistitealenpayees toot an ata comune, cow seni, and sanitary living conditions, a who ab exer the necessary vigilance to event, sar as possible, nn ay fo falling into abit op practices detrimental substantial poste ie The wl elt of tis comps fs to pointe to ea ake them dacontented with mere ing, Subsequent testimony revealed the limits his compassion reached Ford went to great lengths to explain thatthe “profisbaving pl (his term for the Bive-dllar dily wage) was «completely voluntary Mir: "No man is influenced to change his made of Hiving, Wis Carona ein athe Bane Selilaiy » habits, or character i rier to ql under the profit-sharing plan ihe does not willingly so clect” However, the conseypences of noncompliance were made quite dear. "No epercion is lad upo ‘ny employee, but if he ts nat lvinga sober Me, ois eglecting his duties as «father or husband, and he persists in such course he feannot be an associate of our business.” Ford insisted that 0 thomght was ven to the caswouie well-being of the company when the program was initiated, tht the objet was “smgly (0 Detter the Financial and moral status ofthe mes.” But he also nated that predctivity under the plan had increased by 25 10 20 percent snd that absentecism ba deveased from 10 percent tog percent Were, lve conceded: "Our experience leads ys to conclude beyond out that the interest taken st employees as to thelr individual ‘welfare is most desivable fam every standpnint ot ny chat ofthe employee and his family hut ofthe business itself” Cleary, tis ‘snot a ad “sidelight” for an inlustial relations program ereated thought of hetterinent in tis direction.” is unportant to remember that while corporate “soial work” was busy molding an indstal culture to aneet the requirements of employers, skilled, seasoned craftsmen were couniering these ef: Forts by teaching immnigrant proletaians their own version of shop- floor customs and practices Moreover, programs such as Ford's profit-sharing plan dd wot necessarily have to preuce diet bene fits te employers in tertns of productivity and output to be consid- fered successul, Their swaess eonld be meastwed less tangibly by example, Intemati tally to attend to the “social wellae™ of Harvester employees? ‘Emburking on a program to improve sanitary comdtions fn the factory, Decks had Ye congany dil wells a supply clean deinking, water to the workers (wot a minor inprowenncnty as Water pure Ties had heen a major case of illness she Drought i fins to clear the air she had tilts installed and lacs roonss bul; and so on, Inv aition, Becks ongunized a choral group ang the workers, ‘slicted contributions for hibrary. and set np a simmer camp for the families of Harvester workers But lest workers develop too keen a taste for reform, companies that envfetaak social were programs often sinultanenaly engaged in more coercive and re » Corporate Aton andthe Rondo Selierity pressive antiwnion campaigns, as the history of labor relations at both Ford and Intemational Harvester indicate (se below). ‘A more sophisticated andl more widely employed nsanifesttion corporate “welfarisin” was the “employee rupresentation phan,” ‘or “eompany wiion,” originally developed in « pageammatiefornn byy John D. Rockefeller. The events strvounuling its genesis high light factors that sometimes influenced labor relations policy. The “Golorado tnustrial Plan” or "Rockefeller Pla” wis developed i the wake of the Ludlow Massacre of 1gtg. In 1919, the United Mine Workers Union had successfully organized the Rockefell ted Colorado Fuel and Ion Company an list of demands includinga 10 percent wage inerease, observance of the state mining laws, discharge of armed guards, free choice of Fhoardinghouses and doctors, and, most important, union eco tion. After the local managenent refused to bargain withthe ‘union, the men walked off thee jobs and were summarily evieted fom their eompany-ovmed homes along with their wives and chil dren. A virtual eivil war brewed! as nko onganizer ws n= dered, strikers armed themselves, and the governor ostlered the entire National Gul tothe scene, The strikers were ot for over eight months, residing in stent colony with their fanalies until the Infamous night of Easter 1914 when “company-mplayed gunsnen and members of the National Guard drenched the stikers tents with ol They ignited them after the ers aul thes lanes were asleep. When the miners, their wives and cide rat frog the tents they were machine-gunned. Nineteen stikers and kin ere killed, thirteen of them children, The public watery tha followeil coincided with a series of mickrsking articles awed Rockefellers Standard Oil Company. Inthe aftermath of these events the "Rockefeller Plan” to establish « board representing bth management and employees asa for fr discussion of work ing conditions and grievances was waveiled, snl «face of ub: icity. Rockefeller himself spent two weeks in Colorado conducting ia thei a intendents. Newspaper readers throughout the country read how John D. had attended a loeal socal fanetion and dances with nearly ‘every woman on the floor. But living Bernstein recon 4 brief interchange with one William Hoe that reveals as much about the Coryunae Action ad the Bound of Soledarty - logged class instinet of a cal miner a it does about the "new" Jimage of a once-aloal industrials: Moodle dat you, Mistah Rockefeller? Now tats A all hea shakin as wi a ack Dey ike se Fae most fitful employee or yall sok. Aw T wants to few, sh, when Tee gol tit on de person ise Aockefeller: Well, I'm not the pension it mysl,yet, Willian, di oo ahora abr Hood: Yes, but youallae In October 1915, 2,846 workers (out of 4.411 eligible) voted on the plan, and 2,404 voted in fir aft The plan was istituted, and although there is no conclusive evidence that the establishinent of lr programs in other companies was arespoase to such violent ‘ass conflict, it clear that atleast one rnp of industri Felt threatened by the Rockefeller war at Lixiow and adopted very lurstrategies. During the events at Lullow, Cyrus Il, McCormick, ‘on business in New York, wrote to his son ofthe ativities in front of the Standard Oil Company allices, “where excited agitators were making violent speeches against Me Rockefeller and his soa." ‘Shorly thereafter, the McCormicks unveiled their own plan, The account offered by Robert Oranne of the cooperation between the two families, connected by both marstage and class interest, pro videsaisinnpse into the practice afeorporate solidity: n 1914 and 2915 the McCannicks al Hoa nds atone know-how and persed, inthe fori of Clarence Mik, tthe Rockefetlers, han pressed by he tase ssp at tallow. Dt the veer brought restimption ef labor twoubes at Taternthnal ester ad was none Rockefeller eh ie gine to thea a the MeCormicks by releasing Arthur IL Youn ofthe Colorado Fuel tnd tow Co heal u newly estab util lations dpa tment at teratinal Harvester [Ascarly as October 19 he cle in his mentor at Color uc, the tatersationlly famous labor relations consultant” Me: Kenzie King, whose novel ndings “onpany nn” pla secccded in escing the Hocklellrs os the Une Mine Work ‘ew ternational Harvester lightly hal plan to protect the com finy fr advancing onions. Conve Action a the Bona Sai ‘The “employee representation pln” was the organizational ex iession of the corporate wellare Meogy Yast Boiss by We Progressive Era. Supporters heralded the concept asthe preci nent form of dusts eanceracy in which the Mougates of “ope ‘would he opened, creating a new epoch of conse ‘elations. In an address before the Amerigan Mat 2ement Assocation, one corporate prope of company unis tatolled their advantages: “The quigkened sense of freedom ad ‘espousthiity lnossams into loyalty. Perhaps this is the finest flower of employee representation loyalty... Tes loythy suck 25 no wage system cat Iny, enlisting Heir will Jointly workin ‘but the democratization of insta operation.” Despite such enthusiasm for democracy, most employers inteo- Adyced company unions as 4 method of undermining organizations that might be controled by the workers Mhemselves, Te somes lunion provided workers with a semblance of ganization, while management coukdexereive 6 demain by cetaning controling power, I'vasa caricature of trade union, a which workers were involved in deciding the most innocuous of isites, decisions on important ses were made by a board that slows the eoeagany to retain controlling votes, foretlling feal organization by. the workers while snintaning open-shop conlitions for the compat. Althongh the company union took diferent forms, its essential advantage wos that it could replace working-class solidarity with Ccompony solidarity, shop solidarity, "tan Cty relations.” Ay ‘one industrial relations advisor candidly put it "After all, what «Mereuce des it make whether one plant has shop committer. a ‘works council”... oF whatever elses may he ealed? «ey an all he called “company tions’ and they all mean the one big i point the vpen slay." The company union afforded management «great deal ofleeway ina range of “problem” areas, as a group of workers wold ow all ‘management "i making employees see te mevesaity and wisn of 1 decision that would otherwise become disagreeable i true some.” Hwa particulaely effective in engineering wage reluctons ‘One company hoasted of developing “a carefully workec-ant plan of reducing wages during @ peviod of depression witht the ws reseitment from the workers." ‘The ollie of the Bridgeport Brass Company deserted the ease with which wage cuts were fi (Conran ad the Bond of Solariy 2 lated withthe help uf company union "representatives" “The repre= sentatives of the workers got rogether and drew up plans that were eminently fae Hat we nok sly assented them Dust thanked the ‘workers They snaninousy agreed that there shoul bea horizontal “wage vedction of 10 percent, to revive all preferential classifications and abolish overtime pay." There is no cation sf wter the workers at Bridgeport Brass felt their “representatives” to be as senerous as nmagenent fue them, but the pot that, forthe lime being, the concept worked successull in falling manage ment wishes and preventing ellective worker organization ohert Oranne's extensive docomeristion of the “dosti ‘omnel plan” at Intemational Harvester Company sheds some light, ‘on the operation af "Tamily fetory relations.” The company ratio tale for establishing the industrial comic! plan, a program that lasted for twenty-two yeas, isnot easy to pin dew. The employ- fees were informed that suvasernest wae taking he fniiative “to establish closer relations hetween emplayees and management” snd that its inplemesitation would “make forthe greater eontent iment and well-being ofue all” Another explanation, ine lala Scope, yet actually an elaboration ofthe st, was a vesponse made byy Cyrus MeCormivk Hw te 4934 AFL convention, ssi had denounced! company vnionssi as thinly veiled wnion-bustingtac- tie. MeConinick emphasized the value ofthe works counell as an “ally” of organized labor and an eMlacive Sr of ealletive arg i. He characterized is progrant a8 one that woud democratize Indus relations, tu conteaistinction to “Eastern Ruropean syt- ical,” whieh cou not, according to MeCaanic, arasp "the Fundamental solidarity of the Amevican people. However, a third and conicking stale is yeveaed in letter fiom the had of telustsal relations at Usrvester, Arthm ‘Young. ta Gyrus McCormick a the pla was being developed. Ht represents Young’s recommendation nthe mids ok a seussiu of the most opportune moment to initiate the phan It aye tre tht, hc th ra abo wil ese pent Futon the ther hand Haya eve at coins wl he ext wetted in thit peril al alco of anenploynt all psy rig witht greater anurans at ties than has foe ated sine pros 1 fel cota thatthe testes othe lor organizers yl be yuls ne rail cae u Corporate Actions the Boao Solaariy yo that the oar saver, thin they have heen here Fithrrmore, there is greater need for the adopt clearer fateoents of fie ad denocrtie prices by Teaing sti fst, eease such pronouncements will srveas beacon the very tbuleat sex of industrial relations existing ort ow we with action and make no move to combat the ello of labor agitators and Sharchistic workers, itis certain that some of one enavees wil be Influenced by their propaganda. And think that the general con ton of soetty i su that there is dstinet danger, because of the ‘worldwide unrest of what we popularly txm the "working clases.” ‘This internal company communication is particularly illuminating First, indicates that although the company was to have the work- fers vote on whether or not to institute the plan, ove lnlivential positon was that by waiting ix months, dhe vote won take place Inthe contest of a peried of igh lhor supply. and consequently the company woul enjoy a certain advantage based on the work: 15 fear of unemployment. More important, although “democratic principles” played a vole in offer the pan, they were clearly Subordinate to corporate fears of open rebeltion. In Internation Harvester’ highest echelons, the notion that there existe a “fon damental solidarity of the American people” competed with the ‘equally compelling (though not openly stated) view of the primacy of las struggle in industrial las ‘The whole operation of the works counell at Harvester appears to have reflected this latter position. The coucl vas made up ofa ‘equal number of employer and employee representatives, but the Scope of council getviies was largely determined by management Management was given the right to veto any employee proposals and the company president reserved the right 10 cat te-breaking ‘votes in the event of an tinpasse According to Oranne, the plan ‘was carefully designed to ensure the sslation of workers from one fanather. There was no provision for any employee meetings. and templayee representatives though elected by departinents, hud 10 sgreed-upon sgt to call a meeting in their constituent dept. ‘ments. Even the nominating process took pace without a meeting Employee votes were frequent spit on most iste, wlhereas management representatives consistently vol asa blog, ensting ‘management prerogatives and preventing the company esi from having to exercise his (potentially embarrassing) te" breaking Corporate Aton andthe Bou Soarty ‘ power. Although the existence ofthe works comicil protected Inter ational Harvester fom succesful union organizing eampaigns fr many years, demands for wage inereases were repeatedly raised by workers an the council These demands were mostly unsuccessful, iputnage cuts were frequently enacted, forcing the employee repre Sentatives to spend most of their energy Bighting to restore cut ‘wages rather than obtaining real wage inereases Tis portant to wdersand Taw such cts were fatal 0 understand soine of the constraints impose on working-class ac- tion in general, Wage cuts at Harvester were preceded by well trchestated (andl sometimes prolonged) “sftening-up” perias Daring these periods, management would meet with employee representatives to point out the low rate of plant operations and tite wage cuts at other plants, with the implication that te only sway to keep the men working was for them to accept such w ct. ranne explains that at one such meeting, Artur Hl Yo slated that although a 20 percent cut would be necessity he wold derstand ithe epresentatvs tempted ty amend hs ropa torag pervent so that they could "save face" with their constituents subsequently they would be overridden hy management and then would be able to accept the original 20 percent ent the company wanted. ‘Shortly ater this ent was imposed in May 1921, the company began anew sltening-up process in an efor to cut wages yet again, Thistime, the employees hough they cull appeal to the constite tion of the works council, which yeolibited wage readjustinents within sic months of each other. However, ax management conve- niently interpreted the constitution, the employees cook waive the prohibition by a vote oftheir representatives, After a prolonged Derind of meetings, in which management called for aay percent eu Tr day workers and a.g2 peresnt cut fr shift workers (wo oF thee representatives openly protested, but most were tongue-tied inthe presence ofmanagement), lseeined a though management would fave its way ayain 2 But when the secret vote was counted, em- ployee representatives had voted eleven to three ayalns, with mane gement voting unaninoously forthe cuts, When the tendent wanted to hyo shy the workers had voted the way they Thad, one representative replied: "The men come tome and say Mr. Joe, better to starve without working than to slarve and work too.” * Corporate Action a the Bond Seley Management responded: "Looks to meas though [top management willl he forced toclore down the plat,» ifthe pati shat down You cin feel pretty sure that i was your action that eased ‘These workers, who could not meet with their eonstitwents, tess thee fllow representatives, without ian tives present, were intimidated by the threat stele for antes vote, in which they accepted the 27 percent and 32 percent wie ‘cls a voting margin often to Rae But while this series of actions shows the workers to be com pletely submissive inthe operation ofthe ents and file at Harvester readily tossed out” representatives who were 50 easly imimiated, even though there was litte that a more militant group of representatives could have accomplished within this structure, Attempts to organize real ade unions wouk! most certainly have been met by discharge. Deleats such as the one described above did provide valuable lessons later on, as workers at Harvester and elsewhere were given «taste of what veal oriniza tion might provide, The promotion of company wnionisis was ony ne weak a Langer ausenal of corporate antiunion activity in the pre-World ‘War Il period, but it was a popular management steatey. Robert Dunn's estimates, based largely om data fron the National Indus teal Conference Beard, found the number of companies adopting company union taties to have grow from 14g it 1919 430 in »926 The passage ofthe National fdustey Hecowery Aet in 1953 saw a precipitous jump in the number of company unions as 6 ployers interpreted Section a's ambiguos “right of labor to repre sentatives of ts own choosing” as sanction for company’ ne By the spring of 1934. 25 percent of all industital workers were employed in plants with eompany unions, with two-thirds of these organized under NRA auspices” Data Trom the iron and tee ntustey show a gusticarly vigor ‘ous promotion of company wnionisin in respwmnse 40 the NRA OF the Seventy-one company unions reporting in rags fifty had been established under the NBA, and this was conskered a very conse. Vative figure, as not all eompanies reported (se table) The company union strategy. widely employed throughout the twenties and thirties, reduced Progressive Era sia wells to system that, while paternalistic and sometimes bexevstevt fox, Corporate Actin od he Bound of Sly ” TABLE 1. Comany Unions Exit the fran and Stal Indastry ‘Apr 1935, by Tne of Estabahoent Workers Inatoed Jablilinents — Rusber Percentage Die Natal Hessen At n aoe During National Resonery At » sn e Nat rept ‘ 5a 6 “oll eri. 1 far 190 ‘pony, alleen aie, pS e hae owes hl was essentially coercive, The structure of employee representation plans did allow for at Teast a semblance of worker partiiptien in ‘decisions alleeting shop-hoor We, bt these progeams were cae= Tully constructed to keep managerial cooteol intact. In thes of economic expansion workers no doubt received some material Ienefits, certainly more than workers in plants with no representa tion at all For management, however, the real strength ofthis type of program lay in its ability to fuilitte management eoatel in ‘periods af economie eantraction—that is, when there were loses 10 bre absorbed, it was possible to get haba to accep them des the imprimatur of a “iletnoeratic™ procedure. Company unkans would nat have worked sinsothy if they had yiven workers an opporte to meet collectively 0 disewss problems. A compan survive with worker participation aly workers sa fs thelr sole source of power, anil inass meeting of workers in this context ‘woud no dona ase Beaty he withers real source of strength into sharper relief mn promoting company unionism, employers ronialy, yet nate rally, pursued policy that attempted to obtain a 100 percent “losed shop for their unions as prt of their strategy of maintain ing “open-shop” status in elation to actual trade ston organza tion. Bat company’ unions in the twenties and thirties Trequently “ Corporate Atom andthe Bown Seay provided the organiatioual sd stewctural basis for the establish nent of genuine unions in the electrics}, sect, ad other iu tries In fuel, a International Harvester, Gconge Fielde, ein ployee represent Tead th ‘ous militant strikes, “Althongle itis generally assumed that corporations employed ‘either the relaively henign methods arsoctatad with Progressive Era welfare ideology or the more repressive tactics of fee anh intimidation to keep workers from organizing. a more accurate pretation may he that companies employed both tactics sino taneously, oF atleast were able tose fom one to the other wit litte ideoiogialdifclty- The view that some corporations had a clightened approach to shor relations while others stubboraly ‘lung 0 antiquated feudal notions may appear compelling wh ‘one views the Huckeeller decision to allow his employees some representation in the aflerinath ofthe Ludlow Massacre. However, ‘one commentator notes that corporations that adopted compan unions Frequerily atthe same time supported (financially or other wise) the efforts of employer associations sul. as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers to ‘undermine vnionin on a national scale ‘And at International Harvester, 211 econonic downturn just ‘months after the resignation of Gertrude Beeks (the personification ff welfare refon} cused the general manager of manlactoring reatest what appears to have hen a es aul suden shi labor relations strategy. The recommendation begins as «virtua ea Yo teas: “T know of wo ease sere the employers have taken a Brin Stand with thei help anda strike has resulted, in which the employ: ershave not won, ..- Weare in amore fvorable postion today to Ihave a fghn-with labor, f necessaty, than we have been for sone time pastor are kely to be fora lng ime.” Tt goes on to anticipate the costs to the company ofa violent, prolonged strike, and ern cludes "tht by taking @ finn stand on this question an putting through, we shall end up by having our men in beter coatro, that they wil respect us more, and that we wil have less labor tro Dies. for several years to come than we would in adopt compromise stance." Indeed, wellrganized, sometiones by Convrate Action andthe Bond fbr » coercive, tactics were utilized by employers often alongside more Denign iethons. Concerted campaigns conulcted by large corpora: tions or well-financed employer associations were evbyaced on a wide seabe throughout the period preceding the formation of the C10 aid represented « threat to extenze labor solidarity as great ‘or greater than the “fal factory relations” embodied In company lunionsi or welfae reform. Corporate Repression and the ‘ClO Breakthrough is knows throughout much of fhe werkt foe character, The attempts by employers to Teak unions with the assistance of federal tivops, the Natkonal Guard, Pinkertons, private militss, and lured thugs made such jekuonwn places as Coeur UAlene, Cripple Creck, Everett, Homestead, an! Flint into watchwordsa American history. But the tse of military and paramilitary free to secure the wh of capita, though wot infrequent, has heen only the siost latant means of breaking workers associations. Although perhaps loss dramatic, co porate espionage, organized stikebreaking, al open-shop propa ganda tampaigts have probably been significansly more costly (0 corporate treasuries, as well aso'workingelass saldarty Before igoo. employers generally handled their labor affes| without the strategic assistance of nationally organized employer associations. Thus, while the owners of the sve factories in Ly Massachusetts, the mine owners of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, and fenphoyers elsewhere frequently united sn cotnnion ease agalast the airings oftheir workers, these were local events snd not part any nationally coordinated effort lw goa, however, the conten tion of the National Assocation of Manufacturers declared that i twas necessary to approach labor relations in 2 collective manner" The solidarity of workers, expressed in sympithy strikes, boycott and mace picket Hines aud marches, would thereafter he met by the combined efforts of an ovtanized employer class, Trade associa tions, once a forum for the promation of commerce, berame & source of expertise and organization for corporations intenton meet {ng the challenge of working-class slur. David Montgomery's * Ccorvrae Action andthe Bod of Salary ‘ease sty ofthe machinists shows that they drew the attention af Just such an offensive inthe fist decade ofthe twentieth century AAs the hnteruational Association of Machinists registered some sue testes in Chicago, satransigent employers rased the costs of that Suecess in Chicago and elsewhere by attacking the machinists) ine weapon, the ability t hale production, The National Metal {Trades Association spearheaded the olfensive by providing leg neil, strategic, and security assistance t struck employes. ‘The NMTA organized strike-breaking outfitssuch as the "Indepen dent Labor League of America, made up of workers. who were really to 20 anyplace in the land to replice strikers.” Halo helped orm an elaborate espionage network to ifltate the labor moves tment, Montgomery eles an exposé published in 1904, which ident fied spies “on the AFL Executive Council, among national officers, ‘of several unions, federation field organizers, city trades assem bles, and union convention delegates.” Employers acted throng the American Ant:Boycolt Atsocation to engage in legal ation st boycotts and syinpathy strikes, “succesilly establishing itwlicil precedents for the issuance of injunetions andthe collec: tion of damages aginst unions in sich cases."= “The early open-shop campaigns consisted of a range of ap: pronches. Reiuhard Bendix has listed the variety of methods used Ihy employers to maintain non-union status. In addition to the eve ation af counterorginizations (company unions), employers selec lively hired “corperative” workers and fired the “uncooperative” They conseiausly sought to by olf tre enon leaders in an ellort torsion offdaor’s most effective spokesinen, Leaders who could not Te bought weve red-haited, acused publicly of serios erimes, brblackited, the pint being toclrivea wedge between the leader stip nd the rank aid fle orto eliminate the leadership altogether. Spies were employed liberally as a way of ensuring that manage neu vas cognizant of union steategy’ an had sone had in fran lating Ht According to slogan printed on a bulletin advertising sspionage serviees to einployers, "Porewarne is forearined.” ES- piionage also served to maintain fear and paranoia in the union Fanks, rendering communication and solidacity a costly and danger ‘us alae, Strikebreakers were to be called on to break picket lines find undermine work stoppages. Consequently, sul progeams de- ‘manded that good relations he forged hetween the company and Conorate Action and he Bound Slerny ” the loal police and slit The political and facial clout wiekded ly employer associations was t9 be used to pressure the courts, the press, and local politicians to attack the trade unions and de fend the corporations publicly. According to Bend, all of these cellorts were supported cooperatively ly financial donations to em- ployers engaged in battles with the unions. Any fant-heurted em ployers were pressured by their peers to support the cause ofthe ‘open shop. Education was an important element of the early open shop drive, with plans calling for the establishment of “wade Seliols" designed to teach “management plslosoph” Internal edi cation ws partly faitated by an ant-nbion organ, The Review, ‘monthly journal published by the National Me tion, which was later retitled The Open Shep Review.» ‘Although this srt of ant-amion ativity was used by employers Uroughout the first two decades of the ceutry, it played ie anost prominent role in the aftermath of World War I, a the tail end ofa tallitnt strike wave of four millon workers that lef the “captains of finlstey” visibly shaken ® Thoogh the war years the Indasteal Workers ofthe World (the Wobblies), with over 190,000 members and a spirit tht touched many tines that minber, had borne the brunt of repressive action in scares of comminities, Wobblies were jailed, beaten, and lynclied for theie labor agitation and the sition to the war. Invoked repeatedly during the postwar stike wave, the ery of “Re” against strikers inthe Boston Police strike, the Seattle general strike, and elsewhere serve to kindle mil class passions and clo the isses over which millions were st sling! As Richard Boyer aud Herbert Moras point out, ideology ‘was haedly a sificient expkanation for the ferce postwar militaney among industrial workers: Comnmanists were Int ene tenth af ae percent of the cemnty’s Population but milk ad jump since gu foi nine t Bile ents a art eggs fo thirty-seven To aty-two ents dozen, Tater foun tity tw to sity-one ert po, and fo tea From twenty-seven to forty-two cents pnd. Ths fact and Ralshevim was the eee of a ake wave halving 4.000 ‘American workers the epowliseive fthe National Asoc. thon of Manaictrer, esi the ra sare ax ts main weapon, con ‘iced ellis of the middle-class that every ste was the eg ingot revetion 2 * Corporee Actin ath ad Slterity Even the AFL resorted to attacking the IWW (an its al for “one big union”) with fierce ed: baiting and the mobilization of scabs to Inreak Wolly atxkes, partly t0 add legitimacy to "responsible trade waionisn ane! increase Hts own membership ail pasty 0 forestall the organization of unskilled workers. From 1918 to 120 the struggles of many American workers weve notable for their ferocity, but so was the offical repression mounted “gins hem, andthe organization of esas prediction ncastvies Gnd milions of unskilled workers) was thus delayed for a genera tion.2"This period saw the red seare develop into powerfully flee tive weapon asthe Wobblies, the imigsant victims of the Palmer Fads, and the many workers Whe lasers ofthe 1gig steel strike, for ‘example) whore strikes were broken after being labeled “Bolshevik inspice” could attest. The most dramatic attacks on the emergence of solidarity were leveled by the govecoinent in the midst of postwar anti-red hyste ria, but the employers and their organizations continued yo rake important open shop gains throughout the 1gaos, An alinospheee of {ear and anxiety spread throug the working class during the depres: sion of gan, with an unemployment rate of 19-5 percent providing, fertile ground foran intensification otis offensive. Kowa a ayo tne moment for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other em ployer groups to neh “the Ameria ‘which merged the ‘ongoing open-shop dive (a tactics) with racist, hativistsentinents snd movements, Esuqlayer associations Forged Tinks with the American Legion, the National Sectrity League, nl the Ku Klu Klan in a formidable combination in the service of ‘open shop "Americaniin 1m the face ofthe offensive, the working class revealed 4 vier Fully that was to be it Actilles” heel in later employ Although inany unions apposed the Klan for exrying the ba the open shop, white workers (Catholic as well at Protestnt) of feed hile apposition to the racist snd nativist thrust ofthe move: ‘nent, The KKK afforded an ote for many of dhe comsaut ssh tions of Me, including economic tension as wells social nse by providing a wealth of seapegoats against whom weal ight vented.""! Confronted by powerful nativist reaction fueled by the employers and their abies, the" new stniarants retreated into the sanetuaries of ethnic community,” weakening the prospects for sll [Corporate Aton andthe Bown of Soluarity a arity across skill Levels and aceoss ethnic and tac barriers foe ‘many years to come. “The combination of forces in the “Amerksin Plan” movement rave an ade! boost to anti-nion initiatives, Within a year, four states (New York, Minos, Michigan, ase Conneticut) hada com Dried total of 137 organizations detcated to proselytizing for open- shop ideology, ane! nationwide g4o organizations were actively peo ‘moting the cause of ant-unioniom:? The income of the National Metal Trades. Assnintion ba sen froin $127,696 in 1988 to 4541,a36 i 1g] as more and more employers “eagerly sgh the blacklisting, spy, and srike-breaking services offeed hy the associa tion.” Apparently its money was wisely spent, as Thomas R. Brooks ‘notes hat the wachinist ion LAM, the eet union i the indus try, saw its membership decline ftom 330,800 in 920 10 7.56 1924. Union membership in general declined steadily from a peak ots nillion in 1g20 to 29 million in 95" Such concerted asaultson union activity were use successfully thoughout the ¢wenties and well into the Huates, The beeaddh of anti-anion peopagands that was lissemsnated drag these ines is partially revealed in the 4936 repot of the National Association of Manufacturers PRESS: Indsteal Pres Service. x ‘every week es 5.300 weekly newspapers Weel carta service, sent to 2,000 Weekly newssner "Unele Aner Says" com eaten appearing 9 dally ers with ttl craton af 30,000 eer ot and Your Nation’ AG's dally tices by weltknown economists appearing fn ewspens with uta cheatin of 300,008 Pactual Bulletin. my exposition of indasey’s viewpoint sent to every newspaper erin le sy i Citizens weekly pres sevice, tant Poi, sa Wain, pte sewage wt otal election of ln 2,0 Nationwade advertiing. 6 ul pga su he” Amercan System which soo newspapers have arid one oF more RADIO: “The American Family Robsinen” program bear fem ‘st toca! over 228 radio stations once s week, nd over 176 Slatin pea week “ Corporate Actin othe Bods of alalarty ecg Langer. 188 posans soe er MOVIES: Two vo-inute lis for general Ustribtion, sen hy ver 2,000,000 pee. PUBLIC MEETINGS. zo cetings Featuring professional speakers. EMPLOYEE INFORMATION SERVICE: eres of 3g leafets strut to over 12,000,000 workers. POSTERS: Over goo.000 Tor a series of 4 or bulletin oars in plats hunt dhe county. FILMS: 20 sou se fils for showing plans (OUTDOOR ADVERTISING: 6o,o00 bila al Scheled for 997 PAMPHLETS. "You and Your Industry Library --- over 3,000,000 copies ofa zeris of seven pamphlets distetbute to Mirai, ‘alleges, businesen, lawyers ad vers The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, with a membership af 700,000 employers, sponsored similar anti-union propaganda eforts a feast as wide as the above. But union-busting and prevention were wot ‘confined to dissemination of propayanca. In the La Follette Sewate committee hearings of 1938, it was revealed that employers were spenuling $80 million & year for espionage services, Hoyer al Moraishave reported on the extraordinary Scope of labor espionage ‘this period: "ago detective agencies furnished the largest Amer an comporations with 100,000 spies, wo were thought to have penetrated every one of the country’s 48,000 local trae sion ‘And while the National Association of Manufacturers was distibut- ing thousands of copies of a booklet endorsing the strikehveking “Mohawk Valley Formula,” corporations were busily patting this theory into practice. “The "Mohawk Valley Formula” gained popularity among employ- cexsaftes ut was succesfully use by the “Little Stoel” companies to Lestroy the Stoel Workers Orgonizing, Cwanittee in. onic le: ing tothe infamous Memorial Day Massacre in which ten peaceful marchers were killed and eighty-cight injured outside the gates of he Republic Steel plant in South Chieagn."” The progran was developed by James R. Rand ofthe Remington Rand Corporation to combat union organizing drives, but ts components were lar from original: “It provided for the systematic denmncition ofall labor crganizers and leaders as dangerous radicals, use of local Corre Actin od the Bonde iy | palice to break up labor meetings, propaganda campaigns to align the citizenry behind law and order, organization of vigilante com tnitees to protect phuts which lived strikebreakers, back-to-back ‘movements and threats to remove the industry fom the comm nity Tabor were nt put in its place." The garnering of eon fity support on the side of employers ad eats to cripple an ares economically theowgh plant closings Tad heen used by employers tatlies to break strikes, but it appears that seh stestegies appeared {in elie form forthe ist time in the "Mohawk Valley Form Other elements of the plan, the attempts to isolate the leaders from the rank and fleand rebayce oe local police to aid strikebreak- ing, were well-tested tactics by th latter part ofthe aggos. ‘Against such a sustained ollensive by employers, the weaknesses ofthe National Recovery Act appeared in ever sharper relief. The nnass solidarity strikes of 1954, sith theie accompanying violence i) disruption, were easily seen ax a portent of thing to come, particularly as they were occurring within an atmosph ing hostility and sitance on the pat ofthe employing elas. From the perspective of President Noosevel, something sel to he done tocool out” the grosvng conflict. General discontent was inereas- ingly focusing on the ant-labor policies of Roosevelt's New Deal policies, and after some teepidation he decided to support « mare ‘equitable labor reform program. © Subsexent ta Senate approval, Roosevelt gave his spport to the Wagner Act, creating the Na tional Labor Relations Boar, which wo conduct win elections and relate abo practioes general. But although the le was signed in the: ‘was iediately challenge in the for the next two years. Many expected at the law wold eventially be declared unconstitutional, an outside the courtroom the battle raged on. Baployers had appar- ently decid to break the kw wes once bythe power af watons to recognize i Farl Read, hs Drought together by the American Liberty League to stated tne emplovers’ position svccinelly when he declare perfectly fre to aise a client not vo be hound by a law that 1 Consider unoonstitutional”™! So while the Wagner Aet seemed to ‘signal an advance for the union movement, only the force of worker mobilization would cause i to be obeyed “The partion mechanism workers wed to enforce te Connection end the Bound of Salary conganize collectively was the dramatic and widely employed sit down strike. As demonstrated over and over in 4936 1937, the {cdown represented a potent weapon 1 defeat strategies and provided the key to the 0 oduetion industries. The tactic served to successfully underinive ‘many of the opetshop pratices directed at union campaigns. With suck an extensive spy network in place, employers could identify and discharge union organizers al supporters with litle posibil- ity of mass action belng mobilized to defend these workers, The sit- down helped lit such constraints on mass mobilization. As Bert Cochran points out: “With the sitdown, «determined, disciplined minority

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi