n ly.-h
Inst. Indus.
Relations
A
C
A
^??
— 1
:ri
1
iQ
4
4
7
5
JO
4
== ■<.
-^'5
m
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
SERIES XXXIV No. 3
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES
IN
Historical and Political Science
Under the Direction of the
Departments of History, Political Economy, and
Political Science
THE CONTROL OF STRIKES IN
AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS
BY
GEORGE MILTON JANES, Ph.D.
Instructor in Political and Social Science in the University of Washington
BALTIMORE
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS
1916
SERIES XXXIV NO. 3
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES
IN
Historical and Political Science
Under the Direction of the
Departments of History, Political Economy, and
Political Science
THE CONTROL OF STRIKES IN
AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS
BY
GEORGE MILTON JANES, Ph.D.
Instructor in Political and Social Science in the University of Washington
BALTIMORE
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS
1916
Copyright 1916 by
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS
PRESS OF
THE NEW ERA PRINTING COMPANY
LANCASTER, PA.
M.
CONTENTS
Page
Preface vii
Introduction 9
Chapter I . The Development of Control 1 1
Chapter II. Control by National Deputy 20
Chapter III. Arbitration and Control 29
Chapter IV. The Initiation of Strikes 38
Chapter V. The Independent Strike 49
Chapter VI. The Management of Strikes 71
Chapter VII. Strike Benefits 88
Chapter VIII. The Termination of Strikes 116
T
INST. INDUS. REL.
PREFACE
This monograph had its origin in an investigation carried
on by its author while a member of the Economic Seminary
of the Johns Hopkins University. The chief documentary
source of information has been the collection of trade-
union publications in the Johns Hopkins Library. This
study of the printed material has, however, been supple-
mented by personal interviews and correspondence with
both national and local trade-union officials and with em-
ployers of labor in a number of industrial centers.
The author would record here his appreciation of the
helpful criticism of Professor Jacob H. Hollander and
Professor George E. Barnett, under whose guidance the
study was undertaken and carried on.
G. M. J.
THE CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN
TRADE UNIONS
INTRODUCTION
Strikes have been a marked feature of American industrial
life during the last fifty years, and this period has been
characterized by the rise and growth of trade unions in
this country. The two facts are closely connected. The
purpose of a strike is to enforce the demands of the men
who engage in it by a withdrawal from work. To make
this device more effective, the trade union endeavors to
organize the workmen. By means of organization three
results are accomplished. In the first place, the strike
is made more comprehensive and therefore is more likely
to succeed. Secondly, the strike is more efficiently financed
and the strikers, therefore, can stand out longer. Finally,
the advantages won by the strike are better retained when
a permanent organization of the men is accomplished.
It is a popular fallacy that trade unions fqment strikes
and that striking is their reason for being. To this the
trade unionist says: "Young and weak unions have many
strikes; old and strong ones have few. If unions were
mere striking machines, the opposite would be true."^
The importance of moderation is insisted upon by most
labor leaders. Collective bargaining is the ultimate goal
of nearly all trade unions, and to reach it not only organiza-
tion but discipline is needed. Strikes are dangerous to
the organization and costly. Hard experience has taught
trade-union officials that something more than enthusiasm
is necessary to win a strike; and, while it may be true
occasionally that a union thrives on opposition, a strike
is not to be considered an end in itself. If the strike is
^ Painter and Decorator, April, 1910, p. 262.
9
10 CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS [348
lost, the better wages and conditions obtained by previous
effort may be lost also. Experienced union officials,
therefore, count the cost before entering on a struggle
with the employer. The "get-rich-quick strike method,"
as it is called, is termed a failure.^ Paradoxical as it may
seem, young and inexperienced unions often disintegrate
after a strike is won, because it is easier to rely on promises
than to continue the union and pay dues. But the reten-
tion of higher wages and better working conditions is
usually contingent on the continuance of the union. The
trade-union leader must not merely estimate the chances
of success, but must also consider whether the ground
won can be held. The law of the survival of the fittest
has, therefore, brought about a more or less complete con-
trol of strikes in many unions, while in all there is unanimity
of opinion concerning the value and need of organization
and discipline.
The purpose of this study is to describe the control of
strikes exercised by the general or national unions. The
evolution of strike initiation from local autonomy to con-
trol by the general or national union is first described.
This is followed by a somewhat detailed account of the
place of the national deputy or agent, and the influence
of arbitration. The initiation of strikes is then taken up,
after which the unauthorized strike or independent action
on the part of local unions is discussed in connection with a
classified list of unions and union policies. A considera-
tion of strike management follows, together with a de-
scription of the methods used and the part taken by the
national deputy or agent. The real source of control, the
power of the purse, is then described in the matter of strike
benefits, their amounts, and the rules under which they
are paid. An account of the growth and influence of the
strike fund follows, and in conclusion some figures are
quoted as to the amounts paid out in strike benefits. The
final chapter is devoted to a discussion of the methods used
in bringing a strike to an end.
*Shoe Workers' Journal, February, 191 1, pp. 25, 26.
CHAPTER I
The Development of Control
The early history of strikes in American trade unions is
characterized by what may be termed the anarchy of local
autonomy. The course of development has been away
from local independence in all matters pertaining to strikes,
towards the vesting of authority in the matter in the hands
of the national unions and their officers.
Previous to the panic of 1837 general trade unions com-
posed of the local unions in a particular locality were
organized in the larger cities on the Atlantic seaboard.
Some measure of control over the initiation of strikes was
developed by these organizations. The New York General
Trades' Union, for instance, provided in 1833 that "no
Trade or Art shall strike for higher wages than they at
present receive, without the sanction of the Convention."^
Under this rule a strike of the cabinet makers was sanc-
tioned in 1835.^ The Philadelphia General Trades' Union,
likewise, provided in 1836 that any society before striking
must give a written notice to the president, who should
call a special meeting; if a two-thirds vote of the societies
present was given in favor, the strike was to be sanctioned
and aid granted. No aid was granted, however, unless the
society had been represented in the union for the space of
six months and had complied with all other constitutional
requirements.^ With the panic of 1837 and the depression
which followed, the trade unions went to pieces. The
period of rising prices after 1843 found the working classes
unorganized, and although there were numerous strikes
throughout the country they were sporadic and without
^ J. R. Commons and H. L. Sumner, Documentary History of
American Industrial Society, vol. v, p. 218.
' Ibid., p. 234.
» Ibid., p. 347.
II
12 CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS [35O
concerted action.'* "Before the unorganized strikers,"
says Professor Commons, "could be united in permanent
labor organizations, however, prices had resumed their
downward course. Strikes were now futile and the workers
turned their attention towards labor reforms through legis-
lation and through cooperadve purchasing and mutual
insurance."^ The interesting thing about this early move-
ment is that the necessity for strike control was recognized
and an attempt made to secure it through the only available
organ, — the local federation of unions.
A characteristic feature of the trade-union movement
since 1852 has been the increasing dominance of the national
union, that is, the union of local bodies into a national
organization. All other forms of grouping have been sub-
ordinated to the control of the national union. ^ The more
fully the trade unions have turned from political and co-
operative aims the more thoroughly the national union
has established its preeminence. For brief periods the
supremacy of the national union has been threatened — as,
for instance, during the great growth of the Knights of
Labor — but it has always reasserted itself.
The control of strikes has been exercised, therefore,
primarily by the national union. Each step in the in-
creasing dominance of the national union has been evi-
denced by a new check on the power of the local unions to
initiate strikes or by the assumption of power on the part
of the national union to manage strikes. The control of
strikes is by no means equal in all the one hundred and
thirty national unions. In the newer and weaker unions
local autonomy in strike control is almost complete; in
* In 1846, however, the New York handloom carpet weavers in an
effort to bolster up their decaying handicraft met in convention and
provided for mutual help. All grievances were to be submitted to the
workers of each factory for advice, and before using stringent measures
"two-thirds of the whole Trade, the number aggrieved included,"
should approve and advise the same (J. R. Commons, Documentary
History of American Industrial Society, vol. viii, p. 241).
* Ibid., p. 214.
•The term ''national union" is used throughout this study synony-
mously with "international union." The greater part of the American
trade unions have branches in Canada, and accordingly style them-
selves international unions.
35 1 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL 1 3
others the national control is absolute. But the develop-
ment everywhere is in one direction, — the substitution of
national for local control. The evolution of national con-
trol will be illustrated by a description of several of the
older unions. As in biology life forms repeat or recapitu-
late in a brief time the previous slow stages of development,
so now unions by direct imitation of older unions, or by
stern necessity, approach in many respects a common type
of policy.
The national union of the Printers, the oldest of the
national unions, was organized as the National Typo-
graphical Union in 1852. For thirty years the local unions
in this organization enjoyed almost complete autonomy,
and all that the national union did in the matter was to
protest against too frequent strikes. In 1876 rules for the
government of strikes were passed providing for at least a
three-fourths majority vote of the local union, "all the
members being constitutionally notified of the meeting," in
order to initiate a strike. Members to have the right to vote
must have belonged to the local union at least six months.'^
"Since the local unions in case of strike were not aided by
the International," says one authority, "disobedience to
these rules carried no penalty."^ With the establishment
of the strike fund in 1885, a larger degree of control began
to be exercised by the national union. ^ The real executive
power of the union is now vested in an executive coun-
cil composed of the president, the secretary-treasurer, and
the second vice-president, and all strikes must receive
the sanction of this body.^°
Local autonomy was the rule with the Iron Molders'
Union for several years after its organization in 1859. A
strike was sanctioned by the convention of 1861, but with
the resolution "that this body recommends to local unions
to discountenance all strikes in their respective localities
' Proceedings, 1876, p. 65.
* G. E. Barnett, "The Printers: A Study in American Trade Union-
ism," in American Economic Association Quarterly, October, 1909,
P- 327-
» Ibid., p. 67.
^° See below, Chapter V.
14 CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS [352
until every other remedy has been tried and failed. "^^
As early, however, as 1863 the initiation of a strike was
made subject to the approval of a referendum vote.^^ In
1866 the corresponding representatives were earnestly
requested to return all unauthorized strike circulars under
penalty of having their names published if they did not
do so. Two official strike circulars sent out the same year
received yeas 100, nays 5, and yeas 92, nays 9, and strikes
were authorized in both cases.^^ Strikes were generally
authorized; out of forty-one applications in 1866 only
three failed to pass. President Sylvis declared that the
strike rules had worked well, but added that strikes should
be discouraged as much as possible.^"* The rule requiring a
two-thirds vote of all the local unions to sanction a strike
was changed in 1874 to two-thirds of all the votes.^^ The
president was also obliged to give all the facts in his posses-
sion when issuing a strike circular.^^ Another change was
the grant to local unions of the same number of votes on
strike circulars as the number of delegates they were en-
titled to in convention. Local unions failing to return
strike votes were to be fined ten dollars and to suffer for-
feiture of all rights until the fine was paid.^^
President Saffin in 1873 published a number of executive
decisions in regard to the initiation of strikes, such as the
following: no member can strike a job, no shop committee
can order a strike, and no job or shop can be struck except
by a two-thirds vote of the members at a regular meeting,
or at a special meeting when due and proper notice has
been given to every member to be present.^^ These
decisions formed precedents and have been followed by
the officers of other national unions. A standing resolution
enacted in 1876 that the question of either financial or
" International Journal [Iron Molders], April, 1874, p. 322.
" Ibid., May, 1874, p. 354.
^' Ibid., August, 1866, p. 154.
" Ibid., August, 1866, p. 310.
1^ Ibid., March, p. 292, April, p. 327, August, p. 3, 1874.
^^ Ibid., August, 1874, p. 3.
" Ibid., p. 5.
'» Ibid., April, 1873, p. i; Constitution, 1876, p. 32.
353] THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL 1 5
moral support should be voted on, and if sanction for a
strike with moral support was given, no benefits would be
paid.^^ Considerable discontent arose in regard to the
referendum vote in the matter, and wider control was
given the executive board in 1878; but President Saffin
refused to recognize such power .^° One critic said that such,
executive boards were copied from the Friendly Societies
of England and were bound to fail in America.^^ It was
not until 1882, after several years of agitation, that abso-
lute control of all strikes and lockouts was put into the
hands of the executive board and the president, with the
instruction to see that no more strikes should be carried on
at any one time than the organization was able to conduct.^
A similar development has taken place in the Bricklayers
and Masons' International Union since its organization in
1865. At first the general president submitted strike pro-
posals to the presidents of the local unions for approval or
disapproval.^^ Such strike arrangements were found to be
crude and inefficient and not clear .^"^ The executive com-
mittee, made up of the president and the vice-president,
sanctioned strikes, saying that in the absence of any
definite rule the matter was left entirely to their judgment.^^
In 1868 the following rule was enacted to govern local
unions in initiating strikes: "Such unions shall transmit to
the president of this union a bill of grievance properly filled
up and signed by the president and recording secretary,
attested by the seal thereof. When a union wishes to make
application for authority to strike the yeas and nays shall
be taken and it shall require a majority of two-thirds of
the members of said union to adopt the motion. The
result of the vote shall in all cases be returned to the presi-
dent of this union, who on receipt of the bill of grievance
shall notify the secretary to forward a printed copy thereof
" Constitution, 1876, p. 41.
2" Proceedings, 1878, pp. 48-51.
" Iron Molders' Journal, December 10, 1878, p. 62.
^^ Proceedings, 1882, p. 76.
^^ Constitution, 1867, art. xii.
^^ Proceedings, 1868 p. 23.
25 Ibid., pp. 14-18.
1 6 CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS [354
to each corresponding representative who shall return the
same within twenty-four hours with decision thereon. If at
the expiration of twelve days he shall find a majority of
two-thirds in favor of granting authority to strike, he shall
notify the union ; and action thereon shall be taken by said
union within five days from the receipt of said notice.
It shall require a two-thirds majority of said union to
authorize a strike. "^^ President Gaul protested in 1870
that too many local unions went out on strike before asking
for official sanction. He declared himself against strikes,
but urged that in any event the mode of initiating strikes
should be less cumbersome and more expeditious.^^ A pro-
posal in the following year to put the matter in the hands
of the president was rejected.^^ President O'Keefe in 1870
refused to sanction a strike which had received the endorse-
ment of the local unions because of information received
after issuing the circular. The matter was threshed out
at three conventions, and finally the local union received
its strike benefits.^^
The greatest complaint against the general vote was the
delay of local unions in making returns. The committee
on general good recommended in 1886 that all local unions
hold weekly meetings in order that their secretaries may be
able to bring requests for a strike vote promptly before them
for action.^" It was even said that some local unions did
not answer at all. To meet this condition it was provided
in 1887 that a failure to return strike answers should be
penalized by a fine of five dollars.^^ But even this did not
bring the desired results, and the following rule was passed
the next year: "Any Subordinate Union failing to report
their decision for or against a permission to strike within
the specified time, the Secretary shall enter such Unions
as voting in the affirmative upon the records of the Brick-
layers and Masons' International Union." The time of
2"^ Proceedings, 1868, pp. 79, 80.
^^Proceedings, 1870, pp. 24, 25.
"^Proceedings, 1871, p. 15.
" Ibid., p. 8; 1873, P- H-
'" Proceedings, 1886, p. 107.
^1 Proceedings, 1887, p. 91.
355] THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL 17
five days originally set was in 1890 extended to ten days.
Unions were requested to transmit their answers, yes or no,
by telegraph to avoid delay .^^
Aside from recommendations that strike votes should be
taken more quickly, it was proposed from time to time to
put the entire matter in the hands of the executive board.
Power to investigate strikes was given this board in 1894,^^
more authority in 1897,^* and finally in 1903 the whole
matter of strikes and full power in regard thereto were thus
referred .^^ Pure democracy thus made way for representa-
tive government.
The Cigar Makers organized a general union in 1864,
and their rules governing strikes did not involve any great
amount of centralized control until 1879. Until then the
executive board was obliged to sanction without exercising
any discretion all strikes except those for an increase of
wages.^^ The depression of 1873 led to many strikes, and
a committee reported in that year that the reason so many
had been failures was because the requirements of the law
had not been carried out. Recommendation was made
for the more rigid enforcement of the rules relating to
strikes and assessments.^^ In 1879 a thorough change in
regard to the initiation of strikes was effected, and the
rules then adopted remain substantially unchanged.
Strikes involving less than twenty-five members are sanc-
tioned at the discretion of the executive board. All in-
volving more than twenty-five members are submitted to a
vote of all local unions. If a majority of those voting
^2 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 69, 113. The following is a characteristic
strike report: "The vote on Circular No. 5, being the bill of grievance
of Union No. 13, of Lowell, Massachusetts, asking for permission to
strike, has been received, resulting in favor of said bill as follows:
Number of Unions voting Yes, 227; Number of Unions No, 25; Number
of Unions not voting within the ten days required by law, and which
are counted in the affirmative, 75; excused from voting, i; total vote
in favor, 302; Number of Unions question submitted to, 328."
^^ Proceedings, 1894, p. 84.
'^ Proceedings, 1897, pp. 70, 72.
'* Proceedings, 1903, pp. 115, 116.
^^Constitution, 1867, art. vii, sec. ID.
" Proceedings, 1873, p. 45.
1 8 CONTROL OF STRIKES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONS [356
approve the application, the desired permission is given.
Any strike for an increase of wages, however, is not con-
sidered legal unless approved by a two-thirds majority of
all votes cast. The penalty for local unions failing to vote
within one week commencing on the day the circular is
mailed is fixed by the executive board. The local unions
may send their vote by telegram at the expense of the
national union provided their location is over two hundred
miles distant from the office of the national president.
The vote of local unions on strikes is in proportion to their
membership: one vote, from seven to fifty members; two
votes, from fifty to one hundred members or fraction of not
less than seventy-five; three votes, from one hundred to
two hundred, and an additional vote for every additional
one hundred members.^^ Provision was made that the
national president in submitting an application to strike
should state the number of men already on strike in other
localities; the condition of the funds per capita; how much
the per capita assessment would be in order to make up
the requisite amount, and all other information in his
possession bearing upon the matter.^^
The tendency of local unions to vote in favor of a strike
hastily and without thought or merely by mob influence
has been obviated to a certain extent. A rule was passed
in 1886 that "all votes in local unions upon questions of
strikes must be voted by secret ballot and all votes taken
contrary to this method shall not be counted. "^° A unan-
imous strike vote invites suspicion that the rule is being
violated, and word is returned from headquarters that
"unanimous strike votes don't go here."*^
The transition from local autonomy to central control
in the initiation of strikes might be traced in the case of
other unions; but much of this, certainly in the case of
the older and stronger unions, would simply repeat the
experiences of the Printers, the Iron Molders, the Brick-
" Cigar Makers' Official Journal, September 15, 1879, p. 3.
'^ Constitution, 1881, art. vi, sec. 7.
" Constitution, 1886, art. vi, sec. 25.
*^ Interview with President Perkins of the Cigar Makers.
II
357] THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL 19
layers and Masons, and the Cigar Makers. The tendency
is toward centralized control, and new unions usually copy
the policies and rules of older unions. A referendum vote,
similar to that used by the Cigar Makers, is taken by the
Box Makers, the Chain Makers, the Piano and Organ
Workers, the Stone Cutters, and the Tobacco Workers.
The Flint Glass Workers and the Operative Potters require
a vote of the trade, while the railroad brotherhoods also
take a general vote before acting. Some sixty-five national
unions require that sanction for initiating a strike be had
from the executive board. As these executive boards are
composed of the general officers and elected members,
control of strike initiation is in the hands of the general
union through its elected representatives.
CHAPTER II
Control by National Deputy