The Great Steel Strike and its LessonsFoster, William Z.
History
The Great Steel Strike and its Lessons
Foster, William Z.
Steel Strike, U.S., 1919-1920; United States Steel Corporation
In order to approximate more closely the actual cost of the campaign to
the A. F. of L. and the twenty-four co-operating internationals forming
the National Committee, the total of $479,375, figured in a previous
paragraph as their independent expenditures, must be increased by
$101,047.52, the amount they contributed directly to the National
Committee for organizing and for strike expenses during the course of
the campaign;[28] making a grand total outlay for them of $580,422.52.
This in turn should be reduced by $118,451.23, the amount in the
National Committee treasury on January 31, 1920. Against the remaining
$461,971.29 must be checked off what the steel workers paid into these
organizations in initiation fees and dues.
Inasmuch as the co-operating internationals received directly $1.00 to
$2.00 (mostly the latter) from the initiation fees of the approximately
250,000 steel workers signed up during the campaign, not to speak of
thousands of dollars in per capita tax from armies of dues payers over a
period of many months, it is safe to say that their net outlay of
$461,971.29 would be nearly if not altogether offset by their income. It
is true that some of the organizations, like the Miners and the A. F. of
L. itself made large expenditures, with little return; and that others,
like the Structural Iron Workers, broke about even; while the
Amalgamated Association put a huge sum in its treasury. All things
considered, taking the twenty-four organizations as a whole, one is not
much wrong in saying that so far as their national treasuries were
concerned, the great movement of the steel workers, including the
organizing campaign and the strike, was, financially speaking, just
about self-sustaining.
Was the steel strike, then, worth the great suffering and expenditure of
effort that it cost the steel workers? I say yes; even though it failed
to accomplish the immediate objects it had in view. No strike is ever
wholly lost. Even the least effective of them serve the most useful
purpose of checking the employers' exploitation. They are a protection
to the workers' standards of life. Better by far a losing fight than
none at all. An unresisting working class would soon find itself on a
rice diet. But the steel strike has done more than serve merely as a
warning that the limit of exploitation has been reached; it has given
the steel workers a confidence in their ability to organize and to fight
effectively, which will eventually inspire them on to victory. This
precious result alone is well worth all the hardships the strike cost
them.
FOOTNOTES:
[23] Exceptions to this were the cases of the Molders' and Coopers'
Unions. These organizations were compelled by constitutional
requirements to pay regular strike benefits. But they included only a
very small percentage of the total number of strikers.
[24] The commissariat was suggested by John Fitzpatrick, as a result of
his experiences in the Chicago Garment Workers' strike of a decade ago.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account