Industrial Strife Research Articles

Reviews of the Literature

This book seems to be a wholly laudable attempt to make the connection between a set of "social problems" and the modestly accumulating body of theory and research in sociology and social psychology. The authors direct our attention to the various problems of intergroup relations—prejudice, war, industrial strife, etc.—and propose that the contributions of social scientists to their understanding and solution will not come from ad hoc action programs or off-the-cuff research, but from translations into and out of the language, the concepts, and the findings of systematic theory and research. In other words, they argue in favor of treating the problems of intergroup relations on a slightly higher level of abstraction, and within a more organized framework than is usually the case.

Objective: Industrial Peace

Industrial strife leaves its scars upon the relations between employers and employees. When strikes occur, distrust and antagonisms are engendered which persist after the strikes are over. Strikes, too, curtail production. A strike in one plant often causes work stoppages in other plants where industrial peace prevails. Strikes cause employees to lose wages which they may never recover even though they gain increases in their rates of pay. Strikes upset the economy of the communities in which they occur. The butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker lose business if the striking employees cannot buy. Strikes weaken the finances of the companies in which they occur. Stockholders face possible reductions in their dividends. Strikes, particularly in the basic industries and utilities, jeopardize the rights of the public. The cutting off of electricity, gas, transportation, milk, and fuel are serious matters. Strikes and other forms of industrial strife must give way to industrial peace. But we cannot countenance industrial peace any price. Industrial peace must not be gained at the expense of our democratic way of life, nor by the abandonment of our American free enterprise system. Industrial peace must be achieved by democratic means, in some countries industrial strife has been outlawed but only through the compulsion of autocratic government. While we recognize the evils of industrial strife, we have not clearly identified the underlying causes. I shall endeavor to throw some illumination upon the causes, as I see them, by reference to outstanding eveners and developments in the period of about 30 years which commenced with the First World War. (Author's abstract courtesy EBSCO.)

The Negro Worker in Chicago Industry

IT IS apparent from the past history of the Negro worker that any advancement he achieves comes as a result of disequilibrium in the state of economic and political factors in society. At the end of the Civil War, not only in Chicago but in the country as a whole, very few job openings which had previously been held only by were made available to him. In Chicago the first real foothold in industry for the Negro was secured during the conflicts between packinghouse workers and operators in the late i890's when the Negro was introduced as a strikebreaker. The next major industrial opening followed in the early I900's, prior to World War I, at which time Negroes again acted as strikebreakers in the iron and steel industry, thereby securing relatively permanent employment for the years to follow. With the advent of World War I and with continuing industrial strife, the same procedure brought the Negro into the textile and garment industries. All three of these industries continued to employ the Negro in increasing numbers, but his opportunities for advancement beyond the unskilled level of occupations remained minute. The most the Negro could hope for were the undesirable traditional laboring jobs for which management and workers thought him particularly suited. Consequently, Negroes experienced more unemployment during the depression of the I930's than other groups, because, as common laborers, were the first ones to be discharged in great numbers. As business conditions improved and the defense program spurted ahead, those workers on relief or unemployed among the Negroes were gradually able to secure their old unskilled jobs with former employers, particularly in the three industries mentioned above. However, many industries were still reluctant to hire and employers in those industries expressed the usual reasons for not using Negro workers: whites and blacks cannot mix on the job, separate restrooms, locker-rooms, and workrooms would be necessary, making the introduction of Negroes too expensive and time consuming; are no trained Negroes available; they are racially unequipped for skilled work in industry; unions won't have them; or there was merely general dislike. In many cases the reasons were valid; but, as labor needs became more pressing and as the government took more decided measures to eliminate discrimination because of race or creed, reluctant employers found ways of integrating Negroes into their establishmpnts, and without serious difficulties. Although there was an increase in the total employment of Negroes during the war period in every branch of industry, there was a serious time lag both in the wider use of Negroes among many of the smaller individual firms and in the occupational upgrading of Negroes in all firms. This concentration of Negroes in a relatively few large firms, together with slow occupational progress generally, had the effect of restricting the use of Negro workers as a means of meeting immediate labor needs. The reporting firms were seletted by 'Graduate of the School of Business, University of Chicago.

Federal Protection of Labor

eleven millions in 1941 2.graphs a basic change whose real significance must be looked for at the bargaining table, in the stabilization of competitive wage rates and working conditions, and, above all, in the minimization of industrial strife, unrest, and uncertainty during the critical period of wartime readjustment.3 Active labor leadership and economic necessity are essential to the development of a strong labor movement. There have been many periods in our past industrial history when both leadership and economic necessity were present to encourage the growth of strong unions; yet in every decade except the past one, the urge toward collective bargaining has been discouraged and thwarted for lack of legal protec-

The Enforcement of Collective Labor Agreements: A Proposal

The past few years have witnessed an unprecedented growth in trade-union membership in this country. Equally impressive are the victories which organized labor has won during the same period. Accompanying these conquests there has been a sharp increase in the number and magnitude of industrial disputes. That favorable legislation, particularly the National Labor Relations Act, has contributed largely to labor's successes is accepted by every one. The same source is credited by many as also being responsible for the increased number of strikes and lockouts. Both the National Labor Relations Act and its administration have become the objects of wide-spread criticism, especially from the employer side. The Act has been denounced as a fomenter of industrial strife and as placing the employer in an unfair position in dealing with his employees. A flood of proposals has been forthcoming, some of which, embodied in bills, have already been introduced in Congress. If enacted into law they would amend the Act in various respects, curtail the powers of the National Labor Relations Board, require the incorporation or registration of unions, etc. With much of this criticism, and with the corresponding remedies offered, we are not immediately concerned. Directly pertinent to our topic, however, is a renewal of the demand, as old perhaps as the unions' claim for recognition and collective bargaining, that labor be compelled to accept responsibilities commensurate with its increased powers and privileges. The National Association of Manufacturers, for example, demands that the National Labor Relations Act and similar state acts be so amended that no employer may be penalized for failure to deal with any labor organization guilty of organizing, supporting, or maintaining strikes in violation of employment agreements, including agreements to accept an arbitration award.1 The Association also demands legal and social responsibility of both employer and employee for their commitments and their acts, and declares that unincorporated employer associations and labor organizations should be sueable, and should have

AN ANALYSIS OF NINETY CASES OF FUNCTIONAL DISEASE IN SOLDIERS

In Wrong Twin, by Harry Leon Wilson, there is a character, a civil war pensioner, who seems of particular interest at the present time. Judge Penniman, whom Dave Cowan called old Flapdoodle, had been granted a pension for his services in the Civil war. The Judge had been obliged to abandon all thoughts of a career. had been debarred by obscure ailments from active participation in our industrial strife. He could never perform the least work that required muscular effort; but he could always go to the harness shop for his game of checkers. He complained of sciatica and of various other painful symptoms, neuralgia mebbe. He always had the most comfortable chair available and was peevish if anyone else took it; he always demanded consideration and sympathy from his wife, whose earnings as a dressmaker, and his daughter, whose pay as a school teacher, served to piece

The Coal-mining Industry

THE July issue of the Quarterly Review contains an article upon the recent coal dispute by Dr. Arthur Shadwell, to which he has given the somewhat unfortunate title “The War of the Mines.” Dr. Shadwell points out at the beginning that this dispute was really not a war, and that there was in reality no need at all for a difference, which might have been arranged by mutual concessions, to have degenerated into industrial strife. He recognises that this was not a case of the men striking against any arbitrary action of the employers, but was rather an expression of their irritation at the inevitable development of the economic situation, and he states clearly and definitely the only remedy: “There is only one way out-the way of work. Other nations in a-similar position have taken it; they are at work, and working hard. Here less work is being done-than ever before.”