The ability for Labor to strike has been regarded as a powerful tool for many labor unions and American workforces to put pressure on Management to bring about change in working conditions and salaries. American workers have been involved in various strikes in different industries over the years. These strikes address many issues, such as manageable work hours, improved working conditions, better wages, and improved benefits. These early strikes have helped to shape laws and policies that affect Labor even today. Without the ability for Labor to strike, Labor would have no power to negotiate with Management.
This paper will develop a contrast between two historical strikes in the United States. The period following the civil war was marked by the increase in the hostility of Management towards Labor. Labor unions employed strikes, some of which were so disruptive that both state and federal troops were used to control the unrest. Some of the historical strikes are regarded as the biggest in history. Their numbers reached hundreds of thousands, and each brought a varying degree of success (Davis, 2020).
It is important to note that this trend started during the 1890s. It was represented characteristically by the Pullman strike of 1894 and the Anthracite Coal Strike of 1902, which will be discussed in this paper. Both are regarded as crucial in the history of the United States.
The Pullman Strike of 1894
The Pullman Strike was a major railroad strike and boycott that disrupted rail traffic in the Midwestern United States in June and July of 1894. This was the first time that the federal government used an injunction to break a strike. Congress and President Grover Cleveland created Labor Day as a national holiday to recognize the labor movement.
During a nationwide recession in 1893, the Pullman Palace Car Company cut more than 2,000 workers and reduced wages by 25 percent. Prices and rent in the company town of Pullman, Illinois, were unchanged, and many families faced starvation. Some workers attempted to present their grievances to company president Georg M. Pullman, but instead, the workers were fired for their actions.
Workers at the Pullman factory walked off the job on May 11, 1894. Eventually, 125,000 to 250,000 railroad workers in 27 states joined their cause, disrupting rail traffic. The U.S. Attorney claiming that the strike violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, obtained an injunction, which allowed for federal troops to be dispatched. This led to an outbreak of deadly violence, but rail traffic did resume. (Pullman Strike, 2020)
The Anthracite Coal Strike of 1902
The Anthracite Coal Strike of 1902 began in May, and an estimated 147,000 workers walked out. The groundwork for the anthracite coal strike was laid by strikes in the bituminous or soft coalfields in 1897. John Mitchell became President of United Mine Workers in 1898 and hoped to achieve similar success in the anthracite or hard coalfields of Pennsylvania. Management of the coal operators were determined to reject all union offers and break the strike. Public opinion was against Coal Management and supported Labor for the first time.
On October 3, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt called Both Labor and Management to a meeting in the white house. The President urged the two sides to come to some agreement so that the operation of the coal mines could resume so that the needs of the people could be met. This meeting marked a change in the U.S. Government from strikebreaker to peacemaker. In the past, the U.S. Government had sided with Management and called in federal troops to break up strikes.
Roosevelt described Mitchell as behaving with great dignity and moderation and the operators as showing extraordinary stupidity and bad temper. Management told President Roosevelt that he should use his powers to protect the men that wanted to work instead of wasting time negotiating with anarchists. Management rejected Roosevelts efforts to mediate and refused to acknowledge Mitchell. Roosevelt did not believe Labor was blameless, but he disagreed with Management's belief that there was nothing to discuss. Roosevelt felt that Management should be open to compromise.
The Governor of Pennsylvania ordered the State National Guard to the coalfields, and on the surface, it had appeared this was a win for Management. Unfortunately for Management, the miners remained on strike, and they were unable to meet the promise to mine enough coal to meet public demand. Even though Roosevelt did not hold Labor at fault, he appealed to John Mitchell that if the miners returned to work, he would appoint a new commission to investigate the coal industry. Mitchell considered the offer but rejected it based on experience and felt this would be a surrender.
Both sides agreed to arbitration, and finally, On October 23, 1902, the 163-day anthracite coal strike was over. President Roosevelt asked the commissioners to establish good relations between Management and Labor in the anthracite fields. The commissioners met for nearly three months, and five-hundred fifty-eight witnesses appeared with 10,047 legal-sized pages of testimony. John Mitchell played a large role in presenting the miners' case. George Baer made the closing arguments for the coal operators, and Clarence Darrow closed for the miners. Both sides agreed to the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission's findings, Making Roosevelts efforts to end the strike a success. A new role was established for the Federal Government in labor disputes. Roosevelt said that he spoke neither for Labor or Management that instead, he was looking out for the public interest. (Grossman, n.d.)
Differences In The Two Strikes
The first strike I am discussing is the Pullman strike, which took place in 1894 from May to July. About 250,000 employees of the factory at the Pullman Palace, a manufacturer of sleeper cars for the railroads, walked off the job in the Chicago United States. The employees decided to strike because employee wages were reduced to a drastic amount without corresponding company prices or rents. Thus, American Railway Union, which was led by Eugene Debbs, joined the strike in June, and the union issued a boycott of all the trains which were carrying the Pullman cars. The union negotiated with the railroads that if any railway Management refused to detach the Pullman cars, American Railway Union would be more likely to refuse to move the train (Shackel, 2018).
The Pullman strike drew national attention and was regarded as the Pullman's Boycott. The union and the strikers vigorously opposed Management. Here, the American Railway Union sought arbitration of the conflict, and Management refused any compromise. Even though the American Railway Union pioneered new tactics such as public relations and coordinated control of union still, Management, along with the federal government's help, tried to crush the Pullman strike and the American Railway Union (Aldrich, 2018).
The second strike, which is involved in the essay, was the great anthracite coal strike of 1902 when about 147,000 coal miners went on strike in Eastern Pennsylvania, who were also members of the United Mine Workers of America. The Anthracite coal strike was from May to October of 1902. It was feared by most of the people that the strike would affect a primary source of energy. The mineworkers intended to obtain better wages and improved working conditions (Fink & Palacio, 2017).
It came to happen that the President of the United Mine Workers John Mitchell led the strikers in their quest for the uniform payment with shorter hours, increased wages, and union recognition. The operators in that situation were bitterly antagonistic, but the opinion of the public, the federal government, and J.P Morgan persisted for the acceptance of arbitration in October. The strike was based on a settlement required in both of the parties to accept the government commission's decision to determine what post-strike action must be taken (Putnam & Garrett, 2020).
Differences In How Management Treated Employees
In both of these strikes, the main reasons for the strikes were how the employees were being treated. In the Pullman Strike, wages were cut by 25%, and most of the employees lived in the company-owned town where rent and other expenses stayed the same. In The Anthracite strike, the main complaints were pay and working conditions. The common theme in most strikes are Wages, Hors, and working conditions. In the Pullman, strike management convinced the Federal Government to send in troops to break the strike. The Anthracite strike management treated striking workers with hostility and didn't intend to negotiate with them.
Commonalities Of The Two Strikes
It is significant to note that when in the Pullman strike, American Railway Union joined the strike and ordered for boycott, the whole situation was transformed into an affair of national importance. The American Railway Union pioneered new tactics such as better public relations. Eight years late, a similar strike was observed in America. Irrespective of the results, causation in both of the strikes was quite the same, and the outcomes differentiation in both of the strikes goes to even-handed federal government intervention (Calavita, 2020).
The similarity in both of these strikes can be observed because both of them were featured by large unions organized on the industrial base. The Management's concerted hostility caused Labor to walk out, with the willingness to arbitrate and government intervention. It is astonishing how there existed a similarity between the strikes that took place eight years apart. Another similarity in both strikes included the utilization of similar tactics before the initiation and duration of strikes.
Because the Pullman strike was consolidated, the railroad management proved to be completely unwilling to give up its powers to reconcile the public and labor disputes. This is similar to the Anthracite strike when operators became against the organized Labor in many directions, such as in divine right coming across as the sort of old guard (Feurer & Pearson, 2017).
Differences That Set the Two Apart
The main difference that set these two strikes apart was the methods used by the Federal Government to intervene. In the Pullman strike, President Grover Cleveland sent in federal troops to break the strike. In the Anthracite strike, President Theodore Roosevelt went to great lengths to mediate the dispute. This was a significant shift from pro-management to pro-labor.
Causes Of The Strikes
The Pullman strike's core reason included the enduring twelve hours of working days and decreased earnings due to a miserable economy. Members of the American Railway Union, which was the principal unification of laborers, joined those strikers for justice to increase wages and increase the strike's effectiveness. The reason for the anthracite coal strike was for better work conditions and shorter working hours. The mining industry had many different trades organized by the United Mine Workers of America (Faue, 2017). Working hours, wages, and working conditions are the main reasons for Strikes and the organization of Labor even today.
Tactics That Could Have Possibly Avoided The Strikes
The avoidance of both of the strikes was possible if the industries' Management had provided the workers with their fundamental rights and were provided with better working conditions, fair wages on affordable hours of driving. Like United Mine Workers of America, The American Railway Union was also organized beyond the broad lines. Still, the mining industry had more trades in the above and below the grounds, which organized all the workers irrespective of the specific crafts (Feurer & Pearson, 2017).
It cannot be denied that Management suppressed the fundamental rights of the workers. Management forced Labor to work long hours for low wages. All the conditions became much worse when the overall state of the economy was disrupted. This all led to violence and betrayal among the people. However, it is also significant to note that United Mine Workers of America reflected the same earlier labor thought, which mirrored those of The American Railway Union. (Aldrich, 2018).
The primary way for any business is to treat their employees fairly from the beginning. These Strikes took place in an era in which workers had minimal rights, and it is thanks to these strikes and other strikes that have helped to create awareness and laws that have made workplaces fairer and safer for employees.
Outcome Of The Strikes
The Pullman strike outcome was a total failure as all the tactics used, and all the efforts were wasted. No external help was provided to The American Railway Union to support their argument, which was raised to better the fundamental rights. It happened that, The American Railway Union, when repeatedly cautioned against the strike, the whole unit had become too weak, and they were relatively inexperienced to the industrial wage war, which was raised against the Pullman company. (Fink & Palacio, 2017).
The results of the Anthracite strike were quite successful as in early December 1900. It happened that mine workers of the District Nine of United Mine Workers of America expressed their dissatisfaction, and thus, the result of the 1900 strike ended a few months before the termination of the district's convention. Then, suddenly the demand for coal means anthracite was enhanced, it merely raised the need for miners, and they were started to be paid by weight. Although, in many cases, it was also perceived that docking bosses used to under-weigh the coal (Putnam & Garrett, 2020).
With so many similarities, both of the strikes encompassed different outcomes in which the federal government intervention played a significant role. Both strikes were remarkably similar, with the involvement of large unions of organized Labor, the hostility of Management, and government intervention. The American Railway Union was destroyed in the Pullman strike, and United Mine Workers of America somehow managed to secure a substantial gain in anthracite strike (Berman, 2019).
It is important to note that the military presence in the Pullman strike led to more violence. Eugene Debbs realized that The American Railway Union, which was taking part in the strike, would either be crushed or face a partial victory. Debbs was arrested for his role in the strike. It came to happen that Gompers, who had been an antagonist to The American Railway Union from the initiation phase, refused to lend support to Debbs for the campaign. Due to failure, strikers had to return to work, and the last hope of The American Railway Union from the outside help was crushed. It was the reason why not merely the boycott had to be over, but the Pullman Strike as well (Melloan, 2017).
Railroad Management used its power and the federal government to end the Pullman strike and boycott. It is important to note that the national government also issued injunctions for ending The American Railway Union's ability to conduct the boycott. The Pullman strike also provided an exact representation of the crisis faced by Labor in the late 18th century.
Winner Of the Strikes
It is important to note that it was government and the Pullman factory management who were suppressing laborers' rights. Besides that, the American Railway Union and laborers had one of the worst defeats of history. Though the strike won national attention, it could not win the workers' fundamental rights. As a result, all workers had to go back to work without any agreement on their conditions (Shackel, 2018).
In the Anthracite strike, the winners were the miners and United Mine Workers of America. They used the same public speaking tactics and socialization tactics, which were used by The American Railway Union. This time, luck was with the labor union, which caused the local strike to become a national issue, but it also led not to escalate The American Railway Union control. Moreover, the demand of the miners for uniform wages was also accepted (Berman, 2019).
Conclusion
It can be concluded that the period following the civil war was marked by an increase in hostility of Management towards Labor. The similarity in both of these strikes can be observed because both were organized by large unions organized on the industrial base and the Management's concerted hostility.
It is because the Pullman strike was consolidated. The railroad management proved to be completely unwilling to give up its powers to reconcile the public and labor disputes. The very same was posed in the Anthracite strike. With so many similarities, both of the strikes encompassed different outcomes in which a significant role was played by federal government intervention. It is important to note that military presence in the first strike led to more violence and the Debs had a realization that The American Railway Union, which was taking part in the strike. Then, the union turned towards its leaders and members of the legal defense as its main project because the organization's role was obliterated in the railway industry.