CHAPTER VI THE INDUSTRIAL POLICY OF THE UNION The objects of the Furniture Workers' Union were declared to be "united resistance to all dangers that threaten the existence of the members and the advancement of our common welfare in every possible manner. To accomplish these objects we shall struggle to uphold and to increase the rate of wages, shorten the work time, abolish the contract system, provide for a mutual assistance in case of strikes, of loss by fire, sickness, death, lack of employment and legal prosecution of the employers." The spirit of these objects was not materially changed by the Machine Wood Workers who declared that the purposes of their organization were to secure an amelioration of the conditions of labor in the wood working industries, to secure higher wages, to regulate the hours of labor, and to secure "the social, moral and intellectual elevation" of the workmen.2 In order to accomplish these results the union proposed to establish a fund for the protection of its members, to assist them in finding work when unemployed, to provide against sickness, death, and disability, and to regulate the relations between the workmen and the employer as well as the relations between members of the organization.* In fulfilling its pledges to the workmen the Furniture Workers Union took a firm stand in regard to such industrial prob 1 Moebel-Arbeiter Journal, Feb. 1883, p. 4. The legal prosecution referred to arose out of the frequent necessity of sueing employers on account of loss of tools occasioned by fire in workshops. To assist this work a legal benefit was established in some of the locals. a Const. M. W. W. I. U., 1890, Preamble. Employment bureaus were established by the locals. One was established in Chicago in 1892. M. W. W., June 1892, p. 9. 4 Const. M. W. W. U., 1890. Art. I, sect. 2. lems as child labor, piece work, contract labor, and the shorter work day. In the first convention the union declared against child labor, which had become an evil in certain branches of the industry as the result of the introduction of machinery. Frequent accusations were made against the employers for violations of the law in regard to the employment of children. The union had no constitutional regulation of apprenticeship, so that no attempt was made to control the number of workmen entering the trade. The piece work system was strongly opposed by the union. There were at least three arguments used against this system. 1) It gave to the employer an opportunity to deceive, and to take an undue advantage of the workmen, on account of the frequent price regulations made necessary by the introduction of new machinery and new processes. 2) The system was opposed also on the ground that it constantly urged the workmen to exert themselves unduly, and in this way to lessen the demand for labor. 3) And finally, the system tended to create a spirit of jealously among the workmen, which was detrimental to har mony and co-operation in the trade. The opposition to the piece work system took the form of an argument in favor of uniform wages and payment on a time basis. It was argued that the employers by the use of machinery could employ less skilled workmen, and could in this way force the wages of skilled workmen to a lower level. If the system were abolished, the workmen would be better off because the weekly pay would then be certain, and because it would be easier to control the wage-scale. Men working by the day, it was argued, would recognize more quickly that they had a common interest, and under these conditions they would be more likely to pull together for a common cause--the increase of the wagescale. Once the system had been abolished it would then be necessary for the union "to strive for a rate of wages as nearly as possible uniform." The grading of wages is always used by Furniture Workers' Journal, June 8, 1889, p. 1. The italics appear in the article. the employers to keep wages down, and therein they will succeed as long as they deal with the individual in fixing the rate of wages..... This grading system, furthermore, gives almost as much opportunity for using the individual selfishness as the piece work system. As far as classification of wages, according to various grades of skill and experience may be considered necessary, fixed limits might be agreed upon; but within these limits the rate should be the same for all. Such a system would no doubt meet with much opposition even among the workmen, springing from the same motive from which the workmen still prefer piece work; but the whole trade would be decidedly benefited...... We should lose no time in giving our earnest attention to these questions: Abolition of piece-work and the adoption of uniform wage-rates." The agitation for a shorter work day occupied a large place in the policy of the Furniture Workers' Union. From the date of the organization until the time of the amalgamation with the Machine Wood Workers, the union was constantly urging a shorter work-day. The question came up for discussion in some form at every convention. The representatives of the Furniture Workers took an active part in the discussion, and in the framing of the resolution passed in 1885 by the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the United States and Canada, recommending that the eight hour day should constitute the legal work day "from and after May 1st, 1886," for all unions affiliated with that organization, and recommending further that these unions should direct their actions so as to conform with this resolution. The delegates from the Furniture Workers argued against making this resolution general on the grounds that many of the unions were new and untried, 7 Furniture Workers' Journal, June 8. 1889, p. 1. This organization became the American Federation of Labor in 1886. The resolution in full was as follows: "Resolved, By the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the U. S. and Canada, that eight hours shail constitute a legal day's work from and after May 1, 1886, and that we recommend to labor organized throughout this jurisdiction, that they so direct their laws as to conform to this resolution by the time named." MoebelArbeiter Journal, July 17, 1885, p. 1. and for this reason, they urged that the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions should designate such unions as were sufficiently prepared to undertake the action recommended.10 Fear was expressed that the whole movement would go up in aimless enthusiasm and thereby receive a decided setback, and so far as it affected the Furniture Workers, this feeling was expressed as follows: "Especially for our trade the question of introducing the eight hour day is of too much importance to suffer ourselves to assist in kindling a straw-fire enthusiasm." 11 The policy took definite shape in January, 1886. The Executive Committee submitted resolutions to the locals, requesting that they vote upon them, and report the result not later than February 25th, in order that the International Union might comply with the instructions of the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions, which had set March 1st, 1886, as the date for for reporting such information.12 The resolutions declared for a reduction of hours and a demand for higher wages at the same time. The Furniture Workers were very positive in the belief that the whole movement should be centered in the one question of hours, and they were insistent in their arguments that the wage question should not be involved in the demands of the locals at this time. In order to strengthen the movement the locals were recommended to take the following action: First, that a weekly assessment be levied on all members having employment on May 1, and that efforts be made to collect similar accounts from laborers who were not members, for the purpose of supporting those who were compelled to strike for the eight hour day. Second, wherever there was no combination of different trade organizations, these trade 10 Moebel-Arbeiter Journal, July 17, 1885. 11 Furniture Workers' Journal, July 31, 1885, p. 1. 12 The resolutions were as follows: Resolved: That union No. ........ declares in favor of the introduction of the eight hour work day from May 1st, next. Resolved, That simultaneous with the introduction of the eight hour work day, higher wages shall be demanded. Resolved, That union No. ........ with all the means at its command wil endeavor to carry out this rule in all factories and workshops of our branch of the trade. Furniture Workers' Journal, Jan. 1886. unions should immediately unite and should pledge themselves to support those who desire to introduce the eight hour day and were compelled to strike for it.13 The May movement affected the Furniture Worker in much the same way that it did all other labor organizations of that time. There was a rapid increase in membership during the early months of the year, a large number of men on strike after May 1, the strike fund depleted and a decline in the membership; this, in short, is the history of that movement. The Furniture Workers recognized that the May movement was a failure, but their ardor was not lessened by the outcome, for at the Seventh Convention in September 1886, a resolution was passed in favor of keeping up the agitation for the shorter work day, and instructing their delegates to the convention of the Federation of Organized Trade and Labor Unions, to urge in that convention that hereafter such agreements be effected in but one trade at a time, and that all other trade organizations should assist that one financially and morally to carry out the plan.14 From this time until the amalgamation with the Machine Wood Workers, the Furniture Workers continued to advocate this policy. It appears, then, that the Furniture Workers consistently adhered to the policy of a shorter work day, and while they were swept into the over-ambitious attempt of the May movement in 1886, their counsel was on the whole conservative and on the side of what was feasible. The policy of the Machine Wood Workers' union on such questions as hours, child labor, and immigration was determined in a very large degree by the conditions in the industry. The machine processes offered an opportunity for employing unskilled workmen. On this account in certain centers the competition of immigrants and woman and child labor was very marked. Consequently the wages were low,-in some cases extremely low and the hours of labor long. The wages varied from 6 to 35 cents per hour with an average of from 15 to 18 cents; the hours varied from 9 to 12, and the low wages were 18 Furniture Workers' Journal, Feb. 12, 1866, p. 1. 14 Proceedings Seventh Convention. |