ORGANIZED LABOR § 1. Changing relations between employers and wage workers. § 2. Need of common action among wage workers. § 3. Functions of labor organizations. § 4. Types of labor organizations. § 5. Statistics of labor organizations. § 8. Collective bargaining. § 7. Limitation of competition among workers. § 8. Strikes in labor disputes. § 9. Fre quency and causes of strikes. § 10. Picketing and the boycott. § 11. Competitive aspect of organization and particular wages. § 12. Mo nopolistic aspect of organization and particular wages. § 13. Open vs. closed shop. § 14. Political and economic considerations. § 15. The public's view of unions. § 16. Effects of organization upon general wages. § 17. Future role of organization.
§ 1. Changing relations between employers and wage workers. The "organization of labor," or the "labor move ment," so striking a feature of the world to-day, is of com paratively recent origin. It did not begin and advance pan passu with the beginning and early growth of the wage sys tem as above briefly described' In anything like its modern form the labor movement dates from the early years of the eighteenth century. Much of the largest part of its history in all countries, excepting England, is after 1860. Why was organization among the workers so long delayed after wage payment became common, and why when it once appeared did it spread so rapidly in some directions, and why is it still limited in the main to certain fields of industry? These three questions are but one question in three forms, and to answer one fully would be to answer all.
The modern trade-union appeared in England shortly be fore the industrial and has extended as fast and 1 See ch. 20, § 1-3.
2 See Vol. I, p. 459.
337 as far as the same stage of industrial development has been attained in other countries. The effort of wage workers to organize themselves appears everywhere to result from the separation of the economic and personal interests of employers and workmen. As the control of industry became more con centrated in larger units with the advent of power machinery, the feeling of economic unity among the different ranks of industry was further weakened. The average workman had less opportunity of becoming a master, an employer. In the days of the old hand industry, master, journeyman, and ap prentice worked side by side at the same bench. Almost every apprentice might hope to become some time a master, and many a one did so. To-day most wage workers in large
establishments have no hope of rising out of their positions. The mere largeness of an establishment forbids also the personal acquaintance of employer and workman. As a result of these changes, the workmen become more "class-con scious" of their position as wage workers, and the employers in many establishments take the attitude of buyers of labor as a mere ware. When the employer then feels the pressure of competition he is more likely to force the lowest wage that is possible and to compel the workers to accept less favorable conditions than if he were in more personal relations with them. Where the immediate direction of an establishment is intrusted to paid managers who are responsible to stockhold ers, the managers' success is judged almost exclusively by the dividends they succeed in earning. Hence they are under stronger and more persistent temptation than are active own ers to drive hard bargains with their employees. Many exam ples might be found where managers and resident directors have wished to pursue a more liberal policy than absentee shareholders would permit.
§ 2. Need of common action among wage workers. These same industrial changes caused employers, even earlier than it did employees, to have something of a "class-con scious" feeling, which tempered the spirit of their mutual competition, especially in bidding for the services of workers. The smaller the number of employers the easier it is by an understanding to suppress competition on their side. If there is only one factory of a kind in a town the employer is able at times to drive a harder bargain with his employees. Espe cially in times of industrial depression is a change of employ ment difficult for the laborer, involving for him much trouble and loss of time and money in moving. But it is possible to exaggerate the degree to which competition among employers of labor is weakened to-day. In the long run and at many points competition must be felt in all such cases. The notori ously unfair employer will find his workmen drifting away, his working force reduced in number and quality at times of greatest need, and his evil reputation going abroad among workmen. A better realization of this fact has led many em ployers to pursue a farther-sighted policy that fosters a better understanding and a kindlier feeling on both sides of the labor-contract.