37b. Labor vs. Management
ILGWU Archives. Kheel Center. Cornell University
"Holding the Door Shut," a political cartoon depicting the cruelty of management in the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist fire, in New York City.
The battle lines were clearly drawn. People were either workers or bosses, and with that strong identity often came an equally strong dislike for those who were on the other side. As the number of self-employed Americans dwindled in the Gilded Age, workers began to feel strength in their numbers and ask greater and greater demands of their bosses. When those demands were rejected, they plotted schemes to win their cases.
Those who managed factories developed strategies to counteract those of labor. At times the relationship between the camps was as intellectual and tense as a tough chess match. Other times it was as ugly as a schoolyard fight.
Strikes, Boycotts, and Sabotage
The most frequently employed technique of workers was the strike. Withholding labor from management would, in theory, force the company to suffer great enough financial losses that they would agree to worker terms. Strikes have been known in America since the colonial age, but their numbers grew larger in the Gilded Age.
Most 19th century strikes were not successful, so unions thought of other means. If the workers at a shoe factory could garner enough sympathy from the local townspeople, a boycott could achieve desirable results. The union would make its case to the town in the hope that no one would buy any shoes from the factory until the owners agreed to a pay raise. Boycotts could be successful in a small community where the factory was dependent upon the business of a group of people in close proximity
In desperate times, workers would also resort to illegal means if necessary. For example, sabotage of factory equipment was not unknown. Occasionally, the foreman or the owner might even be the victims of worker-sponsored violence.