Steelworkers in America: The Non-Union Era

by David Brody

This edition of one of the seminal books in labor includes a new preface as well as a symposium on the book in which seven prominent historians discuss its significance and its place in the historiography of labor.

Genres: Labor, History

303 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 1970

About the author

David^Brody, historian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_B...

Reviews

[David Bates · Rating 5 out of 5]

David Brody’s Steelworkers in America: The Nonunion Era, published in 1960, is a classic of labor history and a case study in the development of industry that connects economic development with the experience of the men whose work fueled it. A relentless drive for efficiency and cutthroat domestic competition were the hallmarks of the emerging flagship steel sector of the industrialized economy. Above all, the lowering of production costs “shaped American steel manufacture. It inspired the inventiveness that mechanized the productive operations. It formed the calculating and objective mentality of the industry. It selected and hardened the managerial ranks.” Within the framework of the industry’s relentless innovation Brody uses evidence drawn from government investigations to trace the labor relations that led to “[l]ong hours, low wages, bleak conditions,” where “anti-unionism, flowed alike from the economizing drive that made the American steel industry the wonder of the manufacturing world.” Brody is specifically interested in the sources of labor stability that allowed the steel companies to develop while fending off unionism in their workforce and the resulting impact on the lives of the workmen. Brody’s finding was that the boom and bust nature of production in the early decades of the industry’s growth, which swept workers between extremes of overwork and unemployment, created one part of an environment resistant to labor organization. Another element was the disparity between skilled and unskilled workers which diminished solidarity, not least because the divide was also often between native and immigrant workers. While skilled workers were generally well treated, unskilled workers could be pushed to the limits of their endurance during busy periods, working up to 72 hours per week.

Almost half of the immigrants who performed this exhausting labor were only in America for a period of a few years in order to earn money before returning to their native country. As a Hungarian churchman exclaimed bitterly of the Pittsburgh steel mills, “[w]herever the heat is most insupportable, the flames most scorching, the smoke and soot most choking, there we are certain to find compatriots bent and wasted with toil.” Planning to return across the ocean someday, such men had little interest in struggling for reforms, especially since unemployment meant the demolition of their plans for saving money. The nativist inclinations of the American Federation of Labor inhibited outreach to non-native workers. In any case, immigrants who did stay found that they were able to move up into more skilled positions, creating an incentive for not rocking the boat. After the turn of the century rising currents of reform and pressure from critical journalists in the broader society lead to increasing investments in the safety and welfare of workers, which also suppressed labor unrest. Labor stability was only disturbed once, in the great strike of 1919 where the organizing and propaganda for economic democracy which had taken root during the tight labor market of the First World War we met and subdued amid the recession and anti-socialist paranoia which followed in the war’s wake.

[Joseph Stieb · Rating 4 out of 5]

David Brody’s Steelworkers in America presents the history of the conflicted relations between laborers and owners in America’s steel mills from the 1890’s to the 1920’s. The book signaled a key historiographical transition in labor history by focusing on the lives of workers as opposed to unions. Brody’s work has endured because it has spurred so many innovations in labor history and because it is a compelling history in and of itself.
Brody outlines two goals for this book. First, he examines the changing balance of power between the workers and the owners as well as changing patterns of organization within each camp. He portrays the interests of both sides in largely economical terms. The steelmaking industry evolved in a highly competitive atmosphere before the 1901 merger, so the owners wanted to extract the most output from labor at the least cost. This imperative resulted in low wages, long working hours, unsafe conditions, and little concern for the workers’ living conditions. Brody grants laborers a wider diversity of interests. Skilled workers wanted to keep exclude the unskilled from union membership and leverage their value as laborers to gain better conditions and compensation. Mostly unskilled immigrant workers wanted several years of consistent employment that would earn them enough money to return home and attain a higher socio-economic status. Suspicions between these groups hampered the ability of unions to gain traction among steelworkers. Ultimately, Brody portrays the balance of power as dramatically shifting towards the owners throughout this period, especially after the failure of the “Great Strike of 1919.
Brody’s second major purpose is to investigate the effect of this shifting conflict on the workers themselves. Brody contends that steelworkers were largely at the mercy of vast economic forces and incredibly powerful industrial magnates. He writes: “Their lives were ruled by the circumstances of modern metal manufacture” (26). Indeed, the book demonstrates how powerless the atomized worker was in controlling his destiny. The mechanization of production put thousands of unskilled laborers out of work. Economic downturns led to further layoffs or wage reductions. The government rarely intervened on behalf of labor, and owners had numerous ways of preventing workers from agitating or unionizing, including spying and pre-emptive firing. This impotence was not static, however. During World War I, for instance, laborers employed the patriotic language of industrial democracy to gain temporary support from the War Labor Board in exacting concessions and promises from the bosses.
Brody’s central argument is that outside of the World War I exception, the nonunion era had a high level of labor stability in that new unions did not form and old ones, such as the Amalgamated Association, contracted. There were many causes behind this stability. The key structural condition of this stability was labor mobility. Labor was mobile in the horizontal sense in that cheap, politically powerless laborers such as Eastern Europeans or African-American migrants were constantly flowing in to take up low-paying, unskilled positions. Labor was mobile in the vertical sense in that laborers, particularly skilled ones, usually sought promotion, bonuses, consistent long-term employment, and other carrots. These factors dampened their enthusiasm for antagonistic unionism. Either way, the owners rarely lacked laborers who were willing to accept the terms of employment the owners offered. Brody notes the steel companies further stabilized their positions by becoming indispensible parts of mill town communities. Their mere presence sustained many local businesses. They also started public works projects and allied with the political leadership of these towns.
Nevertheless, Brody uncovers a fascinating silver lining for this bleak period for unions. Repeated attempts to build unions or launch strikes may have failed because of divisions within the labor movement, the mill owners’ tactics, and periodic hostility from the government and public opinion. Nevertheless, over the course of this book, working conditions in the mills undoubtedly improved. Brody resolves this contradiction by arguing that low-level organizing, occasional strikes, and muckraking exposes of working conditions pressed owners to offer better wages, safer conditions, and more amenities such as better housing, schools, and disability compensation. He contends owners increasingly followed a policy of calculated benevolence in which they offered a better deal to the workers in order to pre-empt unionization and work stoppages. Combined with public pressure, this trend led to major gains for labor, such as the elimination of the 12-hour workday in 1923. The paradoxical outcome by the 1920’s was that steel mills were still profitable, the plight of workers was improving, and unions were weaker and more publically distrusted than ever.
Brody’s work intersects a number of historiographical trends. He gently countered consensus history by showing that even though neither labor nor capital was particularly radical, there was still room for heated and occasionally violent conflict within the 40-yard lines. Brody changed labor history by focusing on lives, ideas, and strategies of workers whether or not they were in a union. Labor historians since Brody have broadened their exploration of laborers, incorporating gender, religion, race, political affiliations, and class in more complex ways than Brody does. For example, labor historians increasingly do not use psychological archetypes to uniformly describe mill owners or immigrant laborers. Nevertheless, this ground-breaking, well-researched, and concise work still merits a wide readership among American and labor historians even in the 21st century.

[Mark Bowles · Rating 4 out of 5]

vid Brody, Steelworkers in America; The Nonunion Era (1960)
1. Iron and steel industry from 1880-1929
2. The steel industry was not designed for the worker, but for the owner

[Michael Tildsley · Rating 3 out of 5]

Perhaps not a glamorous title for the bookshelf, but it did provide key insight into the steel industry pre-WWI, and the racial make-up in the service injury. Pretty interesting stuff.