Danver Steven L. (Edited). Revolts, Protests, Demonstrations, and Rebellions in American History: An Encyclopedia (ENG)

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

The ILA national leadership was far more conservative than the San Francisco/

Oakland chapters, and t he national president of the ILA, Joseph Ryan, favored

negotiation and signed a tentative agreement with the employers that failed to take

into account key ILA demands, which included the following:

• Recognition of the union

• A closed shop with a union-run hiring hall

• A contract covering all West Coast workers

• A 30-hour week at the rate of $1 per hour, and $1.50 per hour overtime

When Ryan negotiated a “sweetheart” deal that failed to incorporate these

demands, the rank and ﬁle of the union voted to strike. As workers walked off the

job on May 9, 1934, several sailors associations and other unions would soon join

the longshoremen. Up and down the West Coast, pickets battled company-hired

replacement w orkers, or “scabs,” who were engaged i n an attempt to reopen the

ports. The Industrial Association of San Francisco recruited conservative young

businessmen and desper ately poor workers and student s to help br eak the strike.

Though other unions offered support and even joined the strike, the Teamsters Union

initially threatened to start unloading the docks as the strike lingered into the summer.

On July 3, 1934, the Industrial Association decided to make a show of force by

opening the docks with the support of the San Francisco Police Department.

Though there was some sporadic violence that day, more severe violence came

two days later, on Thursday, July 5, 1934, know henceforth as “Bloody Thursday.”

Along the San Francisco Embarcadero, near Pier 38, workers and police battled

with rocks, bricks, clubs, and guns. Two strike supporters, Howard Sperry and

Nicholas Bordoise (occasionally spelled Bordois), were killed by police bullets,

and hundreds of strikers, police, and spectators were wounded. Antiunion vigi-

lantes joined in the fray, attacking workers and raiding and sacking various union

ofﬁces, including the ILA headquarters.

The violence of Bloody Thursday created a pro-union backlash across the city

and the nation. Average citizens with no immediate stake in the struggle began

to favor the union, and the ILA was able to generate enough sympathy that on

July 8, 1934, both of the labor councils in San Francisco and O akland voted to

authorize a general strike in the city of San Francisco. On July 9, over 10,000

workers and their supporters lined Market Street in San Francisco for a funeral

procession for the slain Sperry and Bordoise. On July 16, most of the unions in

San Francisco went out on a four-day-long general strike in support of the ILA.

California governor Frank Merriam called out the California National Guard, and

on July 17, 1934, the guardsmen were ordered into the area where violence had been

the worst. With the cover of the soldiers, vigilantes continued to harass strikers and

858 West Coast Longshore men’s Strike (1934)

vandalize union ofﬁces. The San Francisco General Strike Committee then took

over negotiations, and Bridges was forced out of the negotiation process. Though

many of the workers’ demands were not immediately met, the workers did vote to

accept arbitration and to end the strike. They won several concessions, including

recognition of their union, higher pay, and a union-dominated hiring hall. Over the

next months and years, ILA members would continue to authorize “quickie strikes”

and “slowdowns” to win more demands from their employers.

The West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike in 1934, along with p revious strike

actions in Toledo , Ohio, and Minneapolis, Minnes ota, that same year, helpe d to

usher i n a d ecade of major union activity in the United States in the 1930s. The

National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) of 1935 made the job of organizing

workers slightly easier by providing federal protection to union orga nizati onal

campaigns, among other provisions that were pro-union.

After the strike ended, the ILA began to organize warehouse workers in its “March

Inland” campaign, and it also began to organize workers in Hawaii. Harry Bridges

and the West Coast ILA left the national union in 1937 to help found the more inclu-

sive International Longshoreman and Warehouseman’s Union (ILWU). Bridges also

became the West Coast director for the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO)

and had a l ong career negotiating on behalf of the union. Eventually, the dock-

workers union became one of the most powerful in the United States. Union mem-

bers were among the highest-paid members of the American industrial workforce,

and the longshoremen had an impact on several matters of international politics,

including their refusal to ship scrap metal to Japan in the years prior to World War II.

—Randal Beeman

See also all entries under Molly Maguires (1870s); Great Railroa d S trikes (1877);

Haymarket Riot (1886); Seattle Riot (1886); Homestead Strike (1892–1893); Pullman

Strike (1894); Lattimer Massacre (1897); Black Patch War (1909); Ludlow Massacre

(1914); Boston Police Strike (1919); Battle of Blair Mountain (1921); Bonus Army

(1932); Toledo Auto-Lite Strike (1934); World Trade Organization Protests (1999).

Further Reading

Kimeldorf, Howard. Red and Rackets: The Making of Radical and Conservative Unions

on the Waterfront. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

Larrowe, Charles. Harry Bridges: The R ise and Fall of Radical Labor in the U.S.

New York: Lawrence Hill, 1977.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Preis, Art. Labor’s Giant Step: The First Twenty Years of the CIO. New York: Pathﬁnder, 1964.

Selvin, David F. A Terrible Anger: The 1934 Waterfront and Gen eral Str ikes in San

Francisco. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1996.

West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike (1934) 859

Bloody Thursday (1934)

On July 5, 1934, workers and police battled on the docks of San Francisco during the

heated West Coast Longs horemen’s Strike that lasted fo r 81 days in 1934 and

involved over 12,000 workers. Two strike supporters were killed in the melee, and

scores of others were injured. In response to the perceived overreaction by the author-

ities, unions throughout the city declared a general strike in support of the dock work-

ers that helped lead to a favorable conclusion of the strike for the striking workers.

For years, longshoremen in American ports were low-paid “wharf rats” who

faced long hours and enjoyed few beneﬁts. Attempts to organize the dock workers

had failed in previous decades, but with the advent of Fr anklin Roosevelt’s New

Deal, workers felt entitled to once again organize an independent union. Previous

attempts to strike against the major shipping lines had resulted in crushing defeats

for the longshoremen, whose leaders were frequently “blackballed” from future

employment on the docks. Ship owners also were backed by the San Francisco

Chamber of Commerce and the powerful San Francisco Industrial Association.

On May 9, 1934, the International Longshoreman’s Association (ILA) began a

strike against the major shipping companies on the West Coast . Workers rejected

two contract proposals tha t h ad been negotiated by their leaders, and the strike

was then taken over by the militant Australian leader Harry Bridges. When ship

owne rs began using the San Francisco Police Department to help remove cargo

from the docks, workers became agitated leading to riots along the piers beginning

on Tuesday, July 3, 1934.

After a lull in the confrontation on July 4, the ship owners began to move freight

the following day —Bloody Thursday. Police entered the picket lines wielding

clubs, while strikin g workers fought back, wielding boards a nd throwing bricks

at the police. Workers fought with police and “scabs” crossing their picket lines,

while police retaliated with tear and nausea gas and eventually gunﬁre. Approxi-

mately 5,000 strikers battled with 1,000 San Francisco police ofﬁcers near Pier

38 on the Embarcadero waterfront area.

Strikers overturned trucks, blocked street cars, and tossed rocks and bricks at

the police lines. Police on motorcycles escorted trucks from pier s that had been

secured from the rioting mob. The ensuing violence left 31 people shot and caused

the deaths of union supporters Nicholas Bordoise and Howard Sperry. San

Francisco mayor Angelo Rossi appealed for calm, yet against Rossi’s wishes, Cal-

ifornia governor Frank Merriam ordered t he California National Guard into the

city to establish order. Over 10,000 union supporters attended the funeral of those

killed on Bloody Thursday. T he resulting protest over the manner in which the

confrontation was handled by the police led to a general strike in San Francisco

861

that lasted fr om July 16 to July 19. The ILA won recognition for their union, the

right to a union-run hiring hall, and increased wages.

—Randal Beeman

Further Reading

Larrowe, Charles. Harry Bridges: The Rise and Fall of Radical Labor in the U.S.New

York: Lawrence Hill, 1977.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Bridges, Harry (1901–1990)

Alfred Renton “Harry” Bridges was an Australian-born American labor leader

who was successful in organizing longshor emen into an effective maritime union

in the 1930s. A controversial ﬁgure, Bridges was the subject of several deportation

efforts by the national government. Rising to prominence in the West Coast Long-

shoremen’s Strike in 1934, Bridges l ed the union into a prominent po sition

through a series of difﬁcult and frequently dangerous episodes of labor strife.

Born into a middle-class environment in Australia, Bridges became a merchant

seaman at the age of 16 and spent the next several years sailing the world on a vari-

ety of merchant ships. After growing tired of the vagabond life of a sailor, Bridges

settled in San Francisco in 1921 and started working on the docks.

As the famous 1951 movie On the Waterfront dramatically displayed, the life of a

dockworker was hard, dangerous, and low paying. Workers would come to the pier

each day looking for a day’s wage in what was known as the “shape up.” Often,

workers would have to pay a kickback to a foreman for the right to work, and there

were no provisions for seniority when jobs were distrib uted or any other basic beneﬁts.

Having broken a strike by San Francisco members of the International Longshore-

man’s Association (ILA) in 1919, Bay Area ship owners created a compan y controlled

“blue book” union in the 1920s that distributed work according to the whims

of the ship owners. Bridges wa s blacklist ed for his support of the ILA unti l he

reluctantly joined the “blue book” union in 1927. Bridges was a highly skilled winch

operator, but, along with other workers, he would often work shifts lasting for over

24 hours.

Bridges allied himself with fellow workers who sought to change conditions on

the docks, and he rejoined the ILA in 1933 as Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal

promised to help workers organize into the unions of their cho ice. Bridges and

862 West Coast Longshore men’s Strike (1934)

others began to organize locals up and down the West Coast, and won their ﬁrst

successful strike in 1933 against the Matson Navigation Company.

Bridges rose to prominence in the fabled West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike of

1934. After union leaders negotiated what workers saw as “sweetheart” contracts

with shipping owners, Bridges led a rank-and-ﬁle revolt against local and national

ILA leaders. On July 5, 1934 (“Bloo dy Thursday”) , violence erupted when San

Francisco police attempted to help “scab” workers unload cargoes t hrough the

union picket lines. Police opened ﬁre on the workers and two union supporters

were killed. Eventually the authorities declared martial law in San Francisco,

and the unions of the city joined in a general strike to show support for the long-

shorem en. Rejecting Bridges’s conc erns, the workers voted to accept arbitration

and end the strike, but they did win recognition of their union, wage increases,

and the right to run a hiring hall wherein the union would decide who got to

work.

Bridges’s ﬂamboyance and his association with the Communist movement led

to problems with the U.S. government, which unsuccessfully attempted to deport

Bridges four times for lying about his communist afﬁliations. Bridges was offered

bribes to le ave the United States, and he a ngered the government again in 1937

when dockworkers refused to load scrap iron onto Japanese-bound vessels. As

the leader of (in his words) a “left wing” union, Bridges called for rank-and-ﬁle

democracy and the easy dismissal of union ofﬁcers, and for paying organizers no

more than what the highest workers made in salary; he also insisted on racial

equality at a time when many unions rejected black workers.

Bridges l eft the ILA in 1937 to create what became the International Long-

shoremen and Warehousemen’s Union (ILWU ). Bridges would also serve as the

West Coast director of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). He helped

build one of America’s most powerful unions, and longshoremen became some of

the most highly paid union members in the United States. Eventually, conservative

ship owners came to accept Bridges for his honesty and consistency, especially in

later years as he led the union to accept mechanizat ion (and fewer union jobs) in

exchange for raises, job training, and better working conditions. San Francisco

honored Bridges’s efforts by naming a major plaza in his honor.

—Randal Beeman

Further Reading

Larrowe, Charles. Harry Bridges: The Rise and Fall of Radical Labor in the U.S.New

York: Lawrence Hill, 1977.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike (1934) 863

Communism

Among the main charges hurled a t the West Coast Longshoremen during their

1934 strike was that their actions were spurred by communist sentiments and the

activitie s of communist labor organizers in their midst. For their part, the largest

of the longshoremen’s u nions, the International Longshoremen’s Association

(ILA), refuted such accusations, while still acknowledging that a portion of the

striking workers were actively involved in communist organizations, while noting

that “a great maj ority o f the striking long shoremen are adhere nts of conservative

political parties” (Selvin 1996, 108). In fact, at a number of the rallies held by

the ILA, the presence of communist-leaning members of the small but vocal Mari-

time Workers Industrial Union (MWIU) was widely decried as playing into the

hands of those who wo uld paint the entire strike as communist in origin, su ch as

San Francisco lawyer John Francis Neylan, who was said to be working in co-

operation with newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst. Working under

Neylan’s direction, San Francisco newspapers presented a united front in decrying

the longshoremen’s cause as “radical and Communist” (Selvin 1996, 131–132). Of

course, the employers of the longshoremen were only too happy to have the entire

movement painted with one large red brush.

In the aftermath of the violence that took place i n San Fra nc isc o on “Blo ody

Thursday,” July 5, 1934, numerous arrests were made, and a number of those tar-

geted were those with communist ties, such as ILA leader Harry Jackson. The tri-

als that followed in many ways presaged the McCarthy era hearings some 20 years

later, with verdicts being delivered that were not based on any legal evidence, but

rather on the defendants’ pol itical beliefs. Some reacted to the accusations by

seeking to purge the unions of any c ommunist leaders or m embers. A series of

raids staged by both vigilantes and National Guard troops during mid-July

rounded u p suspected communists, especially targeting the MWIU hall on the

waterfront.

For their part, members of the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, especially

Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, were skeptical of the characterization of the

Longshoremen’s Strike as being communist in nature. The strikers themselves

cert ainly saw the issue as being fair treatment by their employers rather than the

fomenting of any type of communist movement. One MWIU striker put it this

way: “Up to this very minute, no one has crammed a communist license down

my throat nor have I been forced to change my religion or politics. The main issue

is the strike; the main point is solidarity and a continuous picket l ine” (Nelson

1988, 146).

—Steven L. Danver

864 West Coast Longshore men’s Strike (1934)

Further Reading

Kimeldorf, Howard. Red and Rackets: The Making of Radical and Conservative Unions

on the Waterfront. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Selvin, David F. A Terrible Anger: The 1934 Waterfront and Gen eral Str ikes in San

Francisco. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1996.

International Longshoremen’s

Association (ILA)

One of the two major labor unions representing the longshoremen of San

Francisco who went on strike in 1934, the International Longshoremen’s Associa-

tion (ILA) was less radical than the Maritime Workers Industrial Union (MWIU).

ILA leaders, meeting on May 9, 1934, ﬁrst called a general strike of all dock

workers on the West Coast to demand that only union employees be hired, that

they be paid on a wage scale, and that union personnel administer the hiring of

new employees. This brought the West Coast branch of the ILA, led by its new

ﬁrebrand organizer Harry Bridges, into conﬂict with the more conservative East

Coast branch, led by union president Joseph Ryan. Their conﬂict would continue

through the strike and lead to a split shortly after.

Many ILA leaders and workers had been encouraged by the election of Franklin

D. Roosevelt, and the pro-union attitudes seen through pieces of New Deal legis-

lation, such as the National Industrial Recovery Act. Between Roosevelt’s election

and the beginning of the strike, ILA leaders had engaged in heavy organizing

efforts up and down the Paciﬁc coast, so that by the time of the strike, ILA leaders

in San Francisco knew that they would be able to slow down or shut down docks

from California to Washington. However, the Waterfront Employers Union

(WEU), a coalition of ship owners that employed many dock workers, refused to

meet with the I LA. It was not until the Roosevelt administ ration stepped in that

any talks at all were held. During April and early May, ILA and WEU negotiators

met, but were not able to come to any agreement on the ILA’s demands.

Once the strike was on, ILA leader Harry Bridges coordinated its efforts with a

number of other unions in associated trades, such as the Teamsters Union, to shut

the docks down as thoroughly as possible. Sporadic viole nce between ILA pick-

eters and representatives of the employers began to break out during June, culmi-

nating in the “Bloody Thursday” incident of July 5, when confrontations between

the two sides left two strikers dead and 109 injured.

West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike (1934) 865

The strike carried on throughout July, ending with the ILA gaining effective

control over the hiring of workers on all docks on the West Coast. By 1937,

Bridges and the West Coast ILA ofﬁcially split from the national union, forming

the International longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union.

—Steven L. Danver

Further Reading

Kimeldorf, Howard. Red and Rackets: The Making of Ra dical and Conservative Unions

on the Waterfront. Berkeley: University of Califor nia Press, 1992.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Selvin, David F. A Terrible Anger: The 1934 Waterfront and General Strikes in San Fran-

cisco. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1996.

San Francisco

That the 1934 West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike was centered in San Francisco

should not come as a surprise, considering the long history of the city’s association

with both radical labor and the importance of its waterfront. The strike was the cul-

mination of nearly 15 years of effort to improve the quality of life for the city’s

dockworkers. The city’s major ship owners, which employed the vast majority of

dockworker s, had founded the Industrial Association in 1921 in an effort to head

866 West Coast Longshore men’s Strike (1934)

Emblem of the International

Longshoremen's Association (ILA) in

1901. Aggressive unionization of dock

workers began after the Civil War. The

ILA emerged from the National

Longshoremen's Association during the

1890s, changing its name when Canadian

workers joined the union. The ILA remains

the principal union for longshoremen.

(Library of Congress)

off the spread of unionism on the docks. Most workers countered only with small

craft unions, which did not exert much inﬂuence when contracts were negotiated.

Workers paid the price, enduring seasonal employment and low wages.

The city’s ﬁrst brush with labor unrest along the waterfront came in 1919, when

a wave of strikes swept the nation. The Seattle General Strike was the largest work

stoppage, and San Francisco dockworkers were willing to throw their hat in with

their colleagues, despite the Seattle strikers’ open affection for communist rhetoric

and the Bolshevik Revolution occurring in Russia. San Francisco workers struck

that year to get greater control over the loading and unloading of ships, chaﬁng

against their employers’ constant expectations of speedy work a t the expense of

safety. The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) led another strike in

1921 to try to ensure that only union labor would be employed by the ship owners.

Both strikes failed, and the only union that the Industrial Association would permit

was its own Longshoremen’s Association of San Francisco and the Bay District (or

“Blue Book” union).

By 1929, the American Federation of Labo r r ecognized only the owner-

sponsored “Blue Book” union and not the ILA, leading to the radicalization of

San Francisco’s longshoremen, as they increasingly formed alliances with extreme

groups such as the Industrial Workers of the World and the Communist Party.

Communists became more inﬂuentia l in the city, and by 1934 , Harry Bridges,

who had been at least inﬂuenced by the Communist Party if not a member, became

president of a resurgent ILA, and the die was cast for the strike.

—Steven L. Danver

Further Reading

Kimeldorf, Howard. Red and Rackets: The Making of Radical and Conservative Unions

on the Waterfront. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

Nelson, Bruce. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in the

1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Selvin, David F. A Terrible Anger: The 1934 Waterfront and Gen eral Str ikes in San

Francisco. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1996.

West Coast Longshoremen’s Strike (1934) 867