Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and “corporate welfare” work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the “dilution” of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the “new factory system” in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by management reorganization, and during the war years this sector was the most strike-prone (Nelson, 1975; Taylor, 1967; Braverman, 1974; Montgomery, 1974, 1976; Nadworny, 1955; Hinton, 1973; Bing, 1921).
Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and "corporate welfare" work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the "dilution" of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the "new factory system" in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by manage
International Labor and Working-class History, 1995
A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take in... more A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take into account a variety of changes that confronted the working class in this era: the fashioning of a new national state role, the remaking of politics, and finally the remaking of the working class itself. Analysis of American politics in this particular era has been dominated by the paradigm of "The System of 1896" and the model of urban "machine politics." These two concepts represent a widely accepted framework of analysis that demonstrates the integration of the working class into the political system and the consequent muting of class concerns within that system. Our task is to investigate these concepts to measure their useful ness in explaining working-class consciousness and its impact on politics. Specifically, the investigation must examine the dynamics of local-level politics, where working-people's activities had their greatest strength and resonance. This essay will examine these ideas and suggest an alternative understanding of the politics of workers, and especially of immigrants, in this era. At the turn of the century, the United States had recovered from the economic and political turmoil of the 1890s depression and entered three decades of political stability known as the "System of 1896." This system emerged after the 1896 defeat of the Democratic-Populist fusion by the Republican party. As defined by E. E. Schattschneider and Walter Dean Burnham, it was characterized by the national hegemony of the Republi can party (outside the Democratic "Solid South"); the narrowing of politi cal debate; and a diminished party vitality, which was replaced by an ex panding administrative state. In addition, as revealed in declining rates of turnout for national elections, the electoral system of 1896-1928 was one of demobilization of an alarmingly large portion of the potential electorate in the United States.1 This shrinking of the American electorate has been attributed to a combination of an extreme one-party dominance in both the North and South and the cumulative impact of institutional change and changes in the rules of the game for voters. Republican hegemony in the North and Dem ocratic hegemony in the South went hand in hand with what Burnham has called "the decomposition of political parties as action instrumentalities."2 One-party rule deprived voters of meaningful choices, thus leading to a decline in voter turnout. Moreover, as Burnham argued, interest groups had taken over the political functions of bringing issues to bear on the
... Bridgeport's socialist New Deal, 1915-36 / Cecelia Bucki. ... I also wish to thank t... more ... Bridgeport's socialist New Deal, 1915-36 / Cecelia Bucki. ... I also wish to thank those who sat for interviews: Jack C. Bergen, Jack K. Donnelly, Frank Fazekas, Ethel M. Freedman, Abraham E. Knepler, L. Herman Lavit, Robert McLevy, Michael Russo, Pearl K. Russo, Josephine ...
Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and “corporate welfare” work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the “dilution” of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the “new factory system” in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by management reorganization, and during the war years this sector was the most strike-prone (Nelson, 1975; Taylor, 1967; Braverman, 1974; Montgomery, 1974, 1976; Nadworny, 1955; Hinton, 1973; Bing, 1921).
International Labor and Working-Class History, 1995
A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take in... more A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take into account a variety of changes that confronted the working class in this era: the fashioning of a new national state role, the remaking of politics, and finally the remaking of the working class itself. Analysis of American politics in this particular era has been dominated by the paradigm of "The System of 1896" and the model of urban "machine politics." These two concepts represent a widely accepted framework of analysis that demonstrates the integration of the working class into the political system and the consequent muting of class concerns within that system. Our task is to investigate these concepts to measure their useful ness in explaining working-class consciousness and its impact on politics. Specifically, the investigation must examine the dynamics of local-level politics, where working-people's activities had their greatest strength and resonance. This essay will examine these ideas and suggest an alternative understanding of the politics of workers, and especially of immigrants, in this era. At the turn of the century, the United States had recovered from the economic and political turmoil of the 1890s depression and entered three decades of political stability known as the "System of 1896." This system emerged after the 1896 defeat of the Democratic-Populist fusion by the Republican party. As defined by E. E. Schattschneider and Walter Dean Burnham, it was characterized by the national hegemony of the Republi can party (outside the Democratic "Solid South"); the narrowing of politi cal debate; and a diminished party vitality, which was replaced by an ex panding administrative state. In addition, as revealed in declining rates of turnout for national elections, the electoral system of 1896-1928 was one of demobilization of an alarmingly large portion of the potential electorate in the United States.1 This shrinking of the American electorate has been attributed to a combination of an extreme one-party dominance in both the North and South and the cumulative impact of institutional change and changes in the rules of the game for voters. Republican hegemony in the North and Dem ocratic hegemony in the South went hand in hand with what Burnham has called "the decomposition of political parties as action instrumentalities."2 One-party rule deprived voters of meaningful choices, thus leading to a decline in voter turnout. Moreover, as Burnham argued, interest groups had taken over the political functions of bringing issues to bear on the
International Labor and Working-Class History, 2005
Back to the shop floor! This book is a welcome addition to the literature of American labor in th... more Back to the shop floor! This book is a welcome addition to the literature of American labor in the mid-twentieth century. Through meticulous analysis of steel workers at the workplace in Duquesne, Pennsylvania, James D. Rose explains the emergence and eventual victory of the Steel Workers Organizing Committee (SWOC), a part of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), in all its complexity. In doing so, he reveals the inadequacy of Lizabeth Cohen's culture of unity as well as Staughton Lynd's militant alternative unionism to explain the labor history of the 1930s. In addition, he reintroduces the idea that the federal government's role in industrial relations was crucial to the success of the CIO.
International Labor and Working-Class History, 2012
I remember my very first seminar with David Montgomery at the University of Pittsburgh in January... more I remember my very first seminar with David Montgomery at the University of Pittsburgh in January 1976. Here I was, a working-class kid from Bridgeport, Connecticut, trying to switch from rank-and-file labor activism to an academic career. Montgomery's classroom was an intense experience. His seminars were a combination of readings in secondary sources as well as deep reading in primary sources (whether business magazines, industrial relations expert reports, or radical and union journals). In addition, there were always student-generated political debates on one or another left-wing perspective—we had widely diverse ideological leanings! David accepted all approaches in the New Labor History, as long as the evidence was there.
Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and “corporate welfare” work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the “dilution” of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the “new factory system” in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by management reorganization, and during the war years this sector was the most strike-prone (Nelson, 1975; Taylor, 1967; Braverman, 1974; Montgomery, 1974, 1976; Nadworny, 1955; Hinton, 1973; Bing, 1921).
Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and "corporate welfare" work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the "dilution" of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the "new factory system" in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by manage
International Labor and Working-class History, 1995
A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take in... more A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take into account a variety of changes that confronted the working class in this era: the fashioning of a new national state role, the remaking of politics, and finally the remaking of the working class itself. Analysis of American politics in this particular era has been dominated by the paradigm of "The System of 1896" and the model of urban "machine politics." These two concepts represent a widely accepted framework of analysis that demonstrates the integration of the working class into the political system and the consequent muting of class concerns within that system. Our task is to investigate these concepts to measure their useful ness in explaining working-class consciousness and its impact on politics. Specifically, the investigation must examine the dynamics of local-level politics, where working-people's activities had their greatest strength and resonance. This essay will examine these ideas and suggest an alternative understanding of the politics of workers, and especially of immigrants, in this era. At the turn of the century, the United States had recovered from the economic and political turmoil of the 1890s depression and entered three decades of political stability known as the "System of 1896." This system emerged after the 1896 defeat of the Democratic-Populist fusion by the Republican party. As defined by E. E. Schattschneider and Walter Dean Burnham, it was characterized by the national hegemony of the Republi can party (outside the Democratic "Solid South"); the narrowing of politi cal debate; and a diminished party vitality, which was replaced by an ex panding administrative state. In addition, as revealed in declining rates of turnout for national elections, the electoral system of 1896-1928 was one of demobilization of an alarmingly large portion of the potential electorate in the United States.1 This shrinking of the American electorate has been attributed to a combination of an extreme one-party dominance in both the North and South and the cumulative impact of institutional change and changes in the rules of the game for voters. Republican hegemony in the North and Dem ocratic hegemony in the South went hand in hand with what Burnham has called "the decomposition of political parties as action instrumentalities."2 One-party rule deprived voters of meaningful choices, thus leading to a decline in voter turnout. Moreover, as Burnham argued, interest groups had taken over the political functions of bringing issues to bear on the
... Bridgeport's socialist New Deal, 1915-36 / Cecelia Bucki. ... I also wish to thank t... more ... Bridgeport's socialist New Deal, 1915-36 / Cecelia Bucki. ... I also wish to thank those who sat for interviews: Jack C. Bergen, Jack K. Donnelly, Frank Fazekas, Ethel M. Freedman, Abraham E. Knepler, L. Herman Lavit, Robert McLevy, Michael Russo, Pearl K. Russo, Josephine ...
Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of ... more Relations between workers and managers underwent a profound transformation in the early years of the twentieth century. Employers began a systematic attempt to control production and rationalize shop floor processes through technological innovation, subdivision of tasks, and the scientific management (or Taylorism) movement. A concern for a tractable labor force compelled the development of the profession of personnel management and “corporate welfare” work on the part of employers. The all-round skilled craftsman, trained by a union apprenticeship and able to work in any area of the trade without management instruction and supervision, was replaced by the semiskilled machine operative trained by the company to work on a few tasks using modified and specialized machinery. On the other side, craftsmen accustomed to autonomy in their work and governed by a collective ethic felt their organized power threatened by this management offensive that debased skill, imposed new forms of discipline, and promoted individualism and competition. Craftsmen challenged management's encroachment upon the shop floor through militant union action, but in doing so they were forced, by the “dilution” of their trade (the British term for the destruction of skilled jobs), to rethink their traditional reliance on exclusive craft knowledge. The key to any new strategy was the ability of craftsmen to transcend old craft lines, join with the less skilled workers whose jobs were created by management reorganization, and formulate new demands. The World War I years and the production crisis produced by the war saw the permanent institutionalization of the “new factory system” in the United States and elsewhere. The metal trades were the industrial sector most affected by management reorganization, and during the war years this sector was the most strike-prone (Nelson, 1975; Taylor, 1967; Braverman, 1974; Montgomery, 1974, 1976; Nadworny, 1955; Hinton, 1973; Bing, 1921).
International Labor and Working-Class History, 1995
A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take in... more A consideration of workers and politics in the early twentieth-century United States must take into account a variety of changes that confronted the working class in this era: the fashioning of a new national state role, the remaking of politics, and finally the remaking of the working class itself. Analysis of American politics in this particular era has been dominated by the paradigm of "The System of 1896" and the model of urban "machine politics." These two concepts represent a widely accepted framework of analysis that demonstrates the integration of the working class into the political system and the consequent muting of class concerns within that system. Our task is to investigate these concepts to measure their useful ness in explaining working-class consciousness and its impact on politics. Specifically, the investigation must examine the dynamics of local-level politics, where working-people's activities had their greatest strength and resonance. This essay will examine these ideas and suggest an alternative understanding of the politics of workers, and especially of immigrants, in this era. At the turn of the century, the United States had recovered from the economic and political turmoil of the 1890s depression and entered three decades of political stability known as the "System of 1896." This system emerged after the 1896 defeat of the Democratic-Populist fusion by the Republican party. As defined by E. E. Schattschneider and Walter Dean Burnham, it was characterized by the national hegemony of the Republi can party (outside the Democratic "Solid South"); the narrowing of politi cal debate; and a diminished party vitality, which was replaced by an ex panding administrative state. In addition, as revealed in declining rates of turnout for national elections, the electoral system of 1896-1928 was one of demobilization of an alarmingly large portion of the potential electorate in the United States.1 This shrinking of the American electorate has been attributed to a combination of an extreme one-party dominance in both the North and South and the cumulative impact of institutional change and changes in the rules of the game for voters. Republican hegemony in the North and Dem ocratic hegemony in the South went hand in hand with what Burnham has called "the decomposition of political parties as action instrumentalities."2 One-party rule deprived voters of meaningful choices, thus leading to a decline in voter turnout. Moreover, as Burnham argued, interest groups had taken over the political functions of bringing issues to bear on the
International Labor and Working-Class History, 2005
Back to the shop floor! This book is a welcome addition to the literature of American labor in th... more Back to the shop floor! This book is a welcome addition to the literature of American labor in the mid-twentieth century. Through meticulous analysis of steel workers at the workplace in Duquesne, Pennsylvania, James D. Rose explains the emergence and eventual victory of the Steel Workers Organizing Committee (SWOC), a part of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), in all its complexity. In doing so, he reveals the inadequacy of Lizabeth Cohen's culture of unity as well as Staughton Lynd's militant alternative unionism to explain the labor history of the 1930s. In addition, he reintroduces the idea that the federal government's role in industrial relations was crucial to the success of the CIO.
International Labor and Working-Class History, 2012
I remember my very first seminar with David Montgomery at the University of Pittsburgh in January... more I remember my very first seminar with David Montgomery at the University of Pittsburgh in January 1976. Here I was, a working-class kid from Bridgeport, Connecticut, trying to switch from rank-and-file labor activism to an academic career. Montgomery's classroom was an intense experience. His seminars were a combination of readings in secondary sources as well as deep reading in primary sources (whether business magazines, industrial relations expert reports, or radical and union journals). In addition, there were always student-generated political debates on one or another left-wing perspective—we had widely diverse ideological leanings! David accepted all approaches in the New Labor History, as long as the evidence was there.
Uploads
Papers by Cecelia Bucki