In a rush so telegraph style. Have heard much said about 1934 Teamsters strike in Minneapolis. Turns out there was a wave a strikes in the US in 1934.
List from Wikipedia:
# Harlem New York, Jobs-for-Negroes-Boycott (1934, U.S.)
# Kohler Strike, Sheboygan, Wisconsin (1934, U.S.)
# Imperial Valley California, Farmworkers’ Strike (1934, U.S.)
# Auto-Lite Strike (1934, Toledo, Ohio, U.S.)
# Textile Workers’ Strike (1934, U.S.)
# Minneapolis Teamsters Strike of 1934 (U.S.)
# Rubber Workers’ Strike (1934, U.S.)
# Textile workers Strike (1934) (U.S.)
# 1934 West Coast Longshore Strike (U.S.)
# NewarkStar-Ledger Strike (1934, U.S.)
Missing here at least one = Milwaukee laundry strike (know nothing about it except it happened).
See James P. Cannon “The Strike Wave and the Left Wing”
Janet Irons, Testing the New Deal: The General Textile Strike of 1934 in the American South
Onion strike in Ohio
http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM2H76
Strikes in the United States 1880-1936, By Florence Peterson
“Government by Injunction”
The U.S. Judiciary and Strike Action in the Late 19Th and Early 20th Centuries
HOLLY J. McCAMMON
“Strike activity picked up beginning
in 1933, peaking in 1937 with a record number of strikes, and a number of striking
workers second only to the post-World War I strike wave of 1919. The success rate of
these strikes increased rather dramatically as well, from an all time low of 24 percent in
1930 to 37 percent in 1933, and nearly 50 percent in 1935, 1936, and 1937. The fruits of
these organizing campaigns began to be realized in increased union membership and
union density beginning in 1934. By 1937 a record 5.8 million U.S. workers had joined
labor unions, and union density (22%) had reached unprecedented levels.” Conflict and Compromise:
Changes in U.S. Strike Outcomes, 1880 to 1937
Thomas M. Geraghty
Richard Freeman, “Spurts in Union Growth: Defining Moments and Social Processes,” in Michael D. Bordo, Claudia Goldin, and Eugene N. White, eds., The Defining Moment: The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century (Chicago, 1998), 265-96.
but had you heard (as I was told just this morning) that the Aquatennial was started in 1940 to take people’s attention away from the anniversary of the 1934 strike?
Comment by Erik — August 22, 2008 @ 3:58 pm
Interesting. No, I hadn’t heard that. And what’s an Aquatennial?
Comment by Nate — August 22, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
The Toledo, Minneapolis and San Francisco strikes remain the most significant for their militance and their scope as general strikes. For more detailed accounts of these three strikes I can recommend.
I remember like today : the Auto-Lite strike of 1934 / by Philip A. Korth and Margaret Beegle.
East Lansing, Mich. : Michigan State University Press, 1988.
Teamster rebellion / Farrell Dobbs.
Workers on the waterfront : seamen, longshoremen, and unionism in the 1930s / Bruce Nelson.
The great San Francisco general strike the story of the West coast strike–the Bay counties Ě•general strike and the maritime workers Ě•strike. William F Dunne. This one is actually just a booklet published by the CP and written by a party labor functionary.
In searching this title, I discovered that in the years since I was reading about these strikes, two histories of the San Francisco strike have been published. I mention them, but since I have not read them obviously cannot recommend them.
How many machine guns does it take to cook one meal? : the Seattle and San Francisco general strikes / Victoria Johnson. Seattle : University of Washington Press, c2008.
A terrible anger : the 1934 waterfront and general strikes in San Francisco / David F. Selvin. Detroit : Wayne State University Press, c1996.
Comment by Chuckie K — August 25, 2008 @ 8:40 am
Just found this article on Prol-Position, has a short section on 1934: http://www.prol-position.net/articles/2009/usa-1929
The main question for me is how much contact their was between these strikes, ranging from relatively passive awareness (reading newspaper articles) to active attempts to create awareness (leafletting, say) to direct contact between participants.
Comment by Nate — November 1, 2009 @ 1:56 am