Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Labor Control in crisis : the 4L and the Bedaux system in the U.S. Northwest lumber industry, 1931-1935 1980

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1980_A8 E46.pdf [ 8.4MB ]
UBC_1980_A8 E46.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0094679.json
JSON-LD: 1.0094679+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0094679.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0094679+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0094679+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0094679+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0094679.ris

Full Text

Labor Control In C r i s i s : The 4L and the Bedaux System In the U.S. Northwest Lumber Industry 1931-1935 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of History We accept t h i s thesis ...as .conforming to the required standard ^ by Jeremy Ralph Egolf THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1980 (c) Jeremy Ralph Egolf, 1980 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g or p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f fa ft The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 D E - 6 B P 7 5 - 5 1 1 E i i Abstract This work i s a non-quantitative h i s t o r i c a l study of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s i n the U.S. Northwest lumber industry, 1931-35, a period of economic and l e g a l c r i s i s . The primary materials u t i l i z e d include the papers of William C. Ruegnitz (President of the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen, or 4L, 1924- 1937), the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, and several executives of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company. Other manuscripts, including the t r a n s c r i p t of a Regional Labor Board hearing, as w e l l as personal interviews, newspapers and trade journals, and published contemporary and secondary books and a r t i c l e s , complete the sources. This thesis revises e a r l i e r works i n the area and presents two f o c a l points. The f i r s t i s a discussion of the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen, a multi-company federation of c l i e n t unions active i n the lumber industry, 1918- 1937. Although, as other writers have pointed out, the 4L was a minority i n s t i t u t i o n i n the industry, t h i s thesis finds that the 4L did e n r o l l a number of large operators (including several among the Weyerhaeuser group of companies) who were also active i n trade association regulatory e f f o r t s , 1931-32. The 4L was enmeshed i n a r o l e extending beyond i t s company union character at the plant, for i t was used by operators d e s i r i n g to give order to a fragmented i n - dustry by r e g u l a r i z i n g wages and hours of work and by i n t e g r a t i n g lumber workers i n a private c o r p o r a t i s t configuration. The 4L's advocates attempted to use the organization as an anti-union device i n conjunction with Lumber Code agencies under the New Deal's National Recovery Administration (NRA) , 1933-35. The Northwest lumber organizational s t r i k e wave launched by American Federation of Labor lumber unions i n May, 1935, was predicated upon c o n f l i c t s within the 4L and between the 4L and other labor organizations under the NRA. Evidence i s offered that at least a few operators attempted to use conservative- led unions to r e t a i n control of the workplace. i i i This t h e s i s ' second focus i s a case study i n a key theme of twentieth century labour h i s t o r y : workplace c o n f l i c t s ensuing from the extension of more di r e c t managerial controls over the work r e l a t i o n s and practices of experienced i n d u s t r i a l workers i n the i n t e r e s t s of more e f f e c t i v e competitive p r o f i t making. (Most h i s t o r i c a l work i n t h i s area has.been l i m i t e d to the nascent, pre-1920, period of s c i e n t i f i c management.) The case examined i s that of the introduction of the patented Bedaux e f f i c i e n c y system at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , 1933-35, a Weyerhaeuser group member of the 4L. Areas discussed include the d i v i s i o n of labour i n the lumber industry (using planing m i l l work as an example), the ideology of the Bedaux system and management's arguments i n defense of using the same, and the l o c a l u n i o n i s t s ' i d e o l o g i c a l and p r a c t i c a l resistance to the alte r e d patterns of shop management. The unionists used counter-conceptions of e f f i c i e n c y and Americanism, developed or reinforced i n t h i s s p e c i f i c workplace struggle, as part of t h e i r culture of insurgency during the 1935 s t r i k e and i n the formation of the International Woodworkers of America, 1937. In sum, the present study expands and r e f i n e s knowledge of company labour p o l i c y i n a key industry during the period 1931-35, and o f f e r s a case study which may be of in t e r e s t to students of the twentieth century workplace. i v Table of Contents Abstract Page i i L i s t of Tables Page v Figure Page v i Acknowledgements Page v i i Dedication Page i x Chapter I. Introduction Page 1 Chapter I I . The 4L and I n d u s t r i a l Page 9 Self-Regulation, 1931-1932 Chapter I I I . The 4L under the NRA, 1933-35 Page 29 Chapter IV. The Bedaux C r i s i s at Willapa Page 54 Harbor Lumber M i l l s , 1933-35; I: The Company, the Work Process and the Bedaux Ethos Chapter V. The Bedaux C r i s i s at Willapa Page 74 Harbor Lumber M i l l s , 1933-35; I I : The Ideology and Pr a c t i c e of Workers' Resistance Chapter VI. Conclusions and Some Unresolved Page 99 Problems Abbreviations Used i n Notes Page 107 Notes Page 108 Bibliography Page 131 V. L i s t of Tables I. Lumber Operators, Douglas F i r and Western Pine D i s t r i c t s , Page 8 Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and C a l i f o r n i a , with 8-hour Rated Capacity of 275 tfi. or Greater, Indicating Membership i n the 4L, December, 1931 II . Data on West Coast Lumber Production, Employment, P r i c e s , Page 12 P r o f i t s , Real Wages, and Per Cent of Capacity Used, and U.S. per capita Consumption, 1920-40. I I I . 4L and Non-4L Douglas f i r and Western Pine Region M i l l s Page 17 with 50 H or Greater Eight-Hour Capacity, October and December, 1931. IV. Employer Members, 4L Board of Di r e c t o r s , November 18, Page 19 1929, and March 2-3, 1932. V. Employer Members, 4L Board of Directors, June 23, 1933, Page 31 and A p r i l 12-13, 1934. VI. Occupations at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company Planing M i l l , December 1, 1930. C l a s s i f i e d by Level of S k i l l and Autonomy at Work. Page 60 v i . Figure I.Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s Dry Planing M i l l Layout Page 64 v i i Acknowledgements No le s s than a 2" x 6" manufactured i n a modern sawmill, t h i s study em- bodies the labour of many men and women. Its seeds were planted at the U n i v e r s i t y of Rochester, where two then graduate teaching a s s i s t a n t s , Leon Fink and Greg Kealey, encouraged my i n t e r e s t i n labour h i s t o r y . Some of the secondary l i t e r a t u r e i n f l u e n c i n g t h i s work was read i n University of B r i t i s h Columbia History. Graduate Programme courses conducted 1977-1978 by Professors Norbert Macdonald and Michael I g n a t i e f f . My advisor, Professor Joseph C. Lawrence, read and commented upon the several d r a f t s . A l l remaining i n f e l i c i - t i e s of analysis and expression are my own. I hope t h i s thesis does j u s t i c e to the people from whose l i v e s i t was written, e s p e c i a l l y those men and women, not a l l of whom are quoted i n the text, who opened t h e i r homes and t h e i r memories to a young stranger interested i n t h e i r past. They include Wilford Becklund, Oscar Bouffioux, Lester Cadieu, Ray Clemmons, Freeman Cochran, Ru s s e l l Earley, Bafford G. Floyd, Floyd Jackson, John B. Johnson, Hunter Kennard, Dea C. King, Howard and Maxine Knauf, Paul Lanz, Frank Mason, Fred Mulholland, Suzanne Pavolka, John Sabol, John Vargo, and L e s l i e Younglove. B i l l Wickline and h i s colleagues at International Wood- workers of America Local 3-9, Tacoma, answered an innocent's questions and passed me along to some of t h e i r r e t i r e d fellow workers. Vern H u l l , Bob Christensen, Frank Philicomo, and, especially,Warner Matson, a l l of the St. Regis Paper Company, provided s i m i l a r assistance, and permitted me to v i s i t the Company's lumber plant at Tacoma, formerly operated by the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company. Numerous a r c h i v i s t s and l i b r a r i a n s coped with requests for the primary materials used i n t h i s thesis.. I now understand researchers' often expressed gratitude f o r the aid rendered by Richard Berner, Karyl Wynn, and t h e i r v i i i a s sistants at the University of Washington Manuscripts D i v i s i o n , where the taped memoirs c o l l e c t e d i n the course of t h i s study w i l l be deposited. Mrs. Stewart Holbrook permitted me to examine her l a t e husband's d i a r i e s . Arthur McCourt and Donnie Crespo (and t h e i r bottomless pot of coffee) made working at the Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives a r e a l pleasure. Ed J a l l i n g s of the Wisconsin State H i s t o r i c a l Society and T. Lane Moore of the National Archives f a c i l i t a t e d requests for copies of materials under t h e i r auspices. Special thanks are due to the s t a f f of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Library, e s p e c i a l l y George Brandak of Special C o l l e c t i o n s , Karen Peplow and A l i c e McNair at I n t e r l i b r a r y Loan, and the souls who wrestled weighty volumes of the Timberman from storage. Research during the summer, 1979, was f a c i l i t a t e d by a U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia graduate research scholarship. The typing of a s k i l l e d worker, Susanna Lee, contributes a nice touch. My family,Constance Egolf and Barbara King Egolf, helped i n many ways. This thesis was almost dedicated to Frank Nadler, J r . , a mensch. The woman to whom i t i s dedicated would have appreciated the e f f o r t s of Norman Lange, Dea King, the Youngloves, and tens of thousands of other Northwestern lumber workers s i m i l a r l y unknown to her, to create a more l i v e a b l e America. To the S p i r i t of My Maternal Grandmother, L i l l i a n Nadler Wiesemann King Helgas 1894-1949 1 Chapter I, Introduction In the h i s t o r y of American workers, the period 1920-1933 appears as one of quiescence and r e t r e a t , with, labour organizations being decimated by the three pronged attack of the employers' American plan: open shops, welfare capitalism, and the s c i e n t i f i c management of production. The American Plan was designed to strengthen the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l character of corporate c a p i t a l i s m by creating a more favourable climate of public opinion, "harmonizing" workplace r e l a t i o n s , precluding or eliminating non-company sponsored labour organizations, decreasing " i n a r t i c u l a t e " modes of worker d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n such as high labour turnover, and encouraging or f o r c i n g workers to a t t a i n higher l e v e l s of p r o d u c t i v i t y , and therefore, company p r o f i t a b i l i t y . " ^ The term "labour c o n t r o l " as used i n t h i s thesis follows Robert Dunn's 1927 c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of company unions as " d e f i n i t e devices ... to c o n t r o l and manipulate the labour force and to produce c e r t a i n r e s u l t s which are con- sidered p r o f i t a b l e to the company." It i s also applied to the s o c i a l controls of work accounting and incentive wage systems which were designed to influence workers' behaviour at the point of production and are distinguishable from 2 technological controls inherent i n or absent from the tools of production. The present study examines the phenomena of welfare c a p i t a l i s m and s c i e n t i f i c management i n the United States Northwest lumber industry, focusing upon the years 1931-1935, a period of economic and l e g a l c r i s i s . The Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen (or 4L) i s frequently discussed during the following chapters. With the cooperation of the U.S. Army, the 4L was created during World War I to break the power of the I n d u s t r i a l Workers of the World (IWW) i n the northwest woods. The 4L's f o r c e f u l methods of organizing (membership was compulsory for a l l operators and was vigourously pressed upon a l l workers) were coupled with the concession of the eight-hour day and marked improvements i n logging camp s a n i t a t i o n and housing conditions. 2 Government sanctions were removed at war's end, but the peacetime 4L continued to e x i s t as a multi-company federation of c l i e n t unions u n t i l i t was outlawed i n 1937 by the National Labour Relations Act. The 4L divided the lumber regions of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and C a l i f o r n i a into twelve d i s t r i c t s for the purposes of s e l e c t i n g representatives to s i t at semi-annual 4L Board of Directors meetings. Each plant l o c a l (the 4L had no presence i n the woods af t e r World War I) elected a three-member workers' conference committee to adjudicate grievances with management; argument and persuasion were the only tools a v a i l a b l e for workers to press t h e i r case, for the 4L membership contracts which they were required to sign bound them to the organization's c o n s t i t u t i o n a l provisions p r o h i b i t i n g s t r i k e s . Local members within each d i s t r i c t met annually to e l e c t a d i s t r i c t Board of Directors and to designate one employer and one employee representative to serve on the general 4L Board. Board de- c i s i o n s regarding minimum wage scales, overtime, and working conditions were 3 binding on a l l members. Chapter II and III of t h i s thesis survey company labour p o l i c y and the 4L's i n d u s t r i a l p o l i t i c s before and during the National Recovery Administration (NRA) period. These chapters have been influenced by Robert Himmelberg, who em- phasizes the r o l e of "the secular movement for a n t i t r u s t r e v i s i o n which extended continuously from the Great War through the 'twenties and early ' t h i r t i e s " i n 4 creating the National I n d u s t r i a l Recovery Act (NIRA). Herbert Hoover, during his tenure as President of the United States (1929-33), was w i l l i n g to allow c e r t a i n " s i c k " and n a t u r a l resource i n d u s t r i e s , such as cotton t e x t i l e s , rubber, c o a l , o i l , and lumber, a degree of exemption from the a n t i - t r u s t laws' p r o h i b i t i o n of businessmen's c o l l e c t i v e s e t t i n g of operating p o l i c i e s . Hoover, however, because of h i s own antipathy to c a r t e l i z a t i o n and h i s s e n s i t i v i t y to public opinion, was unwilling to use h i s power to aid the trade associations to secure the f u l l measure of l e g a l power with which they desired to e s t a b l i s h 3 binding production and marketing regulations f o r a given industry. Himmelberg found that the p o l i t i c a l movement for a n t i - t r u s t r e l a x a t i o n was concentrated at "segments of industry which shared least i n the prosperity of the 1920's;" lumber was prominent among these.^ The 4L and several of i t s leading employer elements p a r t i c i p a t e d a c t i v e l y i n t h i s movement i n the Northwest. Vernon Jensen's Lumber and Labour i s a survey of unionism which emphasizes the economic problems of the industry, points out that the 4L was a minority i n s t i t u t i o n a f t e r 1918, and notes that i t s greatest strength during the early 1930's was among pine producers.^ It should be noted, however, that although the 4L f a i l e d to e n r o l l a majority of the industry's productive capacity during the Depression, i t did have several well-placed advocates, within, for example the Weyerhaeuser and Shevlin groups, the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, the Tacoma Lumbermen's Club, the West Coast Lumbermen's Association (WCLA), and the Western Pine Association (WPA). (See Table I, following chapter t e x t ) . Timber and Men, by Ralph W. Hidy and others, a h i s t o r y of the Weyerhaeuser in t e r e s t s to 1960, presents an overs i m p l i f i e d analysis counterposing government regulations and business freedom i n the 1930's, p i t t i n g the predominantly Republican Weyerhaeuser management against the Democratic New Deal p o l i c i e s , and minimizes or ignores, as does Jensen, several pre-NIRA Weyerhaeuser group managers' support f o r the 4L and for i n d u s t r i a l self-government under the auspices of regional and n a t i o n a l trade associations.^ An examination of rela t i o n s h i p s among the 4L and the trade associations and c e r t a i n operators, including the Weyerhaeuser group and the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, c l a r i f i e s the movement f o r i n d u s t r i a l s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n i n the Northwest and the subsequent regional h i s t o r y of company unionism under the National Recovery Administration. 4 The New Deal l e g i s l a t i o n , of course, created not only an experimental self-governing i n d u s t r i a l p o l i t y , but also l e g a l devices enabling rank and f i l e workers and professional organizers to e s t a b l i s h i n d u s t r i a l unions challenging the 4L's ethos and i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n t e g r i t y . David Brody has argued that "the Depression experience broke down the system of labor c o n t r o l i n corporate industry," and that "the open shop might well have remained a permanent feature of American i n d u s t r i a l i s m ... had not the Depression shattered the p r e v a i l i n g assumptions of welfare capitalism." Stuart Brandes claims i n h i s survey of American Welfare Capitalism, 1880-1940, that Brody's argument i s "implausible", and asserts that workers eventually would have rejected cor- porate paternalism i n favour of a welfare s t a t i s t s o l u t i o n to the s o c i a l g problems of i n d u s t r i a l society, even i n the absence of general economic c r i s i s . Unfortunately, Brandes f a i l s to o f f e r any evidence of the process of formation of a broad working-class movement for s t a t i s t solutions during the l a t e 1920's and early 1930's which can be distinguished from the influence of the period's general economic collapse. Ultimately, Brandes' argument rests on the dichotomy of i n d i v i d u a l c a p i t a l i s t and state power and the assumption that working people i n the United States would, somehow, i n e v i t a b l y have broken with company unions and other aspects of corporate paternalism and created a p o l i t i - c a l movement for s t a t i s t solutions that they perceived as being more democratic, equitable and e f f e c t i v e than corporate paternalism. One of the problems to be met when evaluating t h i s Brody-Brandes dispute i s that few h i s t o r i c a l studies have been written of i n d u s t r i a l workers i n t h e i r 9 workplaces and communities during the 1930's. Fresh approaches to t h i s study are r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e . Herbert Gutman, for example, whose work was strongly influenced by the English h i s t o r i a n E.P. Thompson and the anthropologists C l i f f o r d Geertz and Sidney Mintz, argues that culture must be understood as the system of cognition, goals and behaviour which i s used to "'confirm, r e i n f o r c e , 5 maintain, change, or deny'" a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l structure's "'arrangements of status, power, and i d e n t i t y . ' " Gutman's work examines the c u l t u r a l base of s o c i a l c o n f l i c t s ; he argues that recurring i n d u s t r i a l c o n f l i c t i n the United States, from 1815 to 1919, resulted from the fact that the American working cl a s s was c o n t i n u a l l y a l t e r e d by infusions, from within and without the nation, of peasants, farmers, s k i l l e d a r t i s a n s , and casual day labourers who brought into i n d u s t r i a l society ways of work and other habits and values not associated with i n d u s t r i a l n e c e s s i t i e s and the i n d u s t r i a l ethos. According to David Montgomery, many of the s t r i k e s i n the early 1900's were struggles for control of i n d u s t r i a l production and involved questions of s o c i a l and economic power which transcended immediate issues of wages, hours and working conditions. He suggests that the majority of workers' experience of the i n d u s t r i a l s e t t i n g , coupled with t h e i r values and e f f o r t s to c o n t r o l the work- ing environment (most e s p e c i a l l y , resistance to managerial c o n t r o l s ) , was s u f f i c i e n t to p r e c i p i t a t e sustained class-consciousness among the rank-and-file. Montgomery has challenged Gutman's use of a "traditional/modern" socio- c u l t u r a l dichotomy, reemphasized the process of c l a s s c o n f l i c t , and observed that entrants to i n d u s t r i a l society "exchanged portions of t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l c u l t u r e , not for the values and habits that welfare plans sought to inculcate, but for working-class mores."^ Norman Clark's Milltown, a study of Everett, Washington, from i t s found- ing to the massacre of IWW adherents there i n 1916, argues that the v i o l e n t q u a l i t y of labour r e l a t i o n s i n the lumber industry during the 1910-1916 period was the r e s u l t of unbridled c a p i t a l i s t development of the resource f r o n t i e r , and asserts that the militancy of the IWW period disappeared a f t e r World War I because of embourgeoisement r e s u l t i n g from technological changes and a gen- e r a l l y higher l e v e l of education among workers. Clark c o r r e c t l y noted the appearance of plant managers with engineering degrees, but then concluded, 6 evidently borrowing a page from the h i s t o r y of automated continuous pro- duction i n d u s t r i e s such as chemical manufacture, that lumber workers became "more technicians than labourers.""'""'" This c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n i s , to say the l e a s t , debatable, for lumber workers during the 1970's as well as the 1930's. Clark treats workers'behaviour as a fixed calculus of response to external economic and technological forces, while, l i k e Brandes, f a i l i n g to elucidate the c o n t i n u i t i e s and d i s c o n t i n u i t i e s i n workers' own terms for de f i n i n g and res o l v i n g t h e i r problems. David Brody has c a l l e d for shop f l o o r analyses of mass-production i n d u s t r i e s during the 1930's, to determine the degree of workers' on the job autonomy and whether or not c r i s e s i n workplace r e l a t i o n - 12 ships and culture influenced the creation of formal labour i n s t i t u t i o n s . The d i v e r s i t y of production work i n the lumber industry i s explored here i n Chapters IV and V, which focus on the work process i n planing m i l l s and o f f e r an in-depth examination of the shop f l o o r , i n s t i t u t i o n a l , and i d e o l o g i c a l aspects of resistance of workers to the i n s t a l l a t i o n of the patented Bedaux system of s c i e n t i f i c shop management at Willapa Harbor- Lumber M i l l s (Raymond, Washington), a Weyerhaeuser group member of the 4L. It should be noted at the outset that t h i s study presents l i t t l e new information on the actual capacity of the 4L and other aspects of company welfare p r a c t i c e s to secure operators' hegemony among sawmill workers during the 1920's and early 1930's. This thesis does, however, use previously unused or un d e r u t i l i s e d manuscript materials to locate the 4L i d e o l o g i c a l l y , pro- grammatically, and i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y during the years under consideration. The issue of hegemony i s one that may best be examined in r e l a t i o n to s p e c i f i c work forces and communities; thus, chapters II and I I I ind i c a t e s p e c i f i c companies and towns where h i s t o r i c a l research may bear f r u i t . These chapters also revise the standard discussions of the 4L. Chapters IV and V take the study l i t e r a l l y to the shop f l o o r at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s . Although t h i s 7 discussion sketches the ideology of the company's general manager, J.W. Lewis, a member of the 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , and of the counter culture of unionists during the 1933-35 period, i t does not present an in-depth analysis of the thinking of pro-4L " l o y a l i s t " workers at that m i l l or other m i l l s . Nevertheless, t h i s section does indicate the f e a s i b i l i t y and value of l o c a l studies of working class culture and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s i n the middle decades of the twentieth century. This study finds that the 4L was supported by several large Northwestern lumber companies during the Hoover administration and was drawn into trade association e f f o r t s to create a more stable c a p i t a l i s t society. The 4L's t i e s with operators and trade associations and i t s co r p o r a t i s t approach to labour i n t e g r a t i o n were themselves incorporated into the NRA Lumber Code-making and adjudicating processes. Within the region, however, attempts were made to use agencies established to adjudicate the Lumber Code regulations to strengthen the 4L against the AFL, while the AFL used ele c t i o n s supervised by the National and Regional Labor Boards to undermine the 4L. Fresh information i s presented on lumbermen's responses to the 1935 Northwest lumber organizational s t r i k e wave. Chapters IV and V constitute an essay i n work place h i s t o r y examining the c o n f l i c t between managers and workers regarding shop supervision and control procedures at a major Douglas f i r m i l l during the New Deal. The associa- t i o n of the 4L with deprivations i n the standard of l i v i n g and, i n at least one important case, with the delib e r a t e i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of the work process, made an enhanced rank and f i l e c o n t r o l of labour organizations and of the job conscious goals of insurgent proto-International Woodworkers of America uni o n i s t s . Table I: Operator Lumber Operators, Douglas F i r and Western Plna D i s t r i c t s , Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and C a l i f o r n i a , with 8-hour Rated Capacity of 275H or Cr e a t e r , I n d i c a t i n g Membership In the 11., December, 1931.* Capacity, Plne(P) Member fl/B hours or 4L F i r ( F ) Weyerhaeuser Croup WTC, Longvlew, Washington 725 WI'C, Everett, Washington 8S0 UI'C, Klumath F a l l s , Oregon 350 1925 W i l l a p a Harbour Lumber H i l l s , Raymond and S. Bend, Washington Snoquulinle F a l l s Lumber Company, Snoqualmle F a l l s , Washington White Kiver Lumber Company, Emuuclaw, Washington Pot l a t c h F o r e s t , Incorporated Pot l a t c h , Idaho 300 Lewiston, Idaho 400 460 349 278 700 4L 4L 41. 4L 4L 3712 Shevlln-Carpenter-Clarke Croup Shevlln-Hlxon Company, Bend,Oregon McCloud River Lumber Company, McCloud, C a l i f o r n i a 300 300 600 41. 4L St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, Tacoma and Dewing, Washington 850 4L Long-Bell Lumber Sales Company, Longvlew, Washington Weed. C a l i f o r n i a 776 224 1000 4L Bloedel-Donovan Lumber Company, Belllnghum and Larson, Washington 830 Charles It. McCormlck Lumber Compuny, Port Gamble and Port Ludlow, Washington St. Helen's, Oregon 60S 312 920 4L Charles Nelson Company, Port Angeles, Washington 325 r Operator Capacity, Plne(P) Member M/8 hours or 4L mm Brooka-Scanlon Lumber Company, Bend, Oregon Morlaon H i l l s Anacortea, Belllngbam, and Bl a i n e , Waslilngton 340 F Shaefer Brothers, Aberdeen, lloqulam, and Hontesano, Washington 472 F Donovan Lumber Company, Aberdeen, Washington 348 , P Canyon Lumber Company, Ev e r e t t , Washington 300 F Puget Sound Pulp and Paper Company, Clear Lake, Washington 300 F Cooa Bay Lumber Company, H a r s l t f l e l d , Oregon 606 F P a c i f i c Spruce Corporation, Toledo, Oregon , 329 F 4L Clark and Wilson Lumber Company, Llnnton and Pr e s c o t t , Oregon 485 F Oregon-American Lumber Company, Vernonla, Oregon 321 F Booth K e l l y Lumber Company, Wendling and S p r i n g f i e l d , Oregon 321 F 4L 290 P 4L Red River Lumber Company Heatwood, C a l i f o r n i a 325 * Data i s adapted from "Reports on F i r oud Pine D i s t r i c t s , " (October, 19311 i n SPT Papera/35/4L. $ - 1000 bfmj 1 bfm (board foot measure) - volume of wood 1" x 1" x 12" Chapter I I . The 4L and I n d u s t r i a l Self-Regulation, 1931-1932 The communist researcher Charlotte Todes once described the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen (4L), the Northwest lumber industry's multi-company federation of c l i e n t unions, as p r i m a r i l y an organization of small and middle- sized operators and even among these i t i s of l i t t l e consequence. The la r g e - s c a l e operators do not want outside agencies intervening i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s with the workers. Although these comments were p a r t i a l l y true when written i n 1930, the 4L shortly thereafter boasted the enrollment of several of the Northwest's most prominent lumbermen, including a strong contingent from the Weyerhaeuser and Shevlin groups. Of equal importance, the 4L was linked i d e o l o g i c a l l y and programmatically with a movement, centered on the lumber trade associa- t i o n s , to reconstruct i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l i s m i n the Northwest through a ser i e s of i n s t i t u t i o n a l and l e g a l innovations permitting more c e n t r a l i z e d economic controls. These programs were composed within but sought to transcend the l e g a l guidelines established by the Hoover administration (1929-1933), which encouraged l i m i t e d voluntary c o l l e c t i v e production policy-making by trade associations, e s p e c i a l l y within the natural resource i n d u s t r i e s . An exam- ina t i o n of the 4L's sponsors and i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s during these years c l a r i f i e s the early 1930's movement for c a p i t a l i s t reform i n the Northwest."*" Born i n 1889, William C. Ruegnitz (President of the 4L, 1924-1937) was one of many reforming engineers of h i s and the preceding generation (such as Frederick W. Taylor) who were dedicated to designing a more e f f i c i e n t , predictable, and orderly c a p i t a l i s t society. Norman Thomas would have c l a s s i f i e d him as a proponent of " c a p i t a l i s t syndicalism". A c i v i l engineer by t r a i n i n g and ten years experience,Ruegnitz served f i v e years as an Oregon sawmill employment manager and purchasing agent before j o i n i n g the 10 4L s t a f f as executive secretary i n 1921. His conception of the 4L s o l u t i o n to the "labour problem" drew e c l e c t i c a l l y from the s c i e n t i f i c and personnel management movements and r e f l e c t e d the r h e t o r i c of such welfare c a p i t a l i s t popularizers as John D. Rockefeller, J r . , Mackenzie King, and John L e i t c h , blending mechanical, accounting, and "human r e l a t i o n s " metaphors, set f i r m l y within the ambience of a h i e r a r c h i c a l , corporately organized indus- t r i a l society: No p r o f i t a b l e s o l u t i o n can be a r r i v e d at u n t i l owners and managers give f u l l consideration to the human machinery of the industry, as w e l l as to the cost sheets and l i a b i l i t i e s . . . . The lumber industry must have the understanding cooperation of i t s employees. The nation i s moving to s o c i a l i z e d production..,. directed from within by i t s natural leaders.... Common problems of employers and employees must be solved, not only by i n d i v i d u a l companies but by whole i n d u s t r i e s , organized by associations set up for the purpose.... The 4L ... i s gradually e f f e c t i n g a merger of c a p i t a l and labor i n the P a c i f i c Northwest lumber industry on a basis of i n d u s t r i a l cooperation. The 4L, according to Ruegnitz, pooled the resources of i t s members, f i n a n - cing a s i n g l e "labor department" for a l l operators: questions of wages, hours, annual income, pensions, workmen's compensation, promotion, and retention of employees, and group insurance, a l l require s p e c i a l i z e d departmental administration, j u s t as much as sales, finance, engineering, and other overhead requirements^. This conception of the 4L was s t r u c t u r a l l y s i m i l a r to the r o l e of the regional and n a t i o n a l lumber trade associations, which, c o l l e c t i v e l y financed by numerous companies, provided services i n the form of production and marketing s t a t i s t i c a l surveys, trade extension, f o r e s t r y and product research and development, and p o l i t i c a l lobbying. Increasingly through the l a t e 1920's and early 1930's, these functions included formulating p o l i c i e s for the industry as a whole. i i Competitive m u l t i p l i c a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s created r e a l problems for lumbermen. Progressive r h e t o r i c regarding the "timber t r u s t " notwith- standing, ownership and c o n t r o l i n the lumber industry was extremely d i f f u s e ; i n 1935, the four large s t producers of lumber and timber products accounted for only 4.7% of t o t a l output. Of 17,647 sawmills included i n reports made by NRA a u t h o r i t i e s , 81% had a capacity of le s s than 1000 board feet per hour, and 98% had a capacity of le s s than 10,000 feet . The largest m i l l s concentrated on the West Coast, where timber required s u b s t a n t i a l l y larger head saws and subsequent machinery than did that of other regions. Even the largest c l u s t e r of i n t e r e s t s (those investors and companies c o l l e c - t i v e l y r e f e r r e d to as the Weyerhaeuser group) c o n t r o l l e d only 10% of 3 regional m i l l capacity. The question of the rate of p r o f i t during the 1920's and 30's among m i l l s represented on the Boards of Directors of the 4L and the trade associations i s beyond the scope of the present study; s u f f i c e i t to note that complaints of c h r o n i c a l l y stagnant markets appeared r e g u l a r l y among lumbermen by the mid-1920's. I t i s estimated that even i n 1925, the decade's peak of lumber production n a t i o n a l l y , only 58% of U.S. sawmill capacity was a c t u a l l y u t i l i z e d . While t o t a l annual Douglas f i r lumber production i n - creased with some r e g u l a r i t y 1921-26, lumber was t y p i c a l l y sold at the 4 m i l l at a loss a f t e r 1923 (see Table I I ) . Sponsored by the West Coast Lumbermen's Association (WCLA), a concerted voluntary production curtailment and f i r m p r i c e movement was launched i n early May, 1928, during the course of which m i l l s layed o f f night s h i f t s or worked fewer than s i x days per week. Douglas f i r region lumber production was held to about 75% of capacity i n 1928-29; the WCLA credited the curtailment movement (coupled with a tempo- r a r i l y expanding lumber market) for causing a p r i c e r a l l y during the f i r s t s i x months of 1929. Demand for lumber, however, began an unseasonal decline 12 TABLE I I : Data on West Coast Lumber Production, Employment, Pr i c e s , P r o f i t s , Real Wages, and Per Cent of Capacity Used, and U.S. per capita consumption. 1920-40. Lumber Production (in 1000 li) U.S. Tot a l P a c i f i c Coast 2 Per cent of West Coast , Capacity used" Lumber Employment U.S. , Tota l Pac.- States Index of P a c i f i c Coast Lumber Employment (1929=100)6 1920 35,000 10,355 1921 29,000 7,215 364,247 75,161 65 1922 35,250 10,613 1923 41,000 12,825 495,932 122,452 106 1924 39,500 12,024 1925 41,000 13,368 467,090 115,904 101 1926 39,750 14,289 72.8 1927 37,250 13,482 69.9 413,946 110,976 96 1928 36,750 13,717 71.2 1929 38,745 14,149 72.0 419,084 115,224 100 1930 29,358 10,670 47.9 1931 19,997 7,494 33.6 196,647 60,295 52 1932 13,524 4,565 19.8 1933 17,151 6,147 30.2 189,369 60,014 52 1934 18,826 6,459 29.6 1935 22,944 7,953 35.4 255,230 77,724 67 1936 27,626 10,297 . 47.1 1937 29,004 10,840 46.8 323,928 102,632 89 1938 24,755 8,601 47.1 1939 28,755 10,693 68.1 1940 31,159 11,698 85.6 Sources: 1. H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s of the United States from C o l o n i a l Times to the Present (Stamford: F a i r f i e l d P u blications, 1965), Series L-37. 2. i b i d . , Series L-44. 3. West Coast Lumbermen's Association, West Coast Lumber Facts (Seattle: WCLA, 1941, p. 10. 4. Al f r e d J. Van T a s s e l l and David W. Bluestone, Mechanization in the Lumber Industry (Phildelphia: Works Project Administration, 1939) p. 118. Average Annual Douglas F i r Lumber Estimated Douglas F i r Per Capita Lumber Real Wages per Wholesale Price/J$ Sales P r o f i t or Consumption, U.S. Wage Earner' (Losses) at M i l l per M (in foot board measure)!^ 2.93 324 $1250 34.90 (2.15) 262 18.00 .77 320 1439 21.00 2.39 362 27.30 (.46) 328 1365 22.40 (.30) 343 21.10 (.38) 327 1387 22.40 (.74) 300 19.80 (.18) 295 1421 19.40 .21 274 20.60 (2.10) 190 1247 17.80 144 13.60 94 1108 11.50 116 14.60 114 1278 17.20 146 17.30 184 1502 19.50 194 22.04 173 19.10 203 5. I b i d . 6. I b i d . , p. 72. 7. West Coast Facts, p. 33. 8. H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s , Series L-91. 9. "Tabulations...Presented...With Testimony.:.of William B. G r e e l e y — B e f o r e the Interstate Commerce Commission, August 12, 1931," Tables 5, 8A, 12. (Copy i n SPT Papers/196/Production S t a t i s t i c s ) 10. West Coast Facts, p. 17. 13 during mid-summer, 1929, and several new, large m i l l s , such as those of Weyerhaeuser at Longview, opened i n the 1929-30 period. The indus- try ' s seasonal output pattern was not interrupted u n t i l l a t e summer, 1930; throughout the Depression, lumbermen cut prices i n an e f f o r t to capture diminishing markets. Although the trade associations continued t h e i r c a l l s for voluntary curtailment u n t i l the enactment of the NIRA, i t became .quite clear by 1931, that, as the Depression continued to broaden and deepen far beyond the " s i c k " i n d u s t r i e s of the 1920's, simple curtailment was u n l i k e l y to stimulate a dependable margin of p r o f i t f o r any p a r t i c u l a r operator or for the industry as a whole; even with complete cessation of production, the lumberman was s t i l l met with taxes on timber, plant, and inventories, as well as i n t e r e s t payments and depreciation. The lumber trade as s o c i a t i o n leaders responded by designing an integrated program for i n d u s t r i a l s e l f - r egulation which they proposed to f a c i l i t a t e and l e g a l l y enforce through r e v i s i o n of the a n t i - t r u s t laws."' Working with like-minded operators and trade association o f f i c i a l s , Ruegnitz and h i s s t a f f promoted an economic recovery p o l i c y emphasizing the industry-wide retention of r e l a t i v e l y high wage rates, which,it was argued, would maintain workers' purchasing power and standards of l i v i n g , while creating a production cost f l o o r beneath which lumber p r i c e s could not pro- f i t a b l y be reduced. The 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s ' c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i n j u n c t i o n to l e g i s l a t e binding minimum wage and overtime regulations for member m i l l s was an inter-company coordination p o t e n t i a l not a v a i l a b l e to more t y p i c a l s i n g l e - e n t e r p r i s e c l i e n t unions. Furthermore, as Ruegnitz pointed out, the 4L's i n c l u s i o n of workers gave i t a quasi-union status, s h i e l d i n g i t from the a n t i - t r u s t l e g i s l a t i o n which otherwise f r u s t r a t e d e f f o r t s to co- ordinate production of goods f o r i n t e r s t a t e d i s t r i b u t i o n . It was argued that t h i s use of the 4L would conserve "resources and revenues, to insure 14 o r d e r l y p r o d u c t i o n , balanced with consumption, s t a b i l i t y of p r i c e s , and a conduct of the business at f a i r wages and reasonable r e t u r n s f o r a l l c o n - c e r n e d . " By l e g i t i m i z i n g w o r k e r - i n c o r p o r a t i n g welfare c a p i t a l i s t i n s t i t u - t i o n s as s u c c e s s f u l v e h i c l e s r e s o l v i n g the tensions of i n d u s t r i a l America, the 4L promised to r e t a r d the development of p o l i t i c a l or trade union move- ments c i r c u m s c r i b i n g c a p i t a l i s t s ' power to manage i n d u s t r y without "outside i n t e r f e r e n c e . " Although Ruegnitz and s e v e r a l 4L operator members were aware of the 4L ' s p o t e n t i a l as a r e g u l a t o r y d e v i c e , t h i s promise remained u n f u l - f i l l e d for s e v e r a l reasons: the problem of m a i n t a i n i n g i n d i v i d u a l company c a p i t a l v a l u e s i n the face of f i e r c e i n t e r - and i n t r a - r e g i o n a l c o m p e t i t i o n ; f e d e r a l laws; and the d e s i r e of operators such as C. Stuart Poison (of the Poison and M e r r i l l - R i n g i n t e r e s t s ) f o r a " f l e x i b l e " 4L which would exert minimal c o n t r o l over t h e i r p r a c t i c e s . ^ S e v e r a l major non-4L o p e r a t o r s ' wage s c a l e s p a r a l l e l l e d the 4L minima, and 4L operators r e g u l a r l y exchanged c o n f i d e n t i a l s c a l e i n f o r m a t i o n with non-4L companies when wage r e d u c t i o n s were impending; i t appears that the 4L s c a l e was roughly contoured to a concensus of o p i n i o n regarding optimal s c a l e s among medium and l a r g e operators who favoured r e l a t i v e l y h i g h wages adjusted to market c o n d i t i o n s and p o l i t i c a l atmosphere.^ The p r a c t i c e of independent exchanges of wage i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h non-4L operators suggests that the 4L o r g a n i z a t i o n was used i n c r e a s i n g l y as an i d e o l o g i c a l and p u b l i c r e l a - t i o n s device as lumbermen chose r e p e a t e d l y to reduce wages d u r i n g the e a r l y 1930's; on the other hand, wage-cutting through the 4L undercut the o r g a n i - z a t i o n ' s welfare c a p i t a l i s t ambience. The 4L's ambivalent p o s i t i o n i n these proceedings, and Ruegnitz ' d e s i r e f o r p r e s t i g e as a p r o f e s s i o n a l i n s t i t u - t i o n a l b r o k e r , impel led h i s d e l i b e r a t e a l l i a n c e f o r g i n g with trade a s s o - c i a t i o n l e a d e r s , who, i n a p o s i t i o n s i m i l a r l y semi-independent of t h e i r operator c o n s t i t u e n t s , expressed v a l u e s of c o o r d i n a t i n g and p l a n n i n g a l l i e d with those enunciated by Ruegnitz." The e f f i c a c y of Ruegnitz' v i s i o n was l i m i t e d by the 4L's minority p o s i t i o n . At the onset of the Depression, the 4L encompassed l e s s than 20% of the Northwest lumber industry's m i l l capacity. The reduction of the 4L minimum wage from $3.40 to $3.00 per diem i n November, 1930, was followed by a concerted organizational expansion d r i v e . Appealing to lumbermen's pa- t e r n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and d i s t a s t e for unions, Ruegnitz warned that i f the 4L attempted to expand when things begin to pick up, men w i l l reason that organization i s being waged i n order to hold wages down.... The [immediate] establishment of the 4L at s t r a t e g i c points would insure ... continuous labor s t a b i l i z a t i o n , with the l e a s t possible expense, with good r e s u l t s for employers, employees, the communities, and the industry. Recruiting e f f o r t s were aided by several i n f l u e n t i a l industry f i g u r e s , i n - cluding E.G. Griggs (President of the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and of the Douglas F i r E x p l o i t a t i o n and Export marketing c a r t e l , and a Director of the United States Chamber of Commerce), A.C. Dixon (President of the Booth-Kelly Lumber Company and the National Lumber Manufacturers Association), M.B. Nelson (President, Long-Bell Lumber Company), Ralph Macartney (Manager, Weyerhaeuser at Klamath F a l l s ) , and J.P. Hennessey (Pre- sident, Shevlin-Carpenter-Clarke, and a former member of the 4L Board). (See Table I on page 9.) Although one Weyerhaeuser subsidiary, the newly created Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , entered the 4L unaccompanied i n May, 1931, most operators approached were concerned that 4L membership contracts would i n t e r f e r e with t h e i r own capacity to reduce wages to meet non-4L competitors' production costs; t h i s apprehension both retarded i n d i v i d u a l a f f i l i a t i o n s and encouraged interested operators to enter the 4L as a group. Before the passage of the NIRA, Weyerhaeuser group p o l i c y was to allow plant and branch managers d i s c r e t i o n i n the area of 4L a f f i l i a t i o n . J.P. 16 " P h i l " Weyerhaeuser, J r . , committed Potlatch Forests to the 4L because he believed that ^strengthening the 4L would be a very wise move on the part of the industry. A l Raught, manager of Weyerhaeuser operations at Longview, was les s sanguine: he claimed that 4L l o c a l s raised "unnecessary" grievances, and that the 4L contract's preference clause impeded foremen's e f f e c t i v e placement of workers. Raught concluded that the WCLA might best be respon- s i b l e f o r adjudicating wages and hours. F.R. Titcomb (general manager of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, 1931-1936) considered the 4L to be a "worth- while organization" with a "good man at i t s head," and, p a r t l y f o r labour and broader public r e l a t i o n s purposes, advised that Weyerhaeuser be slow to cut wages. He rebuffed Ruegnitz' overtures toward the Weyerhaeuser Longview plant, however, asserting that i t was "not sound for us to p r e d i c t what the minimum wage i s going to be," and chose not to be responsible f o r encumbering any plant with a 4L contract against i t s manager's wishes. Long-Bell's vice-president and western general manager, John D. Tennant, p u b l i c l y en- dorsed i n d u s t r i a l self-management and supported the 4L's system of industry- wide firm-wage minima while president of the WCLA (1927-1933), but declined to a f f i l i a t e h i s company's Longview m i l l with the 4L unless Weyerhaeuser did so also. With Raught and Titcomb deferring the Weyerhaeuser-Longview decision to one another, neither that plant nor Long-Bell at Longview joined the 4L u n t i l the enactment of the NIRA, when the Weyerhaeuser Executive Committee established that 4L a f f i l i a t i o n s were company p o l i c y . " ^ In November, 1931, however, a f t e r several months1 negotiations, Potlatch Forests' Clearwater u n i t , Long-Bell at Weed, Weyerhaeuser at Klamath F a l l s , the McCloud River Lumber Company, and seven le s s e r plants did sign 4L mem- bership contracts en m a s s e . A survey of northwestern m i l l s prepared for the October, 1931, 4L Board meeting, presents the only compilation of 4L operator members at any given point i n time that I have been able to locate. 17 As abstracted i n Table I I I , the survey indicated that, before and a f t e r the 1931 expansion, 4L plants tended to be of greater capacity than non-4L m i l l s , i n d i c a t i n g that Todes and Jensen understated the 4L's support among the larger operators. Table III: 4L and Non-4L Douglas f i r and Western Pine Region M i l l s with 50M or Greater Eight-Hour Capacity, October and December, 1931. Num- ber October 1931 Active Total Capacity Mean Capacity Num- ber Down Total Capacity Mean Capacity December 1931 F i r : Active and Down Combined Pine: Active, October 1931, only Num- ber Total Capacity . Mean Capacity 4L 16 3,208 200.5 7 1,092 156.0 25 4 587 181.5 Non-4L 81 14,073 173.7 64 8,083 126.3 143 21 869 154.9 Total 97 17,281 176.8 71 9,175 129.2 168 26 456 157.5 Pine 4L 14 1,965 140.3 N.A. N.A. N.A. 23 3 645 158.5 Non-4L 34 4,154 122.2 N.A. N.A. N.A. 25 2 474 99.0 Total 48 6,119 127.5 N.A. N.A. N.A. 48 6 ,119 127.5 Source: 4L Reports Covering F i r and Pine D i s t r i c t s i n Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, [October, 1931], and clipping from Lewiston Tribune, November 17, 1931, both i n SPT/35/4L. With strong organizational contributions by the Weyerhaeuser and Shevlin groups, s i x t y - f i v e pine operators had met July 22-23, 1931, at Klamath F a l l s , to merge the Western Pine Manufacturers Association and the C a l i f o r n i a White and Sugar Pine Manufacturers Association and e s t a b l i s h the Western Pine Association (WPA). Operators elected as general executives were President B.W. Lakin (President, McCloud R i v e r ) , and Vice Presidents P h i l Weyerhaeuser, J.P. McGoldrick, and C L . Isted (General Manager, Shevlin-Hixon). The WPA's Forestry and Economics Committee, c i t e d by trade j o u r n a l editors as the "crux" of the organization, exemplifying "the most advanced views of asso- c i a t i o n functions,"was authorized to conduct trade surveys, " l e g a l l y endeavour 18 to balance production and consumption," and to devise programs such as sus- tained y i e l d forest management which were considered b e n e f i c i a l to the i n - dustry as a whole. The committee was i n i t i a l l y composed of P h i l Weyerhaeuser (as Chairman), McGoldrick, J.D. Tennant, H.K. Brooks (President, Brooks Scanlon), a l l of whom were 4L members or f r i e n d l y to the organization, and the managers of two southwestern companies. McGoldrick, Isted, and the Weyerhaeuser group c o n t r o l l e d a l l four of the 4L Board pine employers' seats i n March 1932, i n d i c a t i n g the strength of the welfare c a p i t a l i s t i n d u s t r i a l self-government ethos among these lumbermen during these years (See Table 12 IV, on following page). During the autumn, the 4L's program was e x p l i c i t l y linked to that of the WCLA. Major Griggs' WCLA production c o n t r o l committee urged the industry to reduce inventories, enforce f i r m p r i c e s through c o l l e c t i v e s e l l i n g agencies, and adopt a maximum thirty-hour week i n order to spread employment among the m i l l s . WCLA manager William B. Greeley was e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y received by the October 26 Washington f i r d i s t r i c t s 4L convention, where he declared that the WCLA was ready and w i l l i n g to put i t s weight and influence with the 4L i n s t a b i l i z i n g and maintaining wages and production, to the end of balancing output and demand, at prices that [would] bring p r o f i t s for employers and decent wages for employees. Major Griggs stressed the need to expand the 4L to better c o n t r o l wages, hours, and output; on h i s motion, i t was voted to recommend that the 4L Board r e t a i n the current minimum wage structure and declare that a maximum 120 hour working month be the norm at 4L m i l l s as long as the Depression continued. Greeley and the 4L conducted a mass meeting of f i r lumbermen at Tacoma, November 12, for the purpose of devising a "production and employment program f o r the duration of the emergency." The WCLA manager c a l l e d f o r a uniform wage base and thirty-hour week. Aft e r thorough discussion, however, the operators Table IV. Employer Members, 4L Board of Directors, November 18, 1929, and March 2-3, 1932. Movember 18, 1929 March 2-3, 1932 A.C. Dixon (Booth-Kelly Lumber Company, Springfield, Ore.) M.E. Woodard (Silver F a l l s Timber Company, Silvercon, Ore.) H.R. I r i s h (Silver F a l l s Timber Company, Silverton, Ore.) W.B. McMillan (racired; Peninsula Lumber Co., Portland, Ore.) F.H. Ransom (Eastern and Western Lumber Co., Portland, Ore.) R.H. Burnside (Willapa Lumber Company, Raymond, Wash.) J.W. Lewis (Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , Raymond and South Bend, Wash.) C. Stuart Poison (Poison Lumber and Shingle Company, Hoquiam, Wash.) C. Stuart Poison (Poison Lumber and Shingle Company, Hoquiam, Wash.) J.C. Buchanan (Henry M i l l and Timber Company, Tacoma, Wash.) J.F. Buchanan (Henry M i l l and Timber Company, Tacoma, Wash.) D.M. Fisher (Snoqualraie F a l l s Lumber Company, Snoqualmie F a l l s , Wash.) D.M. Fisher (Snoqualmie F a l l s Lumber Company, Snoqualmie F a l l s , Wash.) J.C. McGregor (Morrison M i l l s Company, Anacortes, Wash.) J.P. McGoldrick (McGoldrick Lumber Company, Spokane, Wash.) J.P. McGoldrick (McGoldrick Lumber Company, Spokane, Wash.) Sig Hofslund (Blackwell Lumber Company, Coeur d'Alene, Id.) 10 W R.E. Irwin (Potlatch Forests, Lewiston, Id.) 11 W R.R. Macartney (Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, Klamath F a l l s , Ore.) C L . Isced (Shevlin Hixon Company, Bend, Ore.) S 12 S C.L.Isted(Shevlin-Hixon Company, Bend, Ore.) (W) Weyerhaeuser or (S) Shevlin Group Source:Minutes, 4L Board of Directors, November 18, 1929, in SPT/26/4L, and Minutes, 4L Board of Directors, March 2-3, 1932, i n SPT/41/4L. 4L D i s t r i c t s 1. Southern Oregon, West of Cascades 2. Northern Oregon, West of Cascades 3. Columbia River, Oregon and Washington 4. Willapa Harbor, Washington 5. Olympia-Centralia-Grays Harbor, Washington 6. Tacoma, Washington, and V i c i n i t y 7. Seattle,Washington, and V i c i n i t y 8. Everett and Northern Washington, West of Cascades 9. Northeastern Washington (including Spokane), Northern Idaho 10. Southeastern Washington, Central Idaho 11. Northeastern Oregon 12. Southeastern Oregon, and Northern C a l i f o r n i a 20 1' present refused to c o l l e c t i v e l y endorse the 4L's $3.00 or any other minimum. Considerable i n t e r e s t was aroused among operators during the autumn by the successful Communist-led two-month s t r i k e i n defence of a 40<: per hour base wage at Fraser M i l l s near New Westminster, B r i t i s h Columbia, and by si m i l a r events on the southern side of the 49th p a r a l l e l . On November 3, the crew of the traditionally low-wage Schaf er Brothers Lumber Company M i l l #4 at Aberdeen stuck when the m i l l ' s wage base was reduced to less than $1.50 for a six-hour s h i f t . In quick succession, massed picket l i n e s including members of the National Lumber Workers Union (NLWU, a f f i l i a t e d with the Com- munists' Trade Union Unity League) and the l o c a l Unemployed C i t i z e n ' s League struck the wage-slashing Wilson Brothers' Aberdeen Plant ($1.75 base) and Schafer's M i l l #1 at Montesano; according to Ruegnitz, " p r a c t i c a l l y a l l the s t r i k e r s and picketers [were] American c i t i z e n s . " Following intervention by the 4L (and further NLWU massed picketing to prevent a n t i - s t r i k e r d i s - crimination), Schafer's #4 reopened with a $3.00 minimum; the following March, 85% of the crew were s t i l l reported to be NLWU members. The Montesano plant r a i s e d wages to a $2.50 base, and, repudiating the company union which had o r i g i n a l l y sanctioned the wage cut, f o r t y - f i v e workers signed a 4L l o c a l charter. Ruegnitz claimed the settlement,which occurred i n one of the 4L's weakest d i s t r i c t s , was "a long step i n the d i r e c t i o n of s t a b i l i z a t i o n for 14 the industry." Writing to Raught and other operators, Ruegnitz pointedly a t t r i b u t e d the Grays Harbor s t r i k e s to operators' u n r e s t r i c t e d power to produce too much at a given time. Owners have a r i g h t to do what they please with t h e i r property, but the exercise of that r i g h t without regard to others brought trouble and losses. He urged the industry to help the 4L e s t a b l i s h a "firm wage p o s i t i o n , which with the backing and helping of industry employees, could be made to bring 21 low wage employers to approved l e v e l s . " Exactly how t h i s was to be done, i f not through s t r i k e s , was l e f t unstated. Ruegnitz contrasted the s t r i k e s with a 4L Wood Promotion Committee mass r a l l y at Tacoma, where 500 lumber- workers and others had l i s t e n e d to Ruegnitz, Greeley, Griggs and others explain the industry's problems. I t i s evident that Ruegnitz understood the 4L to be a t o o l f o r i n d u s t r i a l s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n which would f a c i l i t a t e the retention of l i v i n g wages while educating workers to a n a l y t i c a l perspectives of the reforming c a p i t a l i s t s . I m p l i c i t was the warning that i f the 4L f a i l e d , lumber would be s p l i n t e r e d by a m i l i t a n t a n t i - c a p i t a l i s t movement. While several other operators developed c l o s e r r e l a t i o n s with the 4L during 1931, Griggs became d i s i l l u s i o n e d with the organization. Beset with f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s (the St. Paul's estimated losses for 1931 were over $300,000), evidently unimpressed with the 4L's success among pine operators, discouraged by the 4L's and the WCLA's i n a b i l i t y to control wages at Douglas f i r m i l l s (by October, the mean non-4L minimum m i l l wage was $2.42) and by November 4L Board meeting's f a i l u r e to either sanction a wage cut or adopt h i s thirty-hour work week scheme, Griggs tendered a sixty-day notice of r e - signation from the 4L on November 18. According to Stewart Holbrook, then editor of the 4L Lumber News,the resignation was received by the 4L s t a f f as a "shock". Because the "implications and consequences" of the resignation would be "so f a r reaching" — the St. Paul bore the reputation of being the peacetime 4L's staunchest proponent — Ruegnitz refused to inform the Board of Griggs' decision without f i r s t personally discussing the matter with him. On December 29, Griggs agreed to withdraw the resignation but reduced the St. Paul's wages 12%% to meet the 4L minima. He declared that the St. Paul's continued 4L a f f i l i a t i o n would be contingent upon the Board's reducing the wage minima within three months, which, he said, would allow 4L operators to minimize t h e i r losses under the associations' curtailment program, with which 22 he s t i l l "absolutely agreed." Save for J.D. Tennant and Roy Sharp (Pre- sident, Mountain Lumber Company, Tacoma), the majority of 4L and non-4L op- erators present at a meeting arranged held January 22, 1932, at Tacoma by 16 the 4L Executive Committee, echoed Griggs' sentiments. At the Spring, 1932, 4L Board meeting, which was duly advanced from mid- May to March 2, debate on the wage question raged far into the evening. Em- ployment i n the lumber industry was l e s s than 30% of normal; wages at several m i l l s had been slashed to a 20£ per hour base. Ruegnitz blamed the wage-price decline on overproduction, h o s t i l e t a r i f f s , and the " b l i n d competition and lack of u n i t y " of operators outside the 4L. The Tacoma Joint Locals threat- ened that operator pressure to reduce wages would "impel the formation of an employee organization, with provisions to c a l l s t r i k e s to protest wage re- ductions." Despite i n i t i a l l y vigourous worker opposition, a motion reesta- b l i s h i n g the minimum at $2.60 was passed 17 to 3, i n d i c a t i n g that at l e a s t f i v e workers were persuaded to vote with the wage c u t t e r s ^ The WCLA and WPA curtailment program probably required l i t t l e promotion by the spring of 1932, for much of the industry had gone into receivership or was unable to make any p r o f i t on sales by t h i s point. Great d i s p a r i t i e s i n operating hours were evident. In A p r i l , although the average m i l l work week was 32.5 hours, the range was from le s s than twenty to over s i x t y . On May 28, normally several weeks into the annual peak production period, the American Lumberman noted that Douglas f i r p r i c e s had "reached such a low l e v e l that a l l m i l l s that [could] possibly a f f o r d to do so" were shutting down. By June, West Coast production f e l l to 19% of capacity. At Tacoma, of over 20 lumber plants, only the St. Paul and three smaller companies remained open. The Tacoma Unemployed C i t i z e n ' s League, founded March 23, 1932, claimed 7000 fa m i l i e s as members by August (the c i t y ' s 1929 population had been 106,817). E f f o r t s to economize affected o f f i c e and supervisory personnel as w e l l as 23 production workers. The Weyerhaeuser Everett m i l l s ran one-half s h i f t s f i v e days per week with a skeleton crew of s k i l l e d men; several foremen were re - moved from the s a l a r i e d l i s t and paid on a per diem basis, while o f f i c e workers doubled up on jobs and devoted t h e i r evenings as well as days to company bookkeeping. Early i n July, following defaults on bond i n t e r e s t and taxes, Long-Bell cut i t s western base wage to $2.00. Long-Bell at Weed, Poison Lumber and Shingle (Aberdeen), Schaefer Brothers, Brooks-Scanlon, and Jones Lumber and Inman-Poulsen (the l a t t e r two at Portland) — a l l among the larger industry operations — resigned from the 4L to cut wages below the . . 18 minimum.. The WCLA admitted that i t was experiencing serious d i f f i c u l t i e s . C i t i n g operators' " i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c p o l i c i e s , " " v i o l a t i o n s of e t h i c s , " and i n a b i l i t y to pay dues, the Trustees voted i n A p r i l to dissolve the organization unless the membership expanded to 60% of industry capacity. By November, however, the membership did increase to 84.5% of the industry — the highest propor- t i o n yet attained i n the WCLA's existence. The association's functions, however, were l i m i t e d to grade supervision and c o l l a t i o n of s t a t i s t i c s ; 19 e a r l i e r work to extend markets was abandoned. Viewing the c r i s i s i n the f i r d i s t r i c t s , Griggs strenuously demanded another 4L wage cut. As he presented the case to Ruegnitz i n mid-summer, "There i s not a d o l l a r i n the business.... I t r u s t the organization w i l l prove i t s merit..,, otherwise, resignations w i l l be f i l e d ; " he demanded that a s p e c i a l session of the 4L Board be c a l l e d to l e g i s l a t e a scale reduction by August 1. Ruegnitz, who was meeting r e g u l a r l y with WPA Manager David T. Mason to discuss employment conditions, r e p l i e d that i n view of labour's increasing resentment of operator p o l i c y , lumbermen would f i n d i t "far more p r o f i t a b l e . . . t o increase p r i c e s and s t a b i l i z e wages on a $2.50 or better basis... than [to] t r y to follow low wage operations;" he protested that, 24 i n any event, only a 4L Board majority was c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y empowered to schedule extraordinary Board Meetings. Griggs retorted that a number of strong 4L supporters had already gone out of business; he thought ludicrous Ruegnitz' suggestion that workers, under mass unemployment conditions, would r e t a l i a t e against wage cuts by organizing independent r a d i c a l unions: "What the men want i s work." Despite h i s misgivings, Ruegnitz p o l l e d the 4L Board members, recommending an early August meeting. The majority sentiment urged delaying u n t i l September; the Board convened, i n f a c t , at the usual November date. It appears that Griggs' good w i l l had, by t h i s point, been superseded by that of the pine operators as the c e n t r a l factor f or the 4L's i n s t i t u - t i o n a l w e l l - b e i n g . ^ The deepening demoralization of lumber consumption, p r i c e s , and wages spurred the associations to r e f i n e t h e i r programs for c o l l e c t i v e s e l f - regulation. At the semi-annual WPA meeting, August 11, 1932, the Forestry and Economics Committee presented the most sophisticated such pre-NIRA pro- gram devised i n the lumber industry. On hand for the convention were Greeley, Wilson Compton (Secretary-Manager, National Lumber Manufacturers' A s s o c i a t i o n ) , Ruegnitz, and members of the United States Forest Service and the Timber Con- servation Board. The heart of the proposal (whose prime composer was WPA Manager David Mason) was a c a l l for l e g a l strengthening of the trade asso- c i a t i o n s and for cooperation of the lumber industry with the r a i l r o a d s , banking, farmers, mining, and other interdependent economic sectors. Compton, a leading f i g u r e i n the a n t i - t r u s t law r e v i s i o n movement, discussed the r e - levance of the Appalachian Coals marketing c a r t e l Supreme Court test case for the lumber industry. Ruegnitz, under Griggs' pressure to c a l l another s p e c i a l 4L Board meeting to allow further wage cu t t i n g , pointed out that lumber's wages and proportion of normal employment were already among the lowest i n the United States. David Mason expressed h i s antipathy to Fascism, 25 Communism, and the dole, and argued that secure wages were e s s e n t i a l to make the "American plan of doing things ... work better than i t has been." He went on to c a l l f o r long range planning emphasizing timber control and tax reform; sustained y i e l d as a p a r t i a l s o l u t i o n was, according to Mason, i n the public i n t e r e s t , had public approval, and might be used to extract a n t i - t r u s t law concessions. The Forestry and Economics Committee program, with which Ruegnitz stated the 4L was i n " f u l l accord", urged timber and production c o n t r o l , trade extension, spreading the e x i s t i n g work, a uniform wage base, long term planning of p u b l i c works (a major lumber consumer), laws requiring sustained y i e l d management of p u b l i c and p r i v a t e forests (which, among other things, would reduce the amount of timber a v a i l a b l e to non-timber-owning m i l l s ) , l e g a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n favour of the r a i l r o a d s , and lower f r e i g h t rates on the same, a s h i f t of taxation from property i n standing timber to a y i e l d tax on logs and lumber ( e s s e n t i a l l y , a sales tax), and l e g i s l a t i v e r e v i s i o n to f a c i l i t a t e c e n t r a l i z e d planning i n the lumber industry. Concluding, the program c a l l e d for l e g i s l a t i o n authorizing (under appropriate f e d e r a l supervision) i n d u s t r i a l self-government, whereby an appropriate part of any given industry ... may adopt rules of p r a c t i c e binding upon the e n t i r e industry.21 The bulk of t h i s program, with the addition of p r i c e controls, was i n c o r - porated i n the NRA Lumber Code and other codes and p u b l i c works l e g i s l a t i o n s i n 1933. On October 1, Griggs f i r e d o f f another 4L resignation. Ruegnitz informed him that the wage issue was being reconsidered throughout 4L t e r r i t o r y . At Klamath F a l l s , where a round of wage reductions had begun September 1, 4L employee members had resolved that the Board should consider suspending the wage scale for one year, "leaving i t e n t i r e l y to i n d i v i d u a l operators and 4L l o c a l s to determine the most equitable wage scales p o s s i b l e . " Though Griggs 26 declared the action ought to have occurred at the previous Board meeting, he assured Ruegnitz that the Klamath F a l l s proposal would "meet the objection 22 we have ra i s e d to the organization. There i s no other way." Ruegnitz and the 4L s t a f f urged workers to stand i n a "united front against further reductions" and "help the high wage operators maintain good conditions." Once again, the l i n e was taken that an upward adjustment of wages i n the lumber i n - dustry would tend to s t a b i l i z e p r i c e s , thereby bene- f i t t i n g lumber manufacturers, employees, and the community through increased purchasing power of employees, and the State by securing proper return for forest resources. Reporting to the Washington F i r D i s t r i c t s 4L Convention, October 27, Ruegnitz offered the p i t h i l y ambiguous comment that i n d u s t r i e s "that [paid] l e s s than l i v i n g wages" were " e x p l o i t i n g employees at the expense of someone." The convention endorsed the p r i n c i p l e of spreading work among mills,, and opposed reducing the wage scale,while admitting the 4L's i n a b i l i t y to control industry wages. In November, the 4L Board, under threat of operator withdrawals, voted to r e t a i n the' $2.60 d a i l y minimum wage, but suspended the e f f i c a c y of the 4L scale for s i x months, and c a l l e d upon "each l o c a l to set going wages that w i l l allow 4L operations to run i n competition with competing concerns." It was resolved to encourage the Federal government to e s t a b l i s h a n a t i o n a l eight hour day, thus d i s c i p l i n i n g Southern competition, Ruegnitz' ambivalent p o s i t i o n was expressed i n h i s a c t i v i t y . Although he f e a r l e s s l y spoke i n favour of c o l l e c t i v e s t a b i l i z a t i o n of wages at trade association conventions, his behaviour at the Board meeting was c a u s t i c a l l y painted by the general manager of. Potlatch Forests as that of an "animated L i t e r a r y Digest, neutral at a l l times." On New Year's eve, the St, Paul cut to a $2,50 d a i l y wage base; Weyerhaeuser group operations reduced to $2.25, The St, Paul's 4L membership was not cancelled, although Griggs denounced the 4L for i t s "delays" and "decisions arrived at too l a t e to be of r e a l b e n e f i t . " The 27 Weyerhaeuser Executive Committee concluded with disgust that "some new 23 organization might serve the purpose b e t t e r " than the 4 L . The 4L suffered a complex career during the 1931-1932 period, as i t attempted to act as a r e g i o n a l l y based organization i n t e g r a t i n g workers and managers i n an industry which included thousands of producing units during a period of market collapse. I d e o l o g i c a l l y and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y , i t formed .coalitions with lumber trade associations and with some of t h e i r leading f i - gures, and p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the development of programs for i n d u s t r i a l s e l f - regulation. By the early 1930's, the 4L was a f a m i l i a r v e h i c l e a v a i l a b l e to operators attracted to both company unions and multi-company wage s e t t i n g , and i t i s c l e a r that a stronger portion of the industry than suggested by e a r l i e r writers did make use of the 4 L . Ruegnitz' v i s i o n of c o l l e c t i v e wages and hours regulation within a c o r p o r a t i s t ambience, guaranteeing workers' l i v i n g standards i n exchange for t h e i r " l o y a l t y , " was b u i l t into the movement for i n d u s t r i a l self-government. The ethos promulgated by Ruegnitz cannot be ascribed to a l l 4L operator members. More complex than Todes' observation that large operators did not want "outside agencies intervening i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s with the workers," lumbermen's use of the 4L appears to have varied with t h e i r own approaches to labour issues of costs and power within the evolving conditions of lumber production and marketing. (This v a r i e t y would j u s t i f y i n v e s t i g a t i o n of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s within p a r t i c u l a r companies, were no other motivation available.) U n t i l November, 1932, the 4L did serve as a short-term brake on the cutting of wages at member m i l l s . Although some workers attempted to work with the 4L to maintain or r a i s e wage l e v e l s , the organization's c r e d i b i l i t y as an instrument f a c i l i t a t i n g t h e i r material se- c u r i t y remained vulnerable to operators' curtailment programs and sometimes ruthless attempts to remain solvent. It might be argued that the f a i l u r e of a greater number of the largest operators — for instance, the Weyerhaeuser 28 group as a whole — to support the 4L more h e a r t i l y diminished i t s e f f e c t i v e - ness. Since the Weyerhaeuser managers, including those i n the 4L, received t h e i r wages p o l i c y from upper management, and the group's wage cuts were i n - t e n t i o n a l l y lagged behind those of the 4L, Weyerhaeuser commitment to the or- ganization would have been balanced by the resentment of other operators who;, sought more immediate wage reductions, and t h i s might have resulted i n even more intense waves of operator withdrawals than that of the spring, 1932. The 4L, of course, was not able to con t r o l the great majority of operators, both i n the Northwest and i n the remainder of the United States, who were not mem- bers. For some operators, such as the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and Potlatch Forests, the d r i v i n g down of wages coexisted with demands f o r u n i - form controls on wages and production, which, i t was argued, required l e g a l l y enforceable regulation by the trade associations. This complex legacy haunted the 4L's experience during the NRA period. 29 Chapter I I I : The 4L Under the NRA, 1933-35 While the l a n d s l i d e e l e c t i o n of F r a n k l i n Roosevelt as President of the United States i n November, 1932, was undoubtedly a mandate for a p o s i t i v e federal economic recovery p o l i c y , there were probably few, i f any, voters who anticipated the convoluted and contradictory q u a l i t i e s of the New Deal's es- tablishment and implementation."'" The energies released during the New Deal months i n i t i a l l y bouyed the 4L but, by 1935, overtook and broke i t i n the Douglas f i r region. The 4L's program was absorbed by the NRA Lumber Code Authority, and the organization secured a rapid expansion among anti-union lumbermen during mid-1933; as one employer member of the 4L Board prematurely crowed, U.S. Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins gave the 4L "a v i r t u a l d i c t a - torship of labor standards.... The 4L holds the whip hand as i t never has before." The use of the 4L as a corporate p a t e r n a l i s t device d e f i n i n g and shaping workers' r o l e i n the i n d u s t r i a l system was of a complex character. It served as an i n s t i t u t i o n a l l i n k between c e n t r a l i z e d plant management and the s o c i a l i z e d adjudication of wage and production issues at the industry and f e d e r a l agency l e v e l s (which were sometimes the same thing under the NRA). The 4L's wage minima were given force of law d i s c i p l i n i n g northwestern oper- ators' economic a c t i v i t y , and were reinforced by pressure from independent labour organizations. Though the lumber unions' e f f o r t s to become e f f e c t i v e bargaining agents were unsuccessful under the NRA, there i s evidence of r i c h l o c a l a c t i v i t y as unionists worked not only outside and against but also within the 4L, suggesting that at some points the 4L took the aspect of a multi-factioned workers' c o a l i t i o n . The organizing experience and f r u s t r a - tions of l o c a l union organizers and rank and f i l e workers under the New Deal gave impetus to an insurgent movement, challenging lumber operators and con- servative, compromising union o f f i c i a l s a l i k e , when the bulk of the Douglas f i r lumber industry was closed down by a general lumber s t r i k e during the 30 summer of 1935. The November, 1932, suspension of the AL .wage contracts did nothing to r e - solve the lumber industry's economic problems. The fresh round of wage cutting which ensued, however, did revive i n t e r e s t i n the 4L system. In a "rather warm 4L meeting" at Klamath F a l l s , workers unsuccessfully argued against the r e - duction of Weyerhaeuser's base to $2.00; s i m i l a r cuts were made at Shevlin and the majority of other active m i l l s , most of which were operating part time. P h i l Weyerhaeuser (who, i n January, 1933, had been elected Weyerhaeuser Timber Company executive vice-president, and president of Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s and other s u b s i d i a r i e s ) , was said to be "very keen to get the f i r manufacturers together and increase the [4L's] membership." He immediately feared that h i s company had gone too f a r i n encouraging the rapid downward trend i n wages.... I am very anxious [he wrote] ... that we lend ourselves to a movement vigourously to s t a b i l i z e wages at some point, l i t e r a l l y , to my mind, the higher the better. Under B.W. Lakin's leadership, the larger Klamath m i l l s increased t h e i r mini- mum wage to $2.40 per day. At the March 16-17, 1933 WPA annual convention, f a m i l i a r themes were r e i t e r a t e d . P h i l Weyerhaeuser blamed the Depression on a general " f a i l u r e of leadership" and "lack of organization," and Tennant and Ruegnitz suggested adopting the six-hour day and increasing wages. Upon the motion of Shevlin-Carpenter-Clarke president J.P. Hennessey, "the p r i n c i p l e of the 4L was endorsed," and non-members were urged to a f f i l i a t e . Several 4L members were elected to key o f f i c e s . Macartney became president; J.P. McGoldrick, northwestern vice-president; Isted, treasurer. The three d i r e c t o r s - a t - l a r g e included Tennant and P h i l Weyerhaeuser. A high l e v e l l a - bour p o l i c y committee was created, composed of Mason, Macartney, Lakin and McGoldrick. Thus, on the eve of the New Deal, the 4L's advocates remained 3 s o l i d l y entrenched i n the WPA. (See Table V, p. 31 .) The p o s s i b i l i t y of disbanding the 4L i f i t f a i l e d to a t t r a c t a large 31 Table V Employer Members, 4L Board of Directors, June 23, 193 3, and A p r i l 12-13, 1934. June 23-24, 1933 R.H. Burnside ( P a c i f i c States Lumber Company, Astoria, Ore.) M.C. Woodard (Silver F a l l s Timber Company, Si l v e r t o n , Ore.) F.H. Ranson (Eastern and Western Lumber Company, Portland, Ore.) J.W. Lewis (Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , Raymond, Wash.) C. Stuart Poison (Poison Lumber and Shingle Company, Hoquiam,,Wash.) John F. Buchanan (Henry M i l l and Timber Company, Tacoma, Wash.) David M. Fisher (Snoqualmie F a l l s Lumber Company, Snoqualmie F a l l s , Wash.) D i s t r i c t A p r i l 12-13, 1934 1 Dean Johnson ( P a c i f i c Spruce Corporation, Toledo, Ore.) 2 H.R. I r i s h ( S i l v e r F a l l s Timber Company, Silverton, Ore.) 3 M.H. Jones (Jones Lumber Company, Portland, Ore.) W 4 W J.W. Lewis (Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , Raymond, Wash.) (combined) 5 W J.W. Lewis (Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , Raymond, Wash.) 6 J.F. Buchanan (Henry M i l l and Timber, Tacoma, Wash.) W 7 W D.M. Fisher (Snoqualmie F a l l s Lumber Company, Snoqualmie F a l l s , Wash.) J.P. McGoldrick (McGoldrick Lumber 9 Company, Spokane, Wash.) C L . B i l l i n g s (Potlatch Forests, W 10 W Lewiston, Id.) R.R. Macartney (Weyerhaeuser Timber W 11 W Company, Klamath F a l l s , Ore.) C L . Isted (Shevlin-Hixon Company, S 12 S Bend, Ore.) Kenneth Morrison (Morrison M i l l s , Anacortes, Wash.) J.P. McGoldrick Lumber Company, Spokane, Wash.) C L . B i l l i n g s (Potlatch Forests,. Lewiston, Id.) R.R. Macartney (Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, Klamath F a l l s , Ore.) C L . Isted (Shevlin-Hixon Lumber Company, Bend, Ore.) *The D i s t r i c t 8 seat was held at the January, 1934, 4L Board meeting by L.M. Reichmann (Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, Everett, Wash.), giving the Weyerhaeuser group f i v e employer seats at that session. Source: Minutes, 4L Board of Directors Meeting, June 13 and 14, 1933, i n SPT/46/4L. Minutes, 4L Board of Directors Meeting, A p r i l 12-13, 1934, i n CHI/2/4L. number of new members had been raised early in the year. Canvassing the f i r operators' estimation of the 4L, Mason and Ruegnitz found strong support for the restoration of firm wage minima, implemented by a 4L-type organization's contracts and cloak of lawfulness. Objections were raised regarding 4L dues and structure. Charles Ingram (assistant general manager, Weyerhaeuser Tim- ber Company), J.W. Lewis and CL. Billings, for example, desired an industry wage-setting board, but objected to plant grievance committees, complained that the 4L staff strengthened workers' hand against management, and charged that Ruegnitz gave "more excuses than facts" and needed "a boss to t e l l him 32 what to do." Ingram proposed that the 4L s t a f f be reduced i n number and c l o s e l y supervised by the Board, and that a l l references to overtime, f i e l d o f f i c e r s , and l o c a l conference committees be deleted from the 4L c o n s t i t u t i o n : i n short, "leaving e n t i r e l y to the i n d i v i d u a l s how they prefer to carry on t h e i r own organization, with the exception of designating how the employees would be represented on the wage boards." In A p r i l , the Weyerhaeuser mana- gers' recommendations c i r c u l a t e d i n a revised dr a f t c o n s t i t u t i o n , which one employee Board member (who joined the AFL i n July) branded as a strong b i d 4 to secure the e n t i r e Weyerhaeuser group. The 4L's reorganization was overtaken by events i n Washington, D.C. Senator Hugo Black's b i l l , providing for a n a t i o n a l maximum thirty-hour work week, was passed by the Senate A p r i l 6. On A p r i l 12, Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins' substitute proposal was presented, enabling "a n a t i o n a l board to grant l i m i t e d exemptions to the thirty-hour l i m i t and for industry boards to f i x minimum wages." Beginning A p r i l 13, Ruegnitz r e g u l a r l y took pains to assure Perkins that the 4L was organized " f o r the very purpose contemplated i n the proposed establishment of industry wage boards." On A p r i l 25, Ruegnitz and Mason flew to Washington to lobby against the Black B i l l and to " i n s i s t on the i n j e c t i o n of 4L conference ideas" into the Perkins measure. At Washington, Mason and Wilson Compton worked together, as they had since at l e a s t 1931, to devise a " p o l i c y and plan for promoting 'indus- t r i a l self-government.'" They were joined by Greeley, who had been instruc t e d by the WCLA to lobby against uniform government regulation of wages, hours, and production, and to work for laws "which would give industry greater power and freedom to deal with a l l of these questions by cooperative action among i t s own members." Compton and Greeley accepted Mason's and Ruegnitz' sug- gested "section 7-a, an a l t e r n a t i v e to the o r i g i n a l Perkins b i l l ; " the pro- posal was e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y received by a Mr. Battle of the U.S. Department 33 of Labor, who on May 3, endorsed and forwarded i t to the House of Represen- t a t i v e s Labor Committee. With over 300 plans submitted to the Department of Labor by May 9, i t i s not c l e a r what the Mason-Ruegnitz proposal's contribu- t i o n was to the f i n a l form of the NIRA's A r t i c l e 7, which, as summarized by Bernard Bellush, accorded employees the r i g h t to organize and bargain c o l l e c t i v e l y through representatives of t h e i r own choosing, and the freedom to j o i n a labor organization, and required employer compliance with provisions f o r maximum hours of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other working conditions approved by the President. It i s c l e a r , however, that Ruegnitz aggressively sought to augment h i s organi- zation's p o s i t i o n v i s - a - v i s the trade associations and the new order.~* The NIRA was presented to Congress on May 17; the same day, Greeley,Mason, and Ruegnitz met Perkins, who, as the 4L man informed his constituents, "spoke with approval regarding 4L methods and achievements." According to Mason's less sanguine ve r s i o n of the encounter, Perkins t o l d them that "the 4L savors too much of the 'company union' and that labor needs protection, but [she was] w i l l i n g to accept the 4L 'temporarily' on i t s record." This divergence of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the NIRA's intent marked the following years of the 4L's l i f e . 6 The j u b i l a n t Ruegnitz declared that the NIRA was "the kind of plan the 4L and trade associations have preached and t r i e d to p r a c t i c e , " and, fearing recognition of nascent AFL unions by federal Labor Boards which " r e a l l y don't know the 4L and i t s methods",he asked the Weyerhaeuser, Long-Bell, and St. Paul i n t e r e s t s to promote new 4L a f f i l i a t i o n s before the NIRA became law. They required l i t t l e urging. The WCLA trustees, on Tennant's motion and Ingram's second,had resolved, on May 16, to support the 4L "or a s i m i l a r or- ganization" to f u l f i l l the NIRA's c o l l e c t i v e bargaining and minimum wage provisions. On May 22, the Weyerhaeuser Executive Committee authorized the 34 management "to have any of the p l a n t s of the company and of any s u b s i d i a r y company not now members of the [4L] o r g a n i z a t i o n j o i n the same." May 23, the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee reported out the AFL v e r s i o n of S e c t i o n 7( a ) , outlawing businessmen's power to compel workers to j o i n company unions or to r e f r a i n from j o i n i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s of t h e i r own choosing. Newly e l e c t e d WCLA P r e s i d e n t E.W. Demarest ( P a c i f i c N a t i o n a l Lum- ber Company, S e a t t l e ) warned the Tacoma Lumbermen's Club that the AFL would organize the Northwest i f the 4L f a i l e d to gain support. May 25, Charles Ingram,saying there was "no a l t e r n a t i v e , " i n s t r u c t e d the managers of the White R i v e r Lumber Company and the Weyerhaeuser p l a n t s at E v e r e t t and Longview to s i g n 4L c o n t r a c t s . The next day, the NIRA passed the Senate, and with p r o v i s i o n s for c o n t r o l of wages and hours of p r o d u c t i o n , i t was signed as law on June 15. L o n g - B e l l fol lowed Weyerhaeuser i n t o the 4L; the 4L ' s mem- bership t r e b l e d by December, embracing 134 operators ( i n c l u d i n g one at Rapid C i t y , South Dakota) and 10-11,500 workers. Ruegnitz boasted that the 4L had e n r o l l e d 30% of a l l lumber workers i n the d i s t r i c t s i n which i t was e s t a b l i s h e d . ^ During May and June, the NLMA composed and the r e g i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s approved a t e n t a t i v e Code. F o l l o w i n g a s e r i e s of hearings and r e v i s i o n s , the code was signed by President Roosevelt August 19, 1933. To administer the Code, a Lumber Code A u t h o r i t y (LCA) was i n c o r p o r a t e d by i n d u s t r y r e p r e s e n - t a t i v e s , with John D. Tennant as P r e s i d e n t and Greeley and Mason as executive s e c r e t a r i e s f o r the Douglas f i r and Western Pine D i v i s i o n s . (Mason was a p - pointed executive o f f i c e r of the LCA, June, 1934). The major features of the Code (which covered over 400,000 workers at 36,000 f o r e s t products e s t a b l i s h - ments) d e a l t with the c o n t r o l of wages, p r o d u c t i o n , p r i c e s , trade p r a c t i c e s , and f o r e s t c o n s e r v a t i o n . The LCA gathered q u a r t e r l y data regarding i n v e n - t o r i e s , p r o d u c t i o n , shipments, orders on f i l e , probable future demand, and 35 other fa c t o r s , on the basis of which quarterly n a t i o n a l production quotas were set and d i s t r i b u t e d among the regional Code d i v i s i o n s and thence a l l o - 8 cated to i n d i v i d u a l f a c t o r i e s , m i l l s and camps. Even while the NIRA was being designed, workers sought to use 4L, l o c a l s to enhance t h e i r standards of consumption, or , i n some cases, attempted to vote t h e i r l o c a l s out of existence. A few examples w i l l i n d i c a t e the tone of these months. On May 26, the Brooks-Scanlon 4L l o c a l asked management for a 20% wage increase and denounced Ruegnitz' a s s e r t i o n to Perkins that he was a "labor leader;" general manager H.K, Brooks urged the 4L s t a f f to stay away from the Bend area, asserting that t h e i r v i s i t s would merely "agitate condi- t i o n s . " The workers of the newly created 4L l o c a l at the Red River Lumber Company, Westwood, C a l i f o r n i a , promptly demanded a voice i n the company town's housing and working conditions, and c a l l e d for the removal of the company's personnel manager. At the St. Paul and Tacoma 4L l o c a l meeting, June 14, the v i s i t i n g se- cretary of the Wheeler-Osgood sash and door factory 4L l o c a l denounced the St. Paul's chairman, W.G. Campbell, for h i s actions as chairman of the May 15 Tacoma Joint Locals meeting, where Campbell had allowed the passage of motions denouncing the operators f or holding excessive power i n the 4L and demanding secret b a l l o t i n g on a l l substantive issues by the membership at large and at Board meetings, Campbell stood h i s ground and refused to abdicate h i s seat on the 4L Board, The St, Paul Local asked the D i s t r i c t Board to grant a 50<; per hour minimum wage. A seven-member committee which was appointed to d i s - cuss wage d i f f e r e n t i a l s with management included f i v e men who soon appeared as a c t i v i s t s i n the AFL; two of these, Norman Lange and Ed Lohre, served terms as presidents of the St, Paul's AFL and subsequent International Wood- workers of America (IWA) l o c a l s , Lange c i r c u l a t e d an anti-4L p e t i t i o n and presented i t at the regular 4L l o c a l meeting June 20, After Lange and E,G. 36 "Spike" Griggs II (nephew of Major Griggs, and h i s successor i n 1933 as Pre- sident of St. Paul) exchanged some sharp words, Griggs agreed to allow a general meeting on company property June 29 to discuss the 4L's future under the NRA.' At the mass meeting, Ruegnitz repeatedly claimed that Frances Perkins has assured him personally that the 4L "would receive r e c o g n i t i o n " from the NRA. Lange argued with the company o f f i c i a l s , seeking to hold an employees- only meeting. The meeting broke up i n pandemonium. , and Lange led 100-400 workers — the accounts vary — to the Tacoma Carpenter's H a l l for a rump meeting. The following day, labour presses around the States learned that Ruegnitz' claims of 4L recognition were branded "Absolutely F a l s e " by the U.S. Labor Department. July 1, 225 St. Paul workers met and passed a motion 10 of withdrawal from the 4L. Beginning June 10, Long-Bell and Weyerhaeuser-Longview launched an i n - tensive 4L organizing d r i v e ; company o f f i c i a l s presided at r a l l i e s , and fore- men d i s t r i b u t e d membership a p p l i c a t i o n s . The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) l a t e r determined that several workers refusing to j o i n the 4L were discharged. On June 12, the two companies ra i s e d wages, Weyerhaeuser esta- b l i s h i n g a $2.40 d a i l y base. June 16, 400-600 workers met to e s t a b l i s h an AFL l o c a l f o r the Kelso-Longview area; the l o c a l , which was said to be the AFL lumber workers' l a r g e s t , claimed to have over 700 members within three weeks. By mid-August, the "formation of the A. F. of L. union had made con- siderable headway, and i t s members resented the a c t i v i t i e s of the foremen on behalf of the 4L." Allega t i o n s of "improper s o l i c i t a t i o n " and "coersion [sic] of the worst type" p e r s i s t e d , as did the checking-off of 4L d u e s . ^ The AFL Central Labor Councils (CLC's functioned as c i t y or county coordinating body) and state apparatus worked to mobilize f e d e r a l power against what they perceived as a s o l i d i f y i n g 4L-trade ass o c i a t i o n nexus. They urged AFL President William Green, Frances Perkins, and U.S.. Senators 37 and Congressmen to preclude authorization of the 4L ("a mutual admiration society... owned and c o n t r o l l e d by the employers") as an NRA c o l l e c t i v e 12 bargaining agency. These e f f o r t s , however, bore l i t t l e f r u i t ; anti-4L successes attained were the r e s u l t of l o c a l e f f o r t s i n cooperation with the NRA Regional Labor Boards, created to ensure compliance with Section 7(a). These gains were not consolidated u n t i l 1935. The 4L Board met at Portland, June 22-23; the Weyerhaeuser and Shevlin groups were again heavily represented (See Table V). Though leaving the 4L s t a f f and conference committee structure i n t a c t i n order to receive the benefits of the NIRA, the Board did create an eight member supervisory executive committee, whose employer members were B i l l i n g s , Lewis, Isted, and Dean Johnson. A 32%<: per hour interim minimum wage was adopted, to be e f f e c t i v e u n t i l the Lumber Code was endorsed by Roosevelt; wages would then 13 be raised to a 42%% per hour base. The 4L wage became the Northwestern Lumber Code wage. Vigorous s t r i k e s occurred i n July i n the Klamath F a l l s and Grays Harbour D i s t r i c t s . The breadth of union a c t i v i t y pressed operators to r a i s e wages to the new 4L minimum by e a r l y August, giving c r e d i t to the 4L Locals f o r negotiating the increase and, they hoped, discouraging the development of an even greater ferment. This pattern remained t y p i c a l of 14 the period through the 1935 lumber organizational s t r i k e wave. In September, f i v e trade associations representing the Douglas f i r lumber, logging, shingle, plywood, and sash and door manufacturers created a Joint Committee on Labor, empowered to provide a f i r s t review of alleged v i o l a t i o n s of wage, hours, and "right-to-organize" provisions of the Code. The Joint Committee was composed of three representatives of each of the f i v e associations; the WCLA's sub-committee included George T. Gerlinger as Chair- man (President of the Willamette V a l l e y Lumber Company, and a long time f r i e n d of the 4L), Roy Morse (Long-Bell), and Spike Griggs. Both the J o i n t Committee 38 the 4L u t i l i z e d WCLA and Western Pine f i e l d auditors to examine the records of companies i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n as an aid to composing and readjusting minimum wage scales. The J o i n t Committee's stated p o l i c y was that under the lumber code, a l l employees have the r i g h t to organize or to not organize, as they please, and that i n e i t h e r case t h e i r r i g h t s under the Code must be guarded i n every possible way by the agency of the Lumber Code Authority. The Longview LSWU promptly scored the J o i n t Committee as a "side-tracker to keep the men from having t h e i r complaints acted upon" and established the p r a c t i c e of taking complaints d i r e c t l y to the Seattle Regional Labor B o a r d . ^ The 4L general and l o c a l organizations linked the Lumber Code apparatus with plant personnel management and with rank-and-file workers. In September, 1933, for example, an AFL committee at the St. Paul and Tacoma c a l l e d upon Spike Griggs, who was a member of the Joint Committee on Labor, "to discuss wages of semi - s k i l l e d and s k i l l e d labor, but without any f a c t s or figures they did not get very f a r . " The St. Paul 4L l o c a l was rather better supplied with "facts and f i g u r e s , " f or i t s secretary, 1920-35, was Harry Naubert, the company timekeeper. Naubert examined h i s books and learned that about s i x t y men were, according to Code d i f f e r e n t i a l s , being underpaid. Naubert n o t i f i e d the plant 4L conference committee and they, i n turn, brought the discrepancies to the attention of Spike Griggs, who authorized wage increases and posted 16 notices c r e d i t i n g the plant committee for the adjustment. It should be noted that not a l l managers were f u l l y pleased with indus- t r i a l r e l a t i o n s i n the 4L. One 4L f i e l d o f f i c e r was accused of being a s t o o l pigeon for Weyerhaeuser' s for whom he had been a timekeeper.. Ruegnitz t y p i c a l l y suggested that operators grant wage increases through 4L conference committees to give workers a f e l t sense of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e i r own govern- ance; those operators who f a i l e d to observe the 4L minimum and d i f f e r e n t i a l s were threatened with expulsion from the 4L's c a p i t a l i s t - s y n d i c a l i s t order. 39 This raised d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r one lumberman who joined the 4L at Ralph Macartney's behest; he complained that P r a c t i c a l l y a l l meetings with employers and employees amount to simply a row wherein the employees c r i t i c i z e and condemn,some employers and they are continuously t a l k i n g about more wages... and everything i n the world that employees might want with l i t t l e consider- ation as to the employers' needs or desires. He concluded that employers, i f united, could defeat r a d i c a l s ; 4L conference committees and the r e c i p r o c a l obligations of the 4L ethos were les s easy f or employer members to combat, e s p e c i a l l y with unions pounding at the gates. At Snoqualmie F a l l s , the l o c a l conference committee worked on new wage scales with the management, and devised a family medical plan with a l o c a l doctor; even a f t e r enactment of the NIRA, a f i e l d o f f i c e r reported that "some [4L] preference demands ... were met by the management," and, a f t e r a l a y o f f , "the crew that stayed on the job were hand-picked as f a r as possible out of 4L men." At another company town, the B r i d a l V e i l Lumber Company's B r i d a l V e i l , Oregon, the 4L was used much less consciously as a work-force shaping and integrating device. The management evidently f a i l e d to discriminate i n favour of 4L members, took "the attitud e that the 4L [was] an organization of the employees," and "missed the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the cooperative set-up of the 4L." The company's 1933 July 4th p i c n i c was not.given over to the 4L, nor was the organization credited with community h a l l repairs which were directed by the l o c a l o f f i c e r s , who were described as the "natural community leaders," toward whom a group of " a n t i - s o c i a l Swedes" directed derogatory remarks (the l o c a l had enrolled only about 45% of the company's workers when these complaints were made). The 4L was here functioning as l i t t l e more than an anti-union f r a t e r n a l club f o r a minority of the work force who f u l f i l l e d the 4L's notions of cummunity r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . It i s evident then, that the l i f e of the 4L at any given point was influenced by varying management p o l i c i e s , intercompany antipathies, and intra-work force d i v i s i o n s , probably along 40 s o c i a l l i n e s compounded by organizational l o y a l t i e s . ^ The D i s t r i c t s 4, 5, and 6 4L Board meeting, December 18, passed employee resolutions on themes including adoption of a n a t i o n a l six-hour day and a t h i r t y hour week, equal LCA allotments of operating time to a l l operations, seating of workers on a l l northwestern LCA agencies adjudicating Code labour pro- v i s i o n s , and support for the Old Age Pension B i l l advocated.for ten years by the F r a t e r n a l Order of Eagles, a nation-wide worker-oriented organization. Of i n t e r e s t to h i s t o r i a n s of the workplace was a motion preferred by the St. Paul 4L l o c a l through Freeman Cochran, a carpenter and, a f t e r the 1935 lumber s t r i k e , recording secretary of the lumber workers' Tacoma D i s t r i c t Council. This r e s o l u t i o n dealt with contract labour — that i s , workers, e s p e c i a l l y at dry k i l n s , storage yards, and wharves and r a i l shipping docks and, i n the woods, f a l l e r s and buckers, whose work was t y p i c a l l y paid for by the board foot; the sense of the r e s o l u t i o n makes i t also applicable to e f f i c i e n c y sys- tems u t i l i z i n g incentive wages. The motion declared that contract labour was "not i n accord with the expressed intentions of the President of these United States" nor with the NIRA's " e f f o r t to put men back to work;" f u r t h e r - more, i t continued, the use of contract labor has been the cause of laying off of men who need employment, speeding up of labor beyond endurance and necessity, without the corresponding increase i n pay per operation. A f t e r "considerable discussion," the recommendation that the 4L Board abolish piece work i n the logging and lumber industry l o s t . I t i s clear that some workers within the 4L were taking the offensive to modify some aspects of shop management procedures. In September, 1934, almost i d e n t i c a l wording was used by Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s unionists i n t h e i r discussion of the 18 Bedaux system at that plant. The 4L Board meeting, January 23-24, 1934, raised the 4L minimum to 45c 41 per hour; P h i l Weyerhaeuser noted that workers and operators "stood divided for a long time" on the issue: a r e a l problem for the Weyerhaeuser group, which appeared to be^the "spearhead" of an AFL organizing drive abetted by a program of wages, hours, and working conditions demands and Regional Labor Board supervised e l e c t i o n s . On February 15, the LCA turned down the 4L's request for a r e g i o n a l l y prorated general Code wage increase, deferring the matter u n t i l other i n d u s t r i e s granted s i m i l a r increases and a stronger market 19 for lumber developed. At Longview, over 1,200 workers pe t i t i o n e d the Seattle RLB for repre- sentation e l e c t i o n s . With the urging of J . B. F i t z g e r a l d , secretary of the Joint Committee on Labor, the 4L impotently protested the scheduled e l e c t i o n . In February and March, 1934, 80% of the votes at Longview and the White; River Lumber Company were given to AFL candidates. Similar r e s u l t s occurred during the year at Potlatch Forests, Snoqualmie F a l l s , and elsewhere. AFL memberships by May ranged from 25% to 85% at Weyerhaeuser group m i l l s . Organizational membership, however, was not a r e l i a b l e index to worker sentiments; at Weyerhaeuser-Everett, 700 of 1000 workers held 4L cards, but 600 p e t i t i o n e d for an RLB e l e c t i o n . Charles Ingram complained that the AFL and the 4L used 20 the s i t u a t i o n to competitively campaign for the expansion of b e n e f i t s . I t bears emphasis that the AFL at some points i n f i l t r a t e d the 4L; i n May, 1935, for instance, the Morison M i l l s 4L l o c a l chairman, vice-chairman, and t h i r d conference committee member were a l l said to carry AFL cards. Following the e l e c t i o n s at Longview, Weyerhaeuser and Long-Bell formulated a common p o l i c y of continued support for the 4L, meetings with minority organizations and i n d i v i d u a l s , and r e f u s a l to extend the dues check-off from the 4L to the AFL; they also rejected AFL demands for a written contract, wage and hours adjustment, and the employment at machinery of only union c e r t i f i e d s k i l l e d men. By summer, union o f f i c e r s were centering t h e i r RLB appeals on the 4L 42 contract's dues check-off, which Ruegnitz and the Weyerhaeuser managers be- 20 l i e v e d c e n t r a l to the continued v i t a l i t y of the 4L. On March 21, the NRA accepted the 4L's proposal for creating n a t i o n a l and regional employer-employee lumber Code compliance committees, as part of a program giving the LCA " f u l l authorization to handle trade p r a c t i c e s and labor complaints ' i n the f i r s t instance.'" March 25, the same day that the Labor Complaints Committee regulations were adopted by the LCA, President Roosevelt presented hi s settlement of a threatened auto s t r i k e . He allowed manufacturers to meet with minority representatives, and, furthermore, stated that the government makes i t clea r that i t favors no p a r t i c u l a r union or p a r t i c u l a r form of employee organization or representation. The government's only duty i s to secure absolute and unqualified freedom of choice without coercion, r e s t r a i n t , or i n t i m i d a t i o n from any source. The AFL business agent at Longview was immediately concerned that the LCA's compliance power would be used to give the unions the "skids": We can f i n d no way of keeping 4L representatives from the labor committee i n view of the recent r u l i n g s handed down by Roosevelt.... It i s possible that a d e c i s i o n might be made c l a s s i f y i n g the 4L as not a company union. The 4L's advocates sought to take advantage of the ambiguous f e d e r a l labour p o l i c y to strengthen t h e i r organization against the AFL. On March 15, Ruegnitz asked Hugh Johnson, chief administrator of the NRA, "to give f u l l c r e d i t to the earnest industry and N. R. A. cooperation displayed by the 4L," and r e - ferred him to Wilson Compton, who had been appointed trade a s s o c i a t i o n s p e c i a l i s t on the NRA I n d u s t r i a l Advisory Board, Following the J u l y , 1934, e l e c t o r a l defeat of the 4L at Potlatch Forests, C. L. B i l l i n g s wrote f u r i o u s l y to David Mason, now executive o f f i c e r of the LCA: We think i t was reasonably clear [in e a r l i e r corres- pondence] that we wanted the heat turned away from 43 us i n any way that i t could be — whether by an endorsement of the 4L, or a clean claim of neu- t r a l i t y , or a repudiation of the A. F. of L. claims. Ruegnitz and B i l l i n g s f i n a l l y achieved some success when they c o l l a r e d Hugh Johnson at Portland, July 16, on h i s way to denouncing the Longshoremen's general s t r i k e at San Francisco. They secured h i s written word that The duty of the N. R. A. i s to see that men are represented by t h e i r own f r e e l y chosen representa- t i v e s . The Administration w i l l not favor any p a r t i c u l a r form of organization - — neither the American Federation nor another. The question i n each case i s simply one of f a c t whom do the men choose? 21 The statement was given a f u l l page i n the 4L Lumber News. During the l a t t e r months of 1934, the Weyerhaeuser group began rethinking i t s labour i n s t i t u t i o n p o l i c y . While Weyerhaeuser managers, with the bulk of the remainder of the Northwest lumber industry, favoured the retention of a c o l l e c t i v e mode of wage and hour regulation by operators themselves — there was some fear that these functions, the basic ones of the NIRA, would be en- forced by the f e d e r a l government, i f not by i n d u s t r i a l i s t s — the p r i c e main- tenance clauses of the Code had come incr e a s i n g l y into disfavour by September. It was claimed that enforcement against " c h i s e l e r s " was i n e f f e c t i v e , and that minimum pr i c e s placed undue r e s t r i c t i o n s on the capacity of e s p e c i a l l y e f f i c i e n t operations to e f f e c t i v e l y compete. In November, the Weyerhaeuser i n t e r e s t s and others pressured the WCLA to suspend its: price enforcement a c t i v i - t i e s . Labour law conditions s h i f t e d during the autumn. The NLRB ruled i n the Houde case i n September that the v i c t o r of an employee representation e l e c t i o n was to be the worker's exclusive bargaining agent under Section 7(a). Long-Bell and Weyerhaeuser-Longview were found g u i l t y by the Seattle Regional Labor Board, November 6, of v i o l a t i n g 7(a) by v i r t u e of granting the 4L, but not the AFL, the dues check-off, and also, as summarized by Ruegnitz, " f a i l u r e to meet employee representatives, f a i l u r e to pay Code wages, discharge of 44 A. F. of L. members, refusing to hear them, and otherwise d i s c r i m i n a t i n g " against the AFL. Thus, Code enforcement i t s e l f was weakening at the same time as the unions were fi n d i n g increasing support i n the form of Labor Board decisions. P h i l Weyerhaeuser opposed the voluntary withdrawal of the 4L check-off, for such action would undermine the 4L while rousing other oper- ators' resentment. Favouring uniform labour conditions as he had since 19.31, he argued that a NLRB r u l i n g disallowing company contributions to the 4L would a f f e c t a l l operators, while s t i l l f a c i l i t a t i n g industry-wide economic regulation through wage-fixing by AFL contracts. There was concern that un- sanctioned s t r i k e s by l o c a l unions, such as had occurred i n sympathy with the Longshoremen at Longview i n June, 19.34, weakened the value of AFL contracts as devices for c o n t r o l l i n g labour i n the absence of the 4L, P h i l Weyerhaeuser suggested that, to a l l e v i a t e t h i s , Weyerhaeuser ought to encourage the AFL "to take such steps as w i l l r e s u l t i n t h e i r forming an lindustry-wide] i n t e r - n a t i o n a l homogeneous union," i f that development was not i n i t i a t e d by the 22 unions themselves. E a r l y i n January, 1935, the Weyerhaeuser Executive Committee and plant managers discussed the labour issue, and determined to withhold e l e c t i o n compliance unless t h i s was s p e c i f i c a l l y ordered by the NLRB, I t was thought that binding agreements might become expedient when the courts or further l e g i s l a t i o n had c l a r i f i e d the duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of elected employee representatives. P h i l Weyerhaeuser suggested that, i n the interim, "nothing be done ... to unnecessarily antagonize" the unions and fe d e r a l labour 23 agencies. The general thrust of these decisionswas, through delaying actions, to prevent a union-Labor Board a l l i a n c e from encumbering the Weyer- haeuser group with competitive r e s t r i c t i o n s i n the post-price control era, at least u n t i l f e d e r a l law was c l e a r l y revised to transform the unions into labour d i s c i p l i n i n g devices on the 4L model. Vernon Jensen states that, a f t e r November, 1934, "nothing f u r t h e r " came of the Longview di s c r i m i n a t i o n cases. On A p r i l 1, 1935, the NLRB d i d , i n f a c t , order that Long-Bell's and Weyerhaeuser-Longview's check-off and employer f i n a n c i a l contributions be removed from the 4L or granted to the AFL, and that these plants recognize the AFL union as exclusive bargaining agent. J.D. Tennant, s t i l l President of the LCA, declared that the order "would have a disastrous e f f e c t f or the 4L." His opinion as expressed to Mason may be taken as i n d i c a t i v e of h i s expectations of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s under the Code: The d e c i s i o n of the Labor Board i s , I think, the most atrocious thing that has ever come out of Washington .... You, of course, know the e f f o r t that I have put f o r t h toward undertaking to a s s i s t the National Recovery Admin- i s t r a t i o n along a l l l i n e s and I would d i s l i k e very much to be forced to vary from that p o s i t i o n now.... I would d i s l i k e very much to have our company placed i n the p o s i t i o n to combat a r u l i n g of the National Labor Relations Board even though I do not f e e l they have any j u r i s d i c t i o n ; at the same time, there i s a l i m i t to where we can go i n permitting such decisions to c o n t r o l our act i o n . . . . I f there i s any one i n the N. R. A. who has i t s i n t e r e s t at heart, they w i l l c e r t a i n l y temper t h i s d e c i s i o n . 24 In mid-March, the AFL Executive Committee awarded j u r i s d i c t i o n over a l l lumberworkers to the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, reputed to be the AFL's strongest, and, perhaps, most conservative c r a f t union. Events thereafter moved s w i f t l y . On March 23, the Northwest Council of Sawmill and Timber workers set May 6 as a s t r i k e deadline, demanding a written contract, exclusive bargaining r i g h t s , the six-hour day and t h i r t y - hour week, overtime and holiday pay, modified s e n i o r i t y , vacations with pay, a base wage of 75<; per hour, and mediation and contract r e v i s i o n clauses. By A p r i l 12, the Carpenters promised lumberworkers that a s t r i k e , backed with $1.50 per day s t r i k e b e n e f i t s , would be c a l l e d to force the Longview companies to comply with the NLRB order. With cooperation of the 4L and WCLA, these companies appealed the order to the NRA compliance committee. Weyerhaeuser Executive Committeeman L a i r d B e l l , less h o s t i l e to unions than were most 46 lumber executives, suggested that In order to give [the NRA] compliance and c o n t r o l d i v i s i o n any opportunity to withhold p r e c i p i t a t e action... we i n v i t e negotiations with unions immediately s t a t i n g that t h i s i s done i n deference to n a t i o n a l board and pursuant to r e c e i v i n g requests from any employee.• By A p r i l 19, demands were served at Olympia, Portland, Tacoma, and other points, and the f i r s t i s o l a t e d walkouts began. Four days l a t e r , an NLRB e l e c t i o n order was served for the Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s . While holding the e l e c t i o n orders i n abeyance, Weyerhaeuser and Long-Bell opened discussions on May 1 with Abe Muir, the Carpenters; representative assigned to service the lumber unions. On A p r i l 29, the 4L F i r Wage Board belatedly recommended that the 4L Board of Directors r a i s e the minimum wage to 50<; per hour; because of i t s 4L contract, Weyerhaeuser f e l t bound to concede the 50c hour to the unions, and was w i l l i n g to grant the union recognition as bargaining agent for i t s own members, and, probably as a concession to the NLRB's order, withdraw the check-off from the 4L while denying i t to the AFL. Outside a r b i t r a t i o n clauses and a shorter than forty-hour week were s i m i l a r l y denied. In short, the Longview operators were w i l l i n g to grant no more to the AFL than was 25 already required under contract with the 4L. E.P. Marsh, U.S. Department of Labor mediator, advised Weyerhaeuser on May 2 that Muir lacked clear c o n t r o l of the impatient l o c a l unions, which had been b u i l t up during the preceding two years l a r g e l y through the deter- mination of l o c a l a c t i v i s t s . The Carpenters' representative appeared to be r e s t r a i n i n g s t r i k e s at Weyerhaeuser group m i l l s at Raymond, Snoqualmie, and Everett pending negotiations. By May 7, however, these points had struck, and Muir, admitting that he had no c o n t r o l at Everett, advised Weyerhaeuser not to attempt to operate i t s m i l l s there. Two days l a t e r , Muir accepted the operators' contract conditions, but the 4L-Muir settlement was rejected by the rank and f i l e . (It i s conceivable that Muir was planning to use rank and f i l e pressure to force a better agreement, but evidence i s lacking on t h i s point.) By mid-May, with almost a l l f i r m i l l s and camps from the Portland v i c i n i t y north closed by picket l i n e s , about 30,000 workers were on s t r i k e . Employers "Mutual Protection" groups were organized i n a l l f i r d i s t r i c t s by A p r i l 16, and formulated a program of not accepting union demands, meeting with non-employee union representatives, i n s t i g a t i n g a lockout, or negotiating c o l l e c t i v e l y , and r e j e c t i n g a l l written agreements mentioning a union or pro- posing the closed shop or dues check-off; i t was hoped that the unions would collapse of t h e i r own accord. A l l rumours were investigated by a c e n t r a l o f f i c e , maintaining the morale of the anti-union united f r o n t ; the v i r u l e n t l y anti-union e d i t o r C a r l Crow handled s t r i k e b u l l e t i n s and news-releases for 500 m i l l s i n Oregon and Washington. Operators at Tacoma, where Spike Griggs chaired the i n i t i a l meetings, were admitted to be depending on the 4L to 27 combat the s t r i k e . The informal operators' committee was pleased to note that the Longview negotiations, against which they had remonstrated, were "past h i s t o r y " , and concluded that the present plan of i n d i f f e r e n t waiting and i n d i v i d u a l action was working out very n i c e l y . . . . I t was f e l t that anything which would put up resistance to the unions or give them something to f i g h t would be at variance with the program of acquiescence which had worked out so s u c c e s s f u l l y . Although "some few" operators f e l t "very much put out" by the new 4L scale, the concensus was that "no better arrangement" was f e a s i b l e . They were, however, quite pleased to note that Muir had s p l i t with more m i l i t a n t unionists such as Norman Lange of Tacoma, who was expelled from the Carpenters. On May 27, the Supreme Court's Schecter decision outlawed the NIRA. Three days l a t e r , the Longview l o c a l s voted 9-1 to accept the 40-hour week, a 5c per hour r a i s e , and union recognition, which appeared to be the most 28 favourable settlement a v a i l a b l e without government sanction. 48 By June 3, an" estimated 7-8000 s t r i k e r s returned to work. On June 5, however, insurgents with Communist support met at Aberdeen to form the a n t i - Muir Northwest Jo i n t S t r i k e Committee, and r e i t e r a t e d the o r i g i n a l demands for the 75c hour, thirty-hour week and closed shop. On June 6, m i l l s at Longview and elsewhere were again closed by massed pickets. At the suggestion of John Blodgett, past president of the NLMA, Ruegnitz f a c i l i t a t e d meetings of workers from the B r i d a l V e i l Timber Company, Westfir Lumber Company (West- f i r , Oregon), and various Tacoma m i l l s with the governors of Oregon and Washington, s o l i c i t i n g State protection for workers who desired to work be- hind picket l i n e s (the leader of the Tacoma employees delegation, then a millwright and trimmerman at the Gange M i l l , believed that he was r e s i s t i n g Communist unionism). The Governors obliged, providing state p o l i c e and National Guard occupations at B r i d a l V e i l , Westfir, Longview, Aberdeen- Hoquiam, Tacoma, Everett, and other points. Oregon Governor Clarence Martin and h i s Washington counterpart Charles Martin c a l l e d upon " a l l good C h r i s t i a n people" to preserve workers' " r i g h t to work" i n the face of "professional Communists." A long s e r i e s of s t r i k e r s ' parades, massed picketings, v i o l e n t confrontations, and tear gassings ensued. In the midst of a l l t h i s , Ruegnitz lamented to David Mason that "the o r i g i n a l intentions for the NIRA were quite 29 d i f f e r e n t from what i t has a c t u a l l y done." On June 24, Muir ordered the Longview s t r i k e r s to return to work, and, cutting off an important source of f i n a n c i a l aid f o r r e c a l c i t r a n t s , revoked the o r i g i n a l Longview l o c a l charter and established new l o c a l s more amenable to h i s leadership. Similar t a c t i c s were used elsewhere, e s p e c i a l l y at Tacoma and Aberdeen. M i l l executives were reported to endorse the reorganization. On July 3, P h i l Weyerhaeuser advised F.E, Weyerhaeuser, President of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, that a withdrawal from the 4L at a l l f i r plants was desirable; he did not think the company "could refuse recognition of the 49 union i n some way i n the future.... The 4L has done us no good whatsoever 30 and i s completely dead at our p l a n t s . " He concluded that negotiating a written agreement a f t e r the s t r i k e r s had returned to work would strengthen the p o s i t i o n of the conservative u n i o n i s t s . Meeting at Aberdeen July 11, lumbermen developed a standard s t r i k e - terminating agreement which provided f o r a 50c per hour minimum wage with increases at higher brackets, the forty-hour week, willingness to meet with in d i v i d u a l s or representatives of any l e g a l organization, negotiation with committees of U.S. c i t i z e n s employed at l e a s t one year, and no dis c r i m i n a t i o n against former employees save i n cases of "assault, violence, threats, or int i m i d a t i o n " — which l a s t could be broadly interpreted. Although s p e c i f i c terms varied from m i l l to m i l l , t h i s was approximately the basis upon which the s t r i k e ended by mid-August. A discussion of the months between the end of the s t r i k e and the formation of the IWA i n 1937 l i e s beyond the scope of t h i s t h e s i s . S u f f i c e i t to note, however, that the IWA Columbia River D i s t r i c t Council's reputation f o r conservatism may have been encouraged-in part by the union recognition p o l i c i e s of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company. On August 6, 1935, 4L f i e l d o f f i c e r s reported that supporters of the insurgent Longview union were facing d i f f i c u l t i e s being reinstated i n t h e i r former jobs. The f i r s t Weyerhaeuser group lumber union contract was signed at Longview October 30, 1935, according to F. T. Titcomb, "only because we had a responsible group with which to deal." P h i l Weyerhauser defended the contract on the 31 grounds that i t would exclude r a d i c a l s from the m i l l s . D i s c i p l i n a r y values were c l e a r l y embodied i n the f i r s t saw m i l l agreement between St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and Sawmill and Timber Workers Union #2664, signed March 15, 1936. According to the Agreement's preamble, The general purpose of t h i s Agreement i s : to develop harmony, cooperation between employer and employee, 50 and to provide for the operation of the plant ... i n a manner which w i l l further to the f u l l e s t possible extent the safety of the employees, economy of operation, q u a l i t y and quantity of output, elimination of waste, cle a n l i n e s s of the plant, and protection of property. The duty of the employer and employees i s to cooperate f u l l y , i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y f or the advancement of such conditions i s recognized. Under "Hiring and Dischar-ge", the agreement stated that The employer has the r i g h t to h i r e , suspend, or discharge any employee. On request of employee, he agrees to state reasons f o r suspension or discharge. V i o l a t i o n of any of the employer's posted rules s h a l l be cause for immediate suspension or discharge. Review of a worker's suspension and discharge was to be adjudicated by plant committees and could be appealed to the union and the company's top management; the balance of judgment, however, rested with the company: " I f upon in v e s t i g a t i o n by the management i t finds that such employee was unjustly sus- pended or discharged, he s h a l l be reinstated without los s of time." Among the "Causes for Immediate Discharge" were: Disobedience Neglect of duty Refusal to comply with employer's r u l e s Disorderly conduct Dishonesty Fighting i n plant or on plant premises Reading of books, magazines, or newspapers while on duty except where required i n l i n e of duty F a i l u r e to report to work without bonafide reasons Intimidation and/or molestation of any i n d i v i d u a l or group of employer's employees. Regarding promotions, i t was declared that "The employer w i l l be the sole judge as to the a b i l i t y , e f f i c i e n c y , and merit of the employee." Union members d i d , of course, gain some concessions, including the five-day, forty-hour week, time and one-half pay for overtime work, seven unpaid holidays, recognition of s e n i o r i t y i n l a y o f f s , and non-discrimination against union members by v i r t u e of union a c t i v i t i e s , and recognition of the union as bargaining agent for i t s own members. I t i s c l e a r , however, that the union entered a binding contract permitting the company a wide l a t i t u d e of judgment i n exercising d i s c i p l i n a r y powers at the shop f l o o r ; reading union broadsides on the job would be an immediate cause of discharge, as would such forms of rank-and-file struggle as work slowdowns, wildcat s t r i k e s , r e f u s a l to cooperate with e f f i c i e n c y 32 engineers, or f o r c e f u l peer pressure on non-unionists. Several points are c l e a r regarding the 4L during the NRA period. E a r l y i n 1933, the organization was i n the throes of a f i n a n c i a l and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c r i s i s : operators attempted to reconstruct a le s s expensive organization which would r e f r a i n from intervening i n t h e i r plant management p o l i c i e s . The proposal and enactment of the NIRA alte r e d the 4L's conditions of existence; Ruegnitz, the Weyerhaeuser Executive Committee, trade association executives, and others worked to ensure the 4L a secure place i n the new order, backed with the elements of state power granted the trade associations as adjudicators of the Lumber Code. There i s t h i n but firm evidence that key figures such as J . D. Tennant and C. L. B i l l i n g s expected to manipulate the NRA Code agencies to r e s i s t unionism, strengthening the e f f e c t i v e c o r p o r a t i s t labor i n s t i t u t i o n s that had been proposed i n the lumber industry during the Hoover administration. Industry elements favouring the 4L used n e u t r a l i s t or anti-union i n s t i t u t i o n s and persons, such as the Joint Committee on Labor, Hugh Johnson, and the Governors or Oregon and Washington, to combat the fe d e r a l Labor Boards and the AFL and insurgent unions ( i t appears that David Mason was c a r e f u l not to o f f i c i a l l y compromise his p o s i t i o n as executive of the Lumber Code Author i t y ) . There i s also some evidence that when the 4L was broken i n the f i r d i s t r i c t s by the 1935 s t r i k e , operators were i n c l i n e d to negotiate with conservative unions which they believed would serve as d i s c i p l i n i n g devices i n the absence of the 4L. 52 It i s also evident that the 4L encompassed anti-union employees ( i n c l u d - ing, probably, f i r s t l i n e supervisors), and AFL or proto-AFL workers who used the organization to press for material concessions and an element of control over shop management procedures and wage forms. Although the numbers of lumber workers enrolled in AFL l o c a l s remained small u n t i l May, 1935, c e r t a i n tools useful for rank-and-file union movements, including voting for representa- t i v e s , debate (both i n formal meetings and, c e r t a i n l y , between 4L and AFL factions i n the community and on the shop f l o o r ) , and presentation of testimony and argument before t r i b u n a l s , were becoming a v a i l a b l e by 1933. It took only the promise of adequate s t r i k e funds to t r i g g e r a section of lumber workers into movement; once mobilized, many of them s p l i t from the Carpenters, who offered no greater substantive gains that did the 4L, and r e l i e d f o r f i n a n c i a l aid on other unions (notably the Longshoremen), public r e l i e f , and t r a d i t i o n a l forms of assistance i n c r i s i s such as kin networks and c r e d i t from neighbour- hood grocers. Vernon Jensen claims that lumber operators who f a i l e d to accept the o r i g i n a l Longview agreement negotiated by Abe Muir were responsible for the f a i l u r e of a standard industry-wide contract to emerge from the 1935 s t r i k e ( P h i l Weyerhaeuser, interested since at least 1931 i n conservative labour organizations as a device for i n d u s t r i a l standardization and regulation, might have agreed). According to Jensen,most operators' m i l i t a n t opposition to unions, coupled with l i b e r a l use of p o l i c e and m i l i t i a , and the operators' "holding out against any settlement with the union, opened the way for l e f t - wing elements to enter the labor scene." Referring to the s p l i t from Muir, Jensen concludes that the "problem of leadership could have been resolved i n time, once stable r e l a t i o n s were established." Jensen's concern for " s t a b l e " i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s elided the f a c t that loggers and lumber workers r e j e c t i o n of the Longview settlement i n May and again i n June, 53 1935, was a r e j e c t i o n not only of imputed bureaucratic "outside leadership," but also of a return to work on conditions l i t t l e d i f f e r e n t than those a v a i l a b l e from the re g i o n a l l y and i n d u s t r i a l l y indigenous leadership of the 4L. As the following chapters i n d i c a t e , i n s t i t u t i o n a l insurgency was coupled i n at least one important case with a struggle f o r power at the shop f l o o r , which compounded the drive f o r at le a s t a marginal increment i n workers' degree of control of i n d u s t r i a l l i f e . 54 Chapter IV. The Bedaux C r i s i s at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , 1933-35; I: The Company, the Work Process, and the Bedaux Ethos Much att e n t i o n has been given i n recent h i s t o r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e to manage- r i a l attempts to exert controls over workers' a c t i v i t i e s at the point of pro- duction. Research i n the area has focused upon t h i s phenomenon as i t appeared during the period 1890-1920, giving p a r t i c u l a r attention to the basic metal, armanents, r a i l r o a d shops, and t e x t i l e i n d u s t r i e s of the northeastern and mid- western United States. David Brody has pointed out the need to extend shop f l o o r analyses to the mass production i n d u s t r i e s of the 1930's, to determine the degree of workers' on-the-job autonomy, and the extent to which c r i s e s i n the workplace effected the formation of formal labour organizations."'" The 4L and group insurance were used by operators with the e x p l i c i t intent of encou- raging greater " e f f i c i e n c y " among the work force. Writing to a colleague i n 1927, William H. Turner of the Willapa Lumber Company (absorbed by the Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s i n 1931) noted that There i s always a small percentage of men who want to bring petty grievances before the management, and for a period of time I went along l i s t e n i n g to these things. Later, i t occurred to me to beat them to i t by putting the 4-L organization to work p o l i c i n g the crew and the plant, and the r e s u l t was a very decided change i n s p i r i t and e f f i c i e n c y . 2 At some plants, 4L and non-4L a l i k e , the drive f o r greater e f f i c i e n c y and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y was abetted by the use of work accounting and incentive wage plans such as the patented system developed by Charles E. Bedaux. The present chapter and the one following examine workers' response to the r e v i s i o n of shop management at a p a r t i c u l a r plant during the New Deal. It becomes evident that the l o c a l e and plant s p e c i f i c s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s and organization of work, and a v a i l a b l e i n s t i t u t i o n s , values and ideologies (such as in t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the purpose of the New Deal) gave form to the workers' movement against i n s t a l l a t i o n of the Bedaux system, 1933-35, at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s 55 (WHLM), a subsidiary of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company. At the WHLM, worker-management c o n f l i c t developed during the mid-1930's not only over questions of hours, wages, and recognition or defense of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining i n s t i t u t i o n s . Nor was i t the r e s u l t of the j u x t a p o s i t i o n of the cultures of new i n d u s t r i a l workers and the d i s c i p l i n a r y rigours of i n d u s t r i a l society, as suggested by Herbert Gutman's c l a s s i c essay on "Work, 3 Culture, and Society i n I n d u s t r i a l i z i n g America". Rather, the creation of the lumber workers' union at Raymond intersected with and was forged i n the resistance by workers, who had come of age within i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l i s m , to a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l method for lowering unit costs of production. Resistance was informed by conceptions of appropriate workplace r e l a t i o n s and the process of resistance was i n turn incorporated as memory into the culture of unionism i n the d i s t r i c t . The WHLM was created as a corporate e n t i t y May 6, 1931, when the Weyer- haeuser Timber Company (WTC) financed the merger of the greater part of the assets of several companies and t h e i r s u b s i d i a r i e s based at Raymond and South Bend, Washington, located i n P a c i f i c County, about twenty miles south of Aberdeen; the four were the Willapa Lumber, Raymond Lumber, Lewis M i l l s and Timber, and the WTC and i t s subsidiary the Western Brokerage and Land Company. The new company owned 190,000 of P a c i f i c County's 271,000 p r i v a t e l y held acres of timber, and, because of l o c a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , was expected to cut most of the County's 115,720 acres of government owned timber. When purchased, the m i l l s (which provided Weyerhaeuser with processing f a c i l i t i e s f o r i t s already extensive holdings i n the County) were down or approaching the point of receivership. The WHLM's m i l l s were capable by 1933 of sawing about 600,000 board feet of lumber per eight hour s h i f t , one of the s i x greatest m i l l com- plex capacities i n the Douglas F i r region. While l o c a l enterprise included two other saw-mills of moderate capacity (which remained closed 1931-32), 56 three or four shingle mills, and an extensive oyster fishery and canning in- dustry, the WHLM, with a mill and camp work force of over 1000 men, immediate- 4 ly became the largest single employer in Pacific County. The man recruited as general manager of the new company, J.W. Lewis, had managerial experience for both Weyerhaeuser and Long-Bell at Longview, and also at Long-Bell's Lake Charles, Louisiana, operations. Before the merger, the Willapa Lumber Company had been a member of the 4L; Lewis promptly signed 4L contracts for the WHLM's remaining mill units. From 1931-35, he served periodically as a member of the 4L. Board, and, in 1933, he accepted a post as one of the four employer members of the 4L Board Executive Committee. During the period of the NRA Lumber Code formulation, Lewis was a member of the WCLA's Logging Labor Committee; he subsequently served as one of the fifteen members of the f i r trade associations'' NRA Joint Committee on Labor. Thus, Lewis was significantly involved in the northwestern lumber industry's formal inter- company networks for regulating the labour costs of production during the early 1930's.5 Neither Raymond nor South Bend were company-owned towns, and the WHLM's economic primacy did not give i t f u l l control of community mental and political l i f e . When the WHLM was formed, the staunchly Democratic South Bend Willapa Harbor Pilot commented that "This one merger will make South Bend boom again... It is the salvation of the lumber and timber business to have this big corporation take hold, double capacity, and put into effect its wonderful selling organization. A year later, however, the Pilot castigated the Weyerhaeuser company as a "big timber octopus" that could force workers to accept "any rate of pay that it may dictate," and snidely suggested that the WHLM would refuse to pay its taxes. In the summer of 1933, the paper's editor claimed that he had always considered the 4L to be a company union, and advised workers to join the AFL and demand $3.00 for a six hour day.^ 57 Lewis, as did Weyerhaeuser group managers generally during t h i s period, favoured the maintenance of wage rates at figures which, i n the context of the lumber industry, were set at a r e l a t i v e l y high base, "commensurate," according to Lewis, "with the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . " Following the November, 1931, Trade Union Unity League s t r i k e against the c u t t i n g of base wages to less than $2.00 per day at Aberdeen, the West Coast Lumberman (organ of the WCLA) quoted a "prominent Willapa Harbor lumberman" — probably Lewis or a member of the Weyerhaeuser hierarchy — to the e f f e c t that " i f a l l m i l l s have to pay at leas t $3.00 per day to t h e i r men, the management w i l l think twice before i t dumps i t s products on eastern markets at s u i c i d a l p r i c e s . " Although d a i l y wages at the WHLM did reach a low of $2,25 per day during the l a s t months of the Hoover administration, the company's average hourly wages remained above the mean for the northwestern lumber industry as a whole. Lewis used the cen- t r a l economic r o l e of the WHLM i n P a c i f i c County, i t s contribution to the r e - v i t a l i z a t i o n of the l o c a l economy and p o l i c y of paying above-average wages, and l o c a l small business dependence upon the continuation of the company pay- r o l l , as strong debating points i n h i s e f f o r t s , at the l o c a l community and federal agency l e v e l s , to l e g i t i m i z e resistance to unionism and to reduce unit labour costs through the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of the shop management and work 7 processes. Shortly a f t e r assuming the WHLM managership, Lewis increased the combined output of the two Raymond m i l l s from 325,000 to 400,000 board feet per day, la r g e l y by speeding up the m i l l conveyor chains to t h e i r f u l l capacity. A plant modernization program improved the interdepartmental transport systems and brought closer p h y s i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n of departments such as dry k i l n s , storage sheds, and planing m i l l s . By September, 1933, M i l l s "W" and "R", located beside one another i n Raymond... were connected by runways and operated as one uni t . This combination, by making i t possible to a l l o c a t e orders to 58 the best unit adapted, to transfer between units remanu- fac t u r i n g developments, to divide logs as to species and s i z e s best suited f o r a p a r t i c u l a r m i l l i n conjunction with a general overhauling and speeding up of power, transfer, and manufacturing equipment which was made by the new company ... resulted i n greatly increased capacity of these plants. The average hourly capacity was expanded i n t h i s manner from 49,207 i n 1931 • g to 61,031 b.f.m. f o r the f i r s t eight months of 1933. Late i n 1933, encouraged to do so by the Weyerhaeuser general management at Tacoma, Lewis adopted the Bedaux system of shop management, a " s c i e n t i f i c " method f o r c o n t r o l l i n g labour processes, incorporating a complex incentive wage formula based on all e g e d l y 9 precise accounting f o r i n d i v i d u a l and departmental: p r o d u c t i v i t y . Knowledge of pre-Bedaux work processes and shop r e l a t i o n s i s e s s e n t i a l for understanding the impact of the Bedaux system at WHLM. Although the broad contours of mass production and marketing methods had developed at the indus- t r y ' s more s u b s t a n t i a l enterprises by the end of the nineteenth century, sub- d i v i s i o n of labour processes and subordination of work to machine pacing and the c o n t r o l of c e n t r a l management has been a gradual and uneven development."^ Andrew Friedman's d i s t i n c t i o n between "Responsible Autonomy" and "Direct Con- t r o l " as forms of managerial strategy i s h e l p f u l f or i n t e r p r e t i n g the impact of the Bedaux system: I The Responsible Autonomy type of strategy attempts to harness the a d a p t a b i l i t y of labour power by giving workers leeway and encouraging them to adapt to changing s i t u a t i o n s i n a manner b e n e f i c i a l to the firm. To do t h i s top managers give workers status, authority and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . . . . The Direct Control type of strategy t r i e s to l i m i t the scope for labour power to vary by coercive threats, close supervision, and minimising i n d i v i d u a l worker r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . H The May, 1920, 4L B u l l e t i n ' s discussion of labour r e l a t i o n s at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company provides a h e l p f u l synoptic expression of the ethos of "Responsible Autonomy" i n l a r g e - s c a l e , loosely managed lumber m i l l s : 59 [The St. Paul m l l l s j had been operated f o r years without a d e f i n i t e labor p o l i c y . Because of i t s s i z e and the number of employees, i t had been impossible for the executive to have personal r e l a t i o n s with a l l the workers. The handling of the human element had been l e f t to the d i s p o s i t i o n of the many foremen-and superintendents, without, however, any e f f o r t being made for t h e i r guidance. [Major Griggs, President of the St.Paul,] was surprised at the amount of knowledge [the 4L representatives] had about the St. Paul and Tacoma plant.... His crew i s content that he make the p o l i c i e s , but i n t h e i r hearts they know who makes the lumber and i t was with pleasure [the representa- tives] heard from him how they had t o l d the general manager fact s about hi s operations that he did not know. Complaints were raised at the St. Paul to the e f f e c t that the management had only a vague idea of what was being produced i n the plant from day to day. In 1925, for example, the sales manager declared that the company "sim- p l y must have a more comprehensive s t a t i s t i c a l department so that we can know what we are doing." The same vagueness of c e n t r a l c o n t r o l of shop a c t i v i t y 12 was evident at the St. Paul and Willapa Harbor during the early 1930's. The matrix of authority, job structures, production processes, and work- ers' autonomy at lumber plants during the 1930's was complex. Raphael Samuel has noted that, i n Mid-Victorian B r i t a i n , the i n d u s t r i a l r e v o l u t i o n , so f a r from abridging human labour, created a whole new world of labour intensive jobs.... The labour process was dependent upon the strength, s k i l l , guidance, and sureness of touch of the i n d i v i d u a l worker rather than upon the simultaneous and r e p e t i t i v e operation of the machine. This was no le s s true of steam and e l e c t r i c a l l y powered lumber plants i n the twentieth century United States, contrary to Norman Clark's assertion that, a f t e r 1920, a "new technology" caused lumberworkers to become "more 13 technicians than laborers." Much of the p h y s i c a l labour of handling lumber between machines within sawmills had been eliminated by 1900 with the i n s t a l - l a t i o n of systems of conveyor chains and l i v e r o l l s ; d r a f t horses were t y p i -c a l l y replaced with trucks, e l e c t r i c locomotives, cranes, and s e l f - p r o p e l l e d 60 lumber c a r r i e r s for purposes of in-plant transportation by the mid-1920's. Varying degrees of p h y s i c a l strength, a g i l i t y and responsible judgement were, 14 however, s t i l l required of workers i n a l l sections of lumber plants. Planin; m i l l s , v i t a l departments of most large northwestern manufacturers during the 1930's and, at the WHLM, the i n i t i a l point of the Bedaux i n s t a l l a t i o n , provide an i l l u s t r a t i v e case."'"5 As indicated by Table VI, s k i l l demands varied widely at a large planing m i l l during the 1930's, although the bulk of the jobs performed exacted few da i l y demands upon the workers' t e c h n i c a l knowledge and creative judgement. Table VI: Occupations at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company Planing M i l l , December 1, 1930. C l a s s i f i e d by Level of S k i l l and Autonomy at Work Number at T i t l e Wage Number in Category, /diem and i. of Total Foreman 1 $8. 06 Assistant Foreman 1 6. 85 F i l e r 1 7. 28 Knife Grinder 1 6. 42 Repair Man 1 6 42 Head Grader 1 6. 00 Grader (Nights) 1 5. 60 7 4.9% F i l e r ' s Helper 1 4. 80 Checkers [tallymen?] 4 4. 60- 5. 75 Machine Tenders 10 5. 12- 5 44 Motor Tender 1 4. 80 Resaw Feeder 1 4. 76 Graders 18 4. 60 35 24.5% Transfer Operators 2 4. 52 Timber Sizer 1 4. 52 O i l e r 1 4. 20 Feeders 20 4. 20 Lumber to Planer [carrier driver?] 1 3. 60 25 17.4% Trim Saw Operators 18 3 88 Rackmen 4 3 1 56- 88 Transfer Brakemen 2 J 3 60 Offbearers 36 3 60 Laborers 12 3 40 Dividers [boys] 4 2. 36 76 53.2% Total 143 100.0% Source: Adapted from "St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company Wage Scale of Sawmill Operations, December 1, 1930," i n SPT Papers/197/ Comparison of Wage Scales. For levels of s k i l l and autonomy, I have r e l i e d on sources cited at footnote 15. 61 At the apex of the formal planing m i l l hierarchy, the foreman was responsible for supervising the processing of stock according to sales or inventory needs, ensuring production quantity and q u a l i t y , scheduling major repa i r s or t e c h n i - c a l innovations i n cooperation with the plant superintendent and master mechanic (head of maintenance), t r a i n i n g and placing workers, and enforcing shop d i s c i - p l i n e — a task whose i n t e r p r e t a t i o n varied widely among foremen. At l e a s t a few m i l l foremen opposed the diminution of t h e i r sphere of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y im- p l i c i t i n the personnel management movement. The planer foreman at the Clear F i r Lumber Company, Tacoma, a 4L operation of moderate capacity but techni- c a l l y advanced, argued i n the West Coast Lumberman that personnel o f f i c e r s were superfluous: "the proper man to do the h i r i n g i s the man who a c t u a l l y has the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of getting the job done." Foreman t y p i c a l l y exerted some influence i n s e l e c t i n g workers to be retained during seasonal or c y c l i c a l l a y o f f s . Thus, i n at least some cases, 1930's foremen s t i l l performed c e r t a i n roles which overlapped with those of personnel managers, and, with unioniza- t i o n , came in t o tension with c o l l e c t i v e working agreements."^ Without romanticizing the world of the planer worker, i t i s evident that the stereotype of the a u t h o r i t a r i a n " d r i v i n g " foreman ought not be applied u n c r i t i c a l l y to a l l i n d u s t r i a l workplaces; the foreman's work must be examined within a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i o - c u l t u r a l context. For example, i f a foreman who had been promoted from the ranks attempted to break up a group of the more autonomous workers found s o c i a l i z i n g during working hours, he might be shrugged o f f by h i s erstwhile workmates- with a reminder of h i s own p r o c l i - v i t i e s f o r " s l a c k i n g " on the job. If a foreman had poor rapport with the work crews, they might d e l i b e r a t e l y break or jam machinery (for instance, by improperly feeding planers) or simply slow t h e i r work i n an attempt to diminish the department's and the foreman's production record; such, slowdowns were e s p e c i a l l y f e a s i b l e i n large m i l l s where a t a l l y was not recorded, by 62 human or mechanical means, of s p e c i f i c workers' and machinesoutput. x' On the other hand, David Montgomery has noted, a propos p r e - s c i e n t i f i c manage- ment f a c t o r i e s , that "foremen and gang leaders themselves frequently organized 18 t h e i r subordinates deception of higher management." At the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, 75% of the production workers had been paid through the Emerson incentive wage system i n 1920, but s t r a i g h t hourly wages were reintroduced s h o r t l y thereafter; the company subsequently u t i l i z e d welfareism, Americanization schemes, and the 4L as methods for worker p a c i f i c a t i o n . During the depression, the St. Paul planer foreman q u i e t l y advised h i s crews to work slowly i n order to gain a few precious hours extra monthly wages. Toward the same end, he kept the planing m i l l running " f u l l b l a s t , " doing excessive, and, from the sales' department's perspective, unprofitable "blanking;" that i s , running lumber destined for remanufacture as f l o o r i n g , s i d i n g or trim through planers for squaring and regrading, when no orders on the books required 19 blanked material. As i n other mass production workplaces, the most highly s k i l l e d occupa- tions at planing m i l l s were those of maintenance men and craftsmen such as the planer repairman (whose t e c h n i c a l innovations were t y p i c a l l y embodied i n machine design by c a p i t a l goods firms) and the saw f i l e r and k n i f e grinder, who were responsible for keeping cutting tools i n e f f e c t i v e condition. The grinder prepared knives according to models and blueprints i n d i c a t i n g width, thickness, and pattern of cut f o r a v a r i e t y of products including s i l o stock, bull-nose stepping, shiplap, bevel, and tongue-and-groove c e i l i n g and s i d i n g , f l o o r i n g , and a wide assortment of wainscoting and other trim items, as well as surfaced dimension and other stock. The f i l i n g and grinding rooms, ana- logous to the t o o l rooms of machine shops, were set apart from the main m i l l f l o o r , r e i n f o r c i n g the status d i s t i n c t i o n of s k i l l e d workers while providing them xtfith adequate work space. The machine maintenance crew was completed 63 by an o i l e r and motor tender. Depending upon the s i z e of the m i l l , setup men, or the grinders them- selves, changed and adjusted planer knives as necessary according to the pro- gressive d u l l i n g of cutting edges and changes i n the dimension and pattern of the planed product. A survey conducted for the 1930 Sawmill Engineering Conference found only one m i l l i n the Northwest which followed a preset sche- 20 dule for grinding and changing knives. Although the lack of r i g i d schedulin was p a r t i a l l y a t t r i b u t a b l e to technological and sales considerations such as the varied stresses associated with manufacturing a v a r i e t y of products and the i r r e g u l a r quantities of material processed per order, the point to note i s that the more highly s k i l l e d planer workers enjoyed considerable autonomy i n organizing t h e i r own i r r e g u l a r l y paced tasks, while working within the overriding controls of orders booked by the sales department and the progress of material through the processes of production. What was the actual process of planing lumber? Following the 1931 merger the WHLM dry k i l n unstacker — a structure housing a mechanized system of chains which unloaded lumber from dry k i l n cars and ca r r i e d i t past graders who evaluated i t by q u a l i t y standards before i t was sorted and stored — was connected to the dry lumber planing m i l l by the construction of a 500-feet long storage shed (See diagram, page 64). A bridge crane extending the length of the shed was used to transport lumber from the unstacker s o r t i n g chains or dry storage to the planing m i l l end of the shed. A se r i e s of dead (gravity) r o l l s extended from each of the dry planing m i l l ' s three planers at a gradual slope upward into the dry shed. (The WHLM Raymond plant included a green plan ing m i l l contiguous to one of the two head m i l l s ; processes were s i m i l a r to those at the dry -planer, although orders for patterned stock were never run from green lumber, which was susceptable to warping and s p l i t t i n g as i t dried) Loads of lumber appropriate to the order at hand, sorted according to si z e 64 Figure 1: Planing Mill Layout, Willapa Harbor Lumber Mills (not to scale) and grade, were carried by the bridge crane to the planer end of the storage shed and deposited upon dead rolls .at the proper machine. The hook-on man, who set the shoes of the crane l i f t mechanism in position beneath each stack of lumber before lifting, unhooked the shoes when the lumber was properly placed and set blocks i f necessary to prevent the premature rolling of lumber into the mill. At WHLM, a single feeder served each planer or moulder. To plane a stack of lumber, the feeder released the dead r o l l blocks, allowing the lumber to descend to the side of his machine. Each piece of lumber was hand placed 65 sap side up onto a se r i e s of l i v e r o l l s which passed the lumber into and through the planer, where knives, set i n w h i r l i n g c y l i n d e r s , chipped flakes of wood from the material processed to produce a smooth f i n i s h or cut the sides and face of the stock to pattern. An offbearer or " d i v i d e r , " generally an older worker or an underaged boy, stood behind each planer and, grasping the planed material as i t debouched i n t o a trough, f l i p p e d alternate pieces onto either of two sloping tables down which i t s l i d to e i t h e r of the two graders who worked behind each machine. The graders evaluated each and every piece of product according to q u a l i t y and s i z e , used an e l e c t r i c c i r c u l a r trim saw to cut out portions bearing defects, and "pigeonholed" the sorted material i n the appropriate s l o t of a three-tiered bank of temporary storage compart- 21 ments located behind each planer. Graders had greater decision making r e s p o n s i b i l i t y than did other d i r e c t operatives at the planing and moulding machines, and often functioned as straw bosses at head m i l l green lumber chains or dry k i l n chains. At large m i l l s , a head grader was responsible f o r t r a i n i n g new graders and c e r t i f y i n g t h e i r competence. Af t e r the craftsmen, the head grader was t y p i c a l l y the most highly paid planing m i l l worker, and he cooperated with the inspectors of the West Coast and P a c i f i c Lumber Inspection Bureaus to see that orders were f i l l e d i n accordance with standards set by the regional trade associations. Within the planing m i l l s , i f lumber was not being properly f i n i s h e d , the graders or head grader c a l l e d t h i s f a c t to the a t t e n t i o n of the set-up men, who changed 22 or adjusted the planer knives to correct the problem. It i s c l e a r that lum- ber companies' reputations for observing q u a l i t y standards depended i n good part upon the d i s c r e t e judgement of a v a r i e t y of men who worked within the shops. The d i s r u p t i o n of the responsible autonomy of graders under the Bedaux system at the WHLM was one of the t r i g g e r i n g elements giving s p e c i f i c form to the i n i t i a l lumber union impulse at Raymond i n 1934. Behind the planers, when four to s i x pieces of material had accumulated i n a given pigeonhole, pullout men working behind the racks placed them on sawhorses, t i e d each end, and hand p i l e d the bundles on blocks to make up loads f o r a lumber c a r r i e r , to transport to dry storage and shipping sheds. At the WHLM, t h i s procedure was modified i n 1933 when George Cleveland, the dry planer foreman, invented a device dubbed the Cleveland-Willapa bundle trimmer (serviced by a six-man crew) which compressed sets of random length material delivered from the so r t i n g racks, trimmed the t i e d bundles square, and stamped each piece with the company trademark. The r e s u l t was a stan- dardized product, a t t r a c t i v e to r e t a i l e r s and carpenters, eliminating much of the squaring of board ends which had formerly been done at construction s i t e s . According to L e s l i e Younglove, who was a dry planer grader at the WHLM during the Bedaux experiments and the f i r s t president of the Raymond lumber workers l o c a l , Cleveland also developed the idea and technology for producing eased edge lumber (lumber with the edges s l i g h t l y beveled to reduce s l i v e r i n g ) and also invented the s p l i t t e r — a planer which ripped 2"x8" dimension into two 2"x4"'s which were then surfaced and given eased edges. I t i s not c e r t a i n that these l a s t two developments were a c t u a l l y Cleveland's inventions. It i s evident, however, that Cleveland was admired by Younglove as a foreman who 23 combined h i s supervisory r o l e with craftsmanship and inventive genius. Offbearers, t i e r s , and general labourers such as f l o o r sweepers were the le a s t paid planing m i l l workers, performed jobs with l i t t l e content but much monotony, and had l i t t l e opportunity to exercise s e l f - d i r e c t i o n at work. (Feeders are a p a r t i a l exception to t h i s , f o r they were sometimes encouraged by machine tenders to learn to set up t h e i r own machines). Speed and a g i l i t y were e s s e n t i a l a t t r i b u t e s of offbearers and pullo u t men, for lunrr ber would be scratched and dented (lowering i t s grade and price) i f allowed to p i l e up, and machines were not shut down for the.benefit of workers unable 67 to maintain pace with the flow of lumber — which became a source of g r i e - vance when the pace of work was i n t e n s i f i e d at WHLM under the Bedaux system. Howard Knauf, a l i f e - l o n g planing m i l l worker, r e c a l l s that, before h i s pro- motion from offbearing to feeding planer, time used to drag.... They needed somebody to be a feeder on the planer so they asked me i f I would l i k e to do that. I says, "I sure would." That was a change from somebody pushing me u n t i l I got the chance to push somebody else . You work behind the planer and the guy over feeding the planer he had to push you, he had the co n t r o l over you a l i t t l e b i t . So I l i k e d [becoming a feeder]because I could push the guy on the other side and of course i t wasn't nasty or anything l i k e that, but i f there was something I had to do or i f I wanted to slow up a l i t t l e b i t ... there was no one pushing me. Where on the other side i f I wanted to slow up I couldn't because the s t u f f kept coming anyway so you had to keep working.24 Technically advanced high-speed planers introduced at some m i l l s during the 1920's and 1930's a c t u a l l y increased the r a t i o of u n s k i l l e d and semi- s k i l l e d workers to craftsmen. A high speed planer introduced at the St. Paul and Tacoma i n 1928, for instance, was serviced by one feeder, two graders, two trimmers, three rackers, two loaders (who prepared c a r r i e r loads), and 25 one-third of the time of a set-up man. The more highly s k i l l e d planing m i l l jobs were learned over a period of months or years through an informal and i r r e g u l a r t r a i n i n g system. While h i r i n g at the larger m i l l s during the 1930's was t y p i c a l l y the province of a c e n t r a l i z e d personnel o f f i c e , t r a n s f e r s and job promotions were at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y influenced by workers' competitiveness or respect for one another's s e n i o r i t y and by t h e i r attitudes and behaviour within the plant work structure and informal s o c i a l networks, as w e l l as by the foreman's perception of a 2 6 worker's competence and capacity for greater r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . The deferen- t i a l regard with which ambitious young workers considered t h e i r more s k i l l e d mentors, t h e i r own d e s i r e f o r greater autonomy i n work, as well as the esteem with which craftsmen regarded one another's a b i l i t y , coexisted with status 68 tensions and personal animosities. For some workers, i t did provide an intra-departmental cohesion and d i s c i p l i n e balancing the d i v i s i o n of labour and the hierarchy of s k i l l , and suffused the workers' culture with values r e s i s t a n t to being "pushed" by other men, the way one might push a piece of rough stock into a planer. At the WHLM dry planer, the r e s u l t i n g sense of shop s o l i d a r i t y supported the resistance of the foreman and the planer workers to time studies and the systematic reorganization of shop procedures which management attempted to introduce during the 1933-1935 period. Depression era discussions of methods f o r i n t e n s i f y i n g . t h e labour process were i n s t i t u t e d within the Weyerhaeuser group at l e a s t as early as 1931. The topic was broached during May that year at the t h i r d annual Sawmill Engineer- ing Conference, at which representatives of three e f f i c i e n c y consulting firms had outlined the features of t h e i r respective systems. Weyerhaeuser executives were evidently most attracted to the Bedaux system, which was broadly d e r i - 27 vative of the Taylorism of the 1890-1920 period. The Charles E. Bedaux Company, established i n 1916, had become by the 1930's a multi-national con- s u l t i n g firm with branch o f f i c e s i n c i t i e s as diverse as B e r l i n , Stockholm, Milan, P a r i s , Sydney, New York, Chicago, and Portland; the i n t e r n a t i o n a l head- quarters were v a r i o u s l y at London, Amsterdam, and P a r i s . The firm's better known American c l i e n t s included Swift and Company, Campbell Soup, DuPont, General E l e c t r i c , Eastman Kodak, Levi-Strauss, Crown-Zellerbach, and B.F. Goodrich. At i t s height, the Bedaux system was used by 720 companies to control the labour of 675,000 workers. According to Daniel B e l l , the system came into general disfavour i n the United States during World War II as a r e s u l t of union h o s t i l i t y and the d i s c l o s u r e that the company's founder, 28 Charles Bedaux, an American expatriate, was c o l l a b o r a t i n g with the Nazis. I d e o l o g i c a l l y , the Bedaux Company's self-promotion bore c e r t a i n a f f i - n i t i e s with that strand of corporate thinking which sought to create a more 69 e f f e c t i v e i n d u s t r i a l c apitalism through trade associations' c o l l e c t i o n and s c i e n t i f i c a n alysis of " f a c t s " for the purposes of cooperative i n d u s t r i a l 29 n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n and s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . The Bedaux Company promised pros- pective lumber c l i e n t s that i t s methods would increase production 44% per day, while improving grade, decreasing unit costs 20% and r a i s i n g wages 15%. Dis- play ads placed prominently i n the Timberman during the summer, 1931, lumber industry wage cutting drive avered that the Bedaux system offered a "more humane and l o g i c a l method of reducing labor costs" than did t r a d i t i o n a l " a r b i t r a r y " wage cuts based upon the (implied) ignorant opinion of o l d - s t y l e managers, while circumventing the large investments required by the te c h n i c a l modernization of plant and equipment. In l i n e with the broader managerial e f f i c i e n c y movement, Bedaux proposed to eliminate workers' "waste time." Time study analyses would be .used to " r a t i o n a l i z e " work, so that a f u l l eight hours of labour time, with some allowance f o r fatigue (usually guessed a t ) , would be devoted to production. Bedaux time studies and work records, users were informed, were created " p r i - marily ... to give the management a d i r e c t p i c t u r e , an exact p i c t u r e of the amount of work which each man i n a plant i s doing," i n order to determine "the exact amount of each man's eight hours that i s being p r o f i t a b l y u t i l i z e d i n getting out the product which the plant i s turning out." Counteringucharges made by unio n i s t s , Bedaux representatives disclaimed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the speeding-up of machinery, declaring that the Bedaux system simply allowed the use of machinery at f u l l capacity, while leaving the pace of machine operation to the plant management: Bedaux i s a method of measuring labor power by a f a i r and s c i e n t i f i c method and then coordinating i t with the maximum capacity of the plant's machinery. The Bedaux system i s not a matter of d r i v i n g men, i t i s a matter of working the department i n such a way that the l o s t time and the waste time w i l l be eliminated. 70 Daily records would f a c i l i t a t e the c e n t r a l i z e d planning of production and worker placement, enabling management to "equalize the amount of work required 30 by each man along the l i n e . " As l a t e as 1934, the more enthusiastic proponents of Bedaux methods,when addressing p o t e n t i a l clients,couched t h e i r claims for the system's e f f i c a c y i n the vibrant terms of reforming workers'mores that had been associated with the s c i e n t i f i c management and welfare ca p i t a l i s m movements since the 1890's. The system was presented as a set of tools f or intervening i n the behaviour expressing workers' own a t t i t u d e s and thoughts regarding t h e i r work. Repre- sentatives claimed that where no premium wage plans or a l l i e d systems of work control were used by management, a worker would continue to draw h i s hourly pay, whatever i t may be, without any p a r t i c u l a r incentive to get out as much production as poss i b l e , other than h i s natural l o y a l t y to the firm. Bedaux wage incentives would a l l e g e d l y develop the "wholehearted and i n t e l - l i g e n t cooperation of the i n d i v i d u a l employee," and improve "morale, by esta- b l i s h i n g a happy r e l a t i o n s h i p between workers and management." The "cooper- ation of a l l labour" would be " e n l i s t e d " with premium payments for production i n excess of hourly standards. Bedaux has shown the way to convert hidden losses and waste into increased earnings that can be shared between employers and employees. The morale of the personnel i s placed on a higher plane under t h i s method. Lumbermen were assured that "foremen appreciate Bedaux because i t lightens supervision problems"; they "know what they are doing [and] act with i n t e l - ligence"; "workers l i k e i t because they are rewarded with a d a i l y premium for i n t e l l i g e n t e f f o r t . " Declared one enthusiastic advocate i n i n s p i r e d , reforming, quasi-evangelistic tones strongly reminiscent of F.W. Taylor's remarks upon h i s own system, 71 [Bedaux] controls are more or le s s a matter of keeping the men on t h e i r toes and to promote progress, aggressive- ness and thought.... We want to encourge t h r i f t , d i l i g e n c e , and aggressiveness i n every worker.... The people who do not want to make progress and w i l l not adapt themselves to new conditions are people that we are going to have to eliminate from the organization ... and make room for some person who has the p o s s i b i l i t i e s i n them that are going to contribute to the kind of workmanship and pro- duction that you want. We want the best e f f o r t i n t h i s community — we want to pay for that e f f o r t — we want to get r e s u l t s , and we want to make progress.... We do not want l o a f e r s , wasters, and u n t h r i f t y people. In sum, the firm proposed to reshape i n d u s t r i a l shop l i f e by providing i t s worldwide c l i e n t s with s e l e c t factory labour forces imbued with the values of competitive i n d i v i d u a l i s t market actors who, by being "put into business" fo r themselves through the mechanism of incentive wages, would a l l e g e d l y be saved from the degradation of alienated labour — and t h e i r own customary work norms! — while happily f a c i l i t a t i n g the reduction of unit labour costs and i n the long run conforming to the c a p i t a l i s t e l i t e ' s need for a " l o y a l " work force. The f i r s t west coast i n s t a l l a t i o n of the Bedaux system was at Jantzen K n i t t i n g M i l l s , Portland, i n 1925. During the summer of 1928, at the begin- ning of the WCLA's serious drive to c u r t a i l lumber production, a 4L plant, the S i l v e r F a l l s Timber Company of S i l v e r t o n , Oregon, became the f i r s t north- western lumber m i l l to adopt the system. As an aid to labour d i s c i p l i n e at S i l v e r F a l l s , the Bedaux system was complemented by l a y i n g o f f the night s h i f t (associated with curtailment)and by manipulation of family economic i n s e c u r i t y . As the m i l l foreman reported i n 1931, "When we took o f f the night s h i f t we kept the married men and now hardly anyone quits." S i l v e r F a l l s President Myron Woodard, a member of the 4L Board, claimed that, as a r e s u l t , h i s workers became "more contented and [took] a greater i n t e r e s t i n t h e i r work." Work accounting, enforced by the fear of unemployment, e f f e c t i v e l y heightened managerial c o n t r o l of the workers' a c t i v i t y ; as one 68 year-old drying yard lumber p i l e r noted, 72 It used to be that you could look around the yard and see the boys s i t t i n g down when the foreman wasn't near.... It was the same i n every m i l l [department] I ever worked i n . . . . They can't do that any more. At S i l v e r F a l l s , i t was found that even under the Bedaux system, younger men did l e s s work than did the older men, suggesting that during the early years of the Depression, the younger married men were e i t h e r i n jobs that were l e s s systematized and, hence, contained a greater amount of " l o s t time", or they had not learned the older men's habits of intensive work under severe economic 32 i n s e c u r i t y . In p r a c t i c e , when they had the opportunity to express themselves, foremen and production workers took l e s s pleasure i n the "happy r e l a t i o n s h i p " created by the Bedaux system then did the accountants. A 4L f i e l d o f f i c e r observing the Bedaux i n s t a l l a t i o n at an Oregon sawmill noted i n 1936 that while planing m i l l costs had been reduced 15%, the workers' "'upset' range[d] a l l the way from uneasiness to mental 'bloody murder.'" In a widely p u b l i c i z e d s t r i k e beginning September 19, 1934, the k i l l i n g gangs of the Portland Swift plant demanded the suspension of the "infamous speed up 'B[edaux] systems,'" de- c l a r i n g that "Chicago stockyard standards w i l l not s u f f i c e for the people here." A spontaneous anti-Bedaux s t r i k e wave swept non-unionized southern t e x t i l e m i l l s during the spring, 1929, and repeated s t r i k e s — some of them wildcats — were waged against the system at Ohio rubber plants from 1934 to 1936. The WHLM chief e l e c t r i c i a n , who had worked under the Bedaux system at Long-Bell, p r e s c i e n t l y warned j . w. Lewis that Bedaux methods tend to destroy morale and l o y a l t y because no worker w i l l believe that t h i s system i s brought here for h i s own be n e f i t . . . . We cannot, e s p e c i a l l y at t h i s .time, overestimate the value of l o y a l t y and harmony.33- A case study of the Bedaux c r i s i s at WHLM presents an opportunity to examine an issue of broad concern to workers not only during the 1930's but throughout the twentieth century: the i n t e r a c t i o n of modern shop management practices and an entrenched shop culture combining elements of c r a f t pride, mechanized and alienated labour, and patterns of shop and broader community s o l i d a r i t y . 74 Chapter V. The Bedaux C r i s i s at Willapa Harbor Lumber Mills,1933-35; I I : The Ideology and Prac t i c e of Workers' Resistance The Bedaux system's wide vogue i n the 1930's did not enhance i t s ac- c e p t a b i l i t y for workers at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s ; a close examination of the anti-Bedaux struggle at Raymond allows us to consider the mentality and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s of one group of a c t i v i s t workers during the New Deal. Although l o c a l unionists conceded that the company's wages were among the best i n Northwestern m i l l s , they assumed a posture of trenchant opposition to management's program f o r a l t e r i n g shop supervision and work procedures. The l o c a l union's c o l l e c t i v e moral sense was informed by values of d i l i g e n c e , e f - f i c i e n c y , and a proper day's work, whose p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n at the point of production c o n f l i c t e d with the i n d i v i d u a l acquisitiveness and corporate pro- f i t a b i l i t y valued by the Bedaux promoters. David Montgomery's observation that most workers viewed union recognition as a means to aiding them i n shop f l o o r struggles appearstrue for the Raymond lumber workers' AFL Federal Labor Union (FLU) #19446 i n 1934-35. The WHLM workers also sought to manipulate state power to the end of challenging management's new approach to resolving i t s competitive problems. At the same time, the established union and fe d e r a l bureaucracies modified the a c t i v i t i e s of the l o c a l workers and FLU leadership."*" Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s had l o s t $750,000 during i t s f i r s t two years i n business, and manager J.W. Lewis was undoubtedly interested i n making the best possible advantage of the r i s i n g market for lumber which had developed during the f i r s t months of the New Deal. Moreover, the Bedaux system promised to make the greatest p h y s i c a l l y possible use of the WHLM's ex i s t i n g work force (which was working short hours under the LCA production quotas) and antiquated machinery. Lewis believed that the Bedaux system was "one of the best controls ... of business a v a i l a b l e , " and, i n the Autumn of 1933, i n v i t e d the Bedaux 2 Company to i n s t a l l i t s system of work accounting at WHLM. 75 A p p l i c a t i o n of the Bedaux system at the WHLM was begun November 20, 1933, when Bedaux Company executives and personnel, including Edwin J . Hayward, the f i e l d engineer assigned to the project, outlined the system's p r i n c i p l e s and methods for the benefit of the management and foremen. A l l WHLM m i l l workers were given written notice that the system was to be i n s t a l l e d because manage- ment believed i t very important that we know more about our business. This system gives us a de t a i l e d check on the items produced by sizes [,] grades and manufacture ... [and] gives us a more complete cost on the various items. Though the c i r c u l a r made no mention of time studies or the incentive wage features of the Bedaux system, i t did promise that machinery would not be speeded up and that d a i l y wages would not be reduced. For reasons which are not c l e a r , but, perhaps, derived from the desire to absorb the production of the already speeded up head m i l l s , time studies were i n i t i a t e d at the dry planing m i l l . To f a c i l i t a t e the precise accounting of lumber passed through each planer, moulder-matcher, and trim saw, piece counters a n d . l i n e a l foot meters were ordered for i n s t a l l a t i o n on these machines. Because Hayward thought that personnel known to the planermen would be of aid " i n s e l l i n g ... the idea that the measurements are made i n impart i a l f a i r n e s s , " several m i l l 3 workers were d e t a i l e d to a s s i s t the engineer. Time studies began December 2. Hayward immediately noted the operatives' " i n t e r e s t and c u r i o s i t y " and intense "nervousness under observation." Rather than appreciating the "impartial f a i r n e s s " of the process, E a r l Younglove, a dry planer grader and the WHLM FLU's f i r s t corresponding secretary, l a t e r r e - c a l l e d the workers' resentment of the humiliating time studies: Everybody that was around there was very b i t t e r against the idea of having somebody stand over them, looking V around there, necks, that never saw a sawmill i n t h e i r l i f e ; as a matter of f a c t , they don't know a one by four from a one by s i x . They had to ask you. S t i l l they asked you, and made a time-study of your job. 76 On December 19, planer feeders began submitting d a i l y production reports; by January 4, complete d a i l y records were being c o l l e c t e d from several crews. Daily l i n e a l foot reports, keyed to numbered boards hung over each machine, were f i r s t posted p u b l i c l y two weeks l a t e r . Because output l e v e l s were lower than management desired, an "educational program" was conducted to e l i c i t f u l l e r "cooperation"from the planer crews. During the spring, the planing 4 m i l l s were introduced to incentive wages. Certain of Hayward's a c t i v i t i e s were directed to r e v i s i o n of the work process. At the Evans stackers and unstackers — machines which loaded green lumber onto and removed dry lumber from dry k i l n cars — he intervened i n the organization of the less s k i l l e d workers' labour, which had formerly been i n the province of foremen, straw bosses, and the work groups themselves. He suggested ways for more evenly d i s t r i b u t i n g the unstacker chain work load, and urged the men p u l l i n g lumber from the chains to allow graders and the k i l n car transfer men (operators) to spot k i l n cars at the unstackers'; thus, .the lumber p u l l e r s ' work cycle was stripped of some of i t s v a r i e t y and i r r e g u l a r work breaks. To make matters worse, the unstacker was speeded up, and the p u l l i n g crew was reduced from eight men to s i x . A man being trained by the engineer to operate the unstacker i n such a manner as to produce a smooth sheet of lumber seemed unable, and, perhaps, was unwilling to learn the pre- scribed methods. Declaring that one of h i s p r i n c i p a l problems was "getting the k i l n crews to forget the old methods," Hayward placed the k i l n department under . . 5 more intense supervision. Timing of jobs was extended to a l l other departments. Meters were i n - s t a l l e d at the head m i l l s at a l l saws and l i v e r o l l s ; the head saw crews were observed for f u l l eight hour s h i f t s . L i f t meters emplaced at the dry storage shed bridge crane counted the number of loads moved per s h i f t . Hub odometers were i n s t a l l e d on lumber c a r r i e r s , and counters set into t h e i r l i f t mechanisms. 77 Time-study men accompanied the c a r r i e r d r i v e r s on t h e i r d a i l y rounds, and also observed the r a i l shipping car loaders. By-February, 1935, incentive wages were established through most of the plant. The charter of FLU #19446 was i n s t a l l e d with 27 members on A p r i l 5, 1934. Plant union a c t i v i t y and shop f l o o r resistance to the Bedaux system, which were centred at the WHLM's dry lumber sections, undercut the 4L as an i n s t i - t u t i o n securing worker quiescence and corporate i n t e g r a t i o n at Raymond. Early i n July, 1934, F.C. Beckman, a popular planing m i l l set-up man and, since 1924, perennial d i s t r i c t employee representative on the 4L Board of Directors,com- plained to a v i s i t i n g 4L f i e l d o f f i c e r that the "Bedaux system was burning the men up and they were being t o l d by outsiders [ i . e . , AFL a c t i v i s t s ] that i f the 4L was any good they would stop i t . " Beckman got the "blunt of the blow," and i n s i s t e d that although he was " s t i l l 4L and s t i l l believe[d],in i t . . . two.years would be required to overcome the i l l f e e l i n g ... caused by t h i s Bedaux mess and I am not going to be a c t i v e u n t i l there i s a chance to do some good. " The Bedaux system's palpable impact upon job content and workers' d i g n i t y was one reason f o r t h i s locus of unionism: - under Bedaux co n t r o l s , the gra- ders' occupational status became a conundrum. Their r e l a t i v e degree of auto- nomy within the plant occupational structure was affected; furthermore, be- cause the machinery was generally speeded up, lumber was inadequately trimmed and graded at the head m i l l s , and the planer graders lacked s u f f i c i e n t time to properly inspect the lumber. Their PLIB c e r t i f i c a t i o n s were threatened,, as t h e i r percentage of c o r r e c t l y graded lumber declined s i g n i f i c a n t l y . ' ' Frank Mason, who t i e d at George Cleveland's bundle trimmer during the Bedaux i n s t a l l a t i o n , r e c a l l s that "the peons that do a l l the p u l l i n g and sweeping never made cents." Although the graders were able to make a bonus of about $4.00 per week (pa r t l y because they developed the p r a c t i c e of tapping t h e i r trim saw meters whenever planer feeders were engaged i n . c l e a r i n g broken 78 lumber from t h e i r machines), E a r l Younglove's brother L e s l i e did not believe the l a y o f f s and general speedup associated with the system "to be f a i r f o r the workers for the whole." E a r l Younglove, observing the impact of the Bedaux system upon the capacity of older workers to work " e f f i c i e n t l y , " noted i n February, 1935, that the company went to the extent of paying a l l the s k i l l e d men a good bonus and working the common labor to the point of d i s a b i l i t y , so that old men cannot r e a l l y do t h e i r work w e l l . I could name you several men down there that are working i n that plant that are well along i n age who can't do t h e i r work e f f i c i e n t l y any more, and there are several fellows that have been put out down there because they couldn't move fa s t enough.8 The unionists undoubtedly pointed to the e f f e c t s of the Bedaux system on older workers not only i n order to advance the demand for a more moderate pace of work f o r a l l workers, including themselves, but also because t h e i r conception of the moral/social bounds of the workplace community included an almost pro- p r i e t a r y r i g h t of workers to a secure job d i g n i f i e d by i t s e s s e n t i a l p o s i t i o n within the productive system — a proposition not incompatible with either corporate paternalism or the responsible autonomy mode of management, but one which, ..defining the community as including mature workers, was endangered by management's i n t e n t i o n a l i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of the work process. Ray McAndrews was a r a i l shipping shed car loader, vice-president of both the Raymond CLC and FLU//19446, and, a f t e r the 1935 s t r i k e , chairman of the WHLM grievance committee. Early i n 1935, he observed that piece work was "the easiest and most l o g i c a l way to reduce the r e a l wages of the employee," and, counterposing a notion of a " f a i r day's work" to Bedaux's crusading r e d e f i - n i t i o n of optimal p r o d u c t i v i t y , charged that "an e f f i c i e n c y system ... weeds out the men who are not capable of doing a l i t t l e more than a day's work." Other union a c t i v i s t s emphasized the Bedaux system's d i s r u p t i v e influence on intra-work group r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Paul Fowler, a green planer worker, observed that the Bedaux system "seemed to tend to bring confusion between the fellows. 79 It meant generally working against the other fellow and caused considerable s t r i f e . " Dea C. King, who worked at the bundle trimmer during the Bedaux i n s t a l l a t i o n , pointed out that under the Bedaux system, one of a p a i r of workers might receive more of a bonus "than the other one, and i t makes the other man mad." Arguing from the more e g a l i t a r i a n , cooperative, worker- l / ! oriented counter-conception of jaf f iciency," King noted that "Any man that i s mad on the job, or mad at somebody else because he made more bonus, i s n ' t at 9 the best of h i s e f f i c i e n c y at work." At l e a s t one foreman was a v i c t i m to the plant reorganization. As early as A p r i l 17 (about the time the FLU was chartered), Hayward had informed J.W. Lewis that George Cleveland, the dry planer foreman, was devoting h i s time to perfecting the bundle trimmer, rather than a s s i s t i n g with the Bedaux i n s t a l - l a t i o n . (Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , L e s l i e Younglove states that Cleveland " l i k e d the workers r e a l well ... got along f i n e with the union ... and didn't care whether or not Weyerhaeuser l i k e d him.") On August 15, Cleveland was r e l i e v e d of h i s foremanship and replaced by a man f a m i l i a r with Bedaux methods, who worked more conscientiously with Hayward to i n t e n s i f y labour u t i l i z a t i o n than had thee p a s s i v e l y - r e s i s t a n t Cleveland."^ In t h i s rather tense atmosphere, the FLU became ves s e l and v e h i c l e for the workers' mood of resistance. The FLU sought to create and draw upon t i e s with n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s to advance t h e i r shop f l o o r struggle. During August, 1934, the unionists p e t i t i o n e d the Seattle RLB with a representation e l e c t i o n request. It was the i n t e n t i o n of the unionists that, i f they won the e l e c t i o n , the elimination of the Bedaux system would be one of the f i r s t demands raised. Despite repeated requests from the FLU and regional AFL organizer Roland Watson, the RLB's d i r e c t o r simply pointed to h i s f u l l docket and promised to hold an e l e c t i o n as soon as p o s s i b l e . ^ During the summer, the American Federationist (journal of the AFL) 80 c a r r i e d a r t i c l e s describing the successful anti-Bedaux s t r i k e by an Ohio rubber FLU, which resulted i n the removal of the plant manager who had super- vised the system and chaired the l o c a l company union. Armed with t h i s i n f o r - mation, on August 29, a committee of f i f t e e n workers from various WHLM de- partments informed Lewis of t h e i r d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the Bedaux methods. In the course of a "mighty hot" discussion, Hayward, perhaps intending to undercut the FLU's rank and f i l e support, claimed that AFL President William Green was "a good f r i e n d of Mr. Bedaux ; . and indorses [sic] and approves of the system." In September, Hayward restudied the planer and k i l n depart- ments i n search of " u n f a i r " applications of the incentive wage system. The same day, E a r l Younglove wrote to Green, noting that the Raymond workers "were about to go on s t r i k e " against the "un-American, demoralizing, s l a v e - d r i v i n g " system: Our l o c a l voted 100% against the Bedaux System but we are not strong enough [to f i g h t i t ] our- selves as yet being a young organization. The men themselves even 4L's members have gotten together & plan a walkout i n protest against the unfairness of the rotten Bedaux system. We f e e l that a l e t t e r from you personally to show the men how you f e e l about the system would a i d us [in our organizing e f f o r t s ] , because the e n t i r e plant heard Mr. Hayward say that Mr. Green indorses the Bedaux system. Absurd i f you know anything about it.12 "Quite a l o t of t a l k of s t r i k e " was heard at the m i l l during t h i s period; as one unionist r e c a l l e d , "everyone thought we would not object to a s t r i k e . " Without s o l i c i t a t i o n , the Raymond CLC, which had been chartered August 31, 1934, offered the lumberworkers to "support any s t r i k e absolutely." The FLU, 13 however, declined the CLC's generous o f f e r of a general s t r i k e c a l l . It appears that more m i l i t a n t response to the Bedaux system was r e s - trained i n the Autumn, 1934, by several f a c t o r s ; f i n a n c i a l weakness, unconfi- dent l o c a l leadership, and AFL pressure. The lumber workers' savings and l o c a l c r e d i t had been drained during the prolonged 1934 longshore s t r i k e . 81 Under A.F. of L. ru l e s , FLU 1 9 4 4 6 would not be e l i g i b l e f o r f i n a n c i a l a i d u n t i l A p r i l , 1 9 3 5 . AFL organizer^ Rowland Watson, both on h i s own judgement and as a r e s u l t of e x p l i c i t i n s t r u c t i o n s from William Green, urged the FLU executive to "hold the boys down and don't do anything so there would be a s t r i k e , " and advised patience pending the RLB e l e c t i o n . Green did provide some much needed moral a i d ; on September 7 , he wrote to E a r l Younglove, de- c l a r i n g that the American Federation of Labor does not approve and does not support the system. If anyone has made the statement to you that I do endorse and approve the system, i t i s wholly unfounded and has no basis i n f a c t . Your union i s quite r i g h t i n i t s p o s i t i o n of opposition. „ <. E a r l Younglove r e p l i e d that FLU #19446 was indeed surprised and overjoyed with the data that you sent to us regarding the Bedaux system. The information w i l l do much to cement the dubious to our cause.... The Bedaux system i s j u s t cause f o r a s t r i k e but I belie v e we should be prepared & i f we do not get any action we have i n mind plans f o r next spring when the lumber market i s most always on the upgrade.1^ The agents of the A.F. of L, restrained the l o c a l m i l i t a n c y , but t h e i r s e r v i c i n g of the l o c a l , and Green's talismanic signature, probably contributed to the growth of the FLU during late-: 1 9 3 4 . A h a n d b i l l d i s t r i b u t e d at the plant September.r5 announced that a workers mass meeting would be held to formulate a c o l l e c t i v e p o s i t i o n regarding the Bedaux system. Lewis met again with the k i l n and planer crews l a t e the same day. Ce r t a i n l y cognizant of the g e l l i n g Weyerhaeuser group objections to NRA Lumber Code minimum p r i c e s , Lewis pointed out that WHLM wages were among the highest paid i n the industry, and warned that the company's business prospects for the season were precarious. He argued that higher p r o d u c t i v i t y per worker (as f a c i l i t a t e d by the Bedaux system) might circumvent extended l a y o f f s during the winter months.'*"5 82 Unimpressed with Lewis' admonitions, the workers proceeded with t h e i r mass grievance meeting. Contrary to the expectations of many i n the assembly, no s t r i k e vote was taken; instead, the sponsors had determined to p e t i t i o n the Weyerhaeuser head o f f i c e s while waiting for the RLB's e l e c t i o n . Resolu- tions adopted emphasized the point that a moderate pace of work was the r i g h t of a l l i n d u s t r i a l workers. Drawing upon images of degraded labour that were the c u l t u r a l heritage of American workers as a whole, the lumber workers de- clared that the Bedaux system, contrary to management's promises, had created speedup conditions "on a par with the s o - c a l l e d sweatshops." Men were "com- pe l l e d to labor beyond reasonable p h y s i c a l endurance to keep t h e i r machines clear of accumulated lumber [and] to do a d d i t i o n a l work whenever there [was] a slack period i n the regular work assigned." The speedup was enforced with r i t u a l s of humiliation: the worker was required to "make up any overloading of h i s machine by increased labor a c t i v i t i e s or be c r i t i c i s e d f o r lack of e f f i c i e n c y . " F i n a l l y , the assembled workers declared that the Bedaux system, by f a c i l i t a t i n g the production of a greater quantity of lumber with a smaller workforce, was "not i n keeping with the employment plan of President Roosevelt," 16 and was, therefore, "contrary to the National Recovery Act," Thus, the per- ceived goals of the Roosevelt administration were yoked to the ideology of Responsible Autonomy, and used by the mobilized workers at Raymond to l e g i - timize t h e i r resistance to managerial innovation. The resolutions concluded with a " f r i e n d l y " but " p o s i t i v e demand" that "normal, reasonable working conditions be established, which w i l l ensure the laborer a chance to render a reasonable service under favorable conditions." Those present voted 188 to 1 to adopt the resolutions and submit copies to the WTC o f f i c e s at Tacoma, the Washington State Department of Labor and Industry, NRA Headquarters at Washington, D.C,, and William Green, The numbers i n atten- dance at the meeting are p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t , f or only 89 men were then 83 working under the Bedaux incentives, and the remainder were responding to the time-studies i n t h e i r departments or were, as J.W. Lewis noted, "depen- dent e n t i r e l y upon hearsay and rumor for t h e i r judgement;" the strong atten- dance was, then, testimony to the v i t a l i t y of the workers' communication net- works and t h e i r resistance to the degradation of t h e i r working l i v e s . During the week following the mass meeting, 82 workers p e t i t i o n e d the Seattle RLB i n the name of the FLU, again requesting a representation e l e c t i o n . It i s apparent that, at t h i s point, although the union a c t i v i s t s provided a point of coalescence for the workers' mood of resistance,rescindence of the Bedaux system was of greater a c t i v e concern for the rank and f i l e than was the demand for the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining through a recognized A.F. of L. l o c a l . Examination of the a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the mass grievance meeting indicates t h e i r p o s i t i o n s at c e r t a i n shop f l o o r and community nexus. The meeting was opened by the FLU's president, L e s l i e Younglove. Dr. Frederick F. Irwin, Raymond's chiropractor who r e g u l a r l y treated l o c a l a thletes and lumberworkers with sprained backs, was unanimously elected "impartial c h a i r - man." Irwin was a frequent speaker at l o c a l Democrat.Party and Townsend old Age ^pension Club functions. The f i r s t day of the 1935 s t r i k e , Irwin was e- lected an honorary member of the Sawmill and Timber Workers Union; he spoke at various s t r i k e support meetings, argued that l o c a l small business was dependent upon labour prosperity, and c a l l e d f o r community cooperation with the s t r i k e r s . George Cleveland, Gordon King (a Raymond 4L a c t i v i s t during the 1920's and '30's, and, i n 1934, foreman of a WHLM sawmill, and, l a t e r , plant supervisor), and Leo Johnson ( L e s l i e Younglove's neigbour, and k n i f e grinder at the green planing m i l l ) were selected as a "temporary committee to recognize a l l those who wished to speak" and to tabulate votes. L e s l i e Younglove, Paul Fowler (a green planer worker) and three men whose occupations 84 have not been i d e n t i f i e d — Douglas Rains, Joe Leonard, Tom McAndrews, — were elected to present the workers' grievance to management. Persons making and seconding nominations to the committee included Ralph Nelson and Vernon Dunning (graders behind the dry k i l n unstacker, and friends with the Youngloves; Nelson and Irwin were both Mormons and were close f r i e n d s ) , Glen Fykerud ( L e s l i e Younglove's partner when grading f l o o r i n g ) , Henry Orkney (who fed the planer behind which Fykerud and L e s l i e Younglove graded during .the Bedaux i n s t a l l a t i o n ) , E a r l Younglove, and William S t a i r s , Douglas Rains, and Tom McAndrews and his brother Ray (who loaded cars at the r a i l shipping shed and had recently been elected the CLC's vice-president^. L e s l i e Younglove was unani- mously elected chairman of the grievance committee, a f t e r having been nominated 18 for t h i s p o s i t i o n by Fykerud and seconded by Dunning. Two points regarding these e l e c t o r a l proceedings are r e a d i l y evident. F i r s t , at le a s t two foremen, one of whom had l o s t h i s p o s i t i o n because he f a i l e d to cooperate with Hayward, lent support to the resistance movement. Their presence helped to define the struggle as one i n defence of the i n d i r e c t production controls previously practiced, and may have helped to a t t r a c t some of the more conservative, " l o y a l " workers to the l o c a l movement. The second point to note i s that prominent leadership or support posi t i o n s were assumed by several men t i e d by f a m i l i a l , work group, or l e i s u r e bonds, among whom graders were p a r t i c u l a r l y prominent. Graders were the most highly s k i l l e d workers d i r e c t l y t i e d to machine processes at the k i l n chains and planing m i l l s , which were, not i n c i d e n t a l l y , those de- partments where shop f l o o r resistance was most remarked upon i n Hayward's reports. The resistance to the Bedaux system at the WHLM was formally led by work- ers who had come of age within the pre-Bedaux l o c a l i n d u s t r i a l system, and for whom grievance committee positions or union o f f i c e r s h i p s represented the f o r - malization of positions of leadership within the e x i s t i n g workers' community. 85 The WHLM superintendent stated i n February, 19.35, that he knew of no tran- sients i n the company's employee; a large number of the m i l l workers had been d i s t r i c t residents for "some time." The September, 1934, committeemen pos- sessed Anglo or I r i s h surnames and were persistent residents of the d i s t r i c t . The Youngloves had l i v e d i n the Raymond v i c i n i t y about 23 or 24 years; Paul Fowler, 9 years; Joe Leonard, 23 or 24 years; the McAndrews, 10 years; Dea King, about 25 years. These men had a l l been employed by the WHLM's predecessor 19 companies, or were hired shortly a f t e r the merger. With t h e i r mandate to seek the rescindence of the Bedaux system, the grievance committee met with Lewis and Turner, In the words of Paul Fowler, we did not immediately gain anything. We were instruc t e d by the management that we would proceed with the Bedaux system, that [ i t ] was very b e n e f i c i a l to them i n checking over t h e i r plant and that they would proceed w i t h . i t . The locus of power to determine the proper pace of work was c l e a r l y perceived by both management and the grievance committee as .the c e n t r a l point at issue; Joe Leonard asked Lewis who was to determine when the men were overworked, Lewis r e p l i e d , "'We w i l l , ' meaning the management." Again, Leonard asked Lewis whether " i n h i s opinion didn't he believe that a man was. competent to judge a f t e r he had worked a l l day i n a m i l l whether he was overworked or not and [Lewis] said no, he didn't." Lewis advised the committeemen that anyone who didn't l i k e h i s job could q u i t ; the unionists declared that they hardly considered Lewis' a t t i t u d e to be an i n v i t a t i o n to serious c o l l e c t i v e bargaining. Lewis defined the public i n t e r e s t as including the WHLM's use of the Bedaux system. On September 12, he c i r c u l a r i z e d the WHLM workers with a statement l a t e r published i n the l o c a l press, arguing that "Willapa Harbor [had] been more fortunate than other d i s t r i c t s , " and that i t was "necessary, i f we are to stay i n business, to u t i l i z e our f a c i l i t i e s f o r the good of the greatest number of people." The WHLM would, therefore, continue to 20 give the Bedaux system what Lewis construed to be a " f a i r t r i a l , " 86 The workers did extract one minor concession. On September 17, a notice was posted over Hayward's signature at the m i l l s , s t a t i n g that the producti- v i t y ratings of three planer offbearers who had proven absolutely unable to 21 earn a premium would thereafter be posted i n black rather than red f i g u r e s . The pace of work, however, remained unaltered, and the implementation of wage incentives continued. Shop resistance continued pending the anticipated RLB e l e c t i o n . The k i l n men complained that, although they were working harder, t h e i r unit earnings had been reduced. Hayward castigated the lumber p u l l e r s ' work habits and f a i l u r e to make "progress," and what he avered was a lack of coordination and " i n t e l l i g e n t d i r e c t i o n " among them; he proposed that a straw boss be introduced^, at the unstacker, that output standards for a l l work not d i r e c t l y paced by machinery be rai s e d (that i s , c u t t i n g the piece r a t e s ) , and that the work load be further "rebalanced'.' Hayward,noting that the k i l n men's time was nearly-one- fourth " l o s t , " ignored, the mass protests, and proposed to increase, the k i l n men's earnings by speeding up the machinery, which,he reported to Lewis, 22 would "improve the morale i n the department" as monthly premiums rose. Hayward noted that the men behind the planers "consider[ed] one machine to be t h e i r own, rather than [working] f o r the unit as a whole;" they refused to move from planer to planer, "balancing" t h e i r work, as pileups developed. While bunk loaders cleared saw horses of accumulated lumber, the pullout men stood i d l e , rather than aiding pullout men at other racks, or the loaders, with t h e i r work. Hayward was my s t i f i e d : the men: were paid the same standard rates and premiums, so there was, he thought, "no l o g i c a l reason f o r t h e i r 23 a t t i t u d e . " I t appears that the workers were securing b r i e f rest periods not only for themselves, but also f o r the other members of t h e i r work groups, while l i m i t i n g each man's production, and hence, the seasonal l a y o f f s which were being made permanent by the Bedaux speed up system. The workers' 87 resistance to Hayward's notions of the optimal flow of production may be evidence of an agreement across the planer task groups (which included a strong proportion of the anti-Bedaux a c t i v i s t s ) to l i m i t the tempo of work and preserve t h e i r jobs. Management's l o g i c of wage incentives and speedups was countered by the workers' l o g i c of f u l l employment, moderate pace of work, and minimization of overt c e n t r a l controls of t h e i r work. The Bedaux c r i s i s was intertwined with broader issues of Weyerhaeuser group labour p o l i c y . On December 6, Charles Hope of the S e a t t l e RLB s o l i c i t e d Lewis' cooperation i n preparing for an e l e c t i o n . Ingram, Lewis,Al Raught (of Weyerhaeuser-Longview),Ruegnitz, and the Weyerhaeuser labour r e l a t i o n s counsel discussed the issue and determined to seek a delay; Lewis wrote Hope a b r i e f l e t t e r claiming that an e l e c t i o n was unnecessary. Although the Weyer- haeuser managers had cooperated with RLB elections at other m i l l s , a stand was taken at the WHLM, p a r t l y , i t seems, because, by the end of 1934, the 4L was c l e a r l y the e l e c t o r a l loser and the AFL was making a strong drive, with the support of Labor Boards decisions, for exclusive bargaining r i g h t s . Further- more, Lewis was personally obdurate. Management's task, according to Lewis, was to ensure investment s e c u r i t y , "handle employees e f f i c i e n t l y and humanely," r e t a i n stockholder control of the enterprise, and aggressively work to expand the firm's market. He contended that the Weyerhaeuser group, by providing 4L employee representation, insurance, r e l a t i v e l y high wages, and good working conditions, was doing more for workers than were most operators. He asserted that written agreements wittuAFL unions were not an e s s e n t i a l a t t r i b u t e of c o l l e c t i v e bargaining, and. would,in practice,bind only the operator. F i n a l l y , Lewis declared that granting the closed shop would r e s u l t i n increased pro- duction costs, even i f no change i n wage scales was negotiated: the plant manager "would wake up to f i n d that h i s business was being run by walking delegates rather than h i s foremen." Lewis concluded that the Weyerhaeuser 88 24 group might best adopt a p o l i c y of m i l i t a n t non-cooperation with the FLU's. Lewis'opinions were undoubtedly based i n good measure upon his recent d i f f i - c u l t i e s with reducing the labour costs of production; h i s case was made cogent by the complete suspension of LCA p r i c e controls i n December, 1934. It i s in t e r e s t i n g to note that Lewis did not believe h i s free hand i n a l t e r i n g the pace of work to be incompatible with paternal r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , which seem, for him, to have centred on i n d i v i d u a l income issues. On January 11, 1935, an FLU #19446 committee met again with the WHLM management and requested recognition of the union for bargaining purposes; the company again refused to make a p o s i t i v e commitment. The Seattle RLB conducted a hearing at Raymond on February 15-16, to determine whether the union's e l e c - t i o n request was l e g a l l y enforceable. The union presented an e l e c t i o n p e t i t i o n signed by 255 4L, AFL, and u n a f f i l i a t e d workers out of a t o t a l p a y r o l l of 415 at the Raymond plant. The pr o - e l e c t i o n testimony centred upon the workers' desire to create a recognized agency to negotiate f o r removal of the Bedaux system. The hub of the issue was whether the 4L~Bedaux nexus ought to be condoned or broken. In revealing expressions of the unionists' i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the 4L with the speed-up, L e s l i e Younglove declared that at some Oregon m i l l s , They have had them i n s t a l l the [Bedaux] system; i t i s there f o r about a year and a h a l f ; the boys work a great deal harder; t h e i r working capacities increase about one-third and t h e i r pay i s not increased at a l l , and the boys are given a bonus to speed up the work, then a f t e r they get through, out goes the 4-L [( s i c ) ] and the boys are s t i l l working hard, and they don't get any bonus. ROWLAND WATSON: You mean out goes the Bedaux. More damaging l e g a l l y was evidence that a promotion tendered L e s l i e Younglove for a head gradership was revoked during the autumn because Younglove refused to change his a f f i l i a t i o n to the 4L. On the basis of the hearing, the RLB 25 ordered that the e l e c t i o n be held. 89 While appealing the RLB's e l e c t i o n order to the NLRB, WHLM's contract with the Bedaux Company was terminated. Weyerhaeuser complained that labour costs per thousand board feet had a c t u a l l y increased markedly since the f i r s t h a l f of 1933; since i n s t a l l a t i o n fees were to be prorated according to the re- duction of labour costs, the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company claimed that i t owed nothing for the Bedaux Company's services. The Bedaux Company a t t r i b u t e d the WHLM's cost increase to an increase i n small orders, the NRA's l i m i t a t i o n of working hours (which, i t was alleged, forced the company to spread work among less s k i l l e d , l e s s productive workers), and the increased demand for products such as c e i l i n g and f l o o r i n g which demanded more of the head sawyer's highly paid labour time and a greater amount of handling at the shipping department. (The basis for payments was also f a u l t y , for hourly wages had increased 60% under the NRA.) Despite these objections, the contract was cancelled during early March.^ The r o l e of workers' resistance i n the contract c a n c e l l a t i o n i s not c l e a r . The union's encouragement of resistance at the shop f l o o r l e v e l may have re- sulted i n a s l i g h t magnification of production costs. Chet King suggests that the removal of the Bedaux system was encouraged by a s t r i k e or the threat of s t r i k e ; written evidence, however, on th i s point i s lacking. As has been noted, the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company desired not to cause antagonism to the unions and the NLRB. The e l e c t i o n question, however, was already removed from regional auspices, so removing the Bedaux system from the WHLM would not have had a marked e f f e c t on the NLRB; indeed, the A p r i l 23, 1935, NLRB dec i s i o n , which endorsed the RLB's e l e c t i o n c a l l , made no mention of working conditions, but, rather, focused s o l e l y upon the formal question of r e s t r a i n t s upon the workers' r i g h t 27 to j o i n representative organizations of t h e i r own choosing. Once again, Lewis urged Ingram to ignore the e l e c t i o n order and to refuse to bargain with any units of the newly created LSWU. The company secured an 90 extension of the compliance deadline to May 15, and prepared to secure a federal i n j u n c t i o n against the NLRB. On May 6-7, Raymond's p a r t i c u l a r anta- gonisms were subsumed by the great 1935 organizational s t r i k e wave. On June 5, Ray McAndrews was elected vice-president of the insurgent Northwest Joint S t r i k e Committee. The 1100 members of Raymond Sawmill and Timber Workers' Union (STWU) voted, with but 30 dissents, to a f f i l i a t e with the J o i n t S t r i k e Committee; l i a i s o n personnel included the September, 1934, grievance commit- teemen L e s l i e Younglove, Fowler, and Leonard. Dea King, f i r s t f i n a n c i a l secretary of the Raymond STWU, became chairman of the IWA's f i r s t c o n s t i t u - t i o n a l committee, and was a prominent member of the IWA's "white," anti-Harold P r i t c h e t t block. The pointLto note here i s that several of the l o c a l and d i s - t r i c t s e c e s s i o n i s t leaders (the Grays-Willapa D i s t r i c t Council of the STWU led the break-off from the Carpenters to form the IWA) learned t h e i r r o l e as unionists i n a struggle f o r the retention of marginal job c o n t r o l against 28 the WHLM's e f f o r t s to c e n t r a l i z e c o n t r o l of the shop work process. There i s evidence that they made t h i s experience part of the i n d u s t r i a l l o r e of the d i s t r i c t , blending t h e i r experience with reports ( f o r instance, i n the American Federationist) of workers engaged i n s i m i l a r struggles e l s e - where. A capsule h i s t o r y of the Raymond STW l o c a l , printed i n the Labor Day, 1936, issue of the Timberworker (published at Aberdeen but serving loggers and lumber workers throughout the Northwest)..noted that FLU #19446's charter members' resolve [to b u i l d t h e i r union] was fostered by the Bedaux system, [whose purpose] was to eliminate as many men as possible and to get as much work from the men as time would allow. The following year, the Timberworker noted that organized labour objected to a proposal that the Duke of Windsor's American tour be conducted by Charles Bedaux, for the l a t t e r had "invented a k i l l i n g speedup system and Jwas] an anti-labor f a s c i s t . " The Willapa Harbor P i l o t , by t h i s point a popular front 91 oriented newspaper, s i m i l a r l y condemned the Duke's poor choice of tour guide. The IWA's early reputation for rank and f i l e m i l i t a n c y was based not only on dis t a s t e for bureaucratic unionism, as Vernon Jensen argues, but also included a strong o r i e n t a t i o n to i n d u s t r i a l job c o n t r o l — even i f t h i s only meant freezing the q u a l i t y of work at the l e v e l of.responsible autonomy and r e j e c t i n g more overt forms of c o n t r o l . It seems probable that the c r e d i b i l i t y of the anti-AFL insurgence which appeared widely during the 1935 s t r i k e was borne not only upon a d i f f u s e ethos of p a r t i c i p a t o r y democracy, but for some workers, was impelled by the tensions created by the i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of labour e x p l o i - t a t i o n , which was compounded by the 4L issue. The Communist-endorsed Seattle Voice of Action gave extensive p u b l i c i t y to the J o i n t S t r i k e Committee, but from 1933 to '35 also gave frequent notice to speed-up"grievances'in general and to the Bedaux system i n p a r t i c u l a r . By 1936, known l e f t i s t s attained strong pos i t i o n s within both the Raymond STWU (whose executive, save for King, 29 was "red") and the Grays-Willapa Harbor D i s t r i c t Council. Workers' resistance to the Bedaux system at the WHLM was informed by counter-conceptions of the workers' work i n industry — emphasizing " e f f i c i e n c y " as i n d i v i d u a l and group competence i n producing goods of q u a l i t y , rather than a simple notion of minimization of unit costs for a maximum quantity of pro- duction — which coexisted during the 1935 s t r i k e with appeals to the demo- c r a t i c r i g h t s of rank-and-file American workers and which were strengthened, i f not a c t u a l l y created for themselves by the Raymond lumber workers, i n the struggle against the "modern s c i e n t i f i c " methods of the Bedaux system. At the WHLM, the demands for rank-and-file union c o n t r o l were nourished from the same c u l t u r a l complex which supported the anti-Bedaux e f f o r t s to preserve the i n t e g r i t y of shop work groups and informal friendship networks and the values of job c o n t r o l , s o l i d a r i t y , and respect f o r s k i l l and competent workmanship, which these personal networks sought to perpetuate. A press 92 communique from the Raymond lumber union executive, announcing t h e i r l o c a l ' s a f f i l i a t i o n with the Joint S t r i k e Committee, declared that Local Sawmill and Timber Unions throughout the north- west have united i n an attack upon the d i c t a t o r s h i p of Abe Muir. The general b e l i e f i s that Mr. Muir has disregarded the r i g h t s of American c i t i z e n s to have a rank and f i l e vote i n an American organization. Again, responding i n l a t e June, 1935, to the WHLM's attempt to engineer a back-to-work movement among the s t r i k e r s , the union gave notice that we are not anarchists or communists but American c i t i - zens.... [the strike] i s the only weapon we have to force the f i n a n c i e r s to recognize us as a group of men with an American r i g h t of independence[,] and went on to note that the LSWU i n i t i a t i o n oath, which had been i n use since 1881, was "made at Independence H a l l , Pennsylvania, ... and [was] nothing to be ashamed of." E a r l Younglove denounced the Bedaux system as an "unAmerican, s l a v e - d r i v i n g " method of management. This concept of the " r i g h t s of Americans." was, then, used to support demands for greater rank and f i l e c o n t r o l of the job and the union, although the larger p r i n c i p l e of c a p i t a l i s t s ' competence to operate industry i n the i n t e r e s t s of working people, and the r e l a t e d issue of the appropriate p o l i t i c s to be endorsed by the IWA (as expressed most force- f u l l y i n the debates on the issue of Communist membership), remained very much moot points during the years and decades following the 1935 s t r i k e . Regarding the Communist Party, Dea King has commented that he didn't l i k e the philosophy. The f i r s t thing that we talked about when we talked about that old thing was S t a l i n and h i s gang over i n Russia and we didn't want our country run by a d i c t a t o r over here and that i n - cluded the companies. The companies was wanting to dictate.30 In t h i s instance, the ultimately n a t i o n a l - c h a u v i n i s t i c concept of "Americanism," while used to press for c o l l e c t i v e bargaining and c o n t r o l of the job, may, e s p e c i a l l y when combined with opposition to Stalinism, have served to l i m i t demands for or a c t i v e i n t e r e s t i n one or another mode of i n d u s t r i a l s o c i a l i z a t i o n . 93 During the 1935 s t r i k e , 1100 persons attending a s t r i k e support meeting at Raymond May 27 were addressed by the chiropractor Irwin, Raymond Mayor Fred Tregaskis, Rowland Watson, and John C. Stevenson',- who was elected King County Commissioner i n 1932 with the endorsement of the Seattle Unemployed C i t i z e n ' s League. Stevenson, i n a speech a n t i c i p a t i n g h i s gubernatorial nomination by the Washington Commonwealth Federation i n July, 1936, appealed for the unity of farmers, small business, and lumberworkers, castigated the region's large lumber and a i r c r a f t companies as the "biggest thieves i n the United States", and, noting that lumber workers' wages were lower than most other workers save for the needle trades and Southern blacks, c a l l e d upon the Townsend Old Age Pension Clubs, Technocrats, veterans, and labour unions to work for the co- operative r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of the nation's wealth and to "prosecute the present s t r i k e to a d e f i n i t e conclusion." Irwin was roundly applauded when he quoted Abraham L i n c o l n : "'Labor was here f i r s t , and c a p i t a l i s only the f r u i t s of l a b o r . ' " 3 1 During the 1935 s t r i k e , the Raymond unionists used t h e i r community roots to good e f f e c t . Early i n May, "at union request, 20 s t r i k e r s were sworn i n as Raymond p o l i c e and p a t r o l l e d to f o r e s t a l l any vi o l e n c e . " L e s l i e Younglove and Fred Baker (president of the Willapa Harbor Shingle Weavers l o c a l and vice president of the Northwest Shingle Weavers' Council^ defended t h e i r unions' concurrent s t r i k e s at a s p e c i a l meeting of the South Bend Kiwanis Club; seek- ing to cement small business support, Younglove noted that 65% of union dues remained i n P a c i f i c County. P a r t l y to r e t a i n union custom — i t w i l l be r e c a l l e d that the WHLM m i l l force at Raymond t o t a l l e d 25% of the c i t y ' s male population over f i f t e e n years of age — l o c a l merchants supported the s t r i k e r s with extensive c r e d i t . With contributions from farmers and small businessmen, the Raymond lumber union operated a soup kitchen, announcing with pride the a l l i a n c e which J.W. Lewis undoubtedly viewed with misgivings: "We appreciate the s p i r i t of the community: that i f we do,not win we w i l l a l l go down together." In l a t e June, concerned that the National Guard intervention at Tacoma would be re p l i c a t e d at Raymond, the lumber s t r i k e committee again appealed f o r community s o l i d a r i t y against the operators: "Remember trouble never s t a r t s i n any s t r i k e u n t i l the big i n t e r e s t s c a l l i n armed guards to 32 t e r r o r i z e the workingman and the community i n which he l i v e s . " J o i n t e f f o r t s by the sawmill workers and the Shingle Weavers have already been noted; other instances of inter-union cooperation appeared during the 1935 s t r i k e . The Aberdeen press reported that Raymond beer parlors were c a l l e d upon to l i m i t sales of beverages to workers who appear to have "had enough" and every precaution [was] being taken to see to i t that the rule was enforced. Undoubtedly, the unionized bartenders a c t i v e l y aided t h i s e f f o r t to maintain s t r i k e d i s c i p l i n e . More e x p l i c i t inter-union cooperation appeared i n a show of strength July 5, 1935, when the l o c a l Longshoremen, 1000 members of the STW, and the a u x i l i a r y Women's Council of Organized Labor paraded downtown Raymond i n memory of labor martyrs on the f i r s t anniversary of Bloody Thurs- 33 day, the date of the k i l l i n g of two Longshore s t r i k e r s at San Francisco. Thus, J.W. Lewis' c a l l f o r a free hand i n d i r e c t i n g the p o l i c i e s of the WHLM on the grounds that the towns i n which i t operated were dependant upon the company's continuing capacity to extract a "reasonable" rate of p r o f i t , was met with c o l l e c t i v e resistance to the new managerial representatives of the absentee owners, i n a pattern analogous to that which Herbert Gutman found i n c e r t a i n Pennsylvania, Ohio and I l l i n o i s small i n d u s t r i a l and coal mining towns during the 1870's and 1880's. Mass meetings, r i t u a l parades, union s e l f - p o l i c i n g , and a l l i a n c e s with prominent l e f t - l i b e r a l p o l i t i c i a n s who ca l l e d for community s o l i d a r i t y against the "big i n t e r e s t s " a l l were used i n e f f o r t s to i s o l a t e the WHLM and broaden the union's e f f e c t i v e base of support. 95 The Raymond uni o n i s t s ' r h e t o r i c bears comparison with that found i n a series of l e t t e r s to the editor of the Aberdeen D a i l y World; the l e t t e r s appeared a f t e r Sawmill and Timber Workers Union #2507 of that c i t y broke with Abe Muir and had i t s charter revoked, followed by the chartering of a l o c a l led by more conservative unionists and the occupation of the Aberdeen m i l l d i s - t r i c t s by Washington National Guardsmen. Some of the l e t t e r s allude to a parade of 4000-6000 s t r i k e r s and sympathizers, many of whom ca r r i e d large American f l a g s , conducted a f t e r the beginning of the occupation. I t may be noted i n passing that one of the larger Grays Harbor 4L operations, Poison Lumber and Shingle Company, used the Bedaux system, and other lumber and p l y - wood m i l l s used s i m i l a r patented e f f i c i e n c y systems. Women often worked at plywood plants, which struck with the loggers and lumberworkers, and one of the insurgents' demands was for equal pay f o r men and women doing the same work. Since many of the l e t t e r s c i t e d were published anonymously, t h e i r actual authors' i d e n t i t i e s are obscure, but since, as published, t h e i r i d e o l o g i c a l substance became av a i l a b l e for use by the population of Grays Harbor, i t may be assumed that t h e i r content represented r e a l d i v i s i o n s of opinion among working people favouring and opposing the s t r i k e . One anti-union l e t t e r writer c a l l e d f or the teaching of pa t r i o t i s m i n the schools, s t r e s s i n g " s o u l - f i l l i n g marches" and the v i r t u e s of "duty, i n t e g r i t y , and l o y a l t y . " An "Onlooker" asked i f a man who returned to his old job during a s t r i k e was a "scab". Another asked i f "the Communists are going to t e l l us Americans what to do and what not to do," and c a l l e d upon workers to "stand up for our ri g h t s as American c i t i z e n s , " returning to work was said to be pr e f e r - able to accepting r e l i e f . A "Workingman's Wife" declared that the s t r i k e r s ' jobs no longer belonged "to them now any more than they do to some man that never saw the inside of a m i l l . " A "Worker" declared that he "would rather be c a l l e d a weak s i s t e r and working than be c a l l e d weak headed and i d l e , " and 96 c a l l e d upon lumber workers to "wake up and think f o r themselves." A man who went to work behind picket l i n e s declared that he had "some se l f - r e s p e c t and that's more than a l o t of people have who aren't supporting t h e i r f a m i l i e s but are l e t t i n g others do i t , " and urged the s t r i k e r s to be "man enough" to return to work. Thus, for the a n t i - s t r i k e w r i t e r s , mature and r a t i o n a l d i g n i t y was associated with earning one's own l i v i n g , a high valuation of the duty of working, and anti-Communism. On the other hand, a female s t r i k e sympathizer objected to the p a t e r n a l i s t notion that employers should "say what they w i l l do and l i k e meek chil d r e n we're supposed to l i e down and take i t . " George Brown, a s t r i k e r , asked "Why should we taxpayers pay for protection to scabs?" and scored "weak men i n a labor union who are ready to drop out because they haven't the good old American f i g h t i n g s p i r i t . " A "Well Wisher" s i m i l a r l y stated that s t r i k e breakers made l i f e "hard for those with backbone to stand up for t h e i r r i g h t s , and praised those with manly p r i n c i p a l enough to turn down the big d o l l a r and stand true to t h e i r demand, a recognition of the workers' union... No, buddy, j u s t because you got scared of your job i s no sign we are l i c k e d . . . . The m i l i t i a came to f i g h t against poor, hard working men and women whose only weapons are t h e i r s t e e l backbone, t h e i r work worn hands and a plea for j u s t i c e , and the troops haven't alarmed them i n the l e a s t . The l e t t e r concluded that the law and m i l i t i a were "used as instruments by those who have the c a p i t a l " and that strike-breakers were t r a i t o r s against "respect- f u l American working people who are seeking to gain a better American standard of l i v i n g . " Women paraders referred to "our f l a g which i s 'our' f l a g and always w i l l be" and stated that i t represented the b a t t l e for the r i g h t of "better conditions for the laboring c l a s s . " For one of the marchers, Mrs. Josephine Ramiskey,the paraders were " r e a l American working people" and'res- pected c i t i z e n s of our c i t y ; " scabs, on the other hand, were "trash" who had to work under the protection of m i l i t i a and hired gunmen and run themselves "ragged t r y i n g to take a legitimate worker's job." "A Poor Man's Wife" declared that any woman who was "so money crazy she would encourage her hus- band to scab I cannot think of her as one-hundred per cent American" but only as a "vampire"; the s t r i k e r s were " w i l l i n g to s u f f e r a l i t t l e to see better working conditions f o r a l l . " An Aberdeen "Union Mother" believed that any man who took another's job was "nothing but a robber.... If my husband ever t r i e d to go to work now, I would brain him, i f he had any brains. But, thank God, I have a 'man'." This fourth generation American reminded readers that the " s o - c a l l e d 'foreigners'" s t r i k i n g were '"true-blue"; responding to an anti-union l e t t e r w r i t e r , she argued that the f l a g was "more our f l a g than yours, for while [the paraders were] being l o y a l to t h e i r fellow men, you are 35 not being l o y a l to e i t h e r . " As at Raymond, the Aberdeen s t r i k e r s and t h e i r sympathizers used n a t i o n a l i s t ideology and the notion of respectable, i n t e l l i g e n t , "manly" determination to defend insurgent unionism as a struggle for the extension of "American r i g h t s " and d i g n i t y to working people, and to urge s o l i d a r i t y within rank-and-file c o n t r o l l e d unions which permitted but transcended i n d i v i d u a l consumerist acquisitiveness. The notion of property-holding i n the job not only by i n d i v i d u a l s but by the union community, i s hinted i n the Aberdeen l e t t e r s . At Raymond, t h i s was taken a step f u r t h e r , to the r i g h t to comfort and d i g n i t y i n work; to be American was to not be driven to work l i k e a slave. This r e a l i t y of c o n f l i c t i n modes of r e l a t i o n s — d i r e c t control versus i n t e l l i g e n c e , adult d i g n i t y , and responsible autonomy at work — f u e l l e d the capacity to wage a protracted struggle against the Bedaux s t r i k e , and lent p a r t i c u l a r vigour to the q u a l i t y of union l i f e i n P a c i f i c County. Following the 1935 s t r i k e , Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s resumed work August 9, one of the l a s t plants to reopen; with 1600 members at s t r i k e ' s end, the P a c i f i c County Sawmill and Timber Workers l o c a l c l e a r l y became a force to be reckoned with i n the l o c a l m i l i e u . 98 The course of the County's subsequent labour and p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r y c e r t a i n l y bears i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The s h i f t from d i r e c t to i n d i r e c t structures of managerial co n t r o l at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s created a sharp dissonance between the working environment and the ideals of experienced i n d u s t r i a l workers. As a change i n the workplace flowing unambiguously from a conscious choice made by management, ca r r i e d out by i d e n t i f i a b l e agents, such as the engineer Hayward, whose pro- f e s s i o n a l task was to heighten the extraction of labour power from i n d u s t r i a l workers, the introduction of the Bedaux Company's system of shop controls was a s o c i a l act e l i c i t i n g a s o c i a l response by workers i n the form of shop r e s i s t - ance and a union whose leaders were among those men most d i r e c t l y affected by the system. It might be hypothesized that the decision to carry out resistance through formal meetings and p e t i t i o n s d i r e c t e d to company and government aut h o r i t i e s was a p r a c t i c e s p e c i f i c to "Americanized", upwardly mobile semi- s k i l l e d workers such as the planer graders. This point, too, i s worthy of further i n v e s t i g a t i o n not only f or Washington sawmills, but for a l l American industry i n the 1930's. While the desire to e s t a b l i s h i n s t i t u t i o n s at Raymond embodying a s h i f t of power to the workers was. c l e a r , the q u a l i t y of r e l a t i o n s h i p with management was less c e r t a i n . The evident ambiguities of the unions' i d e o l o g i c a l defences — manliness, Americanism, enhanced standard of l i v i n g — permitted both broad c o a l i t i o n s within the unions, as had also been the case with workers' use of the 4L as a pressure organization under the NRA, but also opened p o s s i b i l i t i e s for intra-union p o l i t i c a l f a c t i o n a l i z a t i o n . For some workers, a strong m i l i t a n t union was, perhaps, the means to recreate responsible autonomy at the point of production within i n d u s t r i a l capitalism. The goal f o r others, i f the l a t e r h i s t o r y of the IWA may be taken as i n d i c a t i v e , was not only resistance to d i r e c t management controls, but some form of s o c i a l i z e d or s y n d i c a l i s t control of the productive system. 99 Chapter VI. Conclusions and Some Unsolved Problems This study revises e a r l i e r discussions of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s i n the U.S. P a c i f i c Northwest lumber industry, 1931-35. It finds that the system of anti-union p r i v a t e corporatism promoted by William Ruegnitz and the 4L during the Hoover administration, with support among several well-placed lumbermen and trade a s s o c i a t i o n o f f i c i a l s , was i t s e l f incorporated by quasi-federal agencies administering the NRA Lumber Code. During the NRA period and a f t e r , i t was not c l e a r whether the state would be used to secure a semi-private cor- p o r a t i s t , a l i b e r a l c o l l e c t i v i s t , or a n o n - c a p i t a l i s t form of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a - t i o n s . The 4L d i d , however, seek to secure i t s p o s i t i o n through the use of government sanctions: f e d e r a l law in 1933, and State m i l i t a r y force i n 1935. Its e f f o r t s were thwarted both by the development of a l t e r n a t i v e i n s t i t u t i o n s with a broader base of support, and by operator d i s s a f f e c t i o n with the 4L's e f f i c a c y . The WPA Forestry and Economics Committee 1932 program was given l e g a l e f f e c t by the NIRA; the h i s t o r y of the industry's p o l i t i c s under the Lumber Code should be explored to c l a r i f y the problems of devising and enforcing regulations for the industry: hardly a minor theme for the region, given the economic primacy of forest products i n the Northwest. The extent to which the 4L's operator members before and during the NRA conceived of i t s uses i n the same manner as did Ruegnitz i s for the present unresolved. Evidence has been presented i n d i c a t i n g the existence of disagree- ments within and outside the 4L regarding proper modes of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s , which did a f f e c t the fortunes of the 4L and i t s antagonists. We f i n d , for example, P h i l Weyerhaeuser appearing to move i n 1935 from private corporatism to a form of l i b e r a l c o l l e c t i v i s m which, by written contracts and management recognition of conservative unionists, sought to maintain p r e d i c t a b i l i t y and employer co n t r o l at the point of production. Perhaps future work w i l l c l a r i f y the content and implications of t h i s issue. 100 I t i s evident that although wages declined i n the Northwest lumber industry during the early 1930's, a section of welfare c a p i t a l i s t entrepreneurs, managers, and organization o f f i c i a l s responded not by abandoning w e l f a r i s t p o l i c i e s , but by developing programs which expanded upon them, pressing for power to e s t a b l i s h a set of businessmen's governing i n s t i t u t i o n s which would regulate economic a c t i v i t y i n the alleged i n t e r e s t s of i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l i s t society as a whole. Labour s e l f - o r g a n i z i n g did occur during the pre-New Deal years; the s t r i k e s at Grays Harbor and the organizations of unemployed workers are cases i n point. It i s not c l e a r , however, that the NIRA's Section 7(a) was not a p r e r e q u i s i t e for the prolonged process of e s t a b l i s h i n g , defending, and nurturing l o c a l lumber unions i n 1935 and l a t e r ; stated another way, i t i s possible that the improve- ments i n wages and p a r t i a l economic recovery which occurred i n the summer of 1935, combined with repression of unions (as had occurred i n 1917), would have been s u f f i c i e n t to preserve, and, indeed, enhance the 4L's private corporatism i n the absence of the Regional Labor Board's pro-union i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of 7(a). Thus, i n the absence of either c y n i c a l a p r i o r i notions regarding the p a s s i v i t y of American workers, or Steward Brandes' Whiggish f a i t h i n the v i c t o r y of democratic unions and the welfare state against corporate paternalism, i t would appear that the AFL's i n t e r j e c t i o n of a f a i r l y f r i e n d l y Section 7(a) into the NIRA allowed northwestern lumber workers the time to gain experience in b u i l d - ing cohesive organizations. D e f i n i t i v e conclusions, however, w i l l not be attained i n t h i s area u n t i l more i s known about the s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l h i s t o r y of northwestern workers i n the 1930's, e s p e c i a l l y i n the area.of capacity to sustain a n t i - p r i v a t e ~ c o r p o r a t i s t a c t i v i t i e s . I t w i l l also be r e c a l l e d that, according to the National Labor Relations Board, Long-Bell and Weyerhaeuser did engage i n anti-AFL dis c r i m i n a t i o n . This suggests that while Section 7(a) provided unionists with much needed encouragement and with opportunities to openly organize (in the instance of e l e c t i o n campaigns, for example), and, perhaps, 101 discouraged publicity-conscious lumbermen from wholesale repression of union- i s t s , any f i n a l exploration of the breaking of the 4L i n the Douglas f i r regions w i l l have to consider the r o l e of dedicated l o c a l a c t i v i s t s such as the Norman Lange and the Raymond unio n i s t s . Furthermore, the s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l sea which sustained them and with which they worked to b u i l d t h e i r unions' mental and s o c i a l structures should also be examined. One element of t h i s l o c a l experience was, of course, the issue of deliberate degradation of work. The evidence presented i n t h i s thesis appears to support Brody's contention that the Depression undercut worker's material i n t e r e s t s i n the preservation of welfare capitalism. One i s s t i l l curious to learn more about the 20% of workers at Longview who voted for 4L representatives i n the March, 1934, RLB e l e c t i o n at that c i t y . Intensive c o l l e c t i o n of o r a l memoirs might prove h e l p f u l here, and may also help to elucidate the r o l e of insurance, recreation, and other forms of welfare c a p i t a l i s t a c t i v i t y i n developing a " l o y a l " subordinate workforce. Vernon Jensen's account of Lumber and Labor asserts that the juxtaposed individualism of c a p i t a l i s t resource developers and f r o n t i e r workers nourished the IWW, and that t h i s imputed legacy of c o n f l i c t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s underlay the resistance of lumber workers to the Carpenters' bureaucratic c o n t r o l of t h e i r union from 1935 to the founding of the IWA i n 1937. Jensen's thesis regarding the roots of the IWW's m i l i t a n t a n t i - c a p i t a l i s t fluorescence i s debatable. David Montgomery, for example, has found that workers' control issues raised by the IW were endemic to workplace culture and c o n f l i c t s throughout the United: States, 1890-1920.1 Another observer, f e d e r a l a r b i t r a t o r E.P. Marsh, i n his o f f i c i a l report on the 1935 lumber s t r i k e to Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, contended that the dispute between the insurgent Northwest Jo i n t Strike Committee and Carpenters' agent Abe Muir was a t t r i b u t a b l e to the influence of 102 Communist National Lumber Workers Union a c t i v i s t s who dissolved t h e i r organiza- ti o n i n A p r i l , 1935, joined the AFL, and subsequently offered strong support 2 for the J o i n t S t r i k e Committee. Other than Marsh's i n s u l t i n g treatment of insurgents as unthinking dupes, the point to note i s that although workers with backgrounds i n a n t i - c a p i t a l i s t organizations did provide a key element of experienced assistance for the anti-Muir forces, support for the Joint S t r i k e Committee was founded upon a legacy of struggle between lumber workers and managers on both income and workplace power and work process issues during pre- ceding years, which the Muir-Longview settlement did nothing to resolve. A vote against the Muir settlement was a vote against a return to i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e l a t i o n s formally s i m i l a r to the 4L's private corporatism. The Raymond case indicates that for one key group of unionists who went on to create the IWA, the issues at hand were not simply a greater share of the product of production, but also of a greater recognized share of power to determine the process of production. As has been noted, there was an ambiguity around t h i s issue of co n t r o l , admitting a range of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s from resistance to speedup at the shop f l o o r to f u l l - f l e d g e d s y n d i c a l i s t or, one assumes, given the unionists' r h e t o r i c , democratic state control of industry. The destruction,^ during the 1917-23 period, of the IWW as an e f f e c t i v e force i n the Northwest and the r i s e of S t a l i n i s t sectarianism, l i m i t e d the a v a i l a b i l i t y of popularly acceptable r a d i c a l ideologies, other than that of the democratic r i g h t s of Americans, with which to counter the r i g h t of private c a p i t a l to control the process of production. Community studies of popular culture i n lumber d i s t r i c t s during the 1920's may be useful for determining the reasons for the greater support for l e f t leaders among loggers and longshoremen than among m i l l workers. As Alan Dawley's study of Lynn, Massachusetts, during the i n d u s t r i a l revolution demonstrates, the use of "equal-rights," a n t i - a u t h o r i t a r i a n ideas by American i n d u s t r i a s l workers was hardly unique to western 103 3 Washington State i n the 1930's. The problem here for the h i s t o r i a n of working class culture i s to determine the extent to which notions of American r i g h t s have been associated with labor i n t e r e s t s during periods of open shops and r e l a t i v e quiescence such as the 1920's as opposed to f l o a t i n g i n the general American c u l t u r a l m i l i e u , to be used as p r e s c r i p t i v e norms i n periods of s o c i a l and i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n f l i c t . The present thesis does not resolve t h i s issue, but studies of working-class f r a t e r n a l clubs, veterans groups, the values taught i n schools and Americanization programs, and the exemplary value of mass media p u b l i c i t y given, for example, the use of n a t i o n a l symbols i n e f f e c t i v e general s t r i k e s such as those at Toledo, San Francisco, and Minneapolis i n 1934, may be a u s e f u l place to s t a r t . Addressing the s c i e n t i f i c management of work, Daniel Nelson has character- ized the Taylor system i n p a r t i c u l a r as being fundamentally a "comprehensive answer to the problems of factory coordination." He goes on to argue that the emphasis placed by Frederick Taylor on h i s system as a method of labour control was overstated for polemical and p u b l i c i t y purposes, and he claims that the notion that Taylorism effected a " r a d i c a l r e v i s i o n of the worker's r o l e . . . i s both inappropriate and misleading."^ The impact of the s c i e n t i f i c management movement upon management personnel themselves, however, i n no way obviates the process' impact as a s o c i a l process for the i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of c e n t r a l management c o n t r o l over workers' a c t i v i t i e s . Even i f i t i s conceded that Taylor's decision to emphasize that h i s methods were u s e f u l . f o r countering workers' r e s t r i c t i o n of output was based s o l e l y on p u b l i c i t y motivations, t h i s would s t i l l r e i n f o r c e the point that those i n d u s t r i a l i s t s a t t r a c t e d to his methods and those of subsequent systematizers such as Charles Bedaux, were deeply interested i n a l t e r i n g workers' patterns of work. As has been demonstrated i n the present study, workers at 104 Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s perceived the Bedaux System to be such a potent threat to the r e l a t i v e benefits they received within the responsible autonomy mode of i n d u s t r i a l c o n t r o l that a large segment of the workforce mobilized to o f f e r shop f l o o r and more formal v a r i e t i e s of resistance. This P a c i f i c County, Washington, experience signals the need to be cognizant of s o c i a l , i n s t i t u t i o n - a l , and i d e o l o g i c a l factors informing and informed by workers' responses to d i s r u p t i v e post-1920 innovations i n the process of production. As has been noted, the Bedaux system's c l i e n t s among 4L m i l l s included the S i l v e r F a l l s Timber Company (located i n S i l v e r t o n , Oregon, a company town), the Poison Lumber and Shingle Company (in the small, multi-company i n d u s t r i a l twin c i t i e s of Aberdeen-Hoquiam i n Washington), and Long-Bell ( i n the company b u i l t town of Longview, Washington, dominated by two large producers, where many of the events discussed i n t h i s t hesis occurred). Even i n the absence of s u i t a b l e manuscript sources, intensive use of newspapers and o r a l memoirs may provide useful comparative studies of the conjunction between company unionism, s c i e n t i f i c management, and workers' s e l f - o r g a n i z a t i o n . (A further product of such studies would be a s o c i a l h i s t o r y of a p a r t i c u l a r i n d u s t r i a l e f f i c i e n c y company.) For the management at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , resistance to unionism was c l e a r l y bound with p r i n c i p l e d antipathy to surrendering any portion of the power to determine work processes. The developments at Raymond suggest' that h i s t o r i a n s of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s would do well to look for shop c o n f l i c t s i n any plant where management expresses s i m i l a r claims that a f t e r union recogni- t i o n the manager "would wake up to f i n d that h i s business was being run by walking delegates rather than his foremen." Willapa Harbor planing m i l l f o r e - man George Cleveland might add as an aside that h i s t o r i a n s should also be prepared to f i n d cases at least as l a t e as the 1930's wherein f i r s t l i n e supervisors' sense of appropriate modes of i n d u s t r i a l production c o n t r o l were 105 i n closer accord with those of "walking delegates" than with general manage- ment ' s. One further example of the conjunction between the work process and labour r e l a t i o n s i n s t i t u t i o n s may be c i t e d . In March, 1919, a 10% wage cut was announced at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company. The 4L l o c a l appoint- ed a 25-member committee to confer with the management and t e l l the men i n charge they would personally guarantee through the 4L that the plant would break even on costs, i f the management would stop t h i s t a l k about wage reductions . . . . They posted notices a l l over the place signed by the secretary of the Loyal Legion l o c a l c a l l i n g on every 4L man to use every e f f o r t i n h i s power to cut costs and to increase h i s personal e f f i c i e n c y . The concerted action of the . . . l o c a l reduced losses from 24.4% i n February to 9% in March and increased the cut 9% while doing so.^ Almost s i x t y years l a t e r , Howard Knauf, who worked for f i f t y - o n e years i n the massive planing m i l l owned by the St. Paul and now operated by the St. Regis Paper Company, r e c a l l e d of work i n pre-union decades, that It was a wonder we did i t at a l l but then you either did i t or you didn't stay there. You didn't have a union or anything to back you up. The 4L was there and they cracked the whip and said "you do i t or out" so there was no horseplay then. If you did horseplay, you had your work done f i r s t . You never shut a machine down because you couldn't keep up. You did i t one way or another and that was a l l there was to i t . And that was a funny thing, today i f they're coming a l i t t l e b i t fast they shout "Hey, hey, shut her down" and that was i t and they would shut her g o w n . . . nobody did l i k e that around them days. Chapter III of t h i s thesis b r i e f l y discussed the St. Paul's f i r s t union working agreement signed i n March, 1936. Mr. Knauf's comments (and those of workers at Aberdeen and Raymond) r a i s e questions which should be addressed i n future studies of the lumber industry. To what extent did (and do) c o d i f i e d work regulations conform to shop practices? At what point do pride i n workmanship, the sense of d i g n i t y , and the desire for s e l f - d i r e c t i o n i n t e r s e c t with 106 managerial demands under various forms of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s i n s t i t u t i o n s , and at what points do they p r e c i p i t a t e c o n f l i c t s ? In what way. have work content and values varied with age, e t h n i c i t y , p a r t i c u l a r jobs, and plant s p e c i f i c work and authority structures from the 1920*s to the present? Why do managers choose to adopt or r e j e c t s p e c i f i c mechanisms of control? There are, of course, other problems which should be investigated, such as the i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s of f r a t e r n a l groups, churches, p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s , and formal and informal ethnic community i n s t i t u t i o n s with the pattern of shop r e l a t i o n s i n p a r t i c u l a r m i l l communities. The Raymond case suggest that methodologies by Herbert Gutman and others for studying nineteenth-century i n d u s t r i a l communities may well be applicable to t h e i r twentieth-century counterparts. 107 Abbreviations Used i n Notes* AFL American Federation of Labor Papers, Wisconsin State H i s t o r i c a l Society. Am.Lbr. American Lumberman CHI Charles H. Ingram Papers, Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives. CW "4L BD, Date" FRT G. Corydon Wagner Papers, Uni v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . "Minutes, 4L Board of Directors Semi Annual Meeting, Date" F.R. Titcomb Papers, Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives. Holbrook Stewart H. Holbrook D i a r i e s , i n Stewart H. Holbrook Papers, Dia r i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . IWA Harold P r i t c h e t t - I n t e r n a t i o n a l Woodworkers of America Papers, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia L i b r a r y Special C o l l e c t i o n s . JPW J. P. Weyerhaeuser, Jr.,Papers, Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives. Mason Diari e s PCLC SPT Timb. Extracts from David T. Mason d i a r i e s i n Rodney C. Loehr, ed. Forestsfor the Future (St. Paul: Minnesota H i s t o r i c a l Society, 1952). Pierce County (Washington) Central Labor Council Papers, U n i v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company Papers, U n i v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . The Timberman. WCL West Coast Lumberman. WCR WSFL WTC Le t t e r - books William C. Ruegnitz Papers, U n i v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . Washington State Federation of Labor Papers, U n i v e r s i t y of Washington L i b r a r y Manuscripts D i v i s i o n . Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Outgoing Letterbooks, Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives. ^Manuscripts are c i t e d by C o l l e c t i o n Title/Box Number/File Name or Number. Interviews are c i t e d by name of interviewee, and, where multiple interviews were conducted, by date. .108 Notes Chapter I. 1. For example, Ir v i n g Bernstein, The Lean Years (Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n , 1960). Good discussions of the o r i g i n s of the practices which came to be i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d as the American plan include Bernstein, op. c i t . , chapter 3; Stuart D. Brandes, American Welfare Capitalism, 1880-1940 (Chicago: Un i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1976), chapters 1-4; Daniel C. Nelson, Managers and Workers: Origins of the New Factory System i n the United States, 1880-1920 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1975); and three superb a r t i c l e s by David Montgomery: "Wor- kers' Control of Machine Production i n the Nineteenth Century", Lab- or History XVII ( F a l l , 1976), pp. 485-509; "The 'New Unionism* and the Transformation of Workers' Consciousness i n America, 1909-1922", i n Journal of S o c i a l History VII:4 (Summer, 1974), pp. 509-529; and "Immigrant Workers and Managerial Reform," i n Richard E h r l i c h , ed., Immigrant Workers i n I n d u s t r i a l America ( C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e : U n i v e r s i - ty Press of V i r g i n i a , 1977), pp. 96-110. 2. Robert W. Dunn, Company Unions (New York: Vanguard Press, 1927), p. 4, quoted i n John R. Commons et a l . , History of Labor i n the United States, 1896-1932, Vol. I l l (New York: MacMillan, 1935), p. 336. 3. The best account of the 4L's o r i g i n s i s Harold M. Hyman, Soldiers and Spruce: Origins of the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen (Los Angeles: UCLA Press, 1963). Claude W. Nichols, "Brotherhood i n the Woods: The Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen, A Twenty Year Attempt at I n d u s t r i a l Cooperation" (Ph.D., University of Oregon, 1949), i s a survey of the 4L based almost e n t i r e l y upon 4L and government publications. 4. Robert F. Himmelberg, The Origins of the National Recovery Admini- s t r a t i o n (New York: Fordham University Press, 1976), p. 4. 5. Ibid., p. 76, and passim. 6. Vernon Jensen, Lumber and Labor (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1945), p. 159. In Canada, Shevlin-Carpenter-Clarke also owned the Carpenter-Hixon Co. of B l i n d River, Ont., and the S h e v l i n - Clarke, Co. of Fort Fran- ces, Ont. Brooks Scanlon conducted operations at Eureka, Montana; Foley, F l a . ; and Vancouver, B.C. The Weyerhaeuser group included the V i c t o r i a Lumber and Manufacturing Company, Chemainus, B.C. Adams River Lumber Company of Chase, B.C., was c o n t r o l l e d by the McGold- r i c k i n t e r e s t s . 7. Ralph W. Hidy, et a l . , Timber and Men (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1963), pp. 423-424, 434-437, 444. 8. David Brody, "Labor and the Great Depression: The Interpretive Pros- pects", La^p^_H^tory_ XVIII:2 (January, 1977), pp. 231-244; quotation 109 at p. 242. See also idem, "The Rise and Decline of Welfare C a p i t a l - ism", i n John Braeman et a l . , eds., Change and Continuity i n Twen- t i e t h Century America: the 1920's (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1968), pp. 147-178; Stuart D. Brandes, American Welfare Capitalism, 1880-1940 (Chicago: Uni v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1976), pp. 138, 146-48. 9. As noted i n Brody, "Great Depression," and idem, "The Old Labor History and the New: In Search of an American Working Class," Labor History XX: 1 (Winter, 1979), pp. 111-126. 10. Herbert G. Gutman, Work, Culture, and Society i n I n d u s t r i a l i z i n g America (New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1976), pp. 16, 17, 15. David Mongomery, "Immigrant Workers," at p. 108; also idem, "Gutman's Nineteenth Century America," i n Labor History XIX:4 (Summer, 1979), pp. 416-429. 11. Norman Clark, Mi11town (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1970), pp. 17-18, 232-37; quotation at p. 236. 12. Brody, "The Old Labor History and the New"; and idem, "Radical Labor History and Rank and F i l e M i l i t a n c y , " Labor History XX:1 (Winter, 1979), pp. 111-126. While the lumber industry has not been reputed f o r sharing a p o s i t i o n at the leading edge of technical and managerial innovation with, f o r example, r a i l r o a d s , t e x t i l e , s t e e l manufacturing and f a b r i c a t i n g , auto, or chemical production, examination of the work process i n sawmills may s t i l l be a useful contribution to understanding the ex- perience of i n d u s t r i a l workers during the twentieth century. Acc- ording to the 1929 Census of Manufactures, the lumber industry em- ployed 419,084 wage earners, more than any other i n the U.S. save cotton goods and foundry and machine shop products: United States Bureau of the Census, F i f t e e n t h Census, Manufactures, 1929, Vol. II (Washington, U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1935), p. 34. Of 174,903 i n d u s t r i a l wage earners i n Washington State i n 1929, 40,220 were engaged at sawmills and independent planing m i l l s : i b i d . , Vol. 111:2, p. 1217. Chapter I I . 1. Charlotte Todes, Labor and Lumber (New York: International, 1930), p. 148. Louis Galambos, Competition and Cooperation (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1964), and idem, "The Cotton T e x t i l e I n s t i t u t e and the Government: A Case Study i n Interacting Value Systems," Business History Review, XXXVIII:3 (Summer, 1964), pp. 186-204, have influenced the discussion of i n s t i t u t i o n s , persons, and values i n t h i s chapter and, with Himmelberg, op. c i t . , provide a good introduction to trade associations i n the 1920's and '30's. 2. For Ruegnitz' background, see 4L B u l l e t i n , June, 1925, p. 9. For the background, see Edwin T. Layton, J r . , The Revolt of the Engin- eers (Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University, 1971); David T. Noble, America by Design (New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1977), Chapters 110 4, 8, 10. Samuel Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of E f f i c i e n c y (New York: Viking, 1964), Chap. 1-2; Henry E i l b e r t , "The Development of Personnel Management i n the United States," Business History Review XXXIII:3 (Autumn, 1959), pp. 345-364; and references i n f r a , Chap. I, n. 1. For King L e i t c h , and Rockefeller, see Bernstein, Lean Years, pp. 157-170 Quotations: W.C. Ruegnitz to E. G. Griggs, June 27, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L; W.C. Ruegnitz to CH. Ingram, November 11, 1930, (copy) i n SPT/30/4L; W.C. Ruegnitz to J.P. McGoldrick, July 2, 1932, WCR/3/12: W.C. Ruegnitz to A.L. Raught, October 28, 1931, WCR/3/9; "4L BD, May 20, 1931," p. 7, i n SPT/35/4L; "4L BD November 15, 1926," p. 2 i n SPT/16/4L; W.C Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, November 8, 1930, (copy) i n SPT/35/4L; See also: "4L BD, May 14, 1929," p . l , in SPT/26/4L; W.C Ruegnitz to Charles Ingram, November 8, 1930, and W.C Ruegnitz to J.W. Thompson, May 24, 1930, copies of both i n SPT/30/4L; W.C Ruegnitz to " A l l Attending November 3, 1931, Portland Lumberman's Meeting," November 4, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L. For a l a t e r example, see W.C Ruegnitz to 4L operator Members, November 7, 1934, i n SPT/51/4L: The 4L uses the v e r t i c a l p r i n c i p l e of organization and stresses the mutual i n t e r e s t of managements and men i n companies as well as the industry as a whole. This i s the natural grouping of i n t e r e s t s . At t h i s point, the 4L was under a strong attack by AFL lumber unions. I follow here C o l i n Crouch's treatment of "private corporatism" as a system of i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s characterized by employer co n t r o l l e d labour organ- i z a t i o n , i nsistence on order, without state p a r t i c i p a t i o n or countervailing sources of power, with administered wage systems, wherein c o n f l i c t s are "dealt with through an established system of established r i g h t s " rather than c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s : C o l i n Crouch, Class C o n f l i c t and the I n d u s t r i a l Relations C r i s i s (London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1977, pp. 35-36. Students of p a t e r n a l i s t iconography should consult WCL, October, 1930, p. 35. In a f u l l page a r t i c l e headlined "Shop Committee Idea No Longer an Experiment," J.H. Bloedel claimed that the shop committee's August, 1930, sanctioning of a wage cut — the f i r s t such cut by a major f i r operator during the Depression — had not "impaired that f i n e s p i r i t of cooperation and good w i l l between employees and management that has existed i n our organization during a l l these years." The a r t i c l e discusses the company's annual p i c n i c , which had been organized and paid f or by the shop committee (company union), and features a prominent photograph of J . J . Donovan holding the male winner of the p i c n i c ' s baby show. C l a i r e Wilcox, Competition and Monopoly i n American Industry (Temporary National Economic Committee Monograph No. 21) (Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1940), p. 23; W i l l a r d C. Thorpe and Walter F. Crowader, The Structure of Industry (Temporary National Economic Committee Monograph No. 27) (Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1941) p. 47; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to L a i r d B e l l , October 4, 1933, i n JPW/l/Laird B e l l . Large operators such as the St. Paul and Tacoma, McCormick, and the Weyer- haeuser companies, with integrated operations including timber lands, m i l l s , steamships, and wholesale and r e t a i l yards, may have been able to r e a l i z e p r o f i t s by charging market p r i c e s f or logs cut from t h e i r own timber and sold to themselves, as well as on lumber sold from t h e i r own yards. Hidy, et a l . , passim; Todes, pp. 54-69. I l l 5. Tentative production c o n t r o l e f f o r t s , i n which the 4L p a r t i c i p a t e d , began as early as 1924. See NRA, "Report on Lumber and Timber Products Industry (Summary)," i n FRT/2/WCLA. For 4L curtailment promotion during the mid 1920's, see E.G. Griggs to Norman F. Coleman, February 26, 1924, E.G. Griggs to E a r l M. Rogers, October 29, 1924, and "4L BD, November 17- 18, 1924," p. 9 a l l i n SPT/12/4L; "4L BD, May 18, 1925," pp. 2, 9, i n SPT/14/4L; E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, February 27, 1926, i n SPT/16/4L; "4L BD, May 16, 1927," p. 10, i n SPT/19/4L. The extensive sources for the l a t e '20's and early '30's curtailment include E.G. Griggs to the Tacoman, March 17, 1927, i n SPT/17/E.G. Griggs; E.G. Griggs to Valentine May, September 6', 1928, i n SPT/22/E.G. Griggs; J.P. McGoldrick to E.M. Rogers, October 6, 1928, i n SPT/28/McGoldrick; "4L D i s t r i c t s 4-8 Meeting, October 19, 1928," pp. 6-7, and "4L BD, November 19, 1928," p. 11, both i n SPT/22/4L; "4L BD Meeting, May 16, 1931," p. 9, i n SPT/35/4L; 4L Employers' Organization Committee to 4L Employer Members, January 18, 1932, in SPT/41/4L; G.S. Long, Letters to CH. Ingram and to Mark Reed, May 8, 1928, and to E.H. O'Neil, June 16, 1930, a l l i n WTC Letterbooks. Am.Lbr., February 19, 1927, pp. 92-93, February 25, 1928, p. 65, February 2, 1929, pp. 64-66, February 8, 1930, pp. 64-66, July 8, 1930, p. 64, February 7, 1931, pp. 48-50, March 14, 1931, p. 41, A p r i l 1, 1933, p. 32, June 13, 1931, p. 56; Timb. February, 1932, p. 19; WCL, January, 1930, p. 12; February, 1930, pp. 23, 51; March, 1930, p. 34; February, 1933, p. 5. Curtailment had previously been practiced by the WCLA: see Report of the Trade Commission on Lumber Manufacturers' Trade Associations (Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1922) ,pp. 76-80. Timb., June, 1929, pp. 44-6 describes the Weyerhaeuser-Longview m i l l . 6. Quotation: W.C. Ruegnitz to P a c i f i c Northwest Lumber Industry, November 27, 1931, i n WCR/35/4L. "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t s 4-8, October 19, 1928," pp. 6-7, and "Minutes, 4L BD Meeting, November 19, 1928," p. 11, both i n SPT/22/4L; Harry W. Naubert, memo to E.G. Griggs, November 23, 1929, i n SPT/146/Memoranda; "4L D i s t r i c t s 4-8 Meeting, October 30, 1929," p. 7, and "4L BD Meeting, November 18, 1929," and W.C. Ruegnitz to J.D. Tennant May 15, 1929, (copy), a l l i n SPT/26/4L; "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t s 4-8 Meeting, May 8, 1930," p. 2, and W.C. Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, November 11, 1930, both i n SPT Papers/30/4L. The attempted use of 4L machinery to regulate wages and hours of work as a method of production co n t r o l was concurrent with the Cotton T e x t i l e I n s t i t u t e ' s s i m i l a r use of apparently humanitarian motives to defend i t s programs of output r e s t r i c t i o n by eliminating night work for women and c h i l d r e n : Galambos, Competition and Cooperation, Chap. 7. 7. W.C Ruegnitz to M.T. Dunten, July 2, 1931, WCR/3/7. For examples of scale exchanges see E.G. Griggs to W.W. Clark, January 12, 1931, C.G. Kinsey to E.G. Griggs, January 16, 1931, J.H. Bloedel to E.G. Griggs, January 20 and 21, 1931, E.G. Griggs to W. Clark. J.H. Bloedel, C. Walton, W.H. Peabody, M.C. Woodard, A.L. Raught, H. McCormick, F.H. Ransom, G.W. Thatcher, H.B. Van Duyzen, July 28, 1932, a l l i n SPT/197/Wage Scales; E.G. Griggs to J.D. Tennant, January 12, 21, 1931, J.D. Tennant to E.G. Griggs, January 15, 1931 and E a r l M. Rogers to R.F. Morse, September 17, 1931, i n SPT/35/Long-Bell. SPT/197/Wage Scales contains numerous other examples of inter-company scale exchanges, 1930-37. 8. See Galambos, "Cotton T e x t i l e I n s t i t u t e , " e s p e c i a l l y pp. 155-56, for a si m i l a r f i n d i n g . 112 9. Quotations: W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, August 8, 1930; W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Operator members, August 10, 1930, both i n SPT/30/4L. W.C. Ruegnitz to Lorentz Wage, December 8, 1923, i n WCR/2/W; "4L BD, October 29, 1930," p. 1. Extensive correspondence documents operators actions and attitudes regard- ing the 4L expansion drive. See, for example, T.J. Humbird to F.R. Titcomb (copy) i n SPT/30/4L; J.D. Tennant to W.C. Ruegnitz, May 11, Nov. 11, 1931, i n WCR/1/48; J.E. Hellenius to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 12 and 27, August 3, 1931, i n WCR/1/38; F.R. Titcomb to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 29 and September 30, 1931, and C H . ingram to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 29, 1931, a l l i n WCR/2/42. J.P. Hennessey l e t t e r s to J.D. Tennant and F.R. Titcomb, July 31, 1931, i n WCR/3/51; J.P. McGoldrick, to W.C. Ruegnitz, September 9 and October 12, 1931, both i n WCR/2/5; W.C. Ruegnitz to R.R. Macartney, September 26, 1931, i n WCR/3/8; W.C. Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, October 9, 1931, i n WCR/ 3/9; W.C Ruegnitz to " A l l who Attended Meetings...November 3, 1931," November 4, 1931, and W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, October 23 and November 4, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L; R.R. Macartney to C H . Ingram, November 5, 1931, i n CHI / l/Klamath F a l l s ; W.C. Ruegnitz to C L . B i l l i n g s , November 8, 1931, i n WCR/3/10, Holbrook D i a r i e s ; entries for August 5-7 and December 2-4, 1931. 10. Quotations: J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.R. Titcomb, September 22, 1931, i n JPW/l/Wage Schedules; A.L. Raught to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 6 and December 9, 1931, both i n WCR/2/42; F.R. Titcomb to Executive Committee, September 19, 1931, i n JPW/l/Wage Schedules; F.R. Titcomb to W.C Ruegnitz, July 29, 1931, i n WCR/2/42. For the pre-NIRA p o l i c y , see F.R. Titcomb to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , September 24, 1931, and F.S. B e l l to F.R. Titcomb, September 23 and November 17, 1931 i n JPW/l/Wage Schedules. J.P. " P h i l " Weyerhaeuser, J r . , a "new businessman" of the Gerard Swope type, had evidently developed an appreciation for welfare c a p i t a l i s t measures such as r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s and small bunkhouses (to minimize opportunities f or IWW meetings) as early as 1925, when he was appointed manager of Potlatch Lumber, the Weyerhaeuser group operation at Clearwater, Idaho. In the early 1920's, he had worked at another Weyerhaeuser operation, the Edward Rutledge Lumber Company, whose manager ( u n t i l 1928) was Huntington Taylor, a 4L advocate who had been a member of the Weyerhaeuser anti-IWW w e l f a r e - c a p i t a l i s t Labor Committee during World War I. Hidy, et a l , pp. 253, 322, 422, 436, 518, 520. John P. Weyerhaeuser, Sr., who worked with Taylor, appears to have approved of the Un i v e r s i t y of Washington s o c i o l o g i s t Carleton Parker's logging camp welfare schemes, which were incorporated i n t o the wartime 4L's program: see John P. Weyerhaeuser to H. Taylor, November 22, 1917, i n JPW/4/Labor. For Swope, see Kim McQuaid, "Young, Swope, and General E l e c t r i c ' s 'New Capitalism': A Study i n Corporate Liberalism", i n American Journal of Economics and Sociology, XXXVI:3 (Summer, 1977), pp. 323-34. E f f o r t s to r e c r u i t Weyerhaeuser-Longview began i n 1929: W.C. Ruegnitz to F.R. Titcomb, A p r i l 8, 1929 (copy) i n SPT/26/4L. For the 1931 negotiations, see W.C. Ruegnitz to C H . ingram, March 20, 1931 (copy) to E.G. Griggs, November 2, 1931, and to A.L. Ruaght, December 13, 1931 (copy), and E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, March 23, 1931, a l l i n SPT/35/4L; A.L. Raught to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 6 and December 9, 1931, both i n WCR/2/42, A.L. Raught to F.R. Titcomb, May 27, 1931 (copy) i n CHI / l/Longview; W.C. Ruegnitz to C L . B i l l i n g s , November 18, 1931, i n WCR/3/10. 113 For Titcomb, see F.R. Titcomb to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 29 and September 30, 1931, i n WCR/2/42; F.R. Titcomb to Executive Committee, September 19, 1931, to Managers, March 7, 1932, and to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , a l l i n JPW/1/ Wage Schedules. As Titcomb pointed out, there was danger i n "moving down too f a s t and fermenting trouble. . . . It i s much more d i f f i c u l t f o r large operators to cut wages;" i t took " r e a l backbone . . . as w e l l as the necessity f or being very c l o s e l y a f f i l i a t e d with the manpower i n the operation." F.R. Titcomb to Wilson Clark, March 22, 1932 i n JPW/l/Wage Schedule. 11. Lewiston Tribune, November 17, 1931, c l i p p i n g i n SPT/35/4L. 12. The Weyerhaeuser pine operations had not previously been trade as s o c i a t i o n members; during early summer, 1931, Macartney's proposal that a Klamath Basin d i s t r i c t association be formed was received favourably by George S. Long and F.R. Titcomb; Macartney to CH. Ingram, June 20, 1931, and C H . Ingram to R.R. Macartney, July 5, 1931, both i n CHI/IA/Klamath F a l l s ; see also W.C. Ruegnitz l e t t e r s to A.L. Raught and CH. Ingram, July 7, 1931, i n WCR/3/7. F.K. Weyerhaeuser chaired the WPA organizing Committee: Am.Lbr., August 1, 1931, p. 31. For the WPA founding convention, see i b i d . , August, 1931, pp. 22, 30-32; and Timb., July, 1931, p. 99; and August, 1931, pp. 24, 60-64. 13. Timb., October, 1931, p. 91; "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t s 3-8 Meeting, October 26, 1931," pp. 2-3, and W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, October 27, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L; Am.Lbr., November 7, 1931, p. 56 and November 21, 1931, p. 24; WCL, December, 1931, p. 38. 14. Quotations: "Report of Grays Harbor S t r i k e " , November 9, 1931, i n SPT/ 35/4L; Aberdeen D a i l y World, November 25, 1931. Fraser M i l l s : Fraser M i l l s S t r i k e Minutes, i n IWA/10/11. Grays Harbor: see also: W.C Ruegnitz to 4L Members, November 24, 1931; "Another Chapter About Grays Harbor," December 10, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L; 4L C i r c u l a r s , February 1 and 9, i n SPT/41/4L; Holbrook Diary, February 12, 1932; Aberdeen D a i l y World, November 4-25, 1931, passim. For operators' i n t e r e s t , see C L . B i l l i n g s to W.C. Ruegnitz, November 20, 1931, WCR/2/21; W.C Ruegnitz l e t t e r s to J.D. Tennant, November 7, 1931, (copy), to F.R. Titcomb (copy), September 26, 1931, and to E.G. Griggs, November 18, 1931, a l l i n SPT/55/4L. 15. Quotations: 4L "Report on Grays Harbor Labor S i t u a t i o n , " November 27, 1931, W.C. Ruegnitz to A.L. Raught, November 7, 1931, (copy), Tacoma Dai l y Ledger, November 8, 1931 ( c l i p p i n g ) , a l l i n SPT/35/4L. The 4L Employees' Wood Promotion Committees, financed. 2/3 by the trade associations, originated i n Bend, Oregon, i n 1928, a few months a f t e r the 4L at that town had been s e r i o u s l y challenged by a S o c i a l i s t Labor Party union i n the aftermath of a Brooks-Scanlon wage cut. Subsequently, u n t i l i t l e f t the 4L i n 1932, that company was slow to cut wages, but spread work among long-employed married men. The contrasting models of labour r e l a t i o n s — 4L corporate paternalism vs. wage cuts and l e f t unions — were c l e a r l y juxtaposed i n Ruegnitz' mind. W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Operator Members, September 12, 1927, i n SPT/18/4L; W.C Ruegnitz to 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , November 12, 1929, i n SPT/26/4L; Am.Lbr., March 21, 1931, p. 48; H.K. Brooks to W.C. Ruegnitz, A p r i l 25, 1931, i n WCR/1/6. 114 16. Quotations: Holbrook Diary, November 20, 1931; W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, November 20, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L; E.G. Griggs to W.B. Greeley, February 18, 1932, i n SPT/46/WCLA. See also G.C. Wagner to E.G. Griggs December 5, 1931 i n SPT/196/0perating Data; E.G. Griggs to R.C. L i l l y , October 23, 1931, i n SPT/35/First National Bank; E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, November 18, December 30 and 31, 1931, and 4L Reports on F i r and Pine D i s t r i c t s , October, 1931, a l l i n SPT/35/4L; E.G. Griggs to E.M. Rogers, November 4, 1931, i n SPT/148/E.M. Rogers; Holbrook Diary, January 22, 1931; E.G. Griggs memo to f i l e , December 29, 1931, i n SPT/148/ Memos; E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, January 2 and 5, 1932; J.T. McGoldrick, January 9 and 29, 1932, E a r l M. Rogers (to E.G. Griggs?), January 22, 1932, J.F. Buchanan to " A l l Operators Attending Tacoma Meeting, January 22, 1932," January 23, 1932, a l l i n SPT/41/4L; Am.Lbr., December 5, 1931, p. 52. 17. "4L BD, March 2-3, 1932," pp. 2, 4 and 6, i n SPT/41/4L. 18. Am.Lbr., May 28, 1932, pp. 54 and 56; Timb., February, 1932, p. I l l and March, 1932, pp. 25-27; Am.Lbr., January 6, 1932, p. 27, and June 11, 1932; F.R. Titcomb to J.E. Long, A p r i l 11 and 15, 1932, and to F.K. Weyerhaeuser, A p r i l 15 and 23, 1932, a l l i n JPW/l/Wage Schedules; W.C. Ruegnitz, l e t t e r s to F.R. Titcomb, July 5, 1932, C L . Isted, July 19, 1932, and C L . Lewis, July 28, 1932, a l l i n WCR/3/12; B.W. Lakin to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 9, 1932, i n WCR/2/4; Holbrook Diary, March 29-30, A p r i l 7, and May 31, 1932; Tacoma Labor Advocate, August 15, 1932; U.S. Bureau of the Census, F i f t e e n t h Census of United States, 1930, Population, V o l . I l l : 2 (Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1932), p. 1256. 19. Timb., A p r i l , 1932, p. 15; Am.Lbr., November 26, 1932, p. 38; WCL, June, 1932, p. 9. 20. E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, June 6 and 8 and July 18, and 28, 1932, i n SPT/41/4L; E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 16, 1932, i n WCR/2/SPT; W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, June 20, July 19 and 29, 1932, i n SPT/41/ 4L; W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, July 15, 1932, and 4L c i r c u l a r to Board members [August, 1932?], i n WCR/3/12; and W.C. Ruegnitz to C L . Lemma, August 2, 1932, i n WCR/3/13; Mason D i a r i e s , July 9 and 22 and October 5, 1932. 21. Timb., June, 1932, p. 81, and August, 1932, p. 40. Am.Lbr., June 11, 1932, p. 44, and August 20, 1932, p. 22-23 (emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) ; "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t s 11 and 12 Convention, September 20, 1932," p. 4, i n SPT/41/4L. Mason D i a r i e s , June 14, July 22, and August 11, 1932. For the Appalachian Coals case, see Himmelberg, pp. 151-53, 188, for Compton, i b i d . , pp. 103, 156, 177; the Forestry and Economics Committee was more aggressive i n mid- 1932 than the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which was temporarily muting i t s p o s i t i o n on l e g a l changes; i b i d . , pp. 131, 134, 161. For a proposed Douglas f i r marketing c a r t e l , see Timb., J u l y , 1932, p. 15, 17, 24. 115 The Timber Conservation Board was appointed by President Hoover November, 1930; i t was comprised of the U.S. Secretaries of Commerce, I n t e r i o r and A g r i c u l t u r e , past and current trade as s o c i a t i o n o f f i c i a l s , and p r i v a t e and government f o r e s t e r s . According to the WCL, January, 1931, p. 20, i t was not expected that the Board w i l l attempt to frame any broad n a t i o n a l f o r e s t r y p o l i c i e s [but i t would] compile the important f a c t s of production conditions and trends i n the forest i n d u s t r i e s , analyze and i n t e r p r e t them and develop therefrom recommended p o l i c i e s and programs of p u b l i c and private action, which may secure and maintain economic balance between production and consumption of forest products. The trade journals are a good s t a r t i n g point for examining the antecedents of the 1932 WPA program. For the contributions of Compton, Mason, Greeley, Major Griggs, P h i l Weyerhaeuser, the Timber Conservation Board, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, see, for example, WCL, A p r i l , p. 22, May, p. 29, September, pp. 14-15, a l l 1930; January, p. 30, June, p. 44, August, p. 19, December, p. 40, a l l 1931; and July, 1932, p. 10; Timb., February, 1928, pp. 86-87, July, p. 97, October, pp. 17-18, November, p. 151, and December, p. 36, :, a l l 1931; Am.Lbr., September 13, 1927, p. 49; June 29, 1929, p. 15; October 15, 1930, pp. 1, 30-33; July 4, p. 38, July 18, p.56, August 1, p. 27, August 15, p. 31, August 24, p. 48, October 31, p. 25, and November 21, p. 30, a l l 1931; January 9, p. 24, February 6, p. 23, February 20, p. 42, March 27, pp. 44-46, June 11, pp. 1, 40-41 and 44, and August 20, p. 31, a l l 1932. See also Himmelberg, pp. 104, 127-135, 143-44, 159. 22. E.G. Griggs to 4L Board of Directors, October 1, 1932, W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, October 4, 1932, and E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, October 5, 1932, i n SPT/41/4L. 23. "Report of a Meeting of Columbia River Lumber Industry Employees, August 18, 1932," pp. 1,3; "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t s 4-8 Convention, October 27, 1932," pp. 5, 6, 8-10, 12-13; "4L BD, November 21, 1932," p. 2, and E.G. Griggs to W.C. Ruegnitz, November 28, 1932, a l l i n SPT/41/ 4L. C L . B i l l i n g s to 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , February 4, 1933 and C L . B i l l i n g s to C H . Ingram, February 6, 1933, and CH. Ingram to W.H. Peabody, March 21, 1933, a l l i n CHI/1C/4L; E.G. Griggs to A l l Employees, December 31, 1932, i n SPT/149/Memoranda; J.W. Lewis to CH. Ingram, February 9, 1933, i n CHI/l/Willapa Harbor; Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Executive Committee Minutes, December 9-13, 1932. Chapter I I I 1. For an i n c i s i v e recent introduction to the period, see Bernard Bellush, The F a i l u r e of the NRA (New York: W.W. Norton, 1975). See also the previously c i t e d works by Himmelberg and Galambos, and Irving'Bernstein, The New Deal C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining P o l i c y (Berkeley: Un i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1950). 116 2. J.F. Buchanan to.J.M. Pond and J.E. Hellenius, May 23, 1933, i n WCR/4/20. 3. Quotations: R.R. Macartney to C H . Ingram, February 1 and 3, 1933, i n CHI/1/Klamath F a l l s ; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to A.W. Clapp, February 8, 1933, i n JPW/l/Clapp; E.G. Griggs to W.C Ruegnitz, February 6, 1933, i n WCR/2/7; WCL, A p r i l , 1933, pp. 11-12. W.C Ruegnitz to a l l 4L l o c a l s , A p r i l 25, 1933; C H . Ingram l e t t e r s to W.H. Peabody, March 21, 1933, to R.R. Macartney, January 31 and February 20, 1933, R.R. Macartney to B.W. Lakin, February 20, 1933, i n CHI/1/4L. W.C Ruegnitz to C L . Isted, February 1, 1933 and l e t t e r s to H.K. Brooks and B.W. Lakin, February 8, 1933, a l l i n WCR/3/14; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to A.W. Clapp, March 23, 1933, i n JPW/l/Wage Schedules; A.W. Clapp to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , March 8, 1933, i n JPW/l/Code Matters; Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Executive Committee Minutes, January 20, 1933. Timb., March, 1933, pp. 62-63. 4L Lumber News, April,1933, p. 21; Mason Diary, March 13-16 and 29, and A p r i l 3, 1933. R.R. Macartney to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 7, 1933, and C L . B i l l i n g s to B.W. Lakin, A p r i l 13, 1933, i n CHI/1/4L. 4. Quotations: C L . B i l l i n g s to C H . Ingram, February 6, 1933 and C H . Ingram to W.C. Ruegnitz, A p r i l 20, 1933, both i n CHI/1/4L. J.P. McGoldrick to W.C Ruegnitz, January 25, 1933, i n WCR/2/5; W.C. Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 7, 10 and 22, 1933; E.H. O ' N e i l l to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 14, 1933; C H . Ingram l e t t e r s to C L . B i l l i n g s , February 2, 1933, to W.H. Peabody, March 21, 1933, to J.W. Lewis, A p r i l 13, 1933, to B.W. Lakin, A p r i l 13, 1933, to W.C Ruegnitz, March 7 and A p r i l 12 and 20, 1933, to J.E. Hellenius, March 30 and A p r i l 4, 10, 12, 27 and 28, 1933, and to J.W. Lewis, R.R. Macartney and C L . B i l l i n g s , June 8, 1933; A.L. Raught to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 13, 1933; A.G. Hanson to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 17, 1933; R.R. Macartney to W.C. Ruegnitz and to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 7, 1933, a l l i n CHI/1/4L. C H . Ingram to J.W. Lewis, A p r i l 21, 1933, i n CHI/1/Willapa Harbor. C H . Ingram to E.H. O ' N e i l l , A p r i l 16, 1933, i n CHI/l/Snoqualmie F a l l s . G.F. G e i s l e r to W.C. Ruegnitz, A p r i l 18, 1933, i n WCR/1/29. 5. Quotations: Himmelberg, p. 198; W.C. Ruegnitz to Frances Perkins, A p r i l 13, 1933, i n WCR/3/14; Minutes 4L Local #3, A p r i l 27, 1933, i n WCR/3/58; Mason Diary, A p r i l 27 and May 2 and 3, 1933; R.D. Brown to WCLA Trustees, A p r i l 24, 1933, i n SPT/49/WCLA; Bellush, pp. 14-15. See also Himmelberg, pp. 190-92, 196-8; Holbrook Diary, A p r i l 25, 1933; Mason Diary, A p r i l 24 and 25, 1933; W.C. Ruegnitz to A l l 4L Locals, May 1, 1933; W.C Ruegnitz to 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , A p r i l 15 and May 9, 1933, W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Members, June 15, 1933, a l l i n SPT/46/4L. 6. Quotations: W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , May 7, 1933, i n SPT/46/4L; Mason Diary, May 17, 1933; W.C. Ruegnitz to A l l 4L Board Members and Local O f f i c e r s , A p r i l 5 and May 2, 1933, i n SPT/46/4L. C H . Ingram to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , May 16, 1933, i n JPW/l/W. 7. Quotations: W.C Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs I I , May 27, 1933, i n SPT/57/4L; Loren Slade to W.C Ruegnitz, May 18, 1933, i n WCR/2/30. Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Executive Committee Minutes, May 22, 1933; J.F. Buchanan to J.E. Hellenius, May 23, 1933 i n WCR/4/20; C H . Ingram to A.G. Hanson, May 26, 1933, i n CHI/1/4L. 117 See also; Bernstein, New Deal, p. 34; W.C. Ruegnitz to CH. Ingram, A p r i l 7, 18 and 23, 1933, i n WCR/3/14; W.C. Ruegnitz to CH. Ingram, May 11, 1933 and CH. Ingram, l e t t e r s to W.H. Peabody and A.L. Raught, May 25, 1933, i n CHI/1/4L; W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs I I , May 27 and June 1, 1933, and Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t 6 Board Meeting, December 18, 1933, i n SPT/57/4L; Loren Slade to W.C. Ruegnitz, May 18, 1933, i n WCR/2/30; 4L Lumber News, November 1, 1933, p. 6. 8. Loehr, pp. 100-102; Mason Diary, June 6, 1934; the Lumber Code i s printed i n Am.Lbr., September 2, 1933, pp. 26-38. 9. Loren Slade to W.C. Ruegnitz, May 16, 1933, i n WCR/2/20; J.E. Hellenius to 4L HQ, May 27, 1933, Brooks-Scanlon 4L Local to 4L Board of D i r e c t o r s , May 27, 1933, and H.K. Brooks to W.C. Ruegnitz, June 6, 1933, a l l i n WCR/ 1/37; Dave Winton to Jack Clayton, July 25, 1933, i n WCR/3/48. 10. Loren Slade to W.C. Ruegnitz, May 16, 1933, i n WCR/2/20; Minutes of the 4L Meeting, Local 16:6, June 14, 1933, i n WCR/3/58; Tacoma Labor Advocate, July 7, 1933; Tacoma News Tribune, July 1, 1933; H.S. Mcllvaigh to Frances Perkins, June 29, 1933, and Federated Press release, June 30, 1933, both i n PCLC/20/6. 11. Decisions of the National Labor Relations Board, Vol. II (Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1935), pp. 298-306; Tacoma Labor Advocate, June 23 and July 7 and 21, 1933; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to A.W. Clapp, August 18, 1933, i n JPW/l/clapp; and Thomas J . Linton to James A. Taylor, October 6, 1933, i n WSF/7/39. 12. H.S. Mcllvaigh l e t t e r s to William Green, June 16, 1922, and to C C D i l l , June 13, 1933, both i n PCLC/20/6. H.S. Mcllvaigh to William Green, June 24, 1933, i n PCLC/20/1; William Green to H.S. Mcllvaigh, June 15, 1933, i n PCLC/5/4; and Tacoma Labor Advocate, June 16, 23, and 30, 1933. 13. "Minutes, 4L BD, June 23-24, 1933," W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs I I , June 9, 1933, "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t 6, Meeting, June 19, 1933," W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Operator Members, June 29, 1933, a l l i n SPT/46/4L; E.G. Griggs I I to Executive Committee, June 24, 1933, i n SPT/149/Memos; Tacoma News Tribune, July 1, 1933. 14. E.G. Griggs II to W.C. Ruegnitz, July 11, 1933; W.C. Ruegnitz l e t t e r s to W.B. Greeley and to 4L Members, July 1, 1933, a l l i n SPT/46/4L: W.B. Greeley to E.W. Demarest, July 15, 1933, i n SPT/199/Joint Committee; F.E. Weyerhaeuser to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , July 31, 1933, i n ; JPW/l/F.E. Weyerhaeuser; E.G. Griggs to A l l Employees, July 29, 1933, i n SPT/149/ Memos; WCL, August, 1933, p. 6. 15. W.C. Ruegnitz to A l l 4L Operator Members, September 18, 1933, and "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t 6 Board, December 18, 1933", pp. 1-2, both i n SPT/46/4L; M.T. Owre to W.C. Ruegnitz, February 21, 1934, i n WCR/2/15; West Coast-Lumber- •.mens-jAsso^Giafcion^Inf ormat-fon'"Department' C i r c u l a r , March 22, 1934, i n SPT/199/Joint Committee on Labor; Thomas J . Linton to James Taylor, October 6, 1933, i n WSF/7/39. 118 16. R.E. Earley to W.C. Ruegnitz, September 26, 1933, i n WCR/2/7, 17. M.T. Owre to W.C. Ruegnitz, October 10, 1933, i n WCR/2/15; and J.M. Pond to W.C. Ruegnitz, November 10, 1933, i n WCR/2/20; W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Executive Committee, October 4, 1933, i n WCR/3/15; W.E. Lamm to C L . Isted, June 18, 1936, i n WCR/3/49; M.T. Owre l e t t e r s to W.C. Ruegnitz, June 6 and 7, 1934, i n WCR/2/14. W.C. Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 18 and June 10, 1933, i n CHI/2/14. 18. "Minutes, 4L D i s t r i c t 4, 5 and 6 Board Meeting, December 18, 1933", p. 5 and passim, SPT/18/4L. 19. "4L BD, January 23-24, 1934," pp. 2-5, i n SPT/51/4L; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to Executive Committee, February 10, 1934, i n JPW/2/Executive Committee; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to A.W. Clapp, February 1 and 12, 1934, i n JPW/2/Clapp; W.C. Ruegnitz to Western Lumber Industry, February 28, 1934, i n SPT/51/Labor; "4L BD, A p r i l 12-13, 1934," pp. 5-7, i n CHI/2/4L; Am.Lbr., February 17, 1934, p. 23, and March 3, 1934, p. 49. 20. A.L. Raught to W.C. Ruegnitz, A p r i l 5, 1934, i n WCR/2/31; A.L. Raught to C H . Ingram, February 12, 1934, i n CHI/2/Labor; C H . Ingram to E.H. O ' N e i l l , L.N. Reichman, and J.W. Lewis, February 17, 1934, i n CHI/1/4L; A.D. Chisholm to W.C. Ruegnitz, February 3, 1934, i n WCR/1/10; Sage-Zeimer to 4L Headquarters, February 20, 1934, i n WCR/4/16; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.R. Titcomb, March 5, 1934, and C H . Ingram to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , May 15, 1934, both i n JPW/2/Interoffice; "Minutes, Meeting of Representa- ives of Weyerhaeuser Timber Company and Long-Bell, March 12, 1934," "Memo of Meeting Before Seattle Regional Labor Board, March 17, 1934," and J.P. Weyerhaeuser to J.G. Eddy, A p r i l 18, 1934, a l l i n JPW/2/RLB; W.C. Smith to W.C. Ruegnitz, A p r i l 5, 1934, i n WCR/2/31; Washington State Labor News, October 5, 1934, p. 1; Oliver Westbrook to A.D. Chisholm, May 2, 1935, i n WCR/4/21. 21. Statement by the President, March 25, 1934, i n SPT/51/4L; WCLA Information Department Release, March 22, 1934, i n SPT/199/Joint Committee on Labor; Roger A. Jones to James Taylor, March 27 and 31, 1934, and W.C. Ruegnitz to Hugh Johnson, March 15, 1934, (copy), a l l i n WSF/7/34; C L . B i l l i n g s to D.T. Mason, July 19, 1934, i n WCR/3/50; 4L Lumber News, August 1, 1934, P- 3. 22. Quotations: W.C. Ruegnitz to 4L Operators, November 7, 1934, i n SPT/51/4L; J.P. Weyerbaeuser, J r . , to managers, January 4, 1935, i n JPW/3/Labor. R. H a l l i d y to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , October 2, 1934, i n JPW/2/Industry Code; Timb., September, 1934, p. 52; October, 1934, pp. 10, 24-26, 52-53; November, 1934, pp. ,10-11; December, 1934, p. 92; C H . Ingram to Plant Managers, December 21, 1934, i n CHI/2/Labor; C H . Ingram to W.C Ruegnitz, June 11, 1934, i n CHI/2/4L; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E. Weyerhaeuser, December 1 and 11, 1934,.in JPW/2/Regional Labor Board. 4L Lumber News, July, 1934, pp. 10, 16; B r i e f of the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company i n the Matter of LSWU 18246 vs. the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Before the National Labor Relations Board, i n JPW/2/Regional Labor Board; Wilson Compton, "What i s Ahead?" December 31, 1934, i n SPT/58/NLMA; W.C. Ruegnitz to David T. Mason, August 29, 1934, i n WCR/3/10. 119 23. WTC Executive Committee, Minutes, January 7-8, 1935 (Weyerhaeuser Archives); J.P. Weyerhauser, J r . , to managers, January 14, 1935, i n JPW/3/Labor. 24. Jensen, p. 161; J.D. Tennant to David T. Mason, A p r i l 6, 1935, in WCR/3/49. 25. Jensen, chap. 9, unless otherwise noted, i s the source on which discussion of the 1935 s t r i k e i s based. The conservative reputation of the Carpenters n a t i o n a l l y cannot, of course, always be read into t h e i r l o c a l unions. UBCJA Local #562, Everett, and the Central Labor Council of the same c i t y , resolved about February 20, 1935, that President Roosevelt and the Congress, i n order to "inaugurate more j u s t and s c i e n t i f i c methods of wealth, production, and j u s t d i s t r i b u t i o n thereof," thereby precluding "a very probable period of s t r i f e and bloodshead," ought to immediately s o c i a l i z e industry,, banking, and transportation. And . . . to insure peace and t r a n q u i l i t y , pass adequate unemployment insurance, old age pensions, a two year moratorium on a l l debts except to the government, and other necessary s o c i a l measures. Copies of the re s o l u t i o n were forwarded to Roosevelt, Congressmen, the Presidents of the Washington, Oregon, C a l i f o r n i a , Idaho, and Montana, and a l l Washington state Central Labor Councils. During the 1935 lumber s t r i k e , Everett was a center of insurgent unionism; the Central Labor Council voted to c a l l a general s t r i k e i f t h e i r c i t y was occupied by the National Guard. The r a d i c a l i s a t i o n of the Everett s k i l l e d workers should be investigated. Copy of re s o l u t i o n i n PCLC/7/7. J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E. Weyerhaeuser, A p r i l 12, 1935, i n JPW/3/ FEW; L a i r d B e l l to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , A p r i l 12 and 13, 1935, i n JPW/ 3/Laird B e l l . Kenneth Davis to M i l l Managers, A p r i l 19, 1935, i n PCLC/7/16; National Labor Relations Board, Decisions and Orders, Vol. II (Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1935), pp. 405-407; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . to F.E. Weyerhauser, A p r i l 30 and May 2, 4, and 6, 1935, i n JPW/3/FEW. The 4L F i r Wage Board employer members were Roy Morse (Long-Bell), Spike Griggs and E.S. Downing (Western Lumber Company): 4L Lumber News, May 1, 1934, p. 7. 26. J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E.W. Weyerhaeuser, May 2 and 7, 1935, i n JPW/3/FEW. 27. E.G. Griggs I I , Memo of Telephone Conversation with M.H. Jones, A p r i l 17, 1935, and Minutes of (Operators') Meetings, A p r i l 10, May 1, 3, and 23, 1935, a l l i n CW/83/37. 28. Minutes of (Operators') Meetings, May 14, 21, and 23, 1935, i n CW/83/37. 29. W.C. Ruegnitz to J.W. Blodgett, June 15, 1935, and to D.T. Mason, June 1, 1935, both i n WCR/3/23; J.F. Buchanan to W.C. Ruegnitz, June 13, 1935, i n WCR/1/41; B.G. Floyd Interview. Tacoma Daily Ledger, June 8 and 17, 1935. 120 30. I b i d . , June 25 and 29, 1935; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E. Weyerhaeuser, June 26 and July 3, 1935, both i n JPW/3/FEW. 31. Crow's Qigest, July 11, 1935, i n SPT/201/Strike; Sage-Ziemer to Folks (4L Headquarters), August 6, 1935, i n WCR/4/7; F. R. Titcomb to Managers, November 4, 1935, i n FR T / l / I n t e r o f f i c e ; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to Directors, October 30, 1935, i n JPW/3/WTC Directors; J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E. Weyerhaeuser, November 4, 1935, in JPW/3/FEW. 32. "St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and Lumber and Sawmill Workers' Union Local No. 2664, Working Agreement (Tacoma P l a n t ) , " March 15, 1936, i n SPT/199/Copies of Instruments. 33. Jensen, p. 185. For the early IWA period, see i b i d . , chaps. 10-13. Chapter IV 1. Hugh G.J. A i t k i n , Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal (Cambridge: Harvard Uni v e r s i t y Press, 1960); Katherine Stone, "The Origins of Job Structures i n the Steel Industry," Radical American VII, pp. 19-66; Harry Braverman, Labor and Monopoly C a p i t a l (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974), pp. 85-138; Daniel C. Nelson, Managers and Workers; idem., " S c i e n t i f i c Management, Systematic Management, and Labor, 1988-1915," Business History Review XLVIII:4 (Winter, 1974), pp. 479-500; idem, "Taylorism and the Workers at Bethlehem S t e e l , " Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography CI (1977), pp. 479-500; idem., "The New Factory System and the Unions: The National Cash Register Company Dispute of 1901," Labor History XV:2 (Spring, 1974), pp. 163-178; David Montgomery, "The 'New Unionism'"; idem., "Workers' Control of Machine Production"; idem., "Immigrant Workers and Managerial Reform." A useful introduction to the l i t e r a t u r e i s Jeremy Brecher, "Uncovering the Hidden History of the Workplace," Review of Radical P o l i t i c a l Economics X:4 (Winter, 1978), pp. 1-21. David Brody, "Radical Labor History and Rank and F i l e M i l i t a n c y , " Labor History XVI:1 (Winter, 1975), pp. 117-126; idem., "The Old Labor History and the New: In Search of an American Working Class," Labor History XX:1 (Winter, 1979), pp. 111-126. 2. W.H. Turner to Dean Johnson, March 21, 1927 (copy) i n SPT/17/EGG. 3. Herbert G. Gutman, Work, Culture and Society i n I n d u s t r i a l i z i n g America (New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1976), pp. 3-78. 4. Ralph W. Hidy, et a l , Timber and Men (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1963), p. 411; "Plan of Merger of Willapa Lumber Company, Raymond Lumber Company and Lewis M i l l s and Timber Company with Certain Properties of Weyerhaeuser Timber Company," WTC Executive Committee Minutes, pp. 22-27 121 (Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives); WTC Executive Committee Minutes, March 4—7, November 3, December 4 and 20, 1930; Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s A r t i c l e s of Incorporation, i n "Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s Corporate Meetings," (Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives); trans- s c r i p t of "Hearing i n the Matter of Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s and Sawmill and Timber Workers No. 19946, Raymond, Washington, February 15- 16, 1935," Case F i l e 333, O f f i c e of the Executive Secretary, Records of the National Labor Board, 1933-1935, Record Group 25, National Archives (microfilm) pp. 259-60, 268, 313 (J.W. Lewis testimony), pp. 296, 302 (W.H. Turner). (This t r a n s c r i p t w i l l hereafter be c i t e d as "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t " ) ; Timb., June, 1931, p. 142; Willapa Harbor P i l o t , May 14, 1931; 4L Lumber News, June, 1933, p. 13 notes that the t o t a l m i l l capacity at Raymond was 620 per day, of which 400 Tfi. was at t r i b u t e d to the WHLM. The Lewis M i l l s , organized 1923, had never paid a dividend; Willapa Lumber paid only one dividend (6%) during i t s productive l i f e , 1906-31: "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 269 (Lewis), pp. 301-2 (Turner). In 1929, the population of P a c i f i c County was 14,970, including 5,420 male wage earners 10 years of age and older; 2,200 (including 1,024 at saw and planing m i l l s ) were employed at 61 manufacturing establishments; another 1,078 worked at logging camps. The population of Raymond i n 1930 was 3,828, including 1,597 males 16 and older; South Bend's population was 1,798. In December, 1934, the WHLM employed 392 workers at the Raymond lumber plant, and 95 at the South Bend m i l l ; another 82 worked at the company shingle m i l l . U.S. Bureau of the Census, F i f t e e n t h Census, 1930, Population Vol. 1 (USGPO, 1930), p. 1150; i b i d . , V o l. 111:2, pp. 1220, 1234; Census of Manufactures, 1929, Vol. I l l , p. 540; J.W. Lewis to C H . Ingram, December 8, 1934, i n CHl/2B/Labor. 5. Timb., June, 1931, pp. 142-144; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " pp. 41, 258, 316 (Lewis); "4L BD, May, 1924," p. 8; 4L B u l l e t i n , A p r i l , 1924, p. 8; 4L Lumber News, A p r i l , 1926, p. 20; W.C. Ruegnitz to CH. Ingram, March 20, 1931, (copy) i n SPT/35/4L; W.C Ruegnitz to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 20, 1931, W.C. Ruegnitz to C L . Lewis, A p r i l 20 and 30, 1931, a l l i n WCR/1/18; Minutes, 4L BD and 4L Washington F i r D i s t r i c t s Board, 1931-35, passim; "Minutes of Logging and Lumber Labor Committees, June 21, 1933," i n SPT/ 35/4L. Hidy et a l , p. 423, note that i n A p r i l , 1931, C L . Lewis was unwilling to a f f i l i a t e h i s operations — Lewis M i l l s and Timber and Raymond Lumber — with the 4L. Although C L . Lewis was retained as vice-president of the WHLM, J.W. Lewis, as general manager, had the authority, under Weyerhaeuser group p r a c t i c e , to decide the a f f i l i a t i o n question. The fact that he chose to do so thus indicates an act i v e i n t e r e s t . Hidy et a l , pp. 423- 24, ignore J.W. Lewis' pro-4L p o s i t i o n before the passage of the NIRA, and imply d i s i n t e r e s t . 6. Willapa Harbor P i l o t , A p r i l 30, 1931; May 19, June 2 and 29, 1932 and ^ July 13, 1933. 7. WCL, December, 1931, pp. 38-39. The "dumping" referred to appears to be that a t t r i b u t e d by Ruegnitz to the Schaeffer Brothers Lumber and Shingle Company of Aberdeen and Montesano, one of the operators against whom the 122 TUUL s t r i k e was directed; W.C. Ruegnitz to E.G. Griggs, November 30, 1931, i n SPT/35/4L. Wages at the WHLM were reduced to $2.25 per day on December 31, 1932: J.W. Lewis to CH. Ingram, February 9, 1933, i n CHl/lC/Willapa Harbor; Interview with L e s l i e Younglove, July 14, 1979; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " pp. 228, 260 (Lewis). Ruegnitz c i t e d the Grays Harbor d i s t r i c t as being notoriously i n d i v i d u a l - i s t i c and competitive, and attr i b u t e d d i s t r i c t r a d i c a l i s m to the lack of al t e r n a t i v e ( i ; e . , 4L) leadership; he was evidently pleased with the WHLM consolidation and Lewis' pro-4L p o l i c i e s : W.C. Ruegnitz to J.W. Lewis, March 29, 1933, i n WCR/3/11. For Lewis' continuing favourable a t t i t u d e to 4L and, e s p e c i a l l y , to a uniform industry wage base, see R.E. Daniels to W.C. Ruegnitz, October 2, 1931, i n WCR/1/18; W.C. Ruegnitz to R.P. Scott, July 21, 1932, i n WCR/ 1/18; Holbrook Diary, December 5, 1932; J.W. Lewis to CH. Ingram, A p r i l 19, 1933, i n CHI/1C/4L; W.D. Smith to W.C Ruegnitz, January 4, 1934, i n WCR/2/31; WCLA questionnaire regarding Lumber Code continuation, Spring, 1935, i n CHI/3/Code. "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934 (Respondant's Exhibit "A"); i b i d . , pp. 259- 60, 268 (Turner), p. 296 (Lewis); Raymond Advertiser, January 17 and A p r i l 18, 1935. 8. WCL, July 1931, pp. 58-59; Younglove Interview; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 185 (Earl Younglove); unsigned a f f i d a v i t , September, 1933, i n JPW/3/ Code Matters. 9. For a good, concise introduction to the Bedaux system, and the A.F. of L.'s c r i t i q u e , see Geoffrey C. Brown, "The Bedaux System," American Federationist 45 (September, 1938), pp. 942-949. For a caustic p r o f i l e of Charles Bedaux, emphasizing h i s pro-Nazi a c t i v i t i e s , see Janet Flanner, "Annals of Collaboration: Equivalism," New Yorker, September 22, 1945, pp. 28-47, October 6, 1935, pp. 32-45, and October 13, 1945, pp. 32-48. 10. A l f r e d J . Van T a s s e l l and David W. Bluestone, Mechanization i n the Lumber Industry (Philadelphia: Works Project Administration, 1939), p. 10. 11. Andrew L. Friedman, Industry and Labour (London: MacMillan, 1977), p. 78. 12. 4L B u l l e t i n , May, 1920, p. 3; A.H. Landram to E.G. Griggs, January 15, 1925, i n SPT/14/E.G. Griggs (emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) ; C.A. Marston, "Planing M i l l Report, St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company," A p r i l 13, 1934, i n SPT/ 196/Operating Data. 13. Raphael Samuels, "The Workshop of the World: Steam Power and Hand Technology i n Mid-Victorian B r i t a i n , " History Workshop, (Spring, 1977), p. 6-73, quotation at p. 8. Norman Clark, Milltbwn (Seattle: U n i v e r s i t y of Washington Press, 1970), pp. 235-36. Clark c o r r e c t l y notes the coming of plant managers with engineering degrees, but h i s argument that t h i s contributed to the embourgeoisment of the lumber workers appears u n l i k e l y . 123 According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, F i f t e e n t h Census, Population, V o l . V QJSGPO, 1933), pp. 504 and 506, the 454, 503 persons, employed i n the U.S. lumber industry i n 1930 included; 31,731 owners, managers, and foremen 1,161 engineers, draftsmen, and other professionals 15,937 bookkeepers, c l e r k s , stenographers, etc. 64,529 f i l e r s , sawyers, and other s k i l l e d trades and^341,145 operatives, laborers, truck d r i v e r s , etc. In 1929, 44.6% of t o t a l sawmill rated horsepower was produced e l e c t r i c a l l y ; i n 1936, 28% of a l l P a c i f i c Coast m i l l s with a d a i l y capacity of 100 M or greater (as l i s t e d i n the WCLA's Handbook and Directory of the Western Timber Industries) r e l i e d e x c l u s i v e l y on e l e c t r i c a l power, and another 49.3% used some combination of e l e c t r i c and steam power: Van T a s s e l l and Bluestone, pp. 23 and 71. 14. Van T a s s e l l and Bluestone, passim. Retired lumber workers interviewed f or t h i s study a l l made t h i s point: see, for example, Knauf, Cadieu, Cochran, Mulholland, Johnson, Clemons, and Younglove Interviews. 15. The following discussion of planing m i l l s , except where otherwise noted, i s synthesized from H.B. Oakleaf, Lumber Manufacture i n the Douglas F i r Region (Chicago: Commercial Journal Company, 1920), pp. 84-108, 116- 130; U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s , Job Descriptions for the Lumber and Timber Products Industry (Washington: USGPO, 1939), passim; Knauf Interviews; and for pr a c t i c e s s p e c i f i c to the WHLM during the 1930's, the Younglove and Mason Interviews. Van T a s s e l l and Bluestone, p. 71, note that planing m i l l s and dry k i l n s were reported to be i n use i n 1936 at 32.5% and 11.7%, re s p e c t i v e l y ; of P a c i f i c , Coast m i l l s of 1-49$ capacity; 77.7% and 29.8% of m i l l s with 50-99 $ capacity; and at 90.5% and 72.2% of m i l l s with a d a i l y capacity of 100 $ or more. .16. Bob Merry, quoted i n West Coast Lumberman, September, 1931, p. 44; Younglove Interview. See also David Montgomery, "Immigrant Workers," p. 107. Nelson, Managers and Workers, chap. I l l , i s a useful introduction to the pre-1920 factory foreman's r o l e , but h i s argument that foremen and i n d u s t r i a l managers were more strongly affected by i n d u s t r i a l reform than were workers i s over- stated; idem, "The New Factory System," i s a f i n e case study of the impact of unions and the i n d u s t r i a l welfare movement upon shop r e l a t i o n s at the turn of the century. For the personnel management movement, see Nelson, Managers and Workers, pp. 148-162; Henry E i l b e r t , "Personnel Management." 17. Knauf Interview, February 22, 1979. By the l a t e 1930's, most St. Paul and Tacoma foremen were re c r u i t e d from the ranks: Mulholland Interview. 18. Montgomery, "Immigrant Workers," p. 107; for numerous examples of t h i s phenomenon, see Stanley B. Mathewson, R e s t r i c t i o n of Output Among Unorganized Workers (Carbondale: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s Press, 1959 ed.) Chap. I I . .124 19. Knauf Interview, February 24, 1979; H.F. Browne to St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, n.d. (1925) and E.G. Griggs to National I n d u s t r i a l Conference Board, February "21, 1925, both i n SPT/14/NICB; C.A. Marston, "Planing M i l l Report, St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company," A p r i l 13, 1934, and E.G. Griggs II to C. Wagner, February 13, 1933, both i n SPT/196/ Operating Data. For a b r i e f discussion of the Emerson system, see Robert Hoxie, S c i e n t i f i c Management and Labor (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1920), pp. 70-75. 20. Timb., May, 1930, p. 64. 21. Heart-side up feeding would r e s u l t i n raised grain. The compartments were guaged to hold four to s i x pieces of material four to twenty feet i n length, with short lengths at either end of the racks, and lengths increasing to the c e n t r a l twenty foot p o s i t i o n . 22. Younglove Interview. 23. Ibid.; Mason Interview; Timb., June, 1934, pp. 11-13. According to Frank Mason, untied stock was brought by c a r r i e r to the bundle trimmer, where two men placed loads on a sloping table whose r o l l s c a r r i e d the material to a seri e s of stops at the trimmer end of the table. A man stood at either side of the trimmer proper; together they l i f t e d the loose stock from the table into the trimmer and, a f t e r tying the bundle, one man operated the trimmer saws by stepping on a button co n t r o l which caused a saw to trim the front end of the bundle evenly. The bundle then automatically dropped onto a b e l t and c a r r i e d forward to a stop appropriate f o r cutting the bundle to standard length. The rear end of the f i r s t bundle and the front of the subsequent bundle were trimmed simultaneously as the operator activated the foot c o n t r o l . The completed bundles were ejected onto b e l t s from which another p a i r of men made up c a r r i e r loads f or transport to storage. For discussion of the p r e - s c i e n t i f i c management creative a c t i v i t i e s of foremen, see Nelson, Managers and Workers, p. 42; Braverman, p. 132; David Noble, America By Design, Chap. I I I . Trade journals c a r r i e d occasional a r t i c l e s describing inventions developed by foremen and superintendents (e.g., 4L Lumber News, October 1, 1933, p. 17) although engineering departments were becoming c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of large firms such as the WTC by the 1920's; see references to O.H. Onstad i n Hidy et a l , pp. 406-409. 24. Knauf Interview, February 22, 1979. 25. C.A. Marston, "Planing M i l l Report, St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company," A p r i l 13, 1934, i n SPT/196/Operating Data; Van T a s s e l l and Bluestone, pp. 21 and 62. 26. National I n d u s t r i a l Conference Board, "Questionnaire . . . I n d u s t r i a l Relations A c t i v i t i e s , " December 26, 1924, i n SPT/12/NICB; Knauf, Mulholland, Cochran, and Younglove Interviews. 125 27. WCL, June, 1931, p, 36; Timb., July, 1931, p, 47. The e f f i c i e n c y firms represented were the C.A. Marston, George S. May, and Charles E. Bedaux Companies. 28. C.W. English (President, Charles E. Bedaux Company of the P a c i f i c States), to E.G. Griggs I I , November 6, 1934, i n SPT/51/E.G. Griggs I I ; Timb., June, 1931, back cover, and July, 1931, back cover; Daniel B e l l , Work and i t s Discontents (Boston: Beacon Press, 1956), p. 9; Janet Flanner, "Equivalism;" Timb., January, 1931, p. 20, l i s t s several northwestern lumber and pulp and paper m i l l s using Bedaux, including Long-Bell and Crown Zellerbach. 29. See previously c i t e d works by Galambos and Himmelberg. 30. Timb., March, 1931, p. 161, and January, February, A p r i l , June, July, and August, 1931, back covers; C.W. English to E.G. Griggs I I , November 6, 1934, i n SPT/51/E.G. GriggsII; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " pp. 247-48 (Hayward); Timb., January, 1931, pp. 20-22, 50. 31. Daniel T. Rodgers, The Work Ethic i n I n d u s t r i a l i z i n g America, 1850-1920 (Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1978), pp. 50-57, 70-74; Daniel Nelson, " S c i e n t i f i c Management," pp. 481-82; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 250 (Hayward); Timb., A p r i l and August, 1931, back covers; C.W. English to E.G. Griggs T I , February 20, 1934, and "Statement by the Operating Manager of a Large Corporation," both i n SPT/51/E.G. Griggs I I ; Timb., January, 1931, p. 21. 32. Timb., January, 1931, pp. 20-22, 50. 33. H.E. Vaness to 4L HQ, November 25, 1936, i n WCR/1/18; Washington State Labor News, September 21, 1934, p. 1; Tacoma Labor Advocate, October 12, 1934, p. 1; Monthly Labor Review, May, 1929, pp. 171-72; Ruth McKenney, I n d u s t r i a l V a l l e y (New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Co., 1939), pp. 166-67. An anti-Bedaux speed-up s i t down s t r i k e occurred at Goodrich T i r e and Rubber Company February 8-9, 1936; i b i d . , p. 269; Lewis H a l l e t t to J.W. Lewis, October 19, 1933, i n CHl/l/Willapa Harbor. Chapter V 1. David Montgomery, "Spontaneity and Organization," Radical America VII:6 (November-December, 1973), pp.. '.70-80. 2. J.W. Lewis to C H . Ingram, October 19, 25, and 30, 1933, i n CHI/l/Willapa Harbor; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 185, (E a r l Younglove), p. 269, 285 (J.W. Lewis); Lewis also desired to l i q u i d a t e the WHLM's debt to the WTC: J.W. Lewis to F.R. Titcomb, February 13, 1934, and J.W. Lewis to C H . Ingram, February 12, 1934, both i n FRT/2/Willapa Harbor. 3. "Charles E. Bedaux Company of the P a c i f i c States, Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s Report, E.J. Hayward, Engineer," November 20, 1933, i n CHI/2/Bedaux. (These reports w i l l hereafter be c i t e d as "Bedaux-Willapa," Date.) Text of c i r c u l a r reproduced i n J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934, Respondent's Exhibit "A", "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t . " "Bedaux-Willapa," November 27 and 29 and December 2, 1933, i n CHI/2/Bedaux; "RLB-Willapa 126 T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 185 (Earl Younglove^. 4. "Bedaux-Willapa," December 2, 5, 15, and 19, 1933, and January 4, 19, 23, February 16, and March 14, 1934, a l l i n CHl/2/Bedaux; "RLB-Willapa Transcript," p. 58 (Paul Fowler), p. 109 ( L e s l i e Younglove), p. 192 (E a r l Younglove). 5. "Bedaux-Willapa," February 14 and 20, March 6, A p r i l 10, 17, and 18, and August 7 and 14, 1934, a l l i n CHI/2/Bedaux. 6. "Bedaux-Willapa," January 29, A p r i l 5, 9, and 14, and November 23, 1934, i n CHI/2/Bedaux; "Bedaux-Willapa," January 14 and 21, 1935, i n CHI/3/ Bedaux; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 58 (W.H. Turner). 7. Raymond Advertiser, March 29, 1934; "4L BD, May, 1924, to June, 1933," passim; F.S. Ford to 4L Headquarters, July 4-6, 1934, i n WCR/4/12. "RLB- Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " pp. 185-86 (E. Younglove). See also the comment i n the 4L Lumber News (February, 1933), p. 2: "The greatest obstacle today to a uniform grade i s the quantity production craze. The present speed mania makes grading more or l e s s a game of h i t or miss." 8. Mason Interview; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 185 (L. Younglove), and p. 187 (E. Younglove). The Mason, King, and Younglove Interviews, when discussing the Bedaux system, a l l volunteered the point that graders were able to "cheat." 9. "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 26 (Fowler), p. 140 (King), pp. 155, 157-58 (McAndrews); Timber-Worker, September 7, 1936, p. 48; Tacoma Daily Ledger, June 7, 1935; Voice of Action, June 7, 1935; South Bend Journal, June 21, 1935; Raymond Advertiser-, January 30, 1936. 10. "Bedaux-Willapa," August 15, 17, and 20, 1934, i n CHI/2/Bedaux. King and Younglove Interviews. Nelson, Managers and Workers, p. 44, notes the need to consider the r o l e of foremen as intermediaries i n enforcing company work r u l e s . 11. "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 19 (Fowler), pp. 35, 63, 195 (Rowland Watson), p. 61 (William T. Kraus), p. 106 (L. Younglove), p. 136 (Dea C. King), pp. 157, 162 (R.L. McAndrews), pp. 180-81, 194-95 (E. Younglove), p. 208 (Joseph C. Leonard) and p. 224 (Al Meek). 12. J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934, Respondant's Exhibit "A", "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t ; " E a r l Younglove to William Green, September 1, 1934, i n AFL/25/Federal Union #19446, c i t e d the American Federationist a r t i c l e s i n question; American Federationist, July, 1934, pp. 773-74; August, 1934, p. 857. 13. Raymond Advertiser, September 6, 1934; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " pp. 11, 44, 77, and 95 (Watson), pp. 23, 29, and 32 (Fowler), p. 194 (E. Younglove), pp. 75-76 (Kraus), pp. 160-61 (McAndrews), and p. 227 (Meek). 127 14. William Green to Rowland Watson, September 7, 1934, < • William Green to Earl Youngloye, September 7, 1934, and E a r l Youngloye to William Green, September 9, 1934, i n AFL/25/Federal Union #19446. 15. L e a f l e t reproduced i n J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934, Respondant's E x h i b i t "A", "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t ; " see also Lewis' comments i n Raymond Advertiser, January 17, and A p r i l 18, 1935. 16. "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 71 (Kraus), p. 144 (King), pp. 193-194 (E. Younglove); "Minutes of the Meeting, September 6, 1934," i n AFL/25/Federal Union #19446. Not i n c i d e n t a l l y , the A.F. of L. launched a general s t r i k e of 500,000 t e x t i l e workers i n the eastern United States September 1, 1934, whose major demand was the a b o l i t i o n of the speed-up and stretch-out. Herbert J . Lahne, The Cotton M i l l Worker (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1944), p. 156, notes that " p r a c t i c a l l y every ( t e x t i l e ) s t r i k e i n t h i s period (1926-35), whether organized or unorganized, demanded an end to the stretch-out." Speed-up was a key grievance p r e c i p i t a t i n g the w e l l - known Loray M i l l s t r i k e at Gastonia, North Carolina, 1929: L i s t o n Pope, Millhands and Preachers (New Haven: Yale Un i v e r s i t y Press, 1942), pp. 228-32. For evidence that the Raymond lumber workers' executive was aware that the Bedaux system was also used i n t e x t i l e m i l l s , see "RLB-Willapa Tra n s c r i p t , " p. 191 (E. Younglove). This information would have been included i n documents enclosed with William Green to E a r l Younglove, September 7, 1934, i n AFL/25/Federal Union #19446,' i f the Raymond unionists were not already aware of the same. For the widely-publicized worsening of conditions i n the needle trades a f t e r 1927, see Jack Hardy, The Clothing Workers (New York: International Publishers, 1935), pp. 130, 155-56, 181-86, 218-19, and Chapter IX; J o e l Seidman, The Needle Trades (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1942), pp. 66-68. See Montgomery, "Immigrant Workers," for the argument that i n d u s t r i a l workers' shop culture was d i s t i n c t from the work habits of p r e - i n d u s t r i a l peasants and a r t i s a n s , and stood i n opposition to modes of behaviour considered appropriate by managerial reformers. Montgomery argues that, a f t e r 1890, new i n d u s t r i a l workers were acculturated to the work culture of the experienced workers, rather than to the management's notions of t i m e - d i s c i p l i n e ; see also Mathewson, op c i t , p. 109; Mathewson, Chap. V, provides examples of " R e s t r i c t i o n and the Fear of Unemployment," e s p e c i a l l y pp. 86-87, 98, and 102; and ibid,, p p . 165, 167, for William Leiserson's comments on the economics of the r e s t r i c t i o n of output. 17. J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934, Respondant's Exhibit "A", "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t . " 18. For i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s , see Younglove, Mason, and King Interviews; WCL, August, 1931, pp. 24-25; 4L B u l l e t i n , A p r i l , 1924, p. 20, and 4L Lumber News, July, 1924, p. 22, and A p r i l , 1926, p. 20; "RLB-Willapa Tr a n s c r i p t , " p. 188 (E. Younglove). 128 See also South Bend Journal, May 7 and 31, 1935; Aberdeen Daily World, May 7, 20, 25, and 28, 1935; Raymond Advertiser, March 22 and October 31, 1934, March 21, May 30, October 3, 24, and December 12, 1935; Willapa Harbor P i l o t , March 22, 1934, and July 26, 1936. Foremen didn't l i k e the Bedaux system at Long-Bell or Poison e i t h e r : see Lewis H a l l e t t to J.W. Lewis, October 19, 1933, and L.G. Pauze to J.W. Lewis, October 19, 1933, both i n CHl/l/Willapa Harbor. 19. "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 134 (King), p. 15 (Fowler), p. 150, 155, 156, and 160-161 (McAndrews), p. 206 (Leonard), p. 99 (E. Younglove). Aberdeen Daily World, May 25 and 28, 1935; South Bend Journal, May 31, 1935; Raymond Advertiser, May 30, 1935. 20. "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 26, 98 (Fowler); pp. I l l , 112 (L. Younglove); p. 213-14, 218-19 (Leonard). Lewis r e i t e r a t e d h i s p o s i t i o n at the RLB hearing: i b i d . , p. 283 (Lewis). J.W. Lewis to Our Employees, September 12, 1934, Respondant's Exhibit "A", "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t . " 21. "Notice," September 17, 1934, i n CHI/2/Bedaux. 22. "Bedaux-Willapa," December 12, 1934, i n CHI/2/Bedaux; "Bedaux-Willapa," January 5, February 1 and 4, 1935 i n CHl/3/Bedaux. Nelson, Managers and Workers, p. 49, observes that systematizing engineers t y p i c a l l y equated the absence of formal co-ordination with the lack of any system i n the work process. 23. "Bedaux-Willapa," December 29, 1934, i n CHI/2/Bedaux. 24. W.E. Heidinger to J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , December 17, 1934, i n JPW/2/ Regional Labor Board; J.W. Lewis to Charles W. Hope, December 27, 1934, and Charles W. Hope to J.W. Lewis, December 24, 1934, both i n CHI/2/Labor. "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 237 (Watson), p. 238 (Heidinger); J.W'; Lewis to C H . Ingram, December 31, 1934, i n CHl/2/Labor. 25. NLRB, Decisions and Orders Vol. I I , p. 406. The WHLM's Raymond p a y r o l l of 415 included executives, o f f i c e workers, and foremen: i b i d . , pp. 405-406; W.E. Heidinger to A.W. Clapp, February 20, 1935, i n JPW/3/Labor; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " passim; quotation i s i n i b i d . , p. 206 (L. Younglove). 26. C.W. English to Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s , March 8, 1935, i n CHI/3/ Bedaux. 27. NLRB, Decisions and Orders Vol. I I , pp. 405-407; King Interview.' 28. J.W. Lewis to C H . Ingram, A p r i l 8, 1935, i n CHI/3/Willapa Harbor: J.P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , to F.E. Weyerhaeuser, May 2 and 4, 1935, i n .jpw/3/F.E. Weyerhaeuser. 129 For the 1935 s t r i k e , see Jensen, op. c i t . , Chap, IX. On May 15, 1935, the WTC again refused to allow an e l e c t i o n to be held at the WHLM, and charged that the NLRB was v i o l a t i n g Amendments 4, 5, and 10 of the U.S. Constitution, that the NLRB had no j u r i s d i c t i o n i n the case, and charged that a l l employees as of A p r i l , 1935, had since discontinued t h e i r employment ( i . e . were on st r i k e ) and were, therefore, i n e l i g i b l e to vote: W.E. Heidinger to National Labor Relations Board, May 15, 1935, i n JPWJ/3/Labor. 29. Timberworker.,, September 7, 1935, February 14 and Labor Day, 1936; October 30, November 20, and November 27, 1937; Willapa Harbor P i l o t , June 18, 1936, and June 17 and November 11, 1937; King and Younglove Interviews.; Voice of Action, June 24, October 5 and 9, December 14, 1934, March 29, May 3, 1935. 30. South Bend Journal, June 4 and 28, 1935; King Interviews. 31. Raymond Advertiser, May 30, 193; Aberdeen Daily World, May 25 and 28, 1935; South Bend Journal, May 31, 1935; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " pp. 155-56, 160-61 (R.L. McAndrews). 32. South Bend Journal, May 10 and 17, and June 24, 21, and 28, 1935; Raymond Advertiser, June 6, and August 15, 1935; Younglove Interview. 33. Aberdeen Daily World, May 8 and July 6, 1935; "RLB-Willapa T r a n s c r i p t , " p. 29 (Fowler). 34. Herbert G. Gutman, "The Workers' Search for Power: Labor i n the Gilded Age," i n H. Wayne Morgan, ed., The Gilded Age (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1963) pp. 38-68. 35. Letters found i n Aberdeen Daily World, July 10, 13, 18, 20 and 22, 1935. 36. For the IWA, see Jensen, chapters 10-14. Chapter VI. 1. Jensen, o p . c i t , pp. 108, 206; Montgomery, "Immigrant Workers"; idem., "Workers' Control"; idem., "The 'New Unionism.'" For the IWW's c r i t i q u e of and opposition to s c i e n t i f i c management, see Mike Davis, "The Stop Watch and the Wooden Shoe," Radical America 9:1 (January-February, 1975), pp. 69-96. 2. Y1E.P. Marsh, "History of the Str i k e i n the Northwest Forest Products Industry Occurring May 6, 1935," August 22, 1935, copy i n JPW/3/Executive Committee. 3. Alan Dawley, Class and Community: The I n d u s t r i a l Revaluation i n Lynn (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976), e s p e c i a l l y pp. 1-3, 65-67, 71-72, 207-11, 227-29, 235-40. 4. David Nelson, " S c i e n t i f i c Management, Systematic Management, and Labor, 1880-1915," Business History Review XLVIII:4 (Winter, 1974), pp. 479-500, at pp. 480, 481. 130 5. 4L B u l l e t i n , May, 1920, pp. 3,4. The St. Paul was s t i l l using the Emerson e f f i c i e n c y system at t h i s point; i t was abandoned by June, 1919, when Mr. Knauf was hired by the St. Paul. 6. Interview with Howard Knauf, February 22, 1979. Bibliography 131 Manuscript Collec t i o n s United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland. Record Group 25. Records of the National Labor Board, 1933-35, O f f i c e of the Executive Secretary, Case F i l e 333, Transcript of "Hearing i n the Matter of Willapa Harbor M i l l s and Sawmill and Timber Workers No. 19446, Raymond, Washington, February 15-16, 1935" (Microfilm) University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library Special C o l l e c t i o n s , Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia. Harold P r i t c h e t t - I n t e r n a t i o n a l Woodworkers of America Papers University of Washington Library Manuscript D i v i s i o n , Seattle, Washington. Stewart H. Holbrook Papers Pierce County Central Labor Council Papers William C."'Ruegnitz Papers • "• St. Paul'and Tacoma Lumber Company Papers G. Corydon Wagner Papers Washington State Federation of Labor Papers Weyerhaeuser Company H i s t o r i c a l Archives, Tacoma, Washington. Charles H. Ingram Papers F.R. Titcomb Papers John P. Weyerhaeuser, J r . , Papers Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Executive Committee Minutes Weyerhaeuser Timber Company Outgoing Letterbooks Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s Corporate Meetings Minutes Wisconsin State H i s t o r i c a l Society, Madison, Wisconsin. American Federation of Labor Papers, Str i k e F i l e s , Federal Union # 19446 132 Newspapers and P e r i o d i c a l s Aberdeen Daily World Aberdeen Timberworker American Federationist American Lumberman 4L B u l l e t i n 4L Lumber News Raymond Advertiser (Seattle) Voice of Action (Seattle) Washington State Labor News South Bend Journal (South Bend) Willapa Harbor P i l o t Tacoma Daily Ledger Tacoma Labor Advocate Tacoma News Tribune Timberman West Coast Lumberman" Government Publications Thorp, W i l l a r d L., and Walter F. Crowder. The Structure of Industry (Temporary National Economic Committee Monograph No. 27). Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1941. U.S. Bureau of Labor S t a t i s t i c s . Job Descriptions f o r the Lumber and Timber Products Industry. Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1939. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Fi f t e e n t h Census of the United Sates, 1930: Manufactures, Vol. I I : Reports by Industries; Vol. I I I . : Reports by States. Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e j 1933. 133 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Fi f t e e n t h Census of the United States, 1930: Population. Vol. I: Number and D i s t r i b u t i o n of Inhabitants. Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1931. Vol. 111:2: Reports by States. Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1932. Vol. V: General Reports on Occupations. Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1933. U.S. Department of Labor. Monthly Labor Review. U.S. National Labor Relations Board. Decisions and Orders: Vol. I I . Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1935. Van T a s s e l l , A l f r e d J . , and David W. Bluestone. Mechanization i n the Lumber Industry. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Works Project Administration, 1939. Wilcox, C l a i r . Competition and Monopoly i n American Industry (Temporary National Economic Committee Monograph No. 21). Washington: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1940. Personal Interviews Cadieu, A l f r e d "Les", at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, June 1, 1979. Mr. Cadieu, a boom man f o r the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and the St. Regis Paper Company, was President of h i s Boom Men's l o c a l union, and a member of the f i r s t International Woodworkers of America Executive Board. Clemens, Ray, at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, January 1, 1980. Mr. Clemens was the Recording Secretary of Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union 2664, Tacoma, 1935-36, and was a saw f i l e r f o r the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, 1929-1944. Floyd, Mr. B.G., at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, January 2, 1979. Mr. Floyd worked as a m i l l wright and trimmerman f o r several lumber m i l l s at Tacoma from the 1920's-60's, and was spokesman fo r the Tacoma 4L employees' delegation s o l i c i t i n g National Guard intervention at Tacoma during the 1935 s t r i k e . Jackson, Floyd, at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, January 1, 1980. Mr. Jackson worked as a boom man at several m i l l s i n Washington and C a l i f o r n i a , 1920's-1960's, including the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company, and was active i n union a f f a i r s , holding o f f i c e s as recording and f i n a n c i a l secretary f o r several l o c a l s . 134 King, Dea Chester, at h i s home, Raymond, Washington, January 4, 1980. Mr. King worked at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s during the 1930's, held several o f f i c e s i n l o c a l and d i s t r i c t unions, and served as a member of the Washington State L e g i s l a t u r e , 1945-65. Knauf, Howard, at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, Febraury 22 and 24, and May 17, 1979, and January 5. 1980. Mr. Knauf worked at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company's and the St. Regis Paper Company's Planing M i l l C, 1919-1970, r e t i r i n g as head planerman. Mason, Frank C , at h i s home, Raymond, Washington, January 4, 1980. Mr. Mason worked at Willapa Harbor Lumber M i l l s and i t s successor Weyerhaeuser operation, 1933-1976. Mulholland, Fred, at h i s home, Tacoma, Washington, February 22, 1979. Mr. Mulholland worked as a gang sawyer and saw f i l e r at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber Company and the St. Regis Paper Company, 1921-1964. Younglove, L e s l i e , at h i s home, Shelton, Washington, July 17, 1979. *» Mr. Younglove was the f i r s t President of the Raymond lumber workers' union, 1934-35; he worked at several logging camps and timber and plywood m i l l s i n the Raymond and Shelton d i s t r i c t s , 1916-1965, usually as a grader. Books A i t k i n , Hugh G.H. Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960. B e l l , Daniel. Work and i t s Discontents. Boston: Beacon Press, 1956. Bellush, Bernard. The F a i l u r e of the NRA. New York: W.W. Norton, 1975. Bernstein, I r v i n g . The New Deal C o l l e c t i v e Bargaining P o l i c y . Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1950. Blauner, Robert A. A l i e n a t i o n and Freedom. Chicago: Uni v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1964. Brandes, Stuart D. American Welfare Capitalism, 1880-1940. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976. Braverman, Harry. Labor arid Monopoly C a p i t a l . New York: Monthly Review Press, 1960. Clark, Norman H. M i l l Town. Se a t t l e , University of Washington Press, 1970. Commons, John R., et a l . History of Labor i n the United States, 1896-1932. New York: Macmillan, 1935. Crouch, Co l i n . Class C o n f l i c t and the I n d u s t r i a l Relations C r i s i s . London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1977. Dawley, Alan. Class and Community: The I n d u s t r i a l Revolution i n Lynn. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976. Friedmann, Andrew L. Industry and Labour. London: MacMillan, 1977. Galambos, Louis. Competition and Cooperation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1966 Gutmqn, Herbert G. Work, Culture and Society i n I n d u s t r i a l i z i n g America. New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1976. Hays, Samuel P. Conservation and the Gospel of E f f i c i e n c y . New York: Viking, 1964 Hidy, Ralph W., et a l . Timber and Men. New York: MacMillan and Company, 1963. Himmelberg, Robert F. The Origins of the National Recovery Administration. New York: Fordham Uni v e r s i t y Press, 1976. H i s t o r i c a l S t a t i s t i c s of the United States, from C o l o n i a l Times to the Present. Stamford: F a i r f i e l d P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1965. Il ' ' ' i . Hoxie, Robert F. S c i e n t i f i c Management and Labor. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1920. Hyman, Harold M. Soldiers and Spruce: The Origins of the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen. Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a at Los Angeles Press, 1963. Inkeles, Alex, and David H. Smith. Becoming Modern: Individual Change in Six Developing Countries. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974. Jensen, Vernon. Lumber and Labor. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1945. 136 Lahne, Herbert J . The Cotton M i l l Worker. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1944. Layton, Edwin T., J r . The Revolt of the Engineers. Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University Press, 1971. Loehr, Ronald C , ed. Forests f o r the Future. St. Paul: Minnesota H i s t o r i c a l Society, 1952. Mathewson, Stanley. R e s t r i c t i o n of Output Among Unorganized Workers. Carbondale: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1959. McKelvey, Jean Trepp. AFL Attitudes Toward Production, 1900-1932. Ithaca, C o r n e l l Studies i n I n d u s t r i a l and Labor Relations, 1952. McKenney, Ruth. I n d u s t r i a l V a l l e y . New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, 1939. Nadworny, Milton J . S c i e n t i f i c Management and the Unions, 1900-1932. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1955. Nelson, Daniel. Managers and Workers: Origins of the New Factory Systems i n the United States, 1880-1920. Madison: Un i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1975. Noble, David T. America by Design: Science, Technology, arid the Rise of Capitalism. New York, A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1977. Oakleaf, H.B. Lumber Manufacture i n the Douglas F i r Region. Chicago: Commercial Journal Company, 1920. Pope, L i s t o n . Millhands and Preachers. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1942. Rodgers, Daniel T. The Work Et h i c i n I n d u s t r i a l America, 1850-1920. Chicago: Univers- i t y of Chicago Press, 1978. Todes, Charlotte. Lumber and Labor. New York: International Publishers, 1931. West Coast Lumbermans's Association. West Coast Lumber Facts. S e a t t l e : by Author, 1941. 137 A r t i c l e s Brecher, Jeremy. "Uncovering the Hidden History of the Workplace", Review of Radical P o l i t i c a l Economics X:4 (Winter, 1978), pp. 1-23. Brody, David. "The Rise and Decline of Welfare Capitalism", i n John Braeman, Robert H. Bremner, and David Brody, eds., Change and Continuity i n Twentieth Century America: the 1920's- (Canton: Ohio State Uni- v e r s i t y Press, 1968), pp. 147-178. Brody, David. "Labor and the Great Depression: The Int e r p r e t i v e Prospects", Labor History XVIII:2 (January, 1977), pp. 231-244. Brody, David. "The Old Labor History and the New: In Search of an American Working Class", Labor History XX:1 (Winter, 1979), pp. 111-126. Brody, David. "Radical Labor History and Rank and F i l e M i l i t a n c y " , Labor History XVI:1 (Winter, 1975), pp. 117-126. Davis, Mike. "The Stop Watch and the Wooden Shoe: The IWW vs. S c i e n t i f i c Man- agement", Radical America, IX:1 (Jan.-Feb. 1975), pp. 69-96. E i l b e r t , Henry. "The Development of Personnel Management i n the United States", Business History Review XXXIII:3 (Autumn, 1959), pp. 345-364. Flanner, Janet. "Annals of Collaboration: Equivalism", New Yorker, September 22, 1945 (pp. 28-47), October 6, 1945 (pp. 32-45), and October 13, 1945 (pp. 32-48). Galambos, Louis P. "The Cotton T e x t i l e I n s t i t u t e and the Government^ A Case Study i n Interacting Value Systems", Business History Review XXXVIII:3 (Summer, 1964), pp. 186-204. Montgomery, David. "Gutman's Nineteenth-Century America", Labor History IV:3 (Summer, 1978), pp. 416-429. Montgomery, David. "Immigrant Workers and Managerial Reform" i n Richard E h r l i c h , ed., Immigrant Workers i n I n d u s t r i a l America ( C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e : University Press of V i r g i n i a , 1977, pp. 96-110. Montgomery, David. "The 'New Unionism' and the Transformation of Workers' Conscious- ness i n America, 1909-1922", Journal of S o c i a l History VII:4 (Summer 1974), pp. 509-529. .138 Montgomery, David. "Spontaneity and Organization", Radical America VII:6 (November- December, 1973), pp. 70-80. Montgomery, David. "Workers 1 Control of Machine Production i n the Nineteenth Century", Labor History XVII:4 ( F a l l , 1976), pp. 485-509. McQuaid, Kim. "Young, Swope, and General E l e c t r i c ' s 'New Capitalism': A Study i n Corporate Liberalism, 1920-1933", American Journal of Eco- nomics and Sociology 36 (1977), pp. 323-34. Nelson, Daniel. "The New Factory System and the Unions: The National Cash Register Company Dispute of 1901", Labor History XV:2 (Spring, 1974), pp. 163-178. Nelson, Daniel. " S c i e n t i f i c Management, Systematic Management, and Labor, 1880- 1915", Business History Review XLVIII:4 (Winter, 1974), pp. 479-500. Nelson, Daniel. "Taylorism and the Workers at Bethlehem Street, 1898-1901", Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography CI:3 (Summer, 1977), pp. 487-505. Stone, Katherine. "The Origins fo Job Structures i n the S t e e l Industry", Radical America, VII:6 (November-December, 1973), pp. 19-66. Di s s e r t a t i o n Nichols, Claude W. "Brotherhood i n the Woods: The Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lum- bermen, A Twenty Year Attempt at 'I n d u s t r i a l Cooperation'." Ph.D., University of Oregon, 1959.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 9 69
United States 8 3
Germany 8 24
City Views Downloads
Beijing 9 0
Unknown 8 26
Wilkes Barre 3 0
Clarks Summit 2 0
Ashburn 2 0
Portland 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items