Violence in the Labor Conflicts of the 1890s

VIOLENCE IN THE LABOR CONFLICTS OF THE 1890s
First Name, Last Name
Class Name & Code
May 25, 2022
While the growth of the United States into an industrial economy was beneficial, it also intensified conflicts between industrial workers and owners. This issue followed the demand by workers to voice their grievances as a collective through labor unions. The owners did not want to meet the grievances that the labor unions aired. Thus, the industrial workers initiated a series of worker strikes and boycotts through their labor unions. However, what were once peaceful strikes and boycotts among workers quickly intensified and often led to violence. Why did the peaceful strikes and boycotts of the 1890s labor wars turn violent? The tactics of policing worker strikes, the intervention of the courts and the government on private property matters, and the press's misrepresentation of worker strikes influenced the eruption of violence in the labor conflicts of the 1890s.[Roark, James L., Michael P. Johnson, Patricia Cline Cohen, Sarah Stage, Alan Lawson, and Susan M. Hartmann. Understanding the American promise, volume 2: from 1865: a brief history of the United States. Vol. 2. Macmillan, 2017] [Roark, et al., 506]
The tactics that the industry owners adopted to police the worker strikes were impartial and hostile. Jeffreys-Jones asserts that hiring strikebreakers, employment of armed guards, and picketing are the primary causes of violence during strikes. The Historian further suggests that they can also be the root of eventual violence during periods of industrial peace. For example, in an attempt to suppress the Pullman strike of 1894, the General Manager Association (GMA) fired every industrial worker on the boycott and recruited strikebreakers. Similarly, the acting leader of the Homestead steel mills, Henry Clay Frick, locked the factory doors and brought in strikebreakers in an attempt to squash the looming strike. When the strikes didn’t work because the industry owners employed hostile policing methods, the workers were forced to sabotage factory equipment or respond violently. Hurtful strike policing tactics inspire desperation and violent responses among industrial workers.[Jeffreys-Jones, Rhodri. "Theories of American labor violence." Journal of American Studies 13, no. 2 (1979): 245-264., 250] [Jeffreys-Jones, 250] [Roark, et al., 495-495]
The courts and the state sided with the industry owners in defending private property, which made the unions’ efforts seem futile and left the industrial workers feeling helpless. While one can argue that the court rulings were just and that the government’s interventions were minimal, it is essential to note that the United States is a nation with its commitments set on the people’s rights and capitalism. Consequently, there was a struggle for the courts and the state to find a balance between serving the needs of the industrial workers while protecting the owner’s private property rights. Evidence in the Pullman and Homestead strikes suggests that the court’s ruling was against the unions but favored th...