WORLD HISTORY

In 1700, most British peopleworked the land. Living in villagessurrounded by huge open fields, theyproduced grain and small amounts oflivestock that provided a modest liv-ing. Most villagers cultivated a few

strips of open field and supple-mented their income by grazingcows, keeping fowl, and gatheringfuel wood.

Wool was also an importantsource of income. Throughout Britain,peasants, farmers, and agricultural la-borers worked on producing woolencloth. The process required manysteps: After sheep were sheared, thewool was sorted and cleaned and thencombed to make yarn. The yarn wasspun and woven. Women and childrenoften did the sorting, cleaning andspinning; men did the combing andweaving — all in their own cottages.

Coal played an important part in life,especially after timber began to run outand charcoal (made from wood) was inshort supply. Coal supplied heat tohomes and fueled the furnaces that

© 2013, Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles. All Constitutional Rights Foundation materials and publications, including Bill of Rights in Action, are protected by copyright. However, we hereby grant to all recipients alicense to reproduce all material contained herein for distribution to students, other school site personnel, and district administrators. (ISSN: 1534-9799)

SPRING 2013 Volume 28 No 3

INDUSTRIALIZATION AND LABORThis edition of Bill of Rights in Action examines industrialization and labor is-sues. The first article looks at the Industrial Revolution, which turned Britain intothe first industrial nation and continues today in the developing world. The sec-ond article examines the Pullman strike, an 1894 labor dispute that spreadthroughout the United States. The last article traces the history of U.S. laborunions and looks at where they stand today.World History: The Industrial RevolutionU.S. History: The Pullman Strike and BoycottU.S. History: American Labor Unions: Yesterday and TodayGuest writer Lucy Eisenberg, Esq., contributed the article on the IndustrialRevolution. Our longtime contributor Carlton Martz wrote the other articles.

ConstitutionalRightsFoundation

THE INDUSTRIALREVOLUTION— FROM FARMTO FACTORYIN 1700, BRITAIN WAS LARGELY A RURALCOUNTRY WHERE MOST PEOPLE LIVEDOFF THE LAND. LITTLE HAD CHANGED INTHE PREVIOUS 500 YEARS, AND INCOMEPER PERSON WAS ESSENTIALLY FLAT.BUT BY 1850 THIS SMALL ISLAND NATIONHAD BECOME THE “WORKSHOP OF THEWORLD.” PER PERSON INCOME WASSOARING, AND BRITAIN WAS PRODUCINGABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE WORLD’SCOAL AND MORE THAN HALF OF ITS IRONAND COTTON CLOTH. BUSINESSMENWERE COMING FROM ALL OVER EUROPETO FIND OUT HOW AND WHY THE INDUS-TRIAL REVOLUTION HAD TAKEN PLACE INBRITAIN, WHY BRITAIN HAD A VIRTUALMONOPOLY ON TEXTILES AND MACHINETOOLS, AND HOW THEIR OWN COUN-TRIES COULD MAKE THE SAME CHANGESAND BENEFIT FROM THE HUGE INCREASEIN WEALTH AND PROSPERITY THAT HADSPREAD ACROSS THE BRITISH ISLES.

Wik

ime

dia

Co

mm

on

s

A sketch of one of James Watt’s steam engines. The letter C indicates the steam-cylinder.

Bill of Rightsin Action

2 WORLD HISTORY

produced iron for tools. Coal was mostlymined in agricultural areas, where min-ers would also grow oats and othercrops. At the bottom of the mine shaft,coal was moved by men who pulledwooden sledges or by ponies tended byboys. In some mines, the wives anddaughters of miners carried coal in bas-kets. When water seeped into the coalshaft, it was carried to the surface in aseries of pots hauled by men or donkeys,or occasionally pumped by waterwheelsor windmills. When coal reached thesurface, it was transported in bags slungover the backs of horses — or in wag-ons on bumpy roads to the nearest riveror port. Thus in mining, as in textile pro-duction and farming, work was donewith hand tools and power was suppliedby human or animal muscle (or in somecases by wind or running water).

New InventionsBy 1750, the first Industrial Revo-

lution had begun, and Britain waschanging from an economy based onfarming, manual labor, and draft ani-mals to machine-based manufacturing.Two important breakthroughs oc-curred: the invention of the steam en-gine by James Watt and a series ofinventions that revolutionized the tex-tile industry. New and better ways ofmaking iron were also being developed.

A.Watt’s Steam EngineTo mine more coal, Britain’s coal

industry needed to sink deeper shafts.But that depended on finding a way topump out underground water. In1702, Thomas Newcomen designed asteam engine to power pumps in coalmines. But Newcomen’s engine was in-efficient and consumed large amountsof fuel. Fifty years later, a young Scots-man named James Watt began experi-menting with steam and came up anew two-cylinder steam engine. It in-creased the efficiency of the steamengine by a factor of five and saved75 percent on coal costs. Watt formeda partnership with the owner of anironworks and acquired a patent onhis design. By 1776, the Watt steamengine was installed and working incoal mines to pump water. For thefirst time in history, coal miners did

not have to rely on water, wind, orhuman or animal muscle for power.

B. From Wool to CottonWhile the steam engine was being

developed, big changes were under-way in manufacturing textiles. Priorto 1750, most cloth produced inBritain was made with wool, shornfrom the backs of sheep who grazedon country farms. Individual artisansprocessed the wool, spinning andweaving it in their own homes. No cot-ton grew in Britain, and most of thecotton cloth used in clothing was im-ported from India.

Then within 50 years, a series of in-ventions transformed the textile industry.The invention in 1733 of a “flying shuttle”made weaving much faster, and cottonthread was in short supply. Then a “card-ing” machine was invented in 1748. Itconverted raw cotton buds into a contin-uous coil of cotton fiber. The cardingmachine was improved by RichardArkwright, who became known asthe “Father of the Industrial Revolution.”In the mid-1760s another invention,called the “spinning jenny,” allowed asingle operator to spin dozens of threadsat once. Arkwright then invented anothermethod of spinning — the water frame. Itused water to power a machine that pro-duced an even stronger thread than thespinning jenny. By 1780, a cotton “mule”had been invented that combined thebest points of the spinning jenny and thewater frame. Cotton mills were built —powered by running water — and theprocess of preparing cotton for spinningwas mechanized. In a short time, withArkwright’s spinning roller, a new indus-try was created based solely on cotton.

Between 1750 and 1800, thevalue of cotton goods exported fromBritain increased more than a 100fold — from almost 50,000 to morethan 5 million English pounds. Cot-ton had overtaken wool in Britain’stextile industry.

C. Making More, and Better, IronBritain had good supplies of iron

ore and had been producing iron forcenturies. But the furnaces used toproduce iron were fueled with wood,and by 1700, many forests had been

cut down and timber was in shortsupply. One solution came in 1709when Abraham Darby set up a coalfoundry that used coke (which comesfrom coal) instead of charcoal tosmelt iron ore into pig iron. Darby’stechnique made iron smelting moreprofitable, but it could only producepig iron that was not as strong aswrought iron.

Forged in blast furnaces, wroughtiron was used for important tools suchas plows and hoes. In 1750, Britain wasstill importing wrought iron from Swe-den. Two new inventions in the next 50years transformed the industry. Oneused the Watts steam-engine instead ofwater-wheels to blow the blast furnace.The second was a new process for“puddling” and rolling that removedimpurities caused by using coke andmade bars of the native pig iron at leastas good as Swedish iron. The puddlingprocess was patented in 1783 and 1784.

By 1805, the output of British pig ironhad more than quadrupled. The averageblast furnace produced almost 1,500tons, almost doubling previous output.Iron foundries were springing up all overEngland and Wales.

A Transportation SystemBy 1800, Britain had abundant

fuel from coal, steam engines pow-ered many machines, and foundriesmade high-quality pig iron that couldbe used to make tools. But a trans-portation system also was essentialfor the Industrial Revolution.

In 1700, English roads were theworst in Europe. But by mid-century,hundreds of new and better roadswere being built by “Turnpike Trusts,”which gave private groups the author-ity to build roads and charge tolls torecover their costs. Even good roads,however, could not carry coal andother bulky and weighty goods re-quired by factories. Britain solved thetransportation problem by buildinghundreds of miles of new canals linkedto navigable rivers, which in turn ac-cessed seaside ports.

In 1761 the Duke of Bridgewater fi-nanced a canal that brought coal fromhis mines to the up-and-coming town

of Manchester. A huge commercial suc-cess, the canal halved the cost of trans-porting coal and raw cotton.

Fifty years later, the developmentof railroads revolutionized transporta-tion again. In 1804, Samuel Homfreyfinanced a steam-powered locomo-tive that could haul 10 tons of ironfrom the ironworks. Less than 20years later, the Stockton and Darling-ton Railroad was carrying both coaland passengers over a nine-milestretch in one hour. And by 1830 atwo-track railroad was built to pro-vide cheap transportation for rawmaterials and finished goods — aswell as passengers — between theport of Liverpool and the boomingcity of Manchester.

An Industrial WorldBy 1800, Manchester had become

Britain’s leading industrial city. A hun-dred years earlier, Manchester wasonly a small town, with a populationof approximately 10,000. Then, in1783, Richard Arkwright built a steam-powered cotton mill in Manchester,and within in a few years, new millswith steam-driven machinery dottedthe area. By the turn of the century, thecotton industry had exploded. In just20 years — between 1780 and 1800 —imports of raw cotton increased from 6million to 56 million pounds per year.Cotton mills sprouted up everywhereas did warehouses to store cotton andfinished products. In 1806, the citycenter housed just over 1,000 ware-houses, and 15 years later, this num-ber had almost doubled. By 1821, thecity contained 32 factories with 5,722steam-powered weaving looms. Man-chester was called the “warehousecity” and later became known as“Cottonopolis” and the world’s firstcenter of mass production.

People came from all over theworld to see the new industrialworld. Much of what they saw wasugly, because England had not fig-ured out how to manage its growingpopulation in cities (urbanization).

Manchester’s population grewfrom 25,000 in 1772 to 455,000 in1851. Heavy soot from burning coal

blocked sunlight and blackened thecity, as it did in other factory cities.Other problems arose — a lack of po-lice protection, clean water, sewers,garbage disposal, and housing. Fam-ilies lived in single rooms, and raggedchildren roamed the filthy streets.The factories paid reasonable wagesfor unskilled workers, but not enoughto support a whole family. The work-day was long, and the work was te-dious. Many factories hired childrenas young as 6 years old. In 1835,Alexis de Tocqueville, a French polit-ical writer and historian, went toManchester, which he called “thepalace of industry.” He found a citywith 30 or 40 huge six-story factories,where the “noise of furnaces (and)the whistle of steam fill the air;”where “300,000 human beings areceaselessly at work” and where a feware wealthy and many are poor. Sum-ming up, de Tocqueville wrote:

From the foul drain the greateststream of human industry flowsout to fertilize the whole world.From this filthy sewer pure goldflows, Here humanity attains itsmost complete development and itsmost brutish; here civilizationworks its miracles and civilizedman is turned almost into a savage.

Why England?By 1850, Great Britain was known

as the “workshop of the world.” Asmall country in size and population,

it was producing about two-thirds ofthe world’s coal and more than halfof its iron and cloth. And while gov-ernment representatives and busi-nessmen from throughout Europewere touring Britain’s industrial cen-ters and sending home reports, therest of Europe was still far slowerthan the British in industrializing.

Many explanations account forwhy the Industrial Revolution firsttook place in Great Britain. One fac-tor that gave Britain an advantageover Europe was size. Most Euro-pean countries were larger thanBritain, their populations were morespread out, and their terrain wasmore rugged. Thus, their transporta-tion costs for fuel and raw materialswere higher.

Another factor was natural re-sources. Britain’s ample supply ofcoal and iron ore helped power its in-dustrial growth.

Britain also had good access tothe sea. In Britain, no part of thecountry is more than 70 miles fromthe ocean, and many navigable riversrun through the country. The riversand streams not only facilitated trans-portation, but also helped power theearly cotton mills before the adventof steam engines.

Britain could also furnish the capi-tal needed to build the new inventionsthat gave rise to a machine-based econ-omy. The Bank of England, founded in1694, provided ready access to lendersand borrowers.

3WORLD HISTORY

Re

pri

nte

d w

ith

pe

rmis

sio

n o

f T

he

New

Yo

rk R

evie

w o

f B

oo

ks

REAL INCOME PER PERSON IN ENGLAND (1260S—2000S)

1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

IndustrialRevolution

Source: Gregory Clark. A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World

Rea

l in

com

e per

per

son

(18

60

s =

10

0)

4 WORLD HISTORY

England also had a stable legalsystem, including a patent system thathelped protect and propel new inven-tions. Inventors could patent their in-ventions, and others who used theirinventions had to pay for the privilege.Inventors like Arkwright and Wattearned money from their patented in-ventions, and the details of how theirinventions worked were well-knownand stimulated further inventions. Incountries without a patent system, theonly way to protect an invention wasto keep it secret.

As a world power, Britain also en-joyed a world market for the goods itproduced — as well as overseas sourcesof raw materials including cotton. In1750, Britain’s colonial possessionsreached from North America andCanada to Australia and India andAfrica. Trade with the colonies providedprofit that could be invested in new in-ventions and new cities. As one histo-rian put it, “the commercial frontier ofBritain lay overseas.” In the centuryfrom 1700 to 1800, sales to the West In-dies and mainland colonies grew from10 percent of British domestic exportsto almost 60 percent. Britain, whichused to import cotton cloth from India,was now exporting it to India — alongwith other products. In 1800, Britainhad merchants ready to sell goodsaround the world. Its huge mercantileshipping force and a navy controlledthe seas. As production soared, so didBritain’s exports to its colonies.

Industrialization ContinuesThe transition from an agricul-

tural economy, where farmers andvillagers set their own routines, to themachine-driven routine of 12-hourshifts in huge factories, did not comeeasily to many British workers. Skilledtextile artisans, put out of work by au-tomated looms, began violent protestsin 1811, burning mills and destroyingfactory machinery. The protestors,called Luddites, became so violent thatthe British army had to be called intoaction. But gradually the IndustrialRevolution brought the common manmore comfortable living conditions,better nutrition, and longer life.

In 1851 Queen Victoria and herhusband, Prince Albert, hosted thegreat Crystal Palace Exhibition to dis-play the wonders of manufacturingand industry. Six million visitorscame from around the world to seethe products of industrialization.England showed off hundreds of itsgreat inventions: a huge hydraulicpress, a printing machine, an addingmachine, textile machines, and everykind of steam engine. Other Euro-pean countries beginning to enter theindustrial age sent exhibits, as didAmerica which displayed a sophisti-cated new plow and a fast-firing re-volver. The German iron and steelmaker Krupp startled viewers with atwo-ton block of cast steel.

Prince Albert saw the Great Exhibi-tion as evidence of “a period of mostwonderful transition, which tends rap-idly to accomplish that great end towhich indeed all history points — therealization of the unity of mankind.”And indeed, at different times, and atdifferent speeds, most of the world hasindustrialized.

The most recent example isChina, whose rapid industrializationhas amazed the world. Like Britishcities during the Industrial Revolu-tion, many Chinese cities now sufferfrom pollution and rapid urbaniza-tion. But the wealth of China hasgrown tremendously.

Other parts of the developingworld — countries in Asia, Africa,and Latin America — are still on theroad to industrialization.

FOR DISCUSSION ANDWRITING1. What was the Industrial Revolu-

tion? How is it relevant to today’sworld?

2. Which invention do you thinkcontributed the most to the In-dustrial Revolution? Why?

3. Why do you think the IndustrialRevolution first took place inBritain?

Agricultural Revolution vs. Industrial RevolutionThe Industrial Revolution is frequently compared to another signifi-

cant revolution in human history, the Agricultural Revolution (or Ne-olithic Revolution), which began around 10,000 B.C. Before theAgricultural Revolution, humans lived in small groups, hunted wild ani-mals, and gathered food from plants growing in the wild. The inventionof agriculture meant that people could grow their own food and stay inone place. People domesticated animals, and as food supplies grew, sodid the population. The Agricultural Revolution led to towns, cities, andcivilization. Society grew more complex. New classes arose — crafts-men, warriors, priests, leaders. New problems also arose, especiallythose associated with cities, e.g., disease and crime.

In this activity, students will decide which had the most positive effecton humans, the Agricultural Revolution or the Industrial Revolution. 1. Form small groups. During the activity, students should refer to the

article and use information they have previously learned. 2. Each group should discuss and answer the following questions about

both the Agricultural Revolution and the Industrial Revolution:a. What were its benefits?b. What problems did it cause? c. How would human history be different if it had not occurred?

3. Then each group should discuss and decide which revolution hadthe most positive effect on humans.

4. Groups report back to the class, giving reasons for their decisionsand discussing them with the class.

ACTIVITY

facebook.com/ConstitutionalRightsFoundation

5U. S. HISTORY

THE PULLMAN

STRIKE AND BOYCOTTIN 1894, RAILROAD CAR MANUFAC-TURER GEORGE PULLMAN REFUSEDTO NEGOTIATE WITH HIS FACTORYWORKERS, WHO THEN CALLED ASTRIKE. SOON THE CONFLICT TURNEDINTO A TEST OF STRENGTH BETWEENTHE RAILROAD INDUSTRY AND THESTILL-EVOLVING AMERICAN LABORMOVEMENT.

Following the Civil War and thegrowth of industries, conflicts oftenarose between industrial workers andtheir employers. The big industrialistsfought against labor unions becausethey could potentially organize in-dustry-wide strikes.

One of the biggest conflicts was thePullman strike and boycott of 1894.Federal courts were the deciding factorin this “clash of labor and capital,” as itwas phrased at the time.

Pullman and His Model TownBorn in 1831, George Pullman only

finished fourth grade. He eventuallytook over his father’s business of mov-ing and tearing down homes and otherbuildings. In 1859, he went to Chicagowhere he invested in a number of en-terprises. In 1867, he opened his ownbusiness, the Pullman Palace Car Co.,which manufactured and leased rail-road sleeping cars.

By 1879, Pullman’s company wasearning about $1 million a year. Hesoon expanded to make and sellother specialized railroad cars.

Pullman’s main railroad car factorywas located on the southern edge ofChicago. In 1881, he established an en-tire town for his workers. Named Pull-man, the town included well-builtbrick homes and other buildings. Theworkers were not allowed to buy theirhomes, but paid rent deducted fromtheir paychecks. Officially, the workersdid not have to live in Pullman. Butmany believed they had to do so to pro-tect their jobs.

Pullman was a substantial “com-pany town” with a Protestant church,public school, theater, hotel, library,

indoor shopping arcade, and park. Ithad a piped water supply, sewer sys-tem, gas works, and garbage collec-tion service. The renters paid forthese services and housing repairs.Generally, rents were higher than insurrounding communities.

Pullman envisioned his town as aplace where his workers would beisolated from crime, poverty, laborunions, and drunkenness. No saloonswere allowed in the town. He be-lieved his town would become amodel of living for American work-ers. By 1890, about 12,000 workersand their families lived in Pullman.

Critics of the town, however,pointed out that Pullman had noelected town government since every-thing was run by the company. JaneAddams, a famous Chicago reformer,wrote that George Pullman couldnever accept the idea that his workerswere not children but adults capableof running their own lives.

Like many employers in the1890s, Pullman rejected the conceptof unions representing and negotiat-ing for workers (collective bargain-ing). He insisted that wages, working

Wik

ime

dia

Co

mm

on

s

During the 1894 Pullman strike, members of the Illinois National Guard kept strikers away from the Arcade Building in Pullman, Chicago.

6 U. S. HISTORY

conditions, and employee grievances(complaints) were private matters be-tween him and each employee.

Debs and His AmericanRailway Union

Eugene Debs, the son of immi-grant parents who owned a grocerystore, was born in 1855. He left schoolat 14 to work as a railroad laborer. Heworked his way up to becoming a lo-comotive fireman at 16.

Later, Debs became an organizerfor railroad engineer and firemanunions called brotherhoods. He calledfor “calm reasoning” rather than vio-lent strikes, which had often endedbadly for the brotherhoods in the past.

Like most unions of the time, therailroad brotherhoods included onlywhite skilled workers. Debs, how-ever, came to believe that the broth-erhoods would be much stronger ifthey recruited white unskilled work-ers as well.

Getting nowhere with the brother-hoods, Debs broke with them in 1893and formed the American RailwayUnion (ARU). The ARU was open to allrailroad employees regardless of tradeor level of skill, but still barred racialminorities like black Pullman sleepercar porters. Many workers joined theARU, including some secretly from Pull-man’s Chicago railroad car works.

In the spring of 1894, the ARUcalled a strike against the GreatNorthern Railroad, forcing the ownerto accept an arbitration settlement fa-vorable to the union. (In an arbitra-tion, a neutral decision-makerinvestigates the claims of workersand their employer and then decidesthe terms for settling the dispute.)This success boosted ARU member-ship even more to 150,000, muchlarger than any of the old railroadbrotherhoods.

The Pullman StrikeThe U.S. had entered a deep eco-

nomic depression in 1893. As the de-mand for railroad cars dropped,Pullman laid off thousands of workersand cut the wages of those who re-mained by an average of 25 percent.

Pullman tried to avoid more layoffsby having workers do factory repairsand improvements.

Pullman, however, did not lowerthe rents or costs of services in hismodel town even though he paid hisworkers less. He also avoided cuttinghis and his managers’ salaries, andhe continued to pay dividends to hiscompany’s stockholders. As the fi-nances of many model town familiesbecame desperate, Chicago charitiessent them aid.

In early May 1894, workersformed a grievance committee tomeet with Pullman to ask him to re-store the old wage rates. He repliedthat raising wages would soon forcehim to close his business. He offeredto open his account books to provethis. The committee then asked fortheir housing rents to be reduced, butPullman refused.

Despite promises not to punishanyone on the grievance committee,the company fired three suspectedARU members after the meeting withPullman. The committee then metand voted to strike unless the firedworkers were rehired. The companyrefused, and a big majority of theworkers walked out of the Pullmancar works on May 11. Pullman tookthe strike as a personal insult andclosed his factories.

Eugene Debs rushed to supportthe Pullman strikers. An excitingspeaker, he addressed the strikers,calling George Pullman “a rich plun-derer.” Debs, however, cautionedagainst any violence or destruction ofcompany property.

Privately, Debs was reluctant toinvolve his one-year-old AmericanRailway Union. He feared the strikecould easily fail because of the de-pressed economy with many unem-ployed workers whom Pullman couldhire to replace the strikers.

The Pullman BoycottA month after the Pullman strike

began, the ARU held its schedulednational convention of railroad work-ers in Chicago. Striking Pullmanworkers made emotional pleas to thedelegates for active support.

The ARU convention sent some ofits Pullman delegates to the companyto request arbitration. But companyofficials refused to arbitrate or nego-tiate with the union. Pullman latermade a statement explaining why herefused arbitration:

Can I, as a business man, know-ing the truth of the facts which Ihave stated, bind myself that Iwill, in any contingency, openand operate the Pullman carshops at whatever loss, if itshould happen to be the opinionof some third party that I shoulddo so? The company’s rejection of arbi-

tration pushed Debs to strongly backthe Pullman strike out of solidaritywith the striking ARU members. TheARU convention delegates then votedto instruct its members not to handleany Pullman railroad cars. This wasa “secondary boycott,” which hap-pens when a union takes an actionagainst a company in sympathy withits employees who have gone onstrike. The ARU did not declare astrike against the railroads, and unionmembers were expected to do theirjobs except for moving Pullman carsor trains pulling them.

ARU members, working for manyrailroads, enthusiastically joined the

The committee thenmet and voted tostrike unless the

fired workers wererehired. The

company refused,and a big majority

of the workerswalked out. . .

7U. S. HISTORY

boycott. But the widespread supportamong railroad workers who werenot ARU members surprised evenDebs. The boycott may have revealedtheir deep resentment against paycuts, poor working conditions, andabusive treatment throughout therailroad industry.

Before long, unrest among therailroad workers went far beyond theboycott. When a worker refused tomove a Pullman car, the railroad firedhim. Often, the rest of his crew quittheir jobs in protest.

These protests multiplied andcrippled numerous railroads. Manytrains, including those with U.S. mailcars, stopped operating. Debs said hisunion members were willing to movethe trains, just not those with Pull-man cars.

The General Managers Associationrepresented 24 railroads with terminalsin Chicago. Fearing the unionization ofthe entire railroad industry, it met toplan a strategy to stop the boycott andcrush the railway union. The associa-tion rejected arbitration and began re-cruiting thousands of unemployedworkers to replace the ARU boycotters.It then ordered Pullman cars attachedto mail cars in order to blame theunion for any interruption in trans-porting mail.

By the end of June, violencebegan to erupt as Debs lost control ofan estimated 250,000 strikers andboycotters in 27 states. Mobs at-tacked railroad company property.Local police clashed with rioters.Trains were blocked and derailed. Inthe chaos, hoodlums looted and van-dalized railroad property. Before theywere over, the Pullman strike andboycott claimed at least 40 lives.Debs tried to urge calm, but many ofthose causing the trouble were notmembers of his union.

The General Managers Associa-tion appealed to President GroverCleveland to send U.S. troops toChicago to stop the mob violence. Inearly July, Cleveland ordered about2,000 federal troops to Chicago and14,000 more to other areas of thecountry where train traffic had been

disrupted. Cleveland based his ac-tion on the grounds that he had aconstitutional duty to protect inter-state commerce and the movementof U.S. mail.

The InjunctionA few days before federal troops

entered Chicago, the railroad compa-nies pressured friends in the Cleve-land administration to take legalaction against Debs and his union.Cleveland’s attorney general, RichardOlney, agreed and decided it wouldbe better to go after the union leadersthan the strikers and boycotters.Cleveland later described the Ameri-can Railway Union headquarters inChicago as the “birthplace of the dis-turbance.”

Attorney General Olney requestedtwo federal court judges in Chicago,both with deeply anti-labor views, towrite an injunction (court order) di-rected at Debs and the other ARU lead-ers. The injunction prohibited Debsand the other union leaders from “ob-structing” certain railroads, the mail,and trains in interstate commerce.

The injunction also ordered Debsand the others to cease “sending out

any letters, messages, or communi-cations directing . . . any personswhatsoever to interfere with the [rail-roads].” In its most controversialpart, the injunction prohibited “per-suading any of the [railroad] employ-ees . . . to fail or refuse to perform theduties of their employment.” In ef-fect, the injunction seemed to outlawany writings or speech that called forworkers to quit their railroad jobs insympathy with the Pullman strikers.

On July 4, two days after the in-junction was served on Debs and sev-eral other union leaders, federaltroops entered Chicago. Shortly after-ward, thousands of rioters, some ofthem ARU members, tipped over andburned about 700 railroad cars. Gen-eral Nelson Miles, commander of theU.S. troops, reported that “the in-junction of the United States court isopenly defied.”

A few days later, lawyers for theU.S. government and the railroadsrequested the federal court to citeDebs and other leaders of the ARUfor contempt of court because theyhad violated the court’s injunction.Debs and other ARU leaders werearrested and remained in jail when,

Un

iv. o

f M

N L

aw L

ibra

ry, C

lare

nce

Dar

row

Dig

ital

Co

llect

ion

Eugene V. Debs(1855–1926) led

the AmericanRailway Union and

served six months injail for violating a

court order duringthe Pullman strike.

Later, he ran forpresident five times.

8 U. S. HISTORY

as a form of protest, they refused topost bail.

The federal troops quickly stoppedthe violence in Chicago and else-where. The railroads, backed by thefederal court and U.S. troops, turneddown an offer by Debs to call off theboycott if ARU members could gettheir old jobs back. With the ARUleaders in jail, the Pullman strike andboycott collapsed.

Debs on TrialIn September, Debs faced a civil

trial before William Woods, one ofthe judges who had written the in-junction. Debs and the other unionleaders were charged with contemptof court for violating it.

Helping with the defense wasClarence Darrow, a young idealisticlawyer who had been working forone of the railroads. The main evi-dence against Debs consisted ofhundreds of telegrams he had sentto local union leaders, urging themto continue the Pullman strike andboycott. Darrow pointed out thatDebs had not called for any violenceor unlawful acts against the railroadsor government.

Judge Woods found all the ARUleaders in contempt of the injunctionby conspiring to encourage the strikeand boycott, “knowing that violenceand wrong will be the probable out-come.” The judge sentenced Debs tosix months in jail and the others tothree months. Debs appealed thecontempt of court verdict to the U.S.Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme CourtBy the early 1890s, some judges

were beginning to issue injunctionsto stop strikes and secondary boy-cotts. They relied on their “equitypowers” to address issues not clearlydefined in the law. The judges de-cided that strikes and other labor ac-tions were a “public nuisance” like afactory polluting a river. The SupremeCourt, however, had never ruledwhether such labor injunctions wereconstitutional.

Attorney General Olney arguedbefore the Supreme Court that the

federal court in this case had theconstitutional authority to issue aninjunction under its equity powers.Darrow argued that the injunctionwas unconstitutional because it wenttoo far, virtually declaring the right tostrike illegal. He said this left theworkers “helpless as the prey of thegreat and strong.”

In May 1895, the Supreme Courtunanimously decided the case infavor of the government. The courtfocused on the equity powers of fed-eral judges. The justices ruled thatfederal courts had the constitutionalauthority to issue injunctions inlabor conflicts to protect the publicinterest, which included the flow ofinterstate commerce and movementof the mail.

Debs and the other leaders hadclaimed that they did not commit anycrimes, urge violence, or interferewith interstate commerce and themail. The court disagreed and statedthat “the defendants were engaged insuch obstructions.”

The Aftermath The collapse of the Pullman

strike and boycott along with theSupreme Court legal defeat was adisaster for the union movement.Debs put the blame squarely on thefederal courts and the labor injunc-tion. This became a strong weaponfor the railroads and other corpora-tions to break strikes until the 1930swhen Congress passed laws favor-able to unions.

George Pullman died three yearsafter the strike that still bears hisname. His model town was later ab-sorbed by Chicago. Many of thebuildings still exist and are part of thePullman State Historic Site.

Eugene Debs disbanded hisAmerican Railway Union and wenton to become the nation’s most fa-mous socialist leader. He ran for pres-ident five times and got almost 1million votes in 1920 while he was inprison for opposing U.S. entry intoWorld War I.

FOR DISCUSSION ANDWRITING1. Was George Pullman’s model

town for his workers a good or abad idea? Why?

2. Do you think the Pullman work-ers’ strike and the American Rail-way Union’s secondary boycottwere both justified? Why?

3. Do you think the federal court in-junction was necessary or did itgo too far? Why?

For Further ReadingBeik, Millie Allen. Labor Rela-

tions. Westport, Conn.: GreenwoodPress, 2005.

Papke, David Ray. The PullmanCase: The Clash of Labor and Capitalin Industrial America. Lawrence, Kan.:University Press of Kansas, 1999.

Arbitration?During the Pullman strike

and boycott, the strikers re-quested arbitration of the dis-pute, but the Pullman companyrefused to arbitrate. In this ac-tivity, students will role playspokespersons for each sideand create statements defend-ing their position.1. Form small groups.2. Assign each group either

spokesperson for Pullmanor for the strikers.

3. Each group should:a. Discuss reasons sup-

porting its position.b. Think of reasons sup-

porting the other side.c. Create a one-minute

persuasive presentationfor its position. Thepresentation should in-clude reasons for sup-porting its position andshould also addresswhat the other sidemight argue.

4. The groups should present,alternating spokespersonsfor each side.

ACTIVITY

9U. S. HISTORY

AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS HAVE HADA ROCKY HISTORY. THEY STRUGGLEDDURING THE 19TH AND EARLY 20THCENTURIES, GAINED LEGAL PROTEC-TIONS FROM NEW DEAL LEGISLATIONIN THE 1930S, AND REACHED THEIRPEAK IN POWER AND MEMBERSHIPDURING THE 1950S. SINCE THE 1970S,HOWEVER, UNION MEMBERSHIP HASSTEADILY DECLINED WITH THE EXCEP-TION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEEUNIONS.

In the 1820s as the Industrial Rev-olution began to take hold in theU.S., employers had great power overworkers. Employers, for example,could cut wages at will, place work-ers at unsafe machinery, and makethem work long hours. The workers’only option was to either obey theirbosses or quit and hope to find otherfactory jobs.

To improve their situation, groupsof skilled factory workers began toform local labor unions. Theseunions were usually organized byskilled craft such as shoemaking.

Unions attempted to use theirstrength in numbers to fight for betterwages and working conditions. If an

employer refused to meet theirdemands, union members commonlywent on strike.

Employers resisted unions. Theyinsisted that wages and other termsof employment were private contractsbetween themselves and individualworkers. Employers claimed unionswere illegal because they violatedtheir rights of property and contract.

Union membership typically shrankduring depressions when jobs werescarce. But once prosperity returned andlabor was scarce, unions almost alwaysrebounded, stronger than before. Thiscycle of union ups, downs, and re-bounds held for more than 100 years.

In the 1860s, skilled workersbegan to form national unions. TheKnights of Labor, founded in 1869,was the first national union to try toorganize both skilled and unskilledworkers in all industries. The Knightscalled for an eight-hour day, abolitionof child labor, and equal pay for menand women.

The Knights disliked strikes andcalled for a third party to settle labordisputes between employers andtheir workers. As strikes multiplied

during the 1880s, however, leaders ofthe Knights lost control of their mem-bers who went on strike anyway.Many strikes failed, membership fell,and the Knights collapsed by 1900.

The American Federation of Labor(AFL), established in 1886, organizedonly skilled craft workers like bakersand carpenters. Led by Samuel Gom-pers of the cigar makers union, theAFL was not a centralized union likethe Knights of Labor. Instead, the AFLformed a federation of largely self-gov-erning national unions.

Up to this point, most unions hadrelied mainly on strikes to try to forceemployers to give in to worker de-mands. Employers fought back byhiring armed guards and by replacingstrikers with non-union workers.

By the 1890s, some unions suchas the United Mine Workers wereusing a new method, called the col-lective bargaining contract. A unionwould promise not to strike for a setperiod if the employer agreed towages and other terms acceptable tothe workers. When the contract ex-pired, the union and employer couldnegotiate a new one and thus main-tain labor peace.

At the turn of the 20th century,another union growth spurt occurred.In 1904, union membership reacheda new high of 2 million members,about 12 percent of non-farm indus-trial workers.

Most employers, however, still re-fused to recognize unions or to par-ticipate in collective bargaining.Moreover, the mainstream unionmovement represented by the AFL ig-nored unskilled factory workerswhose numbers were growing muchfaster than the traditional unionmembership of skilled craftsmen.

New Deal Labor LawsDuring World War I, the govern-

ment encouraged collective bargain-ing agreements to prevent strikes.Union membership increased to 16percent of the industrial workforce.But after the war, the sudden drop ingovernment spending led to masslayoffs and union growth stalled.

AMERICAN LABOR UNIONS:YESTERDAY AND TODAY

Members of the Knights of Labor, one of the first national unions, protest in Chicago,demanding an eight-hour day, an end to child labor, and equal pay for men and women.

Wikim

ed

ia Co

mm

on

s

10 U. S. HISTORY

In an exception to the normalcycle of union ups and downs, mem-bership fell when prosperity returnedin the 1920s. With wages on the rise,many workers believed they did notneed a union to bargain for them.Some employers offered health clin-ics, pensions, and other benefits todeter workers from joining unions.

In addition, most employers still re-jected collective bargaining with laborunions. Instead, some employers estab-lished “company unions” to set wages,resolve grievances (worker complaints),and approve working conditions with-out much worker participation.

The law favored employers overworkers. Courts often issued injunc-tions (court orders) that declared strikesillegal, and police and state militias thenbroke them up. In 1921, the U.S.Supreme Court ruled that minimumwage laws were unconstitutional sincethey violated the liberty of contract be-tween a worker and his employer.

When the Great Depression hit inthe early 1930s, employers cut wages,businesses failed, huge numbers ofworkers lost their jobs, and unionmembership dropped. After FranklinD. Roosevelt was elected president in1932, his New Deal Democrat–con-trolled Congress passed new lawssupporting workers and unions.

The most important one was theNational Labor Relations Act (Wag-ner Act) of 1935. It gave workers theright “to form, join, or assist labor or-ganizations, to bargain collectivelythrough representatives of their ownchoosing.” This guaranteed workersa “voice” in improving their wagesand working conditions. The law didnot cover farm workers, supervisors,management, or public employees.

Under this law, the NationalLabor Relations Board banned com-pany unions, prohibited employerinterference with the right of work-ers to join a union, and guaranteedpeaceful picketing by strikers. Thelaw enabled employees to sign acard authorizing a particular unionto represent them. If a majority ofworkers signed, the employer couldimmediately recognize the union as

the exclusive bargaining representa-tive for the workers.

As an alternative, the employercould petition the National Labor Re-lations Board to conduct a secretworker election to confirm the unionas the exclusive bargaining represen-tative. The employer then had to ne-gotiate with the authorized union,which represented all the workers in aworkplace. The resulting collectivebargaining contract had to be ratifiedby the union members and the com-pany’s government board of directors.

In 1938, Congress passed the FairLabor Standards Act. This establishedthe first federal minimum wage at 25cents an hour. It also set the maxi-mum regular work week at 44 hoursand abolished child labor for thoseunder 16 in industries engaged in in-terstate commerce.

At first, many employers resistedthe new labor laws, claiming they vi-olated their constitutional rights. Butin 1937, the U.S. Supreme Courtruled that the National Labor Rela-tions Act was constitutional underthe commerce clause. The court alsofound constitutional the Fair LaborStandards Act and the right of work-ers to strike and peacefully picket.

Unions at Their PeakThe traditional AFL skilled craft

unions had long ignored unskilledworkers. John L. Lewis of the AFL’sUnited Mine Workers led an effort tounionize steel, rubber, auto, and otherunskilled workers. This caused a splitwithin the AFL that ultimately resultedin Lewis’ helping to form a new sepa-rate union federation, the Congress ofIndustrial Organizations (CIO) in the1930s. Membership in the mainlymanufacturing CIO unions soon ri-valed that of the AFL craft unions.

General Motors (GM), the world’slargest industrial corporation, had re-sisted recognizing any union repre-sentation of its auto workers. In 1937,the CIO and its United Auto Workers(UAW) union supported a “sit-downstrike” against GM. Workers occupieda GM factory and refused to work.The strike spread, closing down all

GM production. The giant auto com-pany finally agreed to recognize theUAW as the exclusive bargainingagent for all GM workers.

The stunning UAW victory quicklyled to the unionization of the entireauto industry and inspired similar ef-forts in many other industries. Unionmembership exploded and continuedto increase during World War II.

In 1950, the UAW negotiated afive-year collective bargaining agree-ment with the auto industry. Knownas the “Treaty of Detroit,” the agree-ment included wage bonuses for in-creased worker output, adjustmentsfor cost of living inflation, paid vaca-tions, health insurance, and “definedcontribution pensions” that guaran-teed payouts to retired workers untilthey died.

The Treaty of Detroit set a nationalstandard for labor contracts in manyother unionized industries. Even com-panies not unionized adopted some ofthe union-won benefits to keep theirworkers happy.

During the 1950s, with little com-petition from countries still recover-ing from World War II, the U.S.economy expanded rapidly. Salessurged at home, and exports to for-eign countries grew. Company profitssoared, worker earnings doubled,and union membership reached itsall-time peak of 18 million, 35 per-cent of the non-agricultural laborforce. Collective bargaining and fewerstrikes became the norm. Americanunion workers enjoyed their higheststandard of living in U.S. history,which became their pathway into themiddle class.

The Long Decline of UnionsAfter 1960, the growth in union

membership stalled and then begana long decline. Even when prosperityreturned after the deep recession ofthe early 1980s, unions continued torapidly lose members.

What happened to cause such areversal in the strength of laborunions?

One factor was the Taft-HartleyAct. Passed by a Republican-controlled

11U. S. HISTORY

Congress in 1947, it permitted em-ployers to try to persuade workersnot to vote for union representation.The law also prohibited unions fromdemanding that employers only hireunion members (closed shop).

In many cases, a union that themajority of workers had elected torepresent them required newly hiredemployees to join the union or pay ita fee for its collective bargaining serv-ices (union shop). But the Taft-Hart-ley Act allowed states to ban unionshops with so-called “right to work”laws. Passed in 23 states, mainly inthe South and West, these laws weak-ened union recruitment.

By the 1970s, the postwar era ofU.S. domination of the world econ-omy had ended. U.S. companies likeautomakers and steel producers in-creasingly faced a much more com-petitive global market. In anothershift, largely non-unionized sales, en-gineering, finance, and other white-collar service jobs increased whilethe heavily unionized blue-collarmanufacturing jobs disappeared.

Employers responded to the newglobal competition by seeking cheapernon-union labor at home and in foreigncountries. Businesses also adopted ro-botics and other kinds of technologythat replaced many routine assembly-line jobs. During a 30-year period fol-lowing 1973, manufacturing jobs,many of them unionized, dropped by70 percent. Today, American manufac-turing is still strong, but it requiresfewer workers who often must havemore technical training.

The unions themselves tend toblame their decline on employerswho fired workers who were unionorganizers. Unions also charge thatcompanies commonly stall union or-ganizing elections with appeals andother obstructions.

On the other hand, the AFL andCIO, which merged in 1955, wereslow to react to the changes in theU.S. economy. For example, theyfailed to organize fast-growing groupsof service employees like office work-ers who historically have been reluc-tant to join unions.

To the public, unions seemedmore interested in demanding a guar-anteed job and excessive pensions fortheir existing members whether ornot companies could afford thesethings. A Gallup Poll revealed in 2009that for the first time public supportfor unions dropped below 50 percent.

Total union membership declinedfrom 20 percent of the total laborforce in 1983 to 12 percent in 2011,about what it was 100 years ago.

Public Employee UnionsOne major exception to the long

decline in union membership is theunionization of government employees.Union membership has grown for po-lice, firefighters, teachers, social work-ers, and other government workers.

In 1962, President John F. Kennedyissued an executive order granting fed-eral employees the right to join unionsand bargain collectively but not tostrike. Soon most states and manycities adopted these rights for at leastsome public employees.

As traditional blue-collar unionmembership fell in the private econ-omy, the number of unionized publicemployees surged. In 2009, they be-came the majority of all U.S. unionmembers. Today, 37 percent of public

employees in the nation are unionizedcompared to 6.9 percent of workers inthe private economy. The largest sin-gle union in the U.S. today is the Na-tional Educational Association. Thisindependent teachers’ union is not amember of the AFL-CIO.

The Great Recession caused somepublic criticism of public employeeunions. Almost 90 percent of Ameri-can workers do not belong to anyunion, and many of them believedpublic employee unions had negoti-ated bloated benefits for their mem-bers while taxpayers struggledeconomically.

In 2011, Wisconsin passed a lawthat repealed certain collective bar-gaining rights for most of its publicemployee unions. Governor ScottWalker defended the law as neces-sary to protect local governments andschool boards from union demandsfor pensions and other benefits.Walker said, “We can no longer livein a society where the public em-ployees are the haves and the tax-payers are the have nots.”

The Wisconsin law provoked massdemonstrations by union members,court appeals, and an unsuccessful ef-fort to recall Governor Walker. The con-troversy added to a growing nationaldebate over whether public employeesshould have the same rights as otherworkers in the private economy to joina union, bargain collectively, and strike.

The Case Against Public EmployeeUnions

Government employee unions inthe public sector differ from unions inthe private sector. Private sector unionsnegotiate with companies that try tokeep labor costs down and profits up.Public sector unions negotiate withelected bodies like city councils whosebudgets are funded by taxpayers. Criticsof public sector unions charge that theyhelp elect the government officials whonegotiate and approve the union mem-bers’ wages and benefits. Politicianspay back the unions by agreeing tohigher wages, numerous paid holidays,early retirement, and health care plans.Most expensive are the defined benefitpensions that guarantee retirement

In August 2012, protesting members ofService Employees International Unionmarched through San Francisco’s financialdistrict demanding better pay and workingconditions.

iSto

ck.com

/Ro

i Bro

oks

12 U. S. HISTORY

checks for life, something most Ameri-can workers do not enjoy. Critics arguethat over time, governments cannotfund these benefits without highertaxes or going into debt.

Public employee unions are notneeded, say the critics, because theworkers are already protected bystate and federal civil service laws. Ifpublic employee unions are permit-ted, collective bargaining should belimited to wages only and not to pen-sions and other benefits that threatento bankrupt the government.

At the very least, public employeeunions should be prohibited fromstriking since the taxpaying public isharmed. Of course, public employeesstill would have the right of petitionto city councils and other govern-ment bodies.

The Case for Public Employee UnionsPublic sector workers are often

charged with being overpaid, but nearlyhalf of them have college degrees ver-sus only a quarter of private sectorworkers. Also, public workers earnabout 10 percent less than private work-ers with the same education level. Pub-lic worker benefits tend to be higherthan in the private sector, but total com-pensation of wages and benefits is lowerwhen similar private and public sectorjobs are compared.

Supporters of public employeeunions say that teachers, police, fire-fighters, and other public servants arebeing wrongly blamed for cripplingpension funds and causing govern-ment budget deficits. The real cul-prits, they argue, are the banks andWall Street investment firms whoseactions during the housing boombrought on the Great Recession.

Only a small percentage of publicworkers have unreasonably high pen-sions needing reform. Most public em-ployees contribute to their retirementand receive pensions less than $25,000per year on average. In addition, manypublic employees do not qualify forSocial Security.

Supporters of public employeeunions argue that they deserve thesame rights in collective bargainingas private workers. The only possible

exception would be to deny the rightto strike to particular workers (e.g.,police and fire fighters) whose strikeswould endanger the public.

The Future of UnionsAs unions have weakened, wages

for most American workers havestalled. The median weekly wage ofunion members remains higher thanthat of non-union workers.

If the union movement is goingto rebound again, it must reach be-yond its traditional skilled and bluecollar industrial members. New tar-gets for unionization include unor-ganized low-paid service workerslike janitors, office employees likeclerks, white-collar professionalslike engineers, and government em-ployees. One union that has at-tempted to organize service workersis the Service Employees Interna-tional Union. It is the fastest grow-ing union in America.

Unions want Congress to pass alaw that would make it easier to or-ganize workers by allowing them tosimply sign a card authorizing unionrepresentation (“card check”). Em-ployers strongly oppose this since itwould do away with their right to de-mand a secret vote among workers tosee whether they want a union.

Meanwhile, the well-paid blue-collar union assembly-line jobs thatmany young people once steppedinto right after high school are not

growing. By 2020, 65 percent of alljobs will require some education be-yond high school. If unions want tomake a comeback, they will have toorganize a more educated labor force.

FOR DISCUSSION ANDWRITING1. What are labor unions? What do

they do? 2. How did union collective bar-

gaining from the 1950s until theearly 1970s benefit even non-union workers?

3. What do you think has been themain cause of the sharp declinein union membership since the1970s? Why?

4. Do you support or oppose the“card check” method of unionrecognition by employees at awork site? Why or why not?

5. What are public employeeunions? How are they differentfrom other unions?

For Further ReadingDubofsky, Melvyn and Dulles,

Foster Rhea. Labor in America, A His-tory. 8th ed. Wheeling, Ill.: HarlanDavidson, 2010.

Troy, Leo. The Twilight of the OldUnionism. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe,2004.

Public Employee Unions?Form small groups to discuss and choose one of the following policies

on public employee unions. Each group will then defend its choice beforethe class with information and evidence from the article.A. Unions and collective bargaining for public employees should be abolished.B. Public employee unions should only be able to bargain collectively

on wages.C. Public employee unions should be able to bargain collectively on wages,

hours, working conditions, grievances, pensions, and other benefits,but should not have the right to strike.

D. Public employee unions should have all the collective bargaining rightsin C and also have the right to strike except when the safety of the pub-lic is endangered.

E. Public employee unions should have the right to bargain collectively onany matter of employment and also have the unrestricted right to strike.

F. Students may develop their own policy for public employee unions.

ACTIVITY

13

Sources Industrial RevolutionAshton, T. The Industrial Revolution, 1760–1830. London: OxfordUP, 1948. · Deane, P. The First Industrial Revolution. 2nd ed. Cam-bridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 1965. · Landes, D. The UnboundPrometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development inWestern Europe from 1750 to the Present. London: Cambridge UP,1969. · Mokyr, J., ed. The British Industrial Revolution: An EconomicPerspective. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999. · More, C.Understanding the Industrial Revolution. London: Routledge, 2000.· Stearns, P. The Industrial Revolution in World History. 2nd ed.Boulder, CO: Westview P, 1998.

PullmanBeik, M. Labor Relations. Westport, CT: Greenwood P, 2005. ·Dubofsky, M., et al. Labor in America, A History. 8th ed. Wheeling,IL: Harlan Davidson, 2010. · Papke, D. The Pullman Case: The Clashof Labor and Capital in Industrial America. Lawrence, KS: U P ofKansas, 1999. · Pullman State Historic Site. 10/2010. URL:www.pullman-museum.org · Schneirov, R. et al., eds. The PullmanStrike and the Crisis of the 1890s. Urbana, IL: U of Illinois P, 1999.· Warne, C., ed. The Pullman Boycott of 1894: The Problem of Fed-eral Intervention. Boston: D.C. Heath, 1955.

Labor UnionsDavey, M. et al. “Walker Survives Wisconsin’s Recall Vote.” NYTimes. 6/5/2012. · “Degrees of Difficulty.” Time. 10/29/2012. · DiS-alvo, D. Government Unions and the Bankruptcy of America [e-book]. New York: Encounter Books, 2011. · Dubofsky, M. et al.Labor in America: A History. 8th ed. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson,2010. · Dubofsky, M. et al., eds. American Labor: A DocumentaryCollection. New York: Palbrave MacMillan, 2004. · “Employee FreeChoice Act.” Wikipedia. 10/24/2012. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org· Fairbrother, P. et al., eds. Changing Prospects for Trade Unionism.London: Coninuum, 2002. · Greenhouse, S. The Big Squeeze: ToughTimes for the American Worker. New York: Anchor Books, 2009. ·___. “Most U. S. Union Members Are Working for the Government,New Data Shows.” NY Times. 1/23/2010. · ___. “Strained StatesTurning to Laws to Curb Labor Unions.” NY Times. 1/3/2011. ·Hertzberg, H. “Union Blues.” New Yorker. 3/7/2011. · Hoffer, S.“Collective Bargaining: A Brief History of the Key Issue in the Wis-consin Standoff.” AOL News. 2/18/2011. URL: www.aolnews.com ·Leonhardt, D. “Standard of Living Is in the Shadows as ElectionIssue.” NY Times. 10/23/2012. · Lofaso, A. “In Defense of PublicSector Unions.” Hofstra Labor and Employment Law J. vol. 28:303,2011. · McGinnis, J. et al. “The Case Against Public Sector Unions.”Policy Review. 1 Aug. 2010. Hoover Institution Stanford University.URL: www.hoover.org · Nelson, D. Shifting Fortunes, The Rise andDecline of American Labor from the 1820s to the Present. Chicago:Ivan R. Dee, 1997. · Porter, E. “Unions’ Past May Hold Key to TheirFuture.” NY Times. 7/17/2012. · Reich, R. “The Shameful Attackon Public Employees.” Huffington Post. 11/10/2012. URL: www.huff-ingtonpost.com · Siu, H. et al. “Jobless Recoveries and the Disap-pearance of Routine Occupations.” Vox. 11/6/2012. URL:www.voxeu.org · Surowiecki, A. “State of the Unions.” New Yorker.1/17/2011. · Troy, L. The Twilight of the Old Unionism. Armonk,NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2004. · “Union Members Summary.” U.S. Bureauof Labor Statistics. 1/27/2012. URL: www.bls.gov · Wilcox, G.“Basic Labor Law.” Employee Rights Q. Winter 2003.

Standards AddressedIndustrial RevolutionNational High School World History Standard 33: Understands the causes and con-sequences of the agricultural and industrial revolutions from 1700 to 1850. (7) Un-derstands how and why industrialization developed differently in Britain thanit did on the continent.California History/Social Science Standard 10.3: Students analyze the effects of theIndustrial Revolution in England, France, Germany, Japan, and the United States. (1)Analyze why England was the first country to industrialize. (2) Examine howscientific and technological changes and new forms of energy brought aboutmassive social, economic, and cultural change (e.g., the inventions and dis-coveries of James Watt . . .). Common Core Standard SL.11–12.1: Initiate and participate effectively in a range ofcollaborative discussions . . . with diverse partners on grades 11–12 topics, texts, andissues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

PullmanNational High School U.S. History Standard 18: Understands the rise of the Americanlabor movement and how political issues reflected social and economic changes. (2)Understands labor issues of the late 19th century . . . .California History/Social Science Standard 8.12: Students analyze the transforma-tion of the American economy and the changing social and political conditions in theUnited States in response to the Industrial Revolution. (6) . . . [E]xamine the labormovement, including its leaders (e.g., Samuel Gompers), its demand for col-lective bargaining, and its strikes and protests over labor conditions.California History/Social Science Standard 11.2: Students analyze the relationshipamong the rise of industrialization, large-scale rural-to-urban migration, and mas-sive immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. (5) Discuss . . . the economicand political policies of industrial leaders.Common Core Standard SL.11–12.4: Present information, findings, and supporting ev-idence, conveying a clear and distinct perspective, such that listeners can follow theline of reasoning, alternative or opposing perspectives are addressed, and the or-ganization, development, substance, and style are appropriate to purpose, audience,and a range of formal and informal tasks.

Labor Unions National High School U.S. History Standard 18: Understands the rise of the Americanlabor movement and how political issues reflected social and economic changes. (2)Understands the issues of the late 19th century . . . .National High School U.S. History Standard 24: Understands how the New Deal ad-dressed the Great Depression . . . . (3) Understands how the New Deal influencedlabor and employment . . . .National High School U.S. History Standard 26: Understands the economic boom andsocial transformation of post-World War II United States.

National High School U.S. History Standard 30: Understands developments in . . . do-mestic politics between the Nixon and Clinton presidencies. (4) Understands themajor economic issues from the Reagan through the Clinton presidencies (e.g.,why labor unions declined in recent decades . . .).National High School U.S. History Standard 31: Understands economic, social, andcultural developments in the contemporary United States. (1) Understands howchanges in the national and global economy have influenced the workplace . . . .California History/Social Science Standard 11.6: Students analyze . . . how the NewDeal fundamentally changed the role of the federal government. (4) Analyze . . .New Deal economic policies and the expanded role of the federal government. . . since the 1930s (e.g., . . . National Labor Relations Board . . .). (5) Trace .. . organized labor, from the creation of the American Federation of Labor andthe Congress of Industrial Organizations to current issues of a postindustrial,multinational economy. . . .California History/Social Science Standard 12e.4: Students analyze the elements ofthe U.S. labor market in a global setting. (1) Understand the operations of thelabor market, including the circumstances surrounding the establishment ofprincipal American labor unions, procedures that unions use to gain benefitsfor their members . . . .Common Core Standard SL.11–12.4: Present information, findings, and supporting ev-idence, conveying a clear and distinct perspective, such that listeners can follow theline of reasoning, alternative or opposing perspectives are addressed, and the or-ganization, development, substance, and style are appropriate to purpose, audience,and a range of formal and informal tasks.Standards reprinted with permission: National Standards © 2000 McREL, Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, 2550 S. Parker Road, Ste.500, Aurora, CO 80014, (303)337.0990.

California Standards copyrighted by the California Dept. of Education, P.O. Box271, Sacramento, CA 95812.

facebook.com/ConstitutionalRightsFoundation

14

For additional information: www.crf-usa.org/publications/

Criminal Justice inAmerica, 5th ED.

The most comprehensivesecondary criminal justice text

Our most popular publication, CriminalJustice in America, has been completelyrevised, updated, and formatted in color.It now has new and revised readings, up-to-date statistics, and new, expandedcase studies. It is the most comprehen-sive secondary text available on the sub-jects of criminal law, procedure, andcriminology. It can serve as a text for anentire law-related education course, oras a supplement for civics, government,or contemporary-issues courses.

Its extensive readings are supported by:• Directed Discussions • Role Plays• Mock Trials• Cooperative and Interactive Exercises• Activities to Involve Outside Resource

Experts• Research Activities for Students to Use

the Library or InternetThe Student Edition has six units:Crime | Police | The Criminal CaseCorrections | Juvenile JusticeSolutions

The Teacher’s Guide, a completelyreworked comprehensive guide, providesdetailed descriptions of teaching strate-gies, suggested answers to every ques-tion in the text, activity masters, tests(for each unit and a final test), back-ground readings, and extra resources tosupplement the text.

Criminal Justice in America, 5th Ed.#10120BR Student Edition, 408 pp. $24.95#10121BR Teacher’s Guide, 126 pp. $12.95#10122BR S et of 10 Student Editions $199.95

Mock Trial Series

Take students to the heart of thejustice system.

Grades 6–12

Students acquire critical-thinking skillsand an in-depth understanding of our ju-dicial process as they study a hypotheti-cal case, conduct legal research, and roleplay the trial.

Each Mock Trial packet includes a hypo-thetical case, witness statements, legalauthorities, trial instructions, and proce-dural guidelines. It also includes a pre-trial motion designed to deepen studentunderstanding of constitutional issues.

People v. BuschellMurder and the right to bear arms

A college college student is found mur-dered at a festival’s campground, and po-lice focus on a student rival who themurdered student was planning on re-porting for violating the college’s honorcode. When police make the arrest, thesuspect is carrying a concealed weaponwithout a license. Pretrial issue: Is thestate’s concealed carry statute constitu-tional?#70039CBR, 80 pp. $5.95

#70112CBR Set of 10 $29.95

Mock Trial DVDs Would your students benefit from see-ing skilled students put on a mock trial? #70212CBR People v. Buschell, 120 min, $19.95

People v. WoodsonAssault with a deadly weapon and freeexpression

A middle school student, new to town,is harassed at school and on the Inter-net. On the way home from school, thestudent is attacked from behind with abrick. Police arrest Jesse Woodson, ajunior college student who had internedat the middle school for the attack andfor violating an state law against bully-ing and cyberbullying. Pretrial issue: Isthe anti-bullying law constitutional?#70038BR, 80 pp. $5.95

#70111CBR Set of 10 $29.95

People v. BrattonMurder and search and seizure

When a celebrity blogger is found mur-dered in his driveway, police arrest a co-median who the blogger had harshlycriticized. Pretrial issue: Was the po-lice’s search of the defendant’s com-puter within the scope of the warrant? #70037BR, 80 pp. $5.95#70110CBR Set of 10 $29.95

ORDER ONLINE: www.crf-usa.org/publications

These and over20 additional cases

are available topurchase and download

online now

Drawing by Melissa B., 2012 California Mock Trial Coutroom Artist Competition winner.Drawing by Melissa B., 2012 California Mock Trial Coutroom Artist Competition winner.

_____________________________________________________________Name

_____________________________________________________________School/Organization

_____________________________________________________________Street Address

_____________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip

_____________________________________________________________Telephone

_____________________________________________________________e-mail

Qty. Item Unit Price Total _____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

Subtotal _______

Sales Tax 8.75% (CA. Residents Only) _______

Shipping/Handling _______

Total _______

[ ] Check enclosed [ ] Purchase order enclosed [ ] Please bill my credit card[ ] AmerEx [ ] Master Card [ ] Visa

Card #: ______________________________________________________

CVV2#:________________ Exp. Date _______/_______/______

Signature ___________________________________________________

Mail purchase orders or checks payable to: Constitutional Rights FoundationPublications Dept.601 South Kingsley Dr.Los Angeles, CA 90005-4128

Order online at: www.crf-usa.org

Order by credit card toll free: 1-800-488-4CRF

Fax to: (213) 386-0459

Prices valid until May 1, 2013.

BRIA 28:3

Total Order Shipping/Handling$ 0 - 15.00 $ 7.50$ 15.01 - 35.00 $ 8.00$ 35.01 - 70.00 $ 9.50$ 70.01 - 100.00 $13.00$ 101.00 - 300.00 $17.00$300.00 + 6%

Landmarks: Historic U.S. SupremeCourt DecisionsGrades 9–12

U.S. Supreme Court cases havegreatly affected U.S. history. Letyour students discover some ofthe most important cases. Eachreading in the student text fo-cuses on one case, giving histori-cal background, exploring themajority and dissenting opinions,and explaining the case’s signifi-cance.

A separate teacher’s guide con-tains lesson plans for each read-ing. The plans include focusactivities, discussion questions with suggested answers,step-by-step instructions for interactive activities, and de-briefing questions and suggestions.

The student text begins with a reading on how the SupremeCourt works. The book continues with readings on the follow-ing important cases:

Marbury v. Madison (1803)McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)Schenck v. U.S. (1919)Palko v. Connecticut (1937)Brown v. Board of Education (1954)Mapp v. Ohio (1961)Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)Miranda v. Arizona (1966)U.S. v. Nixon (1974)Regents of UC v. Bakke (1978)Texas v. Johnson (1989)Bush v. Gore (2000).

Web Links: Landmarks Links offer extensive links to more in-formation on each case and on how the Supreme Court works.

Landmarks: Historic U.S. Supreme Court Decisions#10420CBR Student Edition, 114 pp. $14.95#10422CBR Teacher’s Guide, 74 pp. $21.95#10421CBR Set of 10 Student Editions $121.95

DOWNLOAD A FREE SAMPLE LESSONwww.crf-usa.org/publication

About Constitutional Rights FoundationConstitutional Rights Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization committed to helping our nation’s young people to become ac-tive citizens and to understand the rule of law, the legal process, and their constitutional heritage. Established in 1962, CRF is guided by a dedicatedboard of directors drawn from the worlds of law, business, government, education, and the media. CRF’s program areas include the California State MockTrial, youth internship programs, youth leadership and civic participation programs, youth conferences, teacher professional development, and publi-cations and curriculum materials.

Officers: T. Warren Jackson, Board Chair; Publications Committee: K. Eugene Shutler, Chair; Louis E. Kempinsky, L. Rachel Lerman, Peter I. Ostroff,Patrick G. Rogan, Peggy Saferstein, Douglas A. Thompson, Gail Migdal Title. Staff: Marshall Croddy, President; Lucy Eisenberg, Carlton Martz, Writers; Bill Hayes, Editor; Andrew Costly, Senior Publications Manager; L. RachelLerman, CRF Board Reviewer.

601 South Kingsley Drive , Los Angeles, CA 90005213.487.5590 •Fax 213.386.0459 | crf@crf-usa.org •crf-usa.org

Non Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDConstitutional

Rights FoundationLos Angeles, CAPermit #25777 Constitutional

RightsFoundation

www.crf-usa.org

Address Service Requested

Constitutional Rights Foundation Names Marshall Croddy President

ConstitutionalRightsFoundation

Following a rigorous search, the Constitutional Rights Foundation has named Marshall Croddyto be its president. Croddy is a longtime CRF executive and nationally recognized civiceducation leader.

“Our search uncovered a number of outstanding candidates but in the end the leadership an-swer was Marshall. He has played a vital role at CRF for many years. His breadth of knowl-edge and wealth of experience in both civic education and CRF programs and partners makehim the ideal person to drive this organization forward,” said T. Warren Jackson, the currentchair of CRF’s Board of Directors and DirecTV’s senior vice president, associate general coun-sel, and chief ethics officer.

Croddy has served as vice president at CRF for the last four years and prior to that was di-rector of programs. Among his significant accomplishments was the creation of the CivicAction Project (CAP), a national model for online delivery of civics curriculum, and the cre-ation of Active Citizenship Today (ACT), a framework for student civic participation, adoptedas part of several states’ social studies standards.

Croddy has designed, edited, and supervised the publication of hundreds of nationally rec-ognized online and print resources. His oversight of the CRF website design and content re-sulted in over 1.5 million visitors per year and a rating as a top web resource for teachers andstudents by the Los Angeles Times and Finding Dulcinea, Librarian of the Internet. In additionto his program and marketing responsibilities, Croddy has been responsible for creating sev-eral new funding initiatives for the organization.

He has received a number of honors, including the first Roy Erickson Civic Leadership Awardfrom the California Council for the Social Studies and the Isidore Starr Award for Excellencein Law-Related Education from the American Bar Association.