Cheyenne transporter. [volume] (Darlington, Indian Terr.) 1879-1886, 1882-08-10
Do Strikes Pay7
Kansas City journal.

nC pCCulldl bulu WUlCU but ulSCuS-
sion of the labor question has recently
taken, especially by a partisan press.
makes the question, Do strikes pay ?
peculiarly pertinent at this time. And,
first. what is the cause of strikes ?
What object is sought to be obtained,
and are they commonly successful, and
do they pay? are all seemingly insepa-
rable questions. We think it beyond
controversy that strikes are almost uni
versally instigated by trades unions,
which are organizations of laborers
who claim their purpose is to aid un-
ion men to procure information about
wages and assist in its dissemination;
to aid their sick and needy; to assist
those on a strike and to maintain it,
and to fix rules on work with Il view
to affect wages. And we think it but
just to the laborers and to the men,
bers of the trades unions to say that
they as a rule discourage violence, and
in taking this view of the question we
would unhesitatingly say that laborers
have a right to strike, subject, of
course, to this further limitation that
the laborers prior to the strike give due
or reasonable notice to the employer of
their intentions so to do, and do desist
from violence not only to their employ
er, but to other laborers who may wish
to continue or commence again at old
prices. We think this view is fairly
sustained by the conduct of the labor
ers during the present strike, and the
excellent order maintained at Pitts
burg during the present assemblage of
laborers at that place. But are strikes
expedient? We claim they are not,
for the following reasons: First, they
are usually unsuccessful, from
: the fact that capital holds out much
longer than suffering labor. In 1870
no less than eight great strikes occur
red among the various trade unions in
Massachusetts, and only one proved
successful. In 1874 there were a great
number of strikes in New York, and
we don't recall single instance where
any were successful. But the greatest
argument against strikes is, the work
men may soon loose more by being out
of employment than they can make up
j. by obtaining the increase demanded.
This may be easily illustrated in this
e wise, without referring to the present
: SCALE but which any laborer Of ordinary
: intelligence may easy fit to his own or
his neighbor's particular case.
q Suppose the workmen st the time
E the strike occurs is receiving a daily
: salary of 81, and strikes upon being re.
>. fused an additional ten cents per diem.
This, were it granted would increase
> his income $3.50 per month excluding
, Sundays, but in case it is refused, and
! he is thrown out of this employment,
i not s2 go per month but $26 per month
q for every month the strike continues
), would be lost without computing in
=. terest; but suppose after a suspension
O of one month the employers sign the
6 scale, and labor is resumed at the in
a crease demanded. 1t then is ter
i months before the workman regains
g what he has lost by this one months
~ idleRess.
y Now the enormity of the loss to la
d Dor caused by strikes can only be com
It pretended when it is traced in the ag
ID gregate. There are at present nearl.
$4,000 iron workers idle, ION strike.
IF Upon each Of these men it is estimated
,e that four other persons are dependen
+ for support, making in all 100000 per
sons directly affected by the strike
h. Now applying this to the above figures
b. the whole increase demanded is $500
n per day or 100000 a month, and i
III case they are thrown out of employ
ment, as is the cas-, the whole loss pc
diem is $4,000, if it lasts for mont