The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-05-20
A BOYCOTT IS ORDERED.
Ali Violators of the Edict Are
to Be Punishable by
Fines.
One of the Organizations Withdraws
From the San Francisco Trades
Council.

A special meeting of the Building Trades
Council was held last evening and by reso-
luton it was decided TO place a boycott
upon the Parrot building and the EN-
porium department store therein
In order to make the boycott effectuaI it
was further decided TO impose a fine OF
50 upon every member of the affiliated
unions who purchases or does business or
whose family purchases in the boycotted
building.
This action on the part of the council
was caused by the managers OF the Parrot
estate and those in charge of the construc-
ton of the building letting another con-
tract to Charles II. Bruschke, a contractor,
who is bitter enemy of the unions.
1t was thought month or two ago that
all difficulties between the unions and the
Parrot people had been Strengthened out
which led the union men to believe that
no further contracts would be let to
Bruschke.
1t was upon that understanding that the
workmen who were then out on strike
against the building were allowed to
resume work. Recently the council dis
covered that Bruschke had finished the
work he had then in hand and that other
contracts to perform certain work in the
basement had been let to him, which of
course he is fulfilling with his non-union
men. This caused the trades union
people to become very angry, and after
another attempt was made to unioniZe the
Job it was decided to boycott the whole
institution from basement to roof and
every one connected with the building.
The council expects the support of all
trades unions.
The managers of the Emporium en-
phatically deny that they have had any
thing to do with the construction of the
Parrott building or the store or apart
ments that they are to occupy. They feel
that they are not being fairly treated in
this matter in being held responsible for
what they cannot control or influence.
The council took up another matter of
no small importance. 1t seems that the
Chicago ClothIng-store, on kearny street,
let a contract for painting the iEte-
rior of Its store TO Hannemann, the
painter of 427 Geary street, who runs a
n-union snop. Business Agent McIvor
called upon the manager and explained
that no store employing non-union work
men need expect the patronage OF mem.
bers of the trades unions.
Last evening the store manager ap-
peared before the council and explained
that Hannemann's painters were al union
men, ana IN STANDARDIZATION presented an
affidavit, sworn to by the painters, to the
effect that they were union painters.
The painters delegates to the council
asserted that the affidavit was a rank piece
of perjury.
To prove the truth or falsity of the docu-
ment a delegation from the council went
to the store as the painters were obliged
to work at night. and confronted the
affidavit makers. They were recognized
as non-union men, and in fact admitted
this to be the fact.
The clothing store people stated that
they will not employ any but union men,
and that they viii not do anything to an
tagonize the laboring people.
Business Agent McIvor reported that a
gang of p. n. Kuss' non-union painters
are at work on Job on Pine and Sansome
streets. He was ordered to strike the ioh
this morning and call out all of the union
men at work there