© 2004 Kheel Center for Labor-Management Documentation and Archives, Cornell University Library
DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY
Title:
New York State. Board of Mediation and Arbitration. Hearings. Transcript, 1913
Collection Number:
5101
Creator:
New York State. Board of Mediation and Arbitration.
Quantity:
0.3 linear foot.
Forms of Material:
Transcript.
Repository:
Kheel Center for Labor-Management Documentation and Archives, Martin P. Catherwood Library, Cornell University.
Abstract:
Transcript of hearings of the New York State Board of Mediation and Arbitration concerning the lockout of employees of the
Syracuse Plants of the Crucible Steel Company of America. The hearings were conducted June 17-20, 1913.
Language:
Collection material in English
COLLECTION DESCRIPTION
Transcript of hearings of the New York State Board of Mediation and Arbitration concerning the lockout of employees of the
Syracuse Plants of the Crucible Steel Company of America. The hearings were conducted June 17-20, 1913.
About the first of April, 1913 approximately 1,000 of the 1,500 employees of the two Syracuse plants joined together to discuss
the formation of a union. On May 10, 1913 a notice was posted by the employer in all of the departments stating that the two
Syracuse plants would be closed indefinitely. The notice further stated that any employee who wished to remain at work could
do so by signing a statement that he was not a member of the union. The obvious intent of the company was to break the union
through a lockout of union members. At the time of the hearings, over 900 men were still out of work.
The union was formed to improve the wages and working conditions of all employees at the two plants. For the most part, wages
had not risen for 20 years. The physical working conditions were bad, and the men often had to pay for their tools, and equipment
under the sub-contracting system which existed in some parts of the plants. The employees wanted to establish a departmental
shop committee system, which would allow them to present their grievances and demands as a group, rather than as individuals.
The employees did not ask for company recognition of the union they asked only for recognition of the shop committee.
The company refused, as a matter of policy, to allow its employees to organize a union. The company stated that it would not
consider dealing with shop committees unless the employees returned to the plants as non-union employees. Upon satisfaction
of that condition, stated the company the question of shop committees would then be considered.