Research Report:

An Analysis of Union Iron Works Foreman's Index Cards Dated 1908-1918

KEITH TERRY

221 222 217 221 222 219 212 214 216 213 215 209 210 209 219 216 215 215 218 214 212 208

206

2o5 206 ao8 207

210-211

FACTO

Division: Labor

1917-1918

POST

and

Year

By

Works

Ex

Age,

Increases,

Level

Iron

Boxes

Year

Figures

Overview

I)ata

Skill

Wage

Back

Wages

Front

By

Worker

Overview: Box

W’ith of\Vorkers

Union

Length

Level

Nationality

and

and

Figures and

Workers

the

of

\Vage

Race:

Age

Nativity

\\agc

Card

Card

Skill

Age

of

Length,

Length

the

and

Storage

Loaded

and

of

Journeyman’s

I)emographie

Tables

Cart

Average

lisrory

Sample

Card

Average

Employment

Sample

Detailed

Nationality

A

Nationality

Overview:

Surninan’

Summary

\Vorker

Tables

I Average of 2: i:

2:

r:

:

:

:

8: 6:

t:

:

: 5:

:

:

of

Overview

Employment Employment

Nationality

Wages:

General

W’age

Short

listoriography

Image

Image Image

fable Image

Figtire

Figure

Index ‘Fable

‘Fable

‘Fable Table

lable

Coneltision: Table

Table Table

Introduction

Index I

Index Analysis

An

A Index 206

Thispaper analyzes previously unused primary sotiree data, and attempts to place it in its proper historiographical context. The data was gathered during a spring 2007 internship supporting a submission to the National Register of I listoric Places. lThcsubmission is for the Port of , and Dr. Marjorie Dobkin is the consulting historian in charge of the submission. The data analyzed is a subset of a collection of Union Iron Works Foreman’s Index Cards housed at the San Francisco Maritime Museum Library in Fort Mason, covering the period of 1908-1918.The cards were donated to the library by , and have not been previously analyzed, probably due to the technical challenges involved. There arc approximately 45,000 cards, measuring roughly inches each. The cards are stored in one-foot long archive boxes, and fifty-eight boxes arc required to store them. The cards haveinfomiation on both sides. On the front, one finds general information such as name, address, natisitv.birth year (or age). position(s), the division(s) in which the employee worked, and freehand commentan-. On the back of each card, one finds up to nine rows of data for specific employment periods. Each row contains start and end dates, pay rate, shift start time, foreman’s name, and occasional commentary. If an employee worked enough periods, that employee has multiple cards, In order to extract information from this fomidablc source, initial interpretation and extraCtif)ndecisions s’ere required. After these decisions were made in consultation with Dr. Dobkin and Dr. Jules Tvgiel. a database was constructed. Several input timing tests were performed, dtiring which time the database was revised and finalized. With this information in hand, and aware of the time pressures created by the semester structure, the next step was to determine a valid statistical sampling method. Dr. Jtiles Tygiel of San Francisco State Universitykindly contributed his time and expertise to ensure that the i% sample which was to be taken would be statistically valid. The preparation process was completed on February i3th, some three weeks after the beginning of the semester. The data inptlt was completed on April 28th. lYic data then needed to be cleaned, error- checked, imported into the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), and manipulated so that it might be analyzed. This latter process was completed on May i7th. In total. the process of sampling and converting the handwritten data into an analytical database took 175hoots of work, spread across fotir months. ‘I’heanalysis which follows leaves ample room forfurther investigation of the data extracted from the Union Iron Works index cards. J3ysummer of 2oo8 updated versions of this document, along with Dr. Dobkins submis.sion to the National Register for I listoric Places should be available to the pctblieat the Maritime Mtiseum Libran. ‘I’heLihrarvwill also be given the electronic database created in the course of this research. None of this research would havebeen pos.sihlewithout the help of the friendly, skilled, and knowledgeable historians at the Maritime Museum Library. and I ani grateftil for their unfailing support. I also thank Dr. Philip Dreyfuisfor restraining mymore speculative comments and offering suggestions for future research. Any errors in. or shortcomings of, this essay are entirely my own.

A Short History of the Union Iron Works

In 1849,James Donahtie, an Irishman whose family had traveled to New Jersey byway of Glasgow, abandoned his gold tush gold mining attempts and settled in San Francisco. Using the skills he had learned in New Jerse . he founded a primitive blacksmith shop. Within a fewmonths his brother Peter. another experienced iron worker, joined him. The brothers rapidly built their blacksmith shop into a full fledged iron works, the first such on the West Coast. 13yi86o, the Donahue’s Union Iron Works produced stoves, miningequipment. propeller shafts, boilers, steam engines, locomotives, and custom iron orders of all descriptions, and carried on a thriving side

Ex POST fAcTo Research Report2o7

business in ship repair. In 1863,tO provide Civil \Var defenses to the , the Navy sent the disassembled Monitor Qtnainche from the East Coast aboard the sailing vessel Aqizila.‘lhc Aqoila sank the day after arrival, with the Cznz1Inchcstill in her hold. Within six months a salvage crew raised the sunken ship, prompting Mark Twain to give a speech in honor of ? lajor Edward C. Perry, who lcd the salvage crew. The UIW launched the Garnancheon November 14,h, 1864.The first ironclad warship on the West Coast, the C’arnanehenever saw’action.’ James I)onahuc died in i86i, and in z86 Peter I)onahue sold his shares in the UIW to! Ii. Booth and OWT.Prescott, Irving Murray Scott, who had been the Superintendent of the UIW since 1863, was made a full partner by the new owners. lie managed the Works for the next forty years. In the z88os. the navies of the world began to convert to steel hulled ships. Naval yards with experience building locomotives were pardetilarly well stated for building the new ships. as they had the skilled men and equipment needed for both metalworking and shipbuilding. Since the Panama Canal had notyctopcncd, the Navy’spolicy was to defend each coastwith ships htult on that coast. On the \Vest Coast, the UIW was initially the only qualified yard, and so became the primary Western builder of warships prior to World War t. By 1891, the Ul\V had constructed three armored cruisers and a battleship. The most famous of these vessels was the cruiser Ohrnpia, which would serve as Commodore Dewey’s flagship at the battle of Manila Bay in z89$. In 1902, the UIW was sold to the United States Shipbuilding Company, which merged with Bethlehem Steel that same year. I lowever, the San Francisco subsidiary continued to be known as the Union Iron \Vorks until after World War I. Today, tile old Union Iron \Vorks. located at 20th and Illinois streets, are owned by the Port of San Francisco.7 IIisroHoraphv Since this research topic is very tightly focused, it is not surprising that the sources available address the topic only as part of a larger study. ‘l’hebest sotlrcc for this specific isstzcis LaborAdministration in the Shipbuilding Indtistry During War’Ilme: l.”by P. II. Douglas and F. E. Wolfe.8 Skirting the fine line between primary and secondary sources, this article can best be viewed as a scholarly post-mortem examination of the issue of shipyard labor in the preceding three years. The article explains the tirgent need for shipbtulding created by German U-i3oat attacks, discusses the prewar shiphuulding industry, including the labor situation; and explains the governmental action taken to address the situation. The article qtueklv transitions to its primart focus, a detailed study of the actions of the Shipbuilding Labor Adjtistrnent I3oard. The Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board was established on August 20, m9z7by Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Franklin 1). Roosevelt. Members of the board included the presidents of tile najor shipyard workers’ unions and representatives of two U.S. Government agencies: the United States Shipping Board (USSB), founded in the autumn of 1916 to regulate

Richard II. Dillon, Iron ]lien: Peter, James and Michael Donahzze(Fairfleld, CA.: James Stevenson Publisher, 1984; reprint, 2004), 78-88. ‘Edgar M. i3ranch, “Major Perry and the Monitor Camanche: An Early 1\lark Tw’ain Speech,” Anierican Liteozrnre39, no. a (May, 1967):170-73. Joseph Aaron Bltim, “San Francisco Iron: The Indtistry and Its Workers from the Gold Rtzsh to the i’urn of the Century” (San Francisco State University, 1989), n6-m8. William D. Walters Jr,,”Aneriean Naval Shipbuilding, 1890-1989,” GeographicalRelieu’9o, no.3 (Jul., 2000): 419-20. Bltzm, “San Francisco Iron”, 183. Robert I lessen, “The ‘I’ransforrnation of i3ethlehcm Steel, 1904-1909,” The Business Ilisroii’ Rezww46, no.3 (Atitumn, 1972): 345-46. 7 When I3luzrnwrote “San l’raneisco Iron the UIW was owned by Sotzthw’estMarine. P.11. Dotiglas and FE. Wolfe, “Labor Administration in the Shipbtiilding Industry During War Time: I,” The Journal of Political Eeononw27, no. 3 (Mar., 1919).

Ex POST FACTO 208 Keith Terry

shipping and the USSB’s Emergency Fleet Corporation, created in April of 1917 to administer a crash building program. The article dissects in detail the agreements brokered by the board in each region. These agreements covered hours worked, wages, working conditions, and tinion powers. The second most valuable resource is San Francisco Irnn, Joseph Blum’s 1989 M.A. Thesis.’ As a former iron worker, Bltim brings a unique perspective on the nature of work in the iron industry. Mthotigh the thesis does not cover the time period being researched, it does provide a contextual setting for the Union Iron Works itself. Blurn focuses primarily on the nature of the changing relationship between workers and management at the Union Iron Works, placing those relations in a larger labor historycontext. Especially relevant to the topic at hand is the demographic information provided by l3lum on the workers involved in the strike of 188i. Finally. lion Men, by Richard 11. Dillon.’0chronicles the colorful lives of the Donahue brothers: Peter, James, and Michael. Benveen them, the brothers not only proved that heavy industry could thrive in resource-poor , but they also provided gas lighting to the cityof San Francisco, founding the company that would become Pacific Gas and Electric. Peter was a key figure in early railroading and shipping thmughotit northern California, and by the time of his death he had become a wealthy and famous industrialist. The book does not reflect directly on the research topic, but it does help to place the Union Iron Works in context. Various other monographs were related to the topic indirectly, the most relevant ofwhich maybe found in the bibliography. The constraints of time prevented a thorough search for other sources, and the list should by no means be considered comprehensive.

An Overview of the Workers

General Demographic Overview: The men’ who worked at the Union Iron Works between 1908 and 191$ were, on average, thirty-oneyearsold, with the average age fluctuating between tw’enty-sevenand thirty-three in anygiven year. as shown in table i, below. Of those men for whom we have both the position(s) held and an understanding of those positions,’ roughlyone-third held skilled positions, while the remaining two-thirds were unskilled or semi-skilled, as shown in table a, belotv. Based on those men for whom we havenationality information, a sizable minority (40.8%)were foreign-born, as shown in table 3. below. After America, the most-represented nations were Italy, Ireland, Russia, Scotland, and Greece, as shown in table 4, below.

Blum. ‘San Francisco Iron”. I)illon, hon ?Ie,i: Pete,; James and jllichael Donahue. J’wo of the sampled workers appear to have female names, but further investigation is required. ilie suspected women are: Lois Larson, who worked as a carpenter’s helper from Jttly 1916 to Feb. 191$, with a givenaddress ofo rio” st.. Oakland, and Fay White, who worked as a rivet and drill helper in Dee. 1917, with a given address of 133$ hudson Ave., SF. I am indebted to Ted Miles, Assistant Curator at the San Francisco Maritime National I Jistoric Park, National Park Service, San Francisco, for the skill levelsassigned to each of the position titles. It is important to remember that the datasct provided no information at all on the highly skilled workers who in union terms were knownas“Masters.”Therefore, when this paper refers to skilled w’orkers.the reference is to ftillytrained journeymen or their equivalent. Douglas and Wolfe use the terms journeyman and “mechanic”interchangeably, applying these terms to the highest skill levelof worker addressed by the Shipbtulding Labor Adjustment Board. They make no mention of Masters. Other sotirces mention that the SI.A13 created job classification tables, which might be veryusefulin this regard. Unfortunately, I have been tinable to locate these tables as of this tvriting.

Ex POST FACTO 32.5 67.5

100.0 Report2c9 Percent Valid 9.141 8.597 l)cviation 8.169 9.288 8.826 8.399 9.564 9.304 10.735 10.557

10.577 Research i.8 8.8 10.5 29.1 $9.5 Std. 6o4 100.0 Level Age Percent Skill $ 48 133 40 276 457

409 FACTO Average 32.73 32.22 29.87 32.14 29.50 32.34 32.70 33.09 27.40 30.00 32.04 i: Mean Worker : Frcqticncy

Table POST 6i 53 57 63 56 50 58 59 45 6o 64

Table Ix Maximum Multiple Semi- level) or or 12 17 17 17 17 i8 i$ 17 i6 14 20 Minimum Levels Unknown Skilled Unskilled System Skill Skilled Total (Journeyman 4 a Total 3 15 57 41 N 22 35 50 26 43 i 34 169 AgCI9II Agci9i5 Agcr9;8 Agcr9i3 Agc1917 Missing Agc9ia Age1916 Total AgcI9;4 Valid AgC1910 Agcl9o8 Agc,9o9 210 Keith Terry

Table : Summary of Nationality Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid i American 202 44.2 59.2 59.2

2 loreign t39 30.4 40.8 Ioo.o

Total 341 74.6 100.0

Missing 9 Unknown n6 25.4

Total 457 100.0

Table : Detailed Nativity Frequency Percent Valid Cunuilative Percent Percent

Valid California ,a6 27.6 37.0 37.0

6, Italy 31 6.8 9.1 46.0

55 Ireland i8 3.9 5.3 51.3

53 RUssia 12 2.6 3.5 54.8 6o Scotland ti 2.4 3.2 8.i

13 Illinois 10 2.2 2.9 6,.o

52 Greece 9 2.0 2.6 63.6 3$ Pennsylvania 8 i.8 2.3 66.o

66 Germany 8 i.8 2.3 68.3

i6 Kansas 7 1.5 2.1 70.4

32 New York 7 1.5 2.1 72.4 51 England 7 1.5 2.1 74.5

63 Sweden 7 1.5 2.1 76.5

49 Wisconsin 5 1.1 1.5 78.0

57 Spain 5 II 1.5 79.5

67 1lonolulu 5 1.1 1.5 80.9

25 Missouri 4 .9 1.2 $2., 43 ‘lexas 4 .9 1.2 83.3

75 Norway 4 .9 1.2 84.5

22 Michigan 3 .7 .9 85.3

35 Ohio 3 .7 .9 $6.2

EX POST fActo 21[

97.1 99.1

98.5

9j.5 95.3 97.7 99.7

93.3 98.2

92.1

87.1 97.9 98.8

95.9 96.5

99.4

93.8

95.6 96.2 96.8 97.4 92.7 95.0

90.3

89.7

88.9

94.4 88.o 90.9

100.0 Report

-

.3

.3 .3

.3

.3

.3 .3

.3

.3 .3

.3 .3

.3

.3

.3

.3 .3

.6

.6

.6

.6

.6

.6

.6

.6

.9 .6

.9

.9 .9 Research

100.0 .z .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .Z .2 .2 .2 .2 .Z .2 .2 .2 .2

.2

.7 ..

.7 .4 .4

.7 .4

.7

.4 .4

.4 .4 .4

25.4

FACTO 74.6 100.0 1 i I 1 i I I t i i i I

I 2 a

2 a 2 2 2 2

2

3 3

3 3

ii6

34’

457

POST

Ix

Rico

States

Carolina

Seoda

Mexico

OfNIan

Utah

South

PuertO

Denmark

Australia

New Belgium

Nova

Hungary

United

Nevada

Poland

Switzerland

Nebraska

Oregon

finland

Montana Indiana

Isle

Austria

Canada New

Massachusetts

Itancc Minnesota

Mexico Scria

Iowa

florida

Connccdetir

Iampshire

System

78

74 Total

73 79

I 6

72 a8 40

29 27 37 31

21

$o 9

68

‘5 26

64 23 71

6z

69

76

8

56

rvlissing Total 212 Keith Terry

Wage Overview: The earliest year for which we have statisticallysignificantwage data is 1908. and the latest date for which we havewage data is June of 1918.\Vages were largely static from 1908 to 1916, but began to increase sharply in 1917 for both journeymen and laborers, as can be seen in figure i, below. The average wage for jotlrneyrnen for the period 1908to 1918 was $0.56 cents an hour. During the s’ar years. the averagejourneyman earned $0.64 cents an hour, while the average wage was $0.46 cents an hour before the war. The average wage for laborers for the period 1908 to 1918 was S0.35cencs an hour. Dtiring the war years, the laborer earned $0.40 cents an hotir, while the average wage WU5 $0.27 cents an hour before the war. To illtistrate the severityof post-1916wage inflation, note that the average Journeymanearned $0.48 an hour in 1916. iltit fl 1918. the average laborer earned $o. an hour, six edits more than the journeyman had earned only ovo yearsearlier.

Figure I: Average Wage By Year

0.8

Avgerage Wage / Workers 0,8 -. Avemge Wage

1905 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1915 1917 1918 Year

EX POST FACTO

213 74

132 an

206

a

of

so that

.08330

.08330 .6zoo 1908- .28100 .62500

.40600

.3378176

.4590616

.2698474 Yeats .10758042

.05194650

dates,

.06635739

year.

mind

Rate)

Report

received Periods

1916)

per

end

in changed

one

and

Pre-War

data.

bear

rates

Average

eases,

worked

the

employee

start

of

years,

shotild

the

Research

days $8

271

some

183

both

of

In .83167

one

war .83167 .72500 .10940 .10940

.42500

Rate

Data

.15177863

.4795965 .6418761

.10291261

have

.4015604 vagaries the

09945285

because

Years data,

we

the number

(1917-1918)

to

7ar

common.

this

Wage

the

Average

simply

During

which

arc

due

day,

for

FACTO

date.

studying dates

132

estimate

276

408

next

end

difficult

Summary to

.10415 .83167

.10415

.83167 Rate .72500 191$

.28100

end

periods

no the

.4192015

5: .15101170

are .5628973

.3504774

When

.i27$8353

to

.Io6349

nor

POST

made

hut

Içlo$

begins

Average

start

Table

date

were

EX

calculated.

employment

calculations

start

another

neither

a

was

attempts

those

Overview:

and

length

with

show

no

on

Deviation

Maximum Std.

N

Minimum Deviation

Minimum

N Std.

Maximum Mean

Std. I)eviation

Maxirntim

Minimum

N Mean

period

Mean

ends

solely

records

Length

period

frequently

rate

or

Employment

based

of

Accordingly,

employment

that

Level

raise.

Unskilled

Skilled

lowever,

I average

pay

rapidly

employment

employment

Employment

Total

Semi-Skilled

level) 2

(Jotirneyman

Skill \Vorkcr 214 Keith Terry

many employees, especially unskilled ones, worked for only one period, while others worked dozens of periods spanning many years ofcmplovment. On average, skilled workers could expect to work for 6 days per employment period. while unskilled workers could expect a period of l days, as shown in table 6, below.

Table 6: Employment Length

Skill Levelof Worker Mean N Minimum Maximum Std. Deviation 2 Skilled(Journeyman level) 55.67 74 I ó6 86.096

3 Unskilled orsemi-skilled 50.82 131 3 284 58.957

Total 51.57 20 1 566 69.807

Analysis

Nationality and Race: Nationality did not affect pay scales in an’ statistically significant manner, as shown in table . below. Similarly, no significant relationship was found between nationality and skill levelof employment, as shown in table 8. below. A review of the nationalities in table 4, above, shows that theworkforce in the 1910S was exeltisively of North American or European extraction, and no Asian surnames were fotind in the sample. Since racial information was not recorded on the cards, nativity and surnames are the only indicators available. According to Bltim, Chinese workers constituted 25%of the California workforcc in 1870, but collusion between employers and workers ensured that Chinese workers were excltided even from “unskilled ohs in the higher-paving industries’3 stich as the iron trades. Based on the complete absence ofpositive indicators of a Chinese workforee. it is safe to conclude that the workers in the shipyards continued their historic practices of exclusion and racial definition.

Ibid., 213.

EX POST fAcTo 215 13 21 75 57 52 34 39 36 109 Years .3377437 .3350830 .2613720 .3321664 .2752408 .4645372 .2880427 .4670878

.4686667 Report Average Pre-War Ratc(i9o8-i9i6) 23 72 67 90 49 152 170 103

242 Research Rate .6352735 .3971208 .6502222 .4776255 Years .4004575 .4747676 .4026279 .4699410 .682o6 Wages (1917-1918) War Average and 89 59 30 92 215 123 122 i8 304

1918 FACTO tO .3751950 .3705633 .4383276 .6020281 .4473455 .6104203 .3643708 .5977609 .4a8748 Ratc Average Nationality 1908

: POST

Table Ex N N N N N Mean Mean N N Mean N Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean or or or of I.evel Skilled Unskilled Unskilled Skilled Skilled Unskilled 2. (Journeyman level) Total semi-skilled 2 2 (Journeyman level) 3 level) semi-skilled Skill (Journeyman semi—skilled Total Total 3 Worker Foreign 2 Total t Nationality American 216 Keith Terry

Table 8: Nationality and Skill Level

Nationality Total

1 2 I American foreign American Skill Level of 2 Skilled Count 59 30 89 Worker Journeyman level) Expected 53.3 35.7 89.0 Count %within 32.4% z.6% 29.3% Nationality

3 Unskilledor semi- Count 123 92 215 skilled Expected 128.7 86.3 215.0 Count %within 67.6% 75.4% 70.7% Nationality Total Count i8z 122 304 Expected i8a.o 122.0 304.0 Count %within ioo.o% ioo.o% ioo.o% Nationality

One can also infer that there were few,if any. black iron workers in San Francisco from the absenceof any infonnation regarding them, either in the source data or the secondary literature. In Thabor Administration in the Shipbuilding Industry During Wartime: l. Douglas and Wolfe explicitly mention black iron workers in the Southeast. use Shipbuilding Labor Adlustrnent Board award (rtiling) of Fcbnian’ 14. 1918for the South Atlantic and Gulf yards specified “two grades of laborers, one at 40 cents per hour. and ‘common’ labor at 30 cents (the second being provided for negro labor. )“4 Either there were so few black workers in San Francisco that there \s’as no need for a ruling, or pre-existingunion arrangements handled the issue.

Wages: The issue of wages is comples. When researching historical shipyard wages. one generally finds references to daily rather than hourly wages.’5Since the eight hour workday was far from standard in the early twentieth century. questions arise as to the length of the workday when attempting to compare the hotirly rates recorded on the index cards for comparison. I Iappilv. the detailed analysis of Douglas and Wolfe incltides several references to the length of the workday, and in even’ ease, the workday is considered to be eight hours long. The issue was clearly complex.

Wolfe. “Labor Administration in the Shiphtiilding Industry DuringWar Time: 1.”158. ‘ The UIW index cards themselves can be quite confusing regarding rates. Sometimes a decimal is included, and sometimesit is not. I lowever, after analyzing the entire sample, cross-referencing the infomsation with Douglas and Wtilfc, and referencing several non-sample cards that had special notes attached to them. I determined that the standard card has an hourly, rather than a daily, pay rate recorded on it.

Ix POST FACTo a to of rate cent I.E. basic The an day the while the I line with reason was per Fleet is of who the 64. the U.S. had in shipyards that speed in for yard,” cents day), of labor ten deal day Board 8-hour undated. the which a standard him The labor ample of to and per an 65 the ruled 156. i6-8, rulings data percent in worker l3oard of those example discussions.6 or had The 1,” had after I,” Labor IIisro,yReiieii’6i, not War: the ten Report hotirs and/or the levels Emergency Rate is ($6.25 level “steel-ship than of discussion Coast good day, SlAB bringing their this a but of$ the hotir,’° 1917-1018 A hand day especially in SLAB complexity World the specific workers worked. hour, cards. varying per Business higher higher Seattle 1918, contested, the Pacific 8.hour an $0723, WarTime: WarTime: the the excess i, The rates Note First the the frequency 8-hour an to The 1916,butwagcs harried in hours workers, index any of Research a 1, the December, of $07218 $0.78 for to daily and contextwith correlation. in Increases. in basic Wolfe. Dtiring During above. generally In November, SLAB. or unnamed in lowever, Jtine February Seattle and 9, sometimes formation, source I In increase the reflecting and “$5.25 the because good day, 20 One were East. the an Policy a Wage 0.563 to percent” be written made 0.723 0.438 0.613 0.525 since were table regardless After

day). that FACTO find is by wage.” Industry Industry hourly io for that”ovcrtime complexity Emperiment,” the arose in journeymen primary shops,” of in wages cent per we Douglas $5773 Labor Saturday. 1916)._6 the would state pay days.” the both i. is Rate;: Rare3: Rate4: Rate2: Rate6: hourly by Rulings irs.Atigust per on clearly to qtiickly in workers, frcqtiently shown was and Market According data, closed 31 statement especially ($4.00 as all data erupted are [June Western

premium POST authors itselL include states Shipbuulding Shiphtulding then, Journeyma&s for straight were strike. Labor Attgtist complications hour that 1918 workday and Polities the nation. A followed reflected shop, consccutwe i8, the the since research in (journeymen) an the is

1918, increased Ex service a: in in l3oard documented research half the and the 12/12/1917 2/11/1918 2/1/1918 2/5/1917 a 9/29/1917 insufficient, when Seattle page Seattle effective general had Further the to clearly war ihis $0.50 anysix thcmsclvcs times disputes 1917 Immediatelyafter measurc.”This machine on is a 64, in the was and across increased Table $07218 shipyards,7 half agreement to. coast 1918. February, late the living of a made. labor “mechanics” includes and i, Wolfe wage paying in 586-87. in an in of states. page Adjustment “Administrative period hours a to be refer rate granted and increase and on still Administration permanently most information Pacific interpreting cost this Francisco EmpDate4: EmpDate5: EmpDate2: EmpDate3: EmpDate6: shipyards Western which 1987): Coast in Service one signed Labor appreciably for in then periods rate in at Breen, would this 1917 February “the were at San authors J. primarily attention had “LaborAdministration “Labor pay as standard week, on issue became 157. journeyman 156-57. Douglas for I.E. “ft)rn-cight been muddied This its Pacific the I a but (Winter, is yards the changes not 4 the paid Ibid.: strike, Ibid.: Wolfe, Wolfe, William 6 Employment ruling ‘ nc) he ‘7 issue atall. rate u-hour increase Comparing employment w’ith Jones, increase for Jones, Corporation Name September, had hour.’9 turned MidwestorAtlantic worked to however, standard other adjustments Shipbuilding organization organization because Another 218 Keith Terry

Those which are dated often show rate changes on a weeklyor semi-weeklybasis in January and February of 191$. as exemplified by Mr. Jones. Rate data on the cards ends on June 5. 1918. Why the cards ceased to be used is unknown. Possibilities include the system becoming too unw’ieldyin the face of rapid change, or rate standardization by position dtte to contincting actions of the SLAB.

Employment Length, Worker Age, and Labor Division: Despite the already mentioned difficulty in interpreting employment length data, some general observations can be made. Joseph l3lum noted that iron working has “never been an easy trade in which to earn a steady and sectire livelihood ... only a small percentage of the men could ever cocmt on a fullyear’sw’ages.” More specifically, l3lum analyzed the 1875-1876diary of labor leader Frank Roncy. and found that “Roneyheld six different positions lasting from three days to three months, but he wa.snever offered a steady, permanent job and his total working time during the period was only abottt seven months.”’ Blum quotes another iron worker, who said in the mid i88os that “the average mechanic in this city is not employed more than ten months in a year.”0As stated earlier, the UI\V cards reveal that skilled workers could expect to work for 6 days per employment period. While further analysis of the employee length data is required to draw specific conclusions regarding the 1908-1918 period, initial observations indicate that the employment instability reported by Ultimis typicalof this later period as well. The average age of workers varied, btit not in anystatistically significant manner. For the entire period 1908-1918. the average age of all workers was thirty-one. For skilled workers, the average age w’asthirty-five,and unskilled workers were on average nventy-eight years old. As can be seen in figure a. below, worker age tended to fluctuate around these means. No significant change occurred during the war ears, despite the labor shortage. ‘l’his eonprobably be explained by the fact that shipyard workers were exempted from military service and national campaigns were conducted to recruit new’workers, due to the critical need for wartime ship production. The growth of shipyards and shipyard employment was astonishing.On October i. 1917. there were some 90.000 shipyard workers nationwide. By October ist, 1918.that number had grown to 375.000 shipyard explosive growth in shipyard employment may also be a contribtiting factor in the abandonment by the Union Iron Works of the note card system of recording wages, as discussed above.

Blum, “San Francisco Iron”. vi. Ibid.. 140. 0 Ibid.. 165. Wolfe, ‘Labor Administration in the Shipbuilding Industry Dtiring War Time: I,” 171. Ibid.: 147. See also Brcen. ‘Atiministrative Politics and Labor Policyin the First VorId ‘War:flc U.S. Employment Service and the Seattle Labor Market Experiment,” 583.

EX POST FACTO Research Report 219

Figure : Average Age of Workers By Year

1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1919 Year The final topic ‘(Ifor analysis regards the ratio of skilled to ttnskillcd workers in the shipyards. One of the major battlegrounds between iron indtistry workers and employers in the nineteenth century was the ratio of skilled to unskilled workers. According to Biunl, laborers nladc up abotit twenty per cent of tIle iron trades w’orkfiwecin San Francisco in the i88os. l3ased on the data found in the cards, the unions lost this battle. Dtiring l908-1918, unskilled laborers were the majority, forming 67.5%of tile workforee. One should note, however, that tilese statistics shotiid be wew’edwith caution. As Douglas and Wolfe noted, tile silipyards ilad a 230% labor turnover:7 If one postulates that tills nirnovcrw’as larger among tinskilied than skilled workers, tilcn the 67.5%figure given above beconles unreliable. Furtiler analysis is required to determine if the figures need to he adjusted to account for worker turnover. conclusion TIle information gathered tilrough tile sampling and analysis of tile Union Iron Works foreman’s index cards 6r tile period of 1908-1918 provides no new revelations. Existing nineteenth century patterns discussed by Joseph Bluirnin San Francisco hon regarding employment instability and Chinese exclusion continued into tile first decades of tile nventicrll century. iThe unity created by using tile Chinese as a foil also) explains tile lack of any dithirentiation between American and forcign (European) workers in sl’agesand in access to skilled positions. Ihe wage structure created by tile Shipbuilding Labor Adjustnlent l3oard, and analyzed by Douglas and Wolfe in “Labor Aciministtation 0 tile Shipbtiilding Industry Dtiring War lime, I,” erosseileeks nicely vitll tile l’age data found on tile cards. No significant fluctuations were totlild ill worker age during tile years

‘° Blum, ‘San Francisco Iron, 169. ‘7 Wolfe, ‘LaborAdministration fl tile Silipbtlilding Industry During WarTime: 1,”149.

Ex POST FACTO 220 Keith Terry

examined. Mthough one might expect that worker age would rise significantly during the war years, this stability is explained by Douglas and Wolfe, who point out that shipyard workers were considered critical, and were accordingly exempted from military service. Analysisof the foreman’s index cards, then, confirmed existing scholarship while providing another source to be used in future analyses.

Ex POST FACTO C

C)

V C,, V

C

F rJj 4- U 0 C I

‘0 ‘0 I ci U V E E U, Cd,

U V E E 222 Keith Terry

Image : Card Storage Box

Image : Cart Loaded With Boxes

EX POST FACTO