INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A Xerox Education Company LIBERTELLA, Anthony Frank, 1945- THE STEEL STRIKE OF 1959: LABOR, MANAGEMENT, AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS. The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity , P h.D ., 1972 History, modern, University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan [ i © 1973 ' Anthony Frank Libertella ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE STEEL STRIKE OF 1959: LABOR, MANAGEMENT, AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University BY Anthony Frank L ibertella, B.A., M. A. The Ohio State University 1972 Approved by J\x thdZlJt'jL Adviser Department of History PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my adviser, Professor Austin Kerr, far his patience, guidance, and generous help throughout the project. Special thanks goes to Professor Paul N. Lehoczky who, at vital stages, discussed the project with me at length and raised many significant questions. I want to thank Professor Warren Van Tine, who examined the manuscript diligently, and suggested valuable improvements. Hy thanks to Professor Bradley Chapin for his critical observations of the manuscript. My debt to a colleague and friend, John Waksmundski, arises from the fact that he has been, from beginning to end, a constant source of encour­ agement and assistance. I owe a great deal, finally, to my wife, with­ out whose unfailing encouragement and help this study would probably not have been written. Far financial assistance, I should like to thank the Graduate School of The Ohio State University. Oh is institution awarded me a Dissertation Fellowship so that I could devote full time to this study. My thanks also goes to William Vollmer, University Archivist at Ohio State University} for the use of the Paul N. Lehoczky collection, without which this dissertation would not have been complete. ii I PREFACE Many observers have viewed the collective bargaining process in America after 1950 as a ritual. This ceremony, as they saw it, took the farm of propaganda displaying itself as facts —a m ilitant show adopted to persuade the public that a struggle was taking place. Ac­ tually, however, once this m ilitant parade drifted by, labor and manage­ ment negotiators sat down and in a cooperative and friendly spirit settled the real issues at hand. As Albert A. Blum has described in his essay entitled, "Collective Bargaining: Ritual or Reality," "A large share of collective bargaining is not conflict but a process by which the main terms of the agreement, already understood by the negotiators, are made acceptable nob to those in charge of the bargaining, but to x those who w ill have to live with the results. " Even when collective bargaining broke down and strikes ensued, the story remained much the same. Such strikes were considered nothing but a continuation of the collective bargaining ritual. The biting rhetoric and violent action of the past was replaced by a ceremony in which each party knew the other's needs and merely anticipated an 1. Albert A. Blum, "Collective Bargaining: Ritual or Reality?", Harvard Business Review, 59 (November-December, 1961), pp. 6k-65. iii appropriate signal to stop speaking and politely and quickly settle their differences. Evidence of this trend was revealed in the fact that during the m id-fifties strikes occurred less frequently and were less prolonged. Mark Starr, the retired Director of the Garment Workers Union, alluded to this trend when, in 1959> he called attention to the a lessening in strike time itself and the drop in strike activity. His observation seemed valid, for strike activity declined very sharply from the pre-Korean War period (an average of four thousand three hundred and twenty-eight strikes per year) to the post-Korean War era (three thousand six hundred and nineteen per year). These revelations leave little doubt that the m id-fifties was a period of relative calm in labor -management relations. However, one strike stands out as an obvious exception to the ritualistic collective bargaining activities dominating the post-Korean War era. The 1959 steel strike, a long and bitter affair, witnessed a return of the angry and intransigent attitudes, which governed employer -employee relations during an earlier era. ’ This study focuses on the 1959 steel strike, a short, but crucial period in the history of labor -management relations. Mare specifically, 2. Ibid., p. 66. 3- David E. Cullen, National Emergency Strikes (Cornell University: New York State School of industrial Relations and Labor Relations, 1968), pp. 28-30, 3 2 ; see also, Arthur M. Ross, "The Prospects far Industrial Conflict," Industrial Relations, ( 1961-1962), pp. 57- 67. iv it attempts to analyze the human, political relationships, motives and actions of management, the steel union, the steelworkers, the government, and the public during that prolonged work stoppage. Xt further seeks to explain why, at the close of the decade there had been such a determined effort hy both management and labor to resist each otherTs demands. Finally, this study provides valuable Insight into the actual operations and the behind-the-scenes working of the collec­ tive bargaining process and, more importantly, the elements that some­ tim es cause i t to break down. Throughout the post World War XI period, steel-labor relations ran in a ceremonial pattern. The story usually followed along these lines. Around the middle of May, the President of the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) met steel representatives in a hotel room. There both groups eventually signed an agreement, but usually not before a short inconsequential strike occurred. The result of this ritualistic activity was a wage hike followed by a price hike. By 1959 j this pattern ceased. With a new breed of top management men and changed economic, political, and social conditions, the steel industry decided to put an end to the ritualistic bargaining of pre- ceeding years. Management’s altered attitude toward collective bargain­ ing was not to be left unchallenged. The steel union, in turn, fought back in an attempt to hold a firm position an its collective bargaining rights. Subsequently, the parties broke from their friendly, accommo­ dating, and ceremonial bargaining to a determined, hostile, and un­ yielding position. Thus, a struggle erupted causing the longest (one v hundred and sixteen days) and one of the most noteworthy of post-World War II steel strikes. This study is divided into six chapters. She first chapter examines the changing economic conditions during the m id-fifties and demonstrates how these alterations affected the outlook of management and labor towards the 1959 steel contract negotiations. The second chapter analyzes management1 s new attitude toward labor relations concomitant with the changing political, social, and legislative conditions during the latter part of the 1950'8• It reveals how these conditions increased the ten­ sions in steel management-labor relations prior to and throughout the duration of the strike. This contest between steel and the USWA engendered considerable interest on the part of the public. Consequently, the third chapter discusses the campaign undertaken by both factions to mold public opinion and the extent to which each group's campaign was responsible for the state of opinion which prevailed during the early bargaining and strike period. Die fourth and fifth chapters examine in detail the collapse of the collective bargaining process prior to and during the strike. The farmer chapter describes the strike as an insurmountable deadlock in which two powerful interest groups refuse to compromise on wages and contract changes. The latter chapter investigates the strike in its waning stages. It examines, moreover, the multiple and cumulative eco­ nomic and noneconomic forces that bore heavily upon both steel manufac­ turers and the steel union leaders.