A Structure and Nature of Labor Unions in Utah: An Historical Perspective, 1890-1920

Utah Historical Quarterly

Vol. 35, 1967, No. 3

The Structure and Nature of Labor Unions in Utah, An Historical Perspective, 1890-1920

BY SHEELWANT B. PAWAR

Trade unions are highly complex institutions. Their goals and philosophy vary. They differ in their structure, nature, and individual characteristics. They can be studied from the points-of-view of several disciplines including economics, political science, sociology, and history.

"Under the caption of 'history of labor' are chronicled what purport to be the collections of fact and sequences of fact." But as Talcott Parsons contends, "The facts do not tell their own story; they must be crossexamined. They must be carefully analyzed, systematized, compared, and interpreted."

"The development of any labor movement is determined by a number of important factors — the nature of the economy, the political habits and the traditions of the people, the opportunity for social mobility, and the values and attitudes fostered by the culture." This viewpoint, strengthened by Joel Seidman, was advocated by Professor John R. Commons more than 50 years ago, and has since been discovered true by others.

The labor movement in Utah is also a product of its environmental forces. Utah, during the early period of its development, offers a fine example of a regional economy founded for a religious purpose, dominated by religious sentiments, and managed by religious leaders. It endeavored to grow in seclusion and remain free from outside influences. During the first decade after the Mormon pioneers arrived in Utah, their economy was primarily that of a barter system. The activities of the pioneer society were directed mainly toward agrarian production. Utah offers a peculiar set of environmental forces for the study of its economic institutions. Here one finds the foundation and evolution of a pioneer society in which the founders had determined to achieve economic welfare through highly organized cooperative efforts. During the early period the economic activities were organized and directed by religious institutions. Thus, the main directives came from a religious rather than economic institution. This earlier influence on organized society in Utah has left its mark on the subsequent development of economic institutions, including labor organizations.

It is the purpose of this paper to offer an historical perspective of the structure and nature of labor unions in Utah from 1890 to 1920. In this period the labor movement had a sense of continuity; it had a sense of an unfolding history; it had a sense of direction.

As mentioned earlier, an historical study is based on collections of fact and sequences of fact. In an attempt to compile a history of organized labor in Utah as a meaningful interpretation and an adequate analysis, one is confronted with a lack of complete, original written records and historical data. The lack of available primary sources for research presents a challenge to the researcher who attempts to compile factual material unbiased by subjective interpretations.

THE STRUCTURE OF UNIONS IN UTAH

Professor Chester Morgan of the State University of Iowa maintains that structurally the typical labor movement ultimately erects a pyramid. The base of the pyramid consists of the sundry local unions which are usually the first to develop; the heart or midsection of the pyramid consists of national or international unions created later which unite related locals; and the apex of the labor movement pyramid, added usually after the national entities are relatively established, consists of a federation of national unions. Applying this observation to the study of the structure of labor unions within a geographical area, Utah's experience more or less follows the pyramid pattern of the union organization structure.

The base or the foundation of sundry locals in Utah extends from the 1860's to 1890, when the city centrals or councils which form the midsection of the pyramid came into existence. During this early period, labor unions took the form of fraternal organizations of the various crafts. The heart or midsection and the apex of the labor movement, which is the period under examination, covers three decades, from 1890 to 1920. This was the period in which conservative unionism came in conflict with radical unionism in Utah, and it was also the period in which the nature and characteristics of Utah unions were roughly determined. Although the statewide labor organization was affiliated with the American Federation of Labor during the first 10 years of the twentieth century, it was not until the next two decades that the apex of the labor movement pyramid became effective in practice.

Briefly the period 1860 to 1890 was characterized by incidental attempts of persons in various trades or crafts to organize in order to further their mutual interests. The growth of labor organization coincided with periods of prosperity. The only union that continued uninterruptedly from its formation to now is the Typographical Union Local No. 115, which was chartered on August 3, 1868, and was the first affiliated local union organized in Utah.

The following locals, among others, were organized by the end of 1890: Amalgamated Carpenters, Brotherhood of Railway Firemen, Painters, Brewery Workers, Cigar Workers, Plumbers, Retail Clerks, Machinists, and Iron Molders. The total number of locals was around 20.

THE FORMATIVE PERIOD OF UTAH LABOR MOVEMENT 1890-1920

On February 28, 1889, the "Utah Federated Trades and Labor Council" gave an inaugural concert and ball at Emporium Hall. This was the first city central labor organization established in Utah. Most of the locals in Salt Lake City were affiliated with this newly organized city central, commonly known as the Federated Trades. The entry in the minute book of the Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 19, July 16, 1890, says "moved and seconded that Local 19 of Plumbers Steam and Gas fitters and Steamfitters helpers amalgamate with federated trade, ays 15 nays 7 — carried."

The depression of the 1890's apparently slowed union organization activity until the turn of the century. However, repeated attempts were made all through the 1890's to establish a city central. It is of vital importance to note that structurally, organization on the "trades" or "crafts" line was the main theme of unionization during the 1890's as was also the case nationally. In 1880 the number of persons engaged in the building trades in Utah was 6,162. This accounted for 46 per cent of all persons engaged in manufacturing and mechanical industries. This relatively high concentration of persons in the building trade occupations explains the attempt made by them to establish in 1893 a limited and exclusive central organization of the building trade unions.

As early as 1890, R. G. Sleater, the organizer of Utah Federated Trades and Labor Council, urged all the building trade unions to form a council ". . . for the interest and better protection of the skilled mechanic."

An attempt to establish a Building Trades Congress in 1893 was met with only partial success as this central body of building trade locals did not survive the depression of 1894. However, in May 1899, a Building Trades Council was established as a central body with the affiliation of building trade locals only. Most of the locals which had dissolved during the depression were reorganized again. On April 27, 1899, the Painters, Decorators, and Paperhangers organized their Local No. 77. L. W. Gallaher organized and initiated the members. The minutes of the meeting, held in the Bricklayers Hall 49 on Main Street, read as follows: "Bro. Chalker moved that no smoking be allowed during the meeting, adopted — moved by Bro. Kraft that a committee of three be appointed to confer with other Trades in regard to organizing a Building Trades Council."

On the other hand, around 1894, the Federated Trades was dissolved and a newly organized Board of Labor took over the functions of the Federated Trades. The Board of Labor functioned more or less as a social organization during the period of the 1894 depression. It established a free reading room, a library, and an employment office. In 1896 the city central organization of labor came to be known as the Utah Federation of Labor. As the number of unions outside Salt Lake City and vicinity was not too large at this time, the Utah Federation of Labor, though technically a city central body for Salt Lake City, also acted as a central body for most of the labor unions in Utah.

This was an active period in the Utah labor movement, as indicated by the following entry in the minutes of the Painters Local 77.

Bro. Norling Delegate to the U.F.L. [Utah Federation of Labor] stated there was no business of importance with the exception that the Barbers were organized [25 members], and also trying to organize the Laundry employees, Bro. Zimmerman stated that the stage hands at the Theatre would like to have a union if they could have some one to help them. Bro. Norling stated he would see to it as soon as possible . .

The apex of the structural pyramid of labor organization in Utah was completed with the establishment of the Utah State Federation of Labor in 1908. An earlier attempt, in May 1904, to establish a statewide federation of labor met with only partial success as political issues created a conflict between the radical and the conservative elements in the Utah labor movement. Out of this conflict was born a permanent State Federation of Labor in 1908, which has since been the statewide central body of labor in Utah. The minutes of the Utah Federation of Labor report this second attempt to organize the State Federation of Labor, "The organization committee reported the State Federation has been organized; twenty-three unions were represented; all officers elected, and adjourned to meet again May 6th, 1908.. ."

With the establishment of the Utah State Federation of Labor, the Utah Federation of Labor changed its name to Salt Lake Federation of Labor on May 8, 1908, and became solely a city central body rather than a statewide organization. Undoubtedly the reason for this change was to avoid the confusion of names. Thus, the first decade of the twentieth century witnessed the completion of the structural pyramid — local unions, city central, state federation — of the labor unions in Utah, which remained basically unchanged thereafter.

A radical element, consisting primarily of miners in Utah, started to organize by the end of the nineteenth century. In fact, on May 10, 1898, the miners called a conference at Salt Lake City and established the Western Labor Union. The following two decades witnessed active and revolutionary unionism in Utah among the mining and smelter workers through such nationally known organizations as the Western Federation of Miners, the Industrial Workers of the World, and the Workers', Soldiers' and Sailors' Council. The chart on the following page represents the locals in Salt Lake City, Ogden, and mining towns to 1920.

The relatively active unionism in Utah during the first two decades of the twentieth century could be attributed to many factors. First, the population of Utah increased from 276,749 in 1900 to 373,351 in 1910, or by 34.9 per cent. It increased again to 449,396 in 1920. The population of Salt Lake City, which was then the center of most of the labor activity, rose from 53,531 to 92,777, an increase of 73.3 per cent during the first 10 years of the twentieth century. The foreign-born poplation in Utah was 19.4 per cent in 1900, 17.6 per cent in 1910, and 13.1 per cent in 1920.

Second, the occupational changes were remarkable during this period. Of the total persons engaged in all occupations, approximately 29 per cent were engaged in agriculture. On the other hand the manufacturing and mechanical industries accounted for 23 per cent of the total persons engaged in all occupations. The persons engaged in extraction of minerals grew from 6,643 in 1900 to 10,117 in 1920, which was approximately 7 per cent of the persons engaged in all occupations.

Thirdly, the number of manufacturing establishments in Utah in 1900 was 1,400, which provided employment for 6,615 persons. Though the number of establishments decreased to 749 in 1910, the number of persons employed increased to 11,785, which indicates the increase in the size of individual establishments during this 10 year period. Over 1,000 establishments in 1920 employed 18,863 persons.

Between 1890 and 1920, there was a remarkable change in the composition, structure, and characteristics of the labor force in Utah. Intrastate transportation was growing rapidly and extensively. The first report of the Utah State Bureau of Immigration, Labor, and Statistics gives the following account of railroad development in Utah.

Work is now in progress on the Utah railroad, which is being constructed by the United States Smelting and Refining Company, running from Morhland, Emery County, to Provo, a distance of one hundred miles. Work will shortly be started on a suburban electric road from Salt Lake City to Payson, and other interurban lines are completed. The Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company is double tracking and regrading a large section of its road west of Colton, and the electrification of nearly its entire main line in Utah is contemplated. The Utah Light and Railway Company is to extend its street car system from its present northern terminus in Salt Lake City to points north in Davis county, this year. The Ogden Rapid Transit Company will complete its electric line from Brigham City to Logan in 1913.

According to the report of the State Board of Equalization for 1918, the total railway mileage for the state was 3,253.20. Of the 29 counties in the state at the beginning of the year 1919, only seven were without railroads.

The growth of transportation within the state resulted in the expansion of both product market and labor market, which facilitated labor mobility. The environment was conducive to the organization of labor.

THE NATURE OF UTAH UNIONS

The nature and characteristics of workers and their work, and the environment under which they work, influence the philosophy of their organization. The philosophy of a labor union is also characterized by its objectives and goals as well as by the means it uses to achieve these goals. Examining the nature of unionism in Utah at the end of the nineteenth century, one finds a predominance of craft unions which were loosely affiliated to the city central body.

The objectives and goals of early labor unions were restricted to improving conditions of work, protecting the craft, and bettering the wages. The unions more or less took the form of fraternal organizations. Social activities were enthusiastically celebrated and Labor Day parades were colorful. The Labor Day parade of 1901 consisted of 2,000 workers, "... the bone and sinew of Salt Lake," as described by the Deseret Evening News. The report further states:

It was a great crowd, too that deserted the residence portions of the city and swarmed over the streets to greet the toilers. . . . Fair maidens who probably never before gave a second thought to the begrimed and overailed worker, gazed with admiration upon the muscled arm of the blacksmith as he wielded his sledge upon the red hot iron. The little red-clad painters' devils, with their face smeared with ink were voted "just too cute for anything," and the brewery display of kegs and bottles looked more attractive than ever did before.

Until 1910 most local unions insisted on maintaining their own nature and characteristics even when these were in conflict with the policies of central labor organizations, such as Salt Lake Federation of Labor and Utah State Federation of Labor.

The means to achieve the goals of the labor unions were mainly centered around economic pressures or strikes. The earlier strikes were restricted to individual establishments. A list of "unfair" shops was published by the unions and the union members were asked not to work for them. The penalty was usually a fine. For example, the minutes of the meeting of Plumbers Local 19, on June 20, 1896, state that "It was moved and seconded that J. C. Heesch be fined $150.00 for the stand he took against our association during our last strike, and for working debtremential to our by laws since then ... carried."

The impact of the earlier strikes, except in the mining camps, was not severely felt by the community. The nature of the issues involved in the strike, which were mostly economic, and the number of the members involved, which was often not too large, tended to make the strike a mild weapon. The plumbers strike in 1890 is an example of how the employeremployee relationship affected the strike policy. A minute book entry on July 11, 1890, states:

It was here announced that a delegation of master plumbers were awaiting to confer with the Journeyman. It was moved and carried they be invited into Hall and state their case. The delegates were received and stated that they had nothing to offer but requested a like delegation of the Journeymen to confer with him [them] and try and arbitrate.

Later in the same strike it was decided that, ". . . the adjustment of the strike be left in the hands of Mr. Slater," who was the president of the Federated Trades, a city central body of the organized labor. This indicates a tendancy towards mediation and arbitration rather than fighting a strike to the end.

The carpenters strike in 1890 for a wage increase and a closed-shop; the streetcar men strike in the same year for improvement in their conditions of work; the general strike of plumbers in 1911 for a wage increase; the electrical workers strike in 1916 for recognition of their union; and the cooks and waiters strike in 1919 for a wage increase and a closedshop were comparatively important strikes up to 1920. On the other hand the miners strike in November 1903, against Utah Fuel Company of Carbon County; the Federation of Railway Shopmen strike in 1911, against the Harriman Railway System; the Smelters Union strike in 1912, against the American Smelting and Refining Company; the most violent strike of Bingham miners in 1912; and the Park City mining strike in 1915 are examples of powerful strikes conducted not only for economic reasons, but fought for the sake of principles, such as recognition of respective unions.

Generally, the methods used in conducting strikes and their impact on the community reveal the nature and the characteristics of the unions involved. Most of the strikes that occurred in Salt Lake City reflected the conservative nature of the unions. On the other hand, almost all of the strikes conducted in the mining camps of Utah are evidence of the fact that the mine workers' unions were militant in character and radical in nature.

The Building Trades Council, the Metal Trades Council, and the Allied Printing Trades Council, all consisting of skilled locals, formed a bloc of craft-conscious unionism. On the other hand the Western Federation of Miners; the IWW; the Workers', Soldiers' and Sailors' Council; and the United Mine Workers formed an active and revolutionary unionism, which came directly in conflict with the "craft-conscious" conservative element of the Utah labor movement.

The radical groups not only failed in their attempts to organize skilled craft unions, but were also defeated when they tried to organize an IWW local of building laborers. Mr. L. J. Trujillo, an active and idealistic member of IWW Local 202, made sincere efforts to organize an IWW affiliated local of building laborers around 1906. However, his attempts met with only partial success and though Local 262 of the IWW — "Building Employees Industrial Union" — came into existence on March 5, 1906, it was short-lived. A letter written by Mr. Trujillo to the officers of the IWW Local 202 explicitly shows the difficulties encountered by radical organizers to extend their activities beyond the mining camps of Utah.

To the Officers and members of the mix Local #202 [skilled and unskilled]

Comrades & Fellow workers

As I have undertaken to organize the Building Employes Ind. U. #262, with old Craftmen simplers, I wish to state that it has been a failure [the word failure scratched and substituted by the words hard proposition] and on account of a band of ring rulers the Local is not progressing very fast, in our last meeting night the self constructed leaders show[ed] their contempt [the word contempt scratched and the words bitter opposition are substituted] to the new union, but there is enough class conscious members that will uphold our charter and we appeal to your local for moral support. Our object is to incorporate with the mix local until such time that the branching become necessary.

Yours for the revolution, L. J. Trujillo (Organizer)

The Salt Lake Federation of Labor tried in vain to bring together these factions in the Utah labor movement. On November 25, 1910, the Federation, in an attempt to recognize both factions equally, voted unanimously in favor of a charter to be granted to the Western Federation of Miners by the American Federation of Labor.

The minute books of various unions are evidence of the sentiments of the locals of the conservative bloc toward the radicals.

For example, on the matter of sending delegates to the Workers', Soldiers', and Sailors' Council, a radical organization formed in February 1919, the minute books of the Salt Lake Federation of Labor give the following account:

Workers, Soldiers, and Sailors council of Salt Lake asking Federation to send delegates, and upon motion the chair appointed Currie, Roundy, and Bales a committee to investigate and report back to the next meeting.

The inclination of the regular meeting of the Salt Lake Federation of Labor is evident from the minute book entry: "Special committee submitted a majority report recommending that we do not send delegates to the workers, soldiers, and sailors council. Meeting non-concurred [emphasis added] in the report." A further entry on the same issue says, "Resolution from Workers, Soldiers, and Sailors Council, adopted by roll call vote 67 to 5." This action by the Salt Lake Federation of Labor was the result of a difference of opinion between the conservatives on the one hand and the supporters of the radicals on the other. Apparently the supporters of the radicals were successful in adopting the resolution from the Workers', Soldiers', and Sailors' Council. However, on the issue of a general strike in support of securing the release of Thomas J. Mooney, a radical labor leader of the Iron Molders International, the Salt Lake Federation of Labor voted to hold the strike in abeyance.

From the minutes of the Typographical Union, Metal Trades Council, and Building Trades Council, it is apparent the opinions of these unions were not always the same as the Salt Lake Federation of Labor. For example the Federation asked local unions to take a vote on the question of whether the unions should unite in a general strike July 4th for the purpose of "securing the release of Thomas Mooney, now serving a life term in California for complicity in the preparedness-day parade in San Francisco." The Typographical Union voted unanimously against the strike. The Federation also asked whether or not the Federation should send delegates to the Workers', Soldiers', and Sailors' Council of Salt Lake City. The motion was made "that the unions is opposed to the sending of delegates by any labor organization to the Workers, Soldiers, and Sailors council and that we condemn and denounce the said council."

The minutes of the Salt Lake Federation of Labor appearing in the minutes of the Typographical Union stated that the resolution and communication from the Typographical Union regarding the Workers', Soldiers', and Sailors' Council had been consigned to the waste basket, and also that Delegate Steen of the Typographical Union had stated that the resolution did not represent the sentiment of the Typographical Union, but was the work of one individual. The Typographical Union voted to repudiate the alleged statement of Delegate Steen and reaffirm its approval of the resolution and accompanying communication.

The reaction of both the Metal Trades Council and Building Trades Council to the resolution presented by the Salt Lake Federation of Labor concerning the strike and sending a delegation to the Workers', Soldiers', and Sailors' Council were the same. The motion was lost.

The controversy between the Typographical Union and the Salt Lake Federation of Labor regarding the support to the radical element resulted in a decision by the Typographical Union, ". . . to pay no more per capita tax to the Federation."

The radical labor movement did not significantly change the nature or the structure of labor unionism in Utah. But it certainly added color to the history of the Utah labor movement during the first two decades of the twentieth century.

THE SURVIVAL OF CONSERVATIVE UNIONISM

Professor Neil W. Chamberlain of Yale University, in his book talks about unions as agents and institutions. He observes that:

once a labor union has come into existence, it acquires organizational interests of its own which differ in some respects from the interests of the individual member who looks to it as his agent. This is due to the fact that the union regards itself as an ongoing institution whose interests therefore require it to consider a potential future membership as well as its present constituents. Moreover, as a collective representative it encounters conflicts within its own membership, and it can scarcely act as an agent for conflicting interests except by rationalizing its actions in terms of organizational welfare.

It seems that the structure and nature of the unions in Utah, which remained simply as the agents of their members, precluded them from evolving as ongoing institutions emphasizing the broader organizational interests over the specific factional interests. Craft-conscious unionism developed the unity of interests only within specific crafts, and craft unions of skilled workers, which were in the majority, placed emphasis upon the present rather than the future of their own crafts. They were guided solely by the benefits to be derived by those who happened to be on the membership role at the moment.

The survival of conservative unionism in Utah was a result of these structural and characteristic factors which were internal factors existing within the labor movement.

The external factors responsible for conservative labor movement in Utah were social, economic, and political in nature. Edward Gross in his book states that in early days when industry was small, local customs regulated industrial affairs. He says, "Business might dominate the community not because it desired to do so or it felt that it should do so but rather because there was no other power available to counterbalance business control." In the early Utah economy the Latter-day Saints Church played a vital part. Business was mainly under the guidance of the church, and even when business became free of church domination and direction, it still found itself following the philosophy developed in the early period. The church advocated a conservative labor unionism. This is evident in a statement made by President Joseph F. Smith in 1903.

If we are to have labor organizations among us, and there is no good reason why our young men might not be so organized, they should be formed on a sensible basis, and officered by men who have their families and all their interests around them. The spirit of good-will and brotherhood, such as we have in the Gospel of Christ, should characterize their conduct and organization.

It is not easy to see how the Latter-day Saints can endorse the methods of modern labor unions. As a people we have suffered too much from irrational class prejudice and class hatred to participate in violent and unjust agitation. No one denies the right of laborers to unite in demanding a just share of the prosperity of our country, provided the union is governed by the same spirit that should actuate men who profess the guidance of a christian conscience.

During the early period of union organization, social life was centered around church activities. Professor Arrington gives an extensive account of the part played by the church in fighting the depression of the 1890's. All the church welfare programs and other organized social activities indirectly shadowed the activities of the early labor organization. This might be one of the reasons why Utah labor unions evolved as the "functional type" described by Professor Robert F. Hoxie, concentrating their attention strictly on the attainment of economic goals. According to Hoxie, the union emerges when group sentiments have been crystalized. "The union constitutes a common interpretation and set of beliefs concerned with the problems confronting the worker and a generalized program of amelioration. Such a persistent group 'viewpoint or interpretation' Hoxie calls functional type unionism."

The predominance of the agrarian activity and relatively simple economic conditions of life did not give rise to any significant labor legislation in Utah until the turn of the century. The first 20 years of the twentieth century witnessed the enactment of health and safety legislation in mining, child labor laws, eight-hour laws for certain workers, minimum wage laws for female workers, and workmen's compensation laws. Attempts were made to recognize and remedy labor problems, as far as possible, through the establishment of the Utah State Bureau of Labor and the Industrial Commission.

The culmination point in this field of labor legislation came with the enactment of legislation in 1917, entitled "Bettering Conditions of Labor." The act provided that,

It shall not be unlawful for working men and women to organize themselves into, or carry on, labor unions for the purpose of lessening the hours of labor, increasing the wages, bettering the conditions of the members of such organization; or carrying out their legitimate purposes as freely as they could do if acting singly.

The act also embodied measures implying the legality of strikes, permitting picketing during labor troubles, and restricting the use of injunctions against labor unions.

Organized labor, however, did not long enjoy the freedom and security accorded to it by the 1917 enactment. Business organizations of the state strongly urged the repeal of the law, and in spite of a huge demonstration, which involved approximately 2,500 men who marched to the State Capitol on October 4, 1919, a special session of the legislature passed a law defining and prohibiting picketing in Utah. This was the beginning of the open-shop movement which strongly opposed organized labor in Utah all through the 1920's.

Nevertheless, up to 1920, a fairly comprehensive labor code was developed in Utah, although the administration and the enforcement of this labor code did not become effective until the establishment of the State Industrial Commission in 1917. The economic and political efforts of organized labor were quite influential in securing the passage of significant labor laws. However, as this reasonably broad labor code was realized before 1920, relatively more emphasis of Utah labor organizations could be and was directed toward their immediate economic needs. This is a basic characteristic of "pure and simple" unionism. Utah labor legislation was, therefore, another external factor which made possible the development of a conservative or "pure and simple" type of unionism in Utah.

The search for historical truth is an everlasting job. One must necessarily fit the pieces of facts into the theoretical framework and try to find out why things happened the way they happened in the past. Professor Kenneth Davies states that while Utah is not, and never has been, a "labor" state, labor has played an important part in its history. The viewpoint of this paper is that the social and economic history of Utah have played an important part in shaping the structure and nature of its labor organizations.

For full citations and images please view this article on a desktop.