The Eight-Hour War: Seattle’s Labor Law Hits a Legal Wall
As the state’s landmark eight-hour workday law takes effect, prosecutors and judges clash over whether it applies to private contractors like the Pacific Bridge Company, leaving workers in limbo.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Eight Hour Law in This City.
That the Law Does Not in Any Case Apply to the Cedar River Pipe Line Contract.
Next Saturday the state eight-hour labor law will go into effect. The substance of the law is contained in the first section 1, and a part of section 2, which is as follows:
"An act to establish the number of hours to constitute a day's work on all state, county and municipal construction, or such work done by contract or sub-contract, and providing penalties for its violation."
Section 1: "Hereafter eight hours in any calendar shall constitute a day's work on any work done for the state, or any county or municipality within the state, subject to conditions hereinafter provided."
Section 2: "All work done by contract or sub-contract on any building or improvements or works on roads, bridges, streets, alleys, or buildings for the state or any county or municipality within the state, shall be done under the provisions of this act."
William Blackman, railway mill and factory inspector, and also member of the state labor commission, was seen relative to the enforcement of the law, this morning and he said: "We review the law is being violated we shall take the matter up and that it is enforced."
Probably one of the first cases that will come up under this law will be the Cedar River pipe line contract. It is reported that the Pacific Bridge company, who have the contract, are paying their men at the rate of 11 cents per hour for the first eight hours, and 12 cents per hour for two additional hours, making $1 per day for the 10 hours' work.
Prosecuting Attorney McKinnon has rendered an opinion that the law is not apply in that case, as the men have a right to work as many hours at a special rate per hour, as they wish, and that the word "improvements" in section 1 only applies to the things specifically named in that section.
Judge V. A. McDonald was a member of the labor committee in the last session of the legislature, and from that time the bill originated. When seen he expressed the conviction that the bill was intended to cover all improvements by the state, or a county or municipality in the state.
This 1903 clash over an eight-hour workday mirrors modern debates about wage theft and overtime enforcement in Seattle’s booming construction sector. Just as Pacific Bridge Company argued that higher hourly rates justified longer hours, today's gig economy workers often face similar trade-offs between flexibility and fair compensation, highlighting the enduring struggle to define a 'fair day's work.'
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.