Seattle Builders' Exchange Admits Defeat in Union-Busting Effort
After two years of labor strife and an influx of non-union workers, the contractors' association effectively concedes that union labor is the only reliable choice.
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.
The Builders' Exchange of Seattle was originally formed as a union-busting organization pure and simple. Its members reasoned that with the influx of Eastern craftsmen and laborers incidental to the coming exposition, the unions of Seattle could be overwhelmed and bent, and the open shop policy firmly established. After trying to get along for more than two years on an open shop plan of conducting their business, and advertising all over the country for non-union workmen, flooding the city with incompetents, and in other ways working hardships upon the mechanics of Seattle, the Builders' Exchange has at last confessed defeat and acknowledged that the only place to secure competent workmen is through the channel of organized labor.
“The Builders' Exchange has at last confessed defeat and acknowledged that the only place to secure competent workmen is through the channel of organized labor.”
The century-old fight over the 'open shop' and the reliance on skilled trades unions echoes in modern debates about gig labor, workplace standards, and the construction industry's struggle to maintain quality while managing labor costs. History proves that the promise of 'open shop' efficiency often masked a decline in professionalism, a concern that remains central to construction labor relations today.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.