The Contract Proof of a Hidden Strike
A labor newspaper exposes the desperate tactics used by the Sumner Iron Works to recruit strikebreakers through shady employment contracts.
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.
You couldn't get one of the proprietors of the Sumner Iron Works to admit that there was any such thing as a strike on in that plant. Some of their men became dissatisfied through the rantings of some 'professional labor agitators' and just quit! Of course their places were easily filled and everything sailing along lovely. No strike, though! Well, just read the following copy of a contract under date of August 25th, 1910, between a St. Paul employment agent and a strikebreaker sent out to the Sumner plant by that agent. The contract dictates that the worker is to take the place of men on strike and must remain for 90 consecutive days. If the worker leaves before the contract expires, the bonus is forfeited and transportation costs are deducted from wages.
“It is understood that I am to take the place of MEN ON STRIKE at the Sumner Iron Works, Everett, Washington.”
This 1910 report highlights the timeless tension in Everett's industrial history between labor organizing and employer efforts to undermine it through precarious contract work. The use of out-of-state strikebreakers mirrors modern debates about gig labor and the mobility of the workforce in industrial disputes.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.