Bricklayers Refuse to Take a Pay Cut
Workers hold a tense meeting with the City Council, arguing that cutting wages during a depression will only lead to poorer infrastructure and personal poverty.
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.
An important meeting was held at City Hall yesterday between representatives of the Bricklayers' Union and the city council regarding the council's decision to reduce the pay of bricklayers on public works. William White argued that while $5 per day may look like a large amount, the men only averaged $27 per month due to irregular work, and a 40 percent cut would be ruinous. Workers also noted that tunnel and sewer work is inherently dangerous. Matthew Brannigan criticized the city’s management of finances, claiming that the city was attempting to balance its books by pinching the laborer. Mayor Phelps responded that he signed the salary reduction ordinance only because the state of the city treasury forced him to, expressing a preference for lower wages he could actually pay rather than higher promises he could not fulfill. Alderman Clise admitted that the workers' arguments regarding the scarcity of total yearly work had not occurred to him, and he promised to reconsider the ordinance before the next council vote.
“I considered a 'cheap' man the most expensive man that could be employed.”
This debate highlights the classic conflict between austerity measures and the protection of labor. The arguments made in 1894 about the 'cost' of cheap labor and the irregularity of seasonal employment remain central to Seattle’s labor discourse today.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.