The Progress Club—1934 and Class Memory - Revision history

Ccarlsson at 03:26, 22 November 2021

2021-11-22T03:26:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:26, 21 November 2021
Line 235:		Line 235:
	<hr>		<hr>

	[[Image:Reclaiming-san-francisco.jpg\|170px\|left]] This article originally appeared in ~~[http://www.citylights.com/book/?GCOI=87286100049340~~ ''Reclaiming San Francisco: History Politics Culture'', a City Lights anthology] edited by James Brook, Chris Carlsson, & Nancy J. Peters (City Lights Books, San Francisco: 1998)		[[Image:Reclaiming-san-francisco.jpg\|170px\|left]] This article originally appeared in ''Reclaiming San Francisco: History Politics Culture'', a City Lights anthology edited by James Brook, Chris Carlsson, & Nancy J. Peters (City Lights Books, San Francisco: 1998)

	[[category:Labor]][[category:ILWU]] [[category:Power and Money]] [[category:Redevelopment]] [[category:Dissent]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]] [[category:1960s]] [[category:1970s]] [[category:1934 General Strike]]		[[category:Labor]][[category:ILWU]] [[category:Power and Money]] [[category:Redevelopment]] [[category:Dissent]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]] [[category:1960s]] [[category:1970s]] [[category:1934 General Strike]] [[category:Reclaiming San Francisco]]

Ccarlsson at 23:45, 6 July 2017

2017-07-06T23:45:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:45, 6 July 2017
Line 5:		Line 5:
	<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>

	[[Image:33LNGSHR.jpg\|350px\|right~~\|thumb\|~~'''Longshoring evolved over many decades into a fluid, cooperative, mutually dependent labor process'''; ''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library'']] The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.		[[Image:33LNGSHR.jpg\|350px\|right]]

			'''Longshoring evolved over many decades into a fluid, cooperative, mutually dependent labor process'''

			''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library'']

			The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.

	Progress unifies capitalist planners around shared values and assumptions, as if they were in the same social club (which they often are, literally, as well). Progress is also an ideological “club”—in the sense of “blunt instrument”—wielded against recalcitrant workers and uncooperative communities to ridicule opposition to corporate development plans. Progress as ideology has assured that all changes are both for our own good and, in any case, inevitable. Meanwhile, the forces behind progress have broken and rewoven the texture of human life at work and at home repeatedly over decades.		Progress unifies capitalist planners around shared values and assumptions, as if they were in the same social club (which they often are, literally, as well). Progress is also an ideological “club”—in the sense of “blunt instrument”—wielded against recalcitrant workers and uncooperative communities to ridicule opposition to corporate development plans. Progress as ideology has assured that all changes are both for our own good and, in any case, inevitable. Meanwhile, the forces behind progress have broken and rewoven the texture of human life at work and at home repeatedly over decades.
Line 45:		Line 51:
	At 8 a.m. on Monday, July 16, the San Francisco General Strike officially began, affecting around 150,000 workers around the Bay. But it had already been rolling along for a few days by then. Between July 11 and 14, over 30,000 workers went out on strike, including teamsters, butchers, laundry workers, and more; by July 12 twenty-one unions had voted to strike, most of them unanimously.		At 8 a.m. on Monday, July 16, the San Francisco General Strike officially began, affecting around 150,000 workers around the Bay. But it had already been rolling along for a few days by then. Between July 11 and 14, over 30,000 workers went out on strike, including teamsters, butchers, laundry workers, and more; by July 12 twenty-one unions had voted to strike, most of them unanimously.

	[[Image:34TANK1.jpg\|left~~\|thumb~~\|250px\|'''2,500 national guardsmen occupied the waterfront during the General Strike'''; ''Photo: San Francisco History Center, San Francisco Public Library'']] The General Strike began to weaken almost as soon as it officially began. The National Guard occupied the waterfront and violent attacks by vigilantes (off-duty police and hired thugs, coordinated by the Industrial Association) occurred all over San Francisco. The conservative Strike Committee authorized so many workers to go on working that they dramatically undercut the movement. On the very first day, they allowed municipal carmen (running the streetcars) to return to work, ostensibly because their civil service status might be jeopardized. The chairman of the Labor Council and the Strike Committee was Edward Vandeleur, who was also president of the Municipal Carmen and had opposed the strike from the beginning. The ferryboatmen, the printing trades, electricians, and telephone and telegraph workers were never brought in on the strike. Typographical workers and reporters continued to work on newspapers that spewed forth anti strike propaganda. Labor Council leaders even went so far as to issue a work permit to striking sheet-metal workers to return to their jobs in order to repair bullet-riddled police cars.		[[Image:34TANK1.jpg\|left\|250px]]

			'''2,500 national guardsmen occupied the waterfront during the General Strike'''

			''Photo: San Francisco History Center, San Francisco Public Library''

			The General Strike began to weaken almost as soon as it officially began. The National Guard occupied the waterfront and violent attacks by vigilantes (off-duty police and hired thugs, coordinated by the Industrial Association) occurred all over San Francisco. The conservative Strike Committee authorized so many workers to go on working that they dramatically undercut the movement. On the very first day, they allowed municipal carmen (running the streetcars) to return to work, ostensibly because their civil service status might be jeopardized. The chairman of the Labor Council and the Strike Committee was Edward Vandeleur, who was also president of the Municipal Carmen and had opposed the strike from the beginning. The ferryboatmen, the printing trades, electricians, and telephone and telegraph workers were never brought in on the strike. Typographical workers and reporters continued to work on newspapers that spewed forth anti strike propaganda. Labor Council leaders even went so far as to issue a work permit to striking sheet-metal workers to return to their jobs in order to repair bullet-riddled police cars.

	President Franklin Roosevelt stayed officially aloof from the strike, his Labor Secretary Frances Perkins cabling him that the General Strike Committee of Twenty-Five “represents conservative leadership.” On July 19 the General Strike Committee narrowly voted to end the strike. On July 20, the Teamsters voted to return to work, fearing that the Mayor’s Committee of 500 and the Industrial Association would put strikebreakers on all the trucks in San Francisco and leave the Teamsters without any jobs. This was the end for the Longshoremen and Seamen’s strikes along the waterfront. By July 31, they ended their strikes and accepted federal arbitration, which ultimately led to partial victories on wages and hours, but the key issue of union control over hiring halls was settled with a formula that allowed for joint management of hiring halls with the shipping companies. Since the unions got to pick the dispatchers, they enjoyed control in fact if not by contract. The 1934 General Strike put a lethal dagger into the heart of fifteen years of “American Plan” propaganda (the 1920s’ version of anti-union, anti- communist, pro-American patriotism) and open shop conditions.		President Franklin Roosevelt stayed officially aloof from the strike, his Labor Secretary Frances Perkins cabling him that the General Strike Committee of Twenty-Five “represents conservative leadership.” On July 19 the General Strike Committee narrowly voted to end the strike. On July 20, the Teamsters voted to return to work, fearing that the Mayor’s Committee of 500 and the Industrial Association would put strikebreakers on all the trucks in San Francisco and leave the Teamsters without any jobs. This was the end for the Longshoremen and Seamen’s strikes along the waterfront. By July 31, they ended their strikes and accepted federal arbitration, which ultimately led to partial victories on wages and hours, but the key issue of union control over hiring halls was settled with a formula that allowed for joint management of hiring halls with the shipping companies. Since the unions got to pick the dispatchers, they enjoyed control in fact if not by contract. The 1934 General Strike put a lethal dagger into the heart of fifteen years of “American Plan” propaganda (the 1920s’ version of anti-union, anti- communist, pro-American patriotism) and open shop conditions.
Line 57:		Line 69:
	On San Francisco’s contentious waterfront the longshoremen gained practical control over the allocation of work. Worker-elected dispatchers rendered individual employers irrelevant by establishing a remarkably egalitarian “low-man-out-first” system to share the available work. (This system, which equalized opportunity to work but not necessarily income, was developed by longshoremen in San Pedro and copied by the San Francisco local. (Weir, interview with author, 1997)) Moreover, the daily rhythm of the “four-on, four-off,” along with numerous restrictive work rules spread the work out even further while maintaining a pace of work set by the longshoremen themselves. Offshore unions of sailors and others gained complete control of their own hiring hall after the violent waterfront strike of 1936.		On San Francisco’s contentious waterfront the longshoremen gained practical control over the allocation of work. Worker-elected dispatchers rendered individual employers irrelevant by establishing a remarkably egalitarian “low-man-out-first” system to share the available work. (This system, which equalized opportunity to work but not necessarily income, was developed by longshoremen in San Pedro and copied by the San Francisco local. (Weir, interview with author, 1997)) Moreover, the daily rhythm of the “four-on, four-off,” along with numerous restrictive work rules spread the work out even further while maintaining a pace of work set by the longshoremen themselves. Offshore unions of sailors and others gained complete control of their own hiring hall after the violent waterfront strike of 1936.

	The ILWU itself pursued an organizing strategy it called the “March Inland.” Warehouse workers were ready to join. Joe Lynch told interviewer Harvey Schwartz: ~~You~~ had commercial warehouses strung along the waterfront from the Hyde Street pier over to Islais Creek; then you had cold storage warehouses; behind those you had mills, feed, flour, and grain; behind those you had grocery—big grocery, with 1500 people—and that’s the way they organized. Gee, it was terrific. Then came hardware, paper, and the patent drug industry, and the coffee, tea, and spice in ’37. Liquor and wine came in ’38. Then it was a mopping up operation after that. By World War II, the union had under contract, either wholly or partially organized, 46 different industries in warehouse, distribution, production and processing.		The ILWU itself pursued an organizing strategy it called the “March Inland.” Warehouse workers were ready to join. Joe Lynch told interviewer Harvey Schwartz: “You had commercial warehouses strung along the waterfront from the Hyde Street pier over to Islais Creek; then you had cold storage warehouses; behind those you had mills, feed, flour, and grain; behind those you had grocery—big grocery, with 1500 people—and that’s the way they organized. Gee, it was terrific. Then came hardware, paper, and the patent drug industry, and the coffee, tea, and spice in ’37. Liquor and wine came in ’38. Then it was a mopping up operation after that. By World War II, the union had under contract, either wholly or partially organized, 46 different industries in warehouse, distribution, production and processing.”

	Another worker, Brother Hackett, told Schwartz:		Another worker, Brother Hackett, told Schwartz:

	<blockquote>After the 1936–37 strike everybody organized. You went around the ~~neighbor- hood~~ on your lunch hour, found somebody havin’ lunch, and started talkin’ to ’em. If they didn’t belong to a union, you asked ’em what wages they were getting. When you found out how little they were being paid, you’d say, “We just joined the Warehouse Union and went out on strike for a lousy couple of months, and doubled our salary.” The guy’d say, “Just lead me to it.” See, there was a tremendous surge then. We had a meeting every week. There was always fifteen, fifty, or a hundred to two hundred people being sworn in. The people were just waiting in the weeds for somebody to hit them with a stick. It was just like a great awakening or a crusade. </blockquote>		<blockquote>After the 1936–37 strike everybody organized. You went around the neighborhood on your lunch hour, found somebody havin’ lunch, and started talkin’ to ’em. If they didn’t belong to a union, you asked ’em what wages they were getting. When you found out how little they were being paid, you’d say, “We just joined the Warehouse Union and went out on strike for a lousy couple of months, and doubled our salary.” The guy’d say, “Just lead me to it.” See, there was a tremendous surge then. We had a meeting every week. There was always fifteen, fifty, or a hundred to two hundred people being sworn in. The people were just waiting in the weeds for somebody to hit them with a stick. It was just like a great awakening or a crusade. </blockquote>

	With the ILWU setting the example, unionization of workers in other industries continued through the 1930s. The culinary union made rapid gains during this period. Waitresses Local 48 organized first in restaurants patronized by union clientele, spread its drives to restaurants outside working-class neighborhoods, swept up cafeteria, drugstore, and tea-room waitresses, and then included waitresses employed in the large downtown hotels and department stores. By 1941, waitresses in San Francisco had achieved almost complete organization of their trade, and Local 48 became the largest waitress local in the country.		With the ILWU setting the example, unionization of workers in other industries continued through the 1930s. The culinary union made rapid gains during this period. Waitresses Local 48 organized first in restaurants patronized by union clientele, spread its drives to restaurants outside working-class neighborhoods, swept up cafeteria, drugstore, and tea-room waitresses, and then included waitresses employed in the large downtown hotels and department stores. By 1941, waitresses in San Francisco had achieved almost complete organization of their trade, and Local 48 became the largest waitress local in the country.
Line 80:		Line 92:

	Ruling-class planning in San Francisco faced an entrenched, self-confident, smart, historically savvy working class in pre-WWII San Francisco. World War II spurred cataclysmic changes worldwide, and war mobilization in San Francisco promoted a regionalization of industry and an influx of new workers, altering for- ever the composition and residential distribution of the area’s working class. Regional planning, underway since the 1920s, combined with New Deal infrastructural investments to cross the bay with new bridges and surround the region with new highways. In regionalizing the Bay Area economy, planners moved shipping to Oakland, heavy industry to the north and to the East Bay, while high-tech industries grew around university enclaves and military bases. Regionalization was pursued for its perceived economic benefits, but its purpose in the heated battle for the control of work was clear to some.		Ruling-class planning in San Francisco faced an entrenched, self-confident, smart, historically savvy working class in pre-WWII San Francisco. World War II spurred cataclysmic changes worldwide, and war mobilization in San Francisco promoted a regionalization of industry and an influx of new workers, altering for- ever the composition and residential distribution of the area’s working class. Regional planning, underway since the 1920s, combined with New Deal infrastructural investments to cross the bay with new bridges and surround the region with new highways. In regionalizing the Bay Area economy, planners moved shipping to Oakland, heavy industry to the north and to the East Bay, while high-tech industries grew around university enclaves and military bases. Regionalization was pursued for its perceived economic benefits, but its purpose in the heated battle for the control of work was clear to some.

	In 1948, at a Commonwealth Club debate, a San Francisco banker said:		In 1948, at a Commonwealth Club debate, a San Francisco banker said:

Ccarlsson at 05:30, 16 March 2016

2016-03-16T05:30:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:30, 15 March 2016
Line 5:		Line 5:
	<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>

	[[Image:33LNGSHR.jpg\|~~250px~~\|right\|thumb\|'''Longshoring evolved over many decades into a fluid, cooperative, mutually dependent labor process'''; ''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library'']] The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.		[[Image:33LNGSHR.jpg\|350px\|right\|thumb\|'''Longshoring evolved over many decades into a fluid, cooperative, mutually dependent labor process'''; ''Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library'']] The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.

	Progress unifies capitalist planners around shared values and assumptions, as if they were in the same social club (which they often are, literally, as well). Progress is also an ideological “club”—in the sense of “blunt instrument”—wielded against recalcitrant workers and uncooperative communities to ridicule opposition to corporate development plans. Progress as ideology has assured that all changes are both for our own good and, in any case, inevitable. Meanwhile, the forces behind progress have broken and rewoven the texture of human life at work and at home repeatedly over decades.		Progress unifies capitalist planners around shared values and assumptions, as if they were in the same social club (which they often are, literally, as well). Progress is also an ideological “club”—in the sense of “blunt instrument”—wielded against recalcitrant workers and uncooperative communities to ridicule opposition to corporate development plans. Progress as ideology has assured that all changes are both for our own good and, in any case, inevitable. Meanwhile, the forces behind progress have broken and rewoven the texture of human life at work and at home repeatedly over decades.

Ccarlsson at 21:52, 20 October 2015

2015-10-20T21:52:19Z

Show changes

Ccarlsson at 21:11, 20 October 2015

2015-10-20T21:11:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:11, 20 October 2015
Line 189:		Line 189:
	Yellen, Samuel. 1936. ''American Labor Struggles''. Monad Press. New York: 1974<br>		Yellen, Samuel. 1936. ''American Labor Struggles''. Monad Press. New York: 1974<br>
	Zerzan, John. 1977. ''Creation and Its Enemies: The Revolt Against Work'', “Unionization in America” Rochester, NY: Mutualist Book<br></blockquote>		Zerzan, John. 1977. ''Creation and Its Enemies: The Revolt Against Work'', “Unionization in America” Rochester, NY: Mutualist Book<br></blockquote>

			<hr>

			[[Image:Reclaiming-san-francisco.jpg\|170px\|left]] This article originally appeared in [http://www.citylights.com/book/?GCOI=87286100049340 ''Reclaiming San Francisco: History Politics Culture'', a City Lights anthology] edited by James Brook, Chris Carlsson, & Nancy J. Peters (City Lights Books, San Francisco: 1998)

	[[category:Labor]][[category:ILWU]] [[category:Power and Money]] [[category:Redevelopment]] [[category:Dissent]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]] [[category:1960s]] [[category:1970s]] [[category:1934 General Strike]]		[[category:Labor]][[category:ILWU]] [[category:Power and Money]] [[category:Redevelopment]] [[category:Dissent]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]] [[category:1960s]] [[category:1970s]] [[category:1934 General Strike]]

Ccarlsson at 02:09, 20 October 2015

2015-10-20T02:09:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:09, 19 October 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''		''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''

	<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>~~:::~~—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job dispatching. His specialty is to intimidate the guys up in age. It’s a way of destroying memory. We don’t write our history. Those guys are it.''<br>—Hector Soromenho</blockquote>

	The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.		The strategies used since the [[1934 Big Strike\|1934 General Strike]] to overcome San Francisco’s working class have wrought profound changes in work, technology, and daily life. This process has been sold as “progress”—as in “you can’t stop it”—and has enjoyed explosive success on a global scale during the post-WWII growth of the world market. Progress conveniently masks changes in social arrangements, making them appear as “natural” results of technical and market rationality, rather than the self-serving moves of a powerful elite.
Line 125:		Line 125:
	Redesigning work to disconnect workers from their power was only part of the picture. After WWII, San Francisco’s leaders faced an urban landscape full of both physical and social obstacles. Whole neighborhoods had to go—community stability had become an obstacle to rapid economic growth. The story behind several decades of “urban redevelopment” in San Francisco reveals a second front in our local class war. “Progress” was as readily invoked to justify evicting thousands while bulldozing whole neighborhoods as it had been to dismantle decades of workers’ power on the job.		Redesigning work to disconnect workers from their power was only part of the picture. After WWII, San Francisco’s leaders faced an urban landscape full of both physical and social obstacles. Whole neighborhoods had to go—community stability had become an obstacle to rapid economic growth. The story behind several decades of “urban redevelopment” in San Francisco reveals a second front in our local class war. “Progress” was as readily invoked to justify evicting thousands while bulldozing whole neighborhoods as it had been to dismantle decades of workers’ power on the job.

	It is not accidental that the San Francisco neighborhoods most skilled in organizing, with the most active memory of how improvements were actually achieved, were the same neighborhoods that experienced the wrecking ball of redevelopment. Redevelopment targeted neighborhoods where relatively coherent subcultures within the working class flourished. (I speak of the predominantly [[Fillmore Redevelopment\|African American Western Addition]], the [[~~Old~~ Produce Market\|Italian produce district]], and the South of Market single-room-occupancy hotels that housed thousands of retired workers who had participated in the great upsurge of the 1930s.)		It is not accidental that the San Francisco neighborhoods most skilled in organizing, with the most active memory of how improvements were actually achieved, were the same neighborhoods that experienced the wrecking ball of redevelopment. Redevelopment targeted neighborhoods where relatively coherent subcultures within the working class flourished. (I speak of the predominantly [[Fillmore Redevelopment\|African American Western Addition]], the [[Produce Market\|Italian produce district]], and the South of Market single-room-occupancy hotels that housed thousands of retired workers who had participated in the great upsurge of the 1930s.)

	The wrecking ball first cleared the old Italian Produce Market to make way for the Golden Gateway apartments and the eastward thrust of the Financial District to the bay in the early 1960s. This project also led to the demolition of the old Alaska Fishermen’s Union building between Commercial, Clay, the Embarcadero, and Drumm. With its demise the waterfront workers lost a vital social center that had served them for decades (the ground floor had housed the longshoremen’s hiring hall, and several other maritime unions had offices there). Then the Geary Boulevard corridor, known in Redevelopment-ese as Western Addition A-1, cleared a two-block corridor westward from Cathedral Hill through the heavily populated Fillmore District. By mid-1967 the Western Addition A-2 plan had been made public and was well underway, removing over a thousand old Victorians in the Fillmore District and displacing over 10,000 African Americans in the process. Further redevelopment plans targeted the South of Market, Chinatown, and Mission Districts.		The wrecking ball first cleared the old Italian Produce Market to make way for the Golden Gateway apartments and the eastward thrust of the Financial District to the bay in the early 1960s. This project also led to the demolition of the old Alaska Fishermen’s Union building between Commercial, Clay, the Embarcadero, and Drumm. With its demise the waterfront workers lost a vital social center that had served them for decades (the ground floor had housed the longshoremen’s hiring hall, and several other maritime unions had offices there). Then the Geary Boulevard corridor, known in Redevelopment-ese as Western Addition A-1, cleared a two-block corridor westward from Cathedral Hill through the heavily populated Fillmore District. By mid-1967 the Western Addition A-2 plan had been made public and was well underway, removing over a thousand old Victorians in the Fillmore District and displacing over 10,000 African Americans in the process. Further redevelopment plans targeted the South of Market, Chinatown, and Mission Districts.

Ccarlsson at 02:06, 20 October 2015

2015-10-20T02:06:48Z

Show changes

Ccarlsson at 01:43, 20 October 2015

2015-10-20T01:43:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:43, 19 October 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Historical Essay</font></font> </font>'''

	''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''		''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''
Line 155:		Line 155:
	<font size=4>References</font>		<font size=4>References</font>

	Brecher, Jeremy. 1972. Strike! Boston: South End Press.		<blockquote>Brecher, Jeremy. 1972. ''Strike!'' Boston: South End Press.<br>
			California, State of, 1940. ''Handbook of California Labor Statistics'', Table 37: “Workers Involved and Man-Days Idle in Strikes, by Industry Group, California, 1927-1939” and Table 36: “Workers Involved and Man-Days Idle in Strikes, California, Los Angeles City and San Francisco Bay Area, 1927-1940”<br>
	California, State of, 1940. Handbook of California Labor Statistics, Table 37: “Workers Involved and Man-Days Idle in Strikes, by Industry Group, California, 1927-1939” and Table 36: “Workers Involved and Man-Days Idle in Strikes, California, Los Angeles City and San Francisco Bay Area, 1927-1940”		California, State of, 1955, ''Handbook of California Labor Statistics 1953-1954'', Table 54: “Number of Work Stoppages, Workers Involved, and Man-Days Idle, Major California Cities, 1941-1951”<br>
			Cobble, Dorothy. 1991. ''Dishing It Out: Waitresses and Their Unions in the Twentieth
	California, State of, 1955, Handbook of California Labor Statistics 1953-1954, Table 54: “Number of Work Stoppages, Workers Involved, and Man-Days Idle, Major California Cities, 1941-1951”		Century''. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.<br>
			Hartman, Chester. 1984. ''The Transformation of San Francisco'', New York: Rowman & Allanheld.<br>
	Cobble, Dorothy. 1991. Dishing It Out: Waitresses and Their Unions in the Twentieth		International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union, Information Dept. 1963. ''The
	Century. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.		ILWU Story''. San Francisco, CA.<br>
			Kazin, Michael. 1987. ''Barons of Labor: The San Francisco Building Trades and Union Power in the Progressive Era''. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.<br>
	Hartman, Chester. 1984. The Transformation of San Francisco, New York: Rowman & Allanheld.		Larrowe, Charles P. 1972. ''Harry Bridges: The Rise and Fall of Radical Labor in the United
			States''. New York: Lawrence Hill & Co.<br>
	International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union, Information Dept. 1963. The		Lens, Sidney. 1974. ''The Labor War'', New York: Anchor/Doubleday.<br>
	ILWU Story. San Francisco, CA.		Mills, Herb, 1976, “The San Francisco Waterfront: The Social Consequences of Industrial Modernization, Part One: ‘The Good Old Days’... and Part Two: ‘The Modern Longshore Operations’” reprinted from ''Urban Life''. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications: Beverly Hills<br>
			Mollenkopf, John H. 1983. ''The Contested City'', New Jersey: Princeton University Press.<br>
	Kazin, Michael. 1987. Barons of Labor: The San Francisco Building Trades and Union Power in the Progressive Era. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.		Nelson, Bruce. 1990. ''Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in
	Larrowe, Charles P. 1972. Harry Bridges: The Rise and Fall of Radical Labor in the United		the 1930s.'' Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.<br>
	States. New York: Lawrence Hill & Co.		Pacific Maritime Association. 1995. ''Annual Report'', San Francisco. <br>
			Quin, Mike. 1948. ''The Big Strike''. Olema, CA: Olema Books<br>
	Lens, Sidney. 1974. The Labor War New York: Anchor/Doubleday.		Resolution Film Center. 1974. “Redevelopment: A Marxist Analysis,” film, b&w, 95 mins.<br>
			Schwartz, Harvey, ed., July 20, 1995, ''The Dispatcher'', “The March Inland,” quoting Joe
	Mills, Herb, 1976, “The San Francisco Waterfront: The Social Consequences of Industrial Modernization, Part One: ‘The Good Old Days’... and Part Two: ‘The Modern Longshore Operations’” reprinted from Urban Life. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications: Beverly Hills		Lynch in Part IX of the ILWU Oral History Project<br>
			Schwartz, Harvey, ed., November 20, 1995, ''The Dispatcher'', “Rank and File Unionism in Action,” quoting Brother Hackett in Part XII of the ILWU Oral History Project<br>
	Mollenkopf, John H. 1983. The Contested City, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.		Selvin, David. 1967. ''Sky Full of Storm''. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. <br>
			Selvin, David. 1996. ''A Terrible Anger''. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press. <br>
	Nelson, Bruce. 1990. Workers on the Waterfront: Seamen, Longshoremen, and Unionism in		Weir, Stan. 1996. “Unions With Leaders Who Stay On The Job.” In ''“We Are All Leaders”: The Alternative Unionism of the Early 1930s''. Edited by Staughton Lynd. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.<br>
	the 1930s. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.		Weir, Stan. 1967. “USA—The Labor Revolt.” ''International Socialist Journal''. April and June 1967.<br>
			Yellen, Samuel. 1936. ''American Labor Struggles''. Monad Press. New York: 1974<br>
	Pacific Maritime Association. 1995. Annual Report, San Francisco.		Zerzan, John. 1977. ''Creation and Its Enemies: The Revolt Against Work'', “Unionization in America” Rochester, NY: Mutualist Book<br></blockquote>

	Quin, Mike. 1948. The Big Strike. Olema, CA: Olema Books

	Resolution Film Center. 1974. “Redevelopment: A Marxist Analysis,” film, b&w, 95 mins.

	Schwartz, Harvey, ed., July 20, 1995, The Dispatcher, “The March Inland,” quoting Joe
	Lynch in Part IX of the ILWU Oral History Project

	Schwartz, Harvey, ed., November 20, 1995, The Dispatcher, “Rank and File Unionism in Action,” quoting Brother Hackett in Part XII of the ILWU Oral History Project

	Selvin, David. 1967. Sky Full of Storm. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

	Selvin, David. 1996. A Terrible Anger. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

	Weir, Stan. 1996. “Unions With Leaders Who Stay On The Job.” In “We Are All Leaders”: The Alternative Unionism of the Early 1930s. Edited by Staughton Lynd. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

	Weir, Stan. 1967. “USA—The Labor Revolt.” International Socialist Journal. April and June 1967.

	Yellen, Samuel. 1936. American Labor Struggles. Monad Press. New York: 1974

	~~Zerzan, John. 1977. Creation~~ and ~~Its Enemies~~: ~~The Revolt Against Work, “Unionization in America” Rochester, NY~~: ~~Mutualist Book~~		[[category:Labor]][[category:ILWU]] [[category:Power and Money]] [[category:Redevelopment]] [[category:Dissent]] [[category:1930s]] [[category:1940s]] [[category:1950s]] [[category:1960s]] [[category:1970s]]

Ccarlsson: Created page with ' ''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''
The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job di...'

2015-10-20T01:35:17Z

Created page with ' ''by Chris Carlsson, 1998'' <blockquote>The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job di...'

Show changes

The Progress Club—1934 and Class Memory - Revision history

Ccarlsson at 03:26, 22 November 2021

Ccarlsson at 23:45, 6 July 2017

Ccarlsson at 05:30, 16 March 2016

Ccarlsson at 21:52, 20 October 2015

Ccarlsson at 21:11, 20 October 2015

Ccarlsson at 02:09, 20 October 2015

Ccarlsson at 02:06, 20 October 2015

Ccarlsson at 01:43, 20 October 2015

Ccarlsson: Created page with ' ''by Chris Carlsson, 1998'' The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job di...'

Ccarlsson: Created page with ' ''by Chris Carlsson, 1998''
The piecards [paid union officials] took the hiring hall away from us by putting goons like “Johnny Loudmouth” in control of job di...'