Workers' Gains

26f69fadcc074661452fa3ae57cd070a.jpg

A photo of San Antonio garment workers in jail during a 1936 general strike.

A third benefit that the ILGWU could have provided workers was better wages, hours, and conditions guaranteed by union contracts businesses. The San Antonio local held multiple strikes, and some led to negotiations and contracts with business owners that guaranteed hours and wages for union workers. Holding strikes was difficult for workers, who faced police harassment, being blacklisted by employers, and being arrested like those in this picture. Also, in some strikes the white workers sided with the employers against their Mexican American colleagues (Interview with Mrs. Myrle Zappone). The International was able to help with strikes through institutional support, including by paying the organizers and paying for lawyers and bail money for strikers who were arrested. Most other unions in San Antonio didn’t have this institutional support, and as Taylor said, “no union can survive or do anything on the wages of the Mexican workers” because they were paid so poorly (Interview with Miss Rebecca Taylor, October 6, 1936). The support from the International helped the ILGWU have more successes than the average union.

pmc 1.jpg

A pamphlet from the ILGWU Educational Department titled "Progressives Must Choose, which argues for the benefits of unions and union education to society. Click to see full pamphlet. 

Even though the ILGWU had some successful strikes, the contracts that they got were not always very helpful for workers. In some cases, the ILGWU was accused of settling for poor benefits to make a contract, such as a contract with the Juvenile and Texas Infant Dress Company that set a wage below minimum wage (McCaffrey 174). The ILGWU made these “sweetheart deals” in part because of their strategy of appealing to business owners. In an interview in 1936, San Antonio organizer Myrle Zappone said that the ILGWU tried to sell itself to manufacturers by saying that the ILGWU would improve the workers, run a more efficient plant and stabilize the labor supply for the factory (Interview with Mrs. Zappone). The educational department was involved in this approach because one goal of the local classes and on skills and unionism was to make better workers. The International also tried to appeal to businesses and the general public with publications, like this pamphlet, which argues that union education would “prepare the workers for citizenship in a new industrial democracy” and tried to convince society leaders like business owners that union organization is a better choice for them than unhappy workers. Union President Dubinsky argued that “everything we do to help our employers will help immeasurably in improving the workers’ standards”, but the contracts in San Antonio show that that is not always the case (Press and Publicity Department, 14). The San Antonio garment workers benefitted from the institutional support that the International provided for strikes, but only to the extent that the ILGWU didn't sacrafice their business-friendly strategy.