Unfortunately, Andrew Carnegie’s Homestead Steel Mill suffered because of the lack of railroad business. Carnegie went from having pennies to being one of the richest people because of the steel industry. Homestead had terrible working conditions: no indoor plumbing and …show more content…
people froze during winter and were over heated in the summer (Homestead Strike Documentary). Homestead came with a union which wasn't the case for Carnegie’s other businesses, so he wanted to get out of it. Skilled workers created a partnership with non-skilled workers to fight against Carnegie. Carnegie believed he had no responsibility to individual workers. The labor contract was about to expire which is when Carnegie made his move to destroy the union. Carnegie’s partner Henry Clay Frick went against the union and cut wages. Frick’s plan for workers to quit the union and negotiate with them took an unexpected turn and the workers went on strike. This was not a civil strike; the workers were armed, so in return Frick hired the Pinkerton Private Militia Organization of armed volunteers. Union workers met the Pinkerton’s at the dock to keep them from taking their jobs. A shot was fired, no one knows which side, which started the fight (Homestead Strike Documentary). Seven workers and three guards died, while hundreds were badly injured. Workers of all ethnicity were killed which brought skilled and unskilled workers together to fight against Pinkerton’s (Homestead Strike Documentary). After 12 hours of battle the fight came to an end. The union thought they won, but the people were divided. The public viewed the workers as lawless rioters and after an attempt to kill Frick it gave him a heroic image. The mill was secured and 2700 non-union workers took the jobs. Strikers gave in to be able to feed their families especially their kids. The skilled workers in leadership with the union were not allowed back to work at the Homestead. Carnegie and Frick said they taught their employees a lesson they will never forget. Wages were reduced by half and the whole town was affected. Homestead changed the relationship of the working class and management.
Wal-Mart, like Homestead, is against labor unions.
There are two activist campaigns: Working Families for Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Watch. Working Families for Wal-Mart frames supporters as average families pursuing the American Dream while opponents such as Wal-Mart Watch are portrayed as out-of-touch elitists (Massengill,2013, 49). In comparison to the Homestead Mill, Wal-Mart is a huge corporation with thousands of employees. The union workers would relate to people who are a part of Wal-Mart Watch, who portray the corporation as “driving local stores out of business, pressuring local town officials or encouraging workers to join state health rolls, Wal-Mart has a negative impact on local communities” (Massengill, 2013, 60). On the other hand I view workers as having the idea of Working Families for Wal-Mart who focus on the positives of what Wal-Mart does for average families. “There are two kinds of Americans- those who work for a living and those who tax for a living. Wal-Mart is for those who work for a living” (Massengill, 2013, 51). Wal-Mart Watch used a more civilized form of protesting than union workers during the Homestead Strike. “WMW had used paid picketers to protest a local Wal-Mart- and paid them less than the average wages of the Wal-Mart workers employed inside” (Massengill, 2013, 55). This just showed how hyprotcritical WMW is and how they are concerned with their own interest and not the publics. People against Wal-Mart say the business is taking out other local businesses, but really it is only there to benefit the community by providing affordable costs. Wal-Mart also gives back to the local community by donating products or allowing teams or clubs to fundraise outside the store (Massengill, 2013, 59). “Unions only help union members and thats it,” but Wal-Mart is helping millions of people (Massengill, 2013, 55). The difference between the Homestead strike and Wal-Mart wars is today we create imagined societies. These societies include: “those
who are unfairly made responsible for the medical care of uninsured workers and those depended, uninsured workers themselves” (Massengill, 2013, 58). Corporations are held to a high standard which is why WMW thinks Wal-Mart should be apart of the union, to make sure workers aren't poorly compensated. However, Wal-Mart creates an emotional appeal and appears as a physical attribution. WFWM mentioned, “Wal-Mart pours its heart out for them” (Massengill, 2013, 64). On the other hand, WMW makes a point of Wal-Marts corporate misspending the communities tax dollars (Massengill, 2013, 76). In Homestead it mentioned bad working conditions and Carnegie doesn't want a relationship with workers. With Wal-Mart being a huge corporation I doubt CEO, Carl Douglas Macmillan has a personal relationship with most employees; however, the employees are still taken care of. Peoples perspective shift depending on their background, “if my individual grocery bill is significantly lower because of Wal-Mart’s low prices, it becomes difficult to imagine how other people or aspects of society could be suffering in order to bring those savings to me and my household” (Massengill, 2013, 76). I do not think the attitudes about organized labors has changed dramatically since the early 1900s. There are always people who are going to agree and disagree with what Wal-Mart represents for example. I think people still view working class as not reaching the American Dream because the American Dream has become an idea of being successful based on money. The example used after the documentary of seeing someone with dirty overalls and hands are less morally valued and having worked their way to the American Dream. In a Town Hall article by, John Hawkins, states five reasons unions are bad: severely damaging industries, ruining public eduction, cause billions of tax dollars, fundamentally anti-democratic, and government unions are bankrupting cities and states. People today view unions the same way Carnegie and Frick did in the nineteenth century.