Some reasons for the lack of a successful union movement in the South
Perkel explains the difficulties of organizing southern workers. Southern mill towns were isolated places dominated by paternalistic mill owners who reinforced a belief in authority. On the job, mill workers performed repetitive tasks under close supervision. These and other factors meant that southern mill workers had no foundation for collective action. When their frustrations peaked, they expressed them through spasms of violence but were unable to sustain a successful protest.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with George Perkel, May 27, 1986. Interview H-0281. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
The other broad area is organization of workers. The Union, throughout
its history, was in an organizing stage, because, unlike most of the
other major unions, we did not succeed, in an early period, in
organizing the bulk of the industry. We never organized more
than—well, in the North, we organized the bulk of the
industry, fifty, sixty, seventy percent. But, during the period from the
'20s to the '50s, there was a mass movement, from
North to South, of the industry. And, so, by the 1950s, ninety percent
of the industry was located in the South. So, while we were
substantially organized in the North, that represented less
than ten percent of the industry. And our efforts in the
South were generally not successful. We organized, at best, between
fifteen and twenty percent of the Southern textile workers, and usually
a good deal less than that.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
Why do you attribute such a low percentage?
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
Well, that's a long answer, and, if you like, I can spend
several minutes discussing that.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
I don't mind, if you don't mind.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
OK. In order to appreciate our difficulties in organizing Southern
textile workers, I think you have to concern yourself with the
characteristics of the various people who played a part in that process.
And, we'll start with the workers. First, in talking about
worker characteristics, you have to understand something about the
culture of mill towns. Most of the textile workers historically have
lived in very small communities or rural areas, generally in mill
villages, where the employer—until the '40s, at
least—the employer owned the homes, he owned the utilities,
he dominated the churches and schools and all the other local
institutions. The predominant cultural milieu was one of strong
paternalism on the part of the employer being the powerful, dominant
interest, and the employees having a strong sense of inferiority, both
to the employer and to the community at large. The
people who lived in the mill villages were regarded as the bottom social
stratum in the environment. The people in the towns nearby looked down
on them and wouldn't socialize with them.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
We've interviewed some people that really, I think, express
that—
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
So you're familiar with that. I won't elaborate on
it. By the way, Dale Newman wrote a good piece in Labor
History in '78, which you may have seen.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
No, I haven't.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
Well, I recommend you look at it.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
N-E-W-M-A-N?
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
N-E-W-M-A-N. Labor History in 1978.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
OK, I'll take a look at it.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
Which is a field study, including much interviewing, which I think
you'll find interesting. It emphasizes the parochial nature
of the communities, the attitudes that workers had, living in the rural
isolation that they did. The traditional nature of their attitudes,
their acceptance of the hierarchy above them, the
importance of religion in developing attitudes toward acceptance of life
as it is, rather than doing something about it. And, in general,
creating a strongly dependant type of personality among the employees of
textile mills. The relatively few people who were able to overcome all
of these strong tendencies driving them into dependancy tended to leave
rather than try to improve things where they were.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
Well, certainly, there's lots of cases of times when workers
did try to organize and just didn't get anywhere. So I guess
some of that was kind of realistic on their part.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
That's true, but the type of activities that historically
textile workers engaged in tended to be the kind of explosion of
hostility at their terrible plight rather than a sustained activity to
establish a continuing organization.
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
That's an interesting distinction.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
Yes, well, if you look at the various strikes that took place in the
South in the '20s, you see that there tends to be strong
protest feeling, strong and violent activity, that gets dissipated after
a short time because the people lacked a sustained base or basis for
sustained organization. They could get angry and explode, but that
didn't generally lead to a sustained
organization.
Now another series of factors that affected worker characteristics, more
or less in the same direction, of producing downtrodden, inactive
people, was the nature of the work itself in the textile mill. Have you
seen Blauner's Alienation and Freedom?
[Robert Blauner, Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker
and His Industry (Chicago: 1964)]
- PATRICIA RAUB:
-
I've taken a look at it, yes.
- GEORGE PERKEL:
-
Well, the chapter on the textile industry is very good, and it will give
you details on how the work is organized and what effect it has on the
psychology of the people who were engaged in it. The control of their
lives by the machine, and the close supervision by the foremen, or what
they called overseers, the routine nature of the work and its repetitive
character, the lack of autonomy that people have on the job, where
everything is controlled for them and they're told what to
do, the insecurity that they felt because of the frequent layoffs, the
ups and downs in the textile cycle, causing frequent layoffs of people
and low wages, which resulted in a very low standard of living, an
insecure standard of living. The occupational structure being very
compressed—there are very few opportunities for advancement
to more skilled jobs; there are very few skilled jobs in the textile
mill. So, all of these conditions tended to
reinforce the conditions in the cultural and social environment, to push
people down, to give them no sense of their own capabilities. They were
real cogs in a machine. So, all of these tended to create people who,
while they did protest and revolt, on occasion, as I say, they lacked
the feeling of their own power or potential power. They were so
downbeaten, beaten down by their circumstances that they tended not to
be able to sustain, or generate, leadership to lift themselves out of
their terrible conditions.
Still another factor that has to be given consideration in dealing with
workers in the textile industry is the unusually large proportion of the
work force that is female. The type of work and the type of situation
that prevails in textile communities is to take advantage of the
availability of young women and employ them in routine, nonskilled
tasks. And more than forty percent of the work force in textiles has
historically been female. Females, for a number of historical reasons,
have been harder to organize and have tended not to be as active in
their own behalf as men, in the industrial situation. They tend to feel,
or have tended to feel, that work was not their dominant concern, they
were housekeepers, housewives, and mothers as well as workers and rather
than devote themselves, as men might, who are concerned with their job
as their main source of livelihood, women have tended not to be active
in labor organizations.
Now, of course, all of these considerations that I've just
been discussing have been changing over time.
Particularly in the more recent period. Yet, still today, the dominant
cultural and work-related characteristics in textiles are the ones that
I've mentioned. There isn't quite the degree of
social isolation that existed when the mills owned the homes. Now
they've been sold to people. But, still, there is the strong
sense of inferiority, compared to the people who live outside the towns,
outside the mill towns. And the type of work, even with all the
technological change that has occurred, the type of work still is
predominantly semi-automatic, unskilled, where there's very
little autonomy of the worker and the worker tends to be a slave of the
machine.