[Cliquez ici pour le texte en français]
In the first period, the United
Mine Workers of America (UMWA) emerged as the principal
spokesman on behalf of miners. Spontaneous efforts to strike at
Lethbridge, between 1887 and 1897, proved that miners could not
match the power of the companies without formal organization.
The Western Federation of Miners (WFM), based in Montana, made a
brief attempt to mobilize coal workers between 1899 and 1903,
but failed to win their allegiance when it was unable to satisfy
their pay demands. The UMWA seemed less controversial than the
WFM, which had a reputation for radicalism. The UMWA also had a
better record of success in the United States, where it already
had negotiated a series of favourable agreements for miners in
the coal industry. In the Canadian West, it formed District 18,
encompassing coal miners in Alberta and southeastern British
Columbia. Between 1903 and World War One, it waged a series of
struggles with management, many of which ended in strikes. These
confrontations became district-wide in scope after the companies
formed the Western Coal Operators' Association in 1906.1
Several key issues emerged
during these struggles. The major demand of workers related to
wages and pay levels. In the case of the skilled miners, this
question was complicated by the complexity of the contracts they
had signed at different mines. The rates varied from place to
place, depending on when they had been established, and were
frequently subject to differences of interpretation. The
question of union recognition was another source of conflict.
Companies in the Crowsnest Pass were generally willing to
acknowledge the right of the UMWA to exist, because of the
unstable financial state of the industry, but they sought to
minimize the union's influence, and to deal with workers on an
individual basis whenever they could. Meanwhile, the union
strove for miner solidarity and to prevent workers from
competing with each other for jobs or pay. The struggle came to
be expressed in terms of the preference for a `closed' or an
`open' shop. The UMWA sought a `closed' environment in which
all workers would be required to be union members. Management
preferred an `open shop' in which miners would be hired
regardless of union affiliation.2
Safety was a third issue, though
one less pressing to miners. The region's mines were among the
world's most dangerous, because of the prevalence of explosive
methane gas and coal dust. The danger of gas was particularly
serious in the mountains where it was compounded by the
challenges of working safely in steeply-sloping passages and
rooms. A series of major disasters marked the early years of
mining in the Crowsnest Pass: explosions killed 120 miners at
Coal Creek in 1902; 34 at Bellevue in 1910; 189 at Hillcrest, in
1914, and finally, 34 at Coal Creek again in 1917. The union
pushed for more safety regulations and better enforcement of
those already in effect, but the issue rarely became a leading
one. In spite of the danger, miners remained more concerned with
questions of income. Even in the Pass area, accidents seem to
have been regarded as unavoidable hazards of the occupation.3
Safer mines ultimately emerged after 1920, as companies and
miners became more familiar with regional geological conditions,
and as the provinces became proficient in enforcing safety
regulations.
The outcome of the miners'
struggles prior to World War One was compromise. There was a
slight upward movement in wages, but not enough to keep up with
the rising cost of living. The companies were inflexible on this
issue because of economic problems. There was some
acknowledgment of union influence. In 1905, the owners agreed to
a voluntary check off of union dues from the pay of individual
workers, but the UMWA was not successful in obtaining a
compulsory check off of dues from new miners, which would have,
in effect, forced them to become union members. In return for
their concessions, the companies were able to negotiate
restrictions on strike action. In a series of contracts between
1903 and 1911, a dispute settlement process was worked out,
outlawing spontaneous walk-outs while grievances went through a
formal resolution process. Management got further security in
the 1909 contract, which made workers responsible for
maintaining pits in the event of work stoppages. Miners agreed
to prevent flooding or gas accumulation, thus protecting the
works from long-term damage during strikes.4
During these years, the state
intervened repeatedly in labour relations. Its power was not
always exercised consistently. For example, the local
constabulary intervened during a strike at Fernie, on the
British Columbia side of the Pass, in 1903 in order to prevent
strikers from harassing company `scabs' hired to carry on
production. The North West Mounted Police, however, was more
sympathetic to labour. In the Lethbridge strike of 1906, the
force permitted the union some latitude in pressuring
strikebreakers, in order to encourage a settlement in which
neither side lost face.5
Because of the economic
importance of the coal industry, both provincial and federal
governments sought compromise to reduce unrest and maintain
production. The Liberal government of Alberta was particularly
conciliatory to miners after its election in 1905, seeking not
only labour peace, but electoral support in the coalfields. In
the years before World War One, it introduced several reforms
demanded by coal miners, such as the eight-hour day. The federal
government was also a leading player. Its main spokesman was
Mackenzie King, the nation's first Deputy Minister of Labour,
who intervened repeatedly in coal strikes on the grounds that
the industry was of national importance. His most famous
contribution was at Lethbridge in 1906, when he brought the two
sides to the table, with threats of holding them responsible for
a winter fuel crisis on the prairies. This experience directly
influenced the drafting of the Industrial Disputes Investigation
Act (IDIA), the federal government's most ambitious effort to
discourage labour conflict. Enacted in 1907, it proclaimed
certain key industries, including coal mining and railways, as
`public utilities' deserving the attention of the state. In
these industries, the two sides were prevented from initiating
work stoppages while a mandatory conciliation process was
underway. According to specialists on the subject, the IDIA was
not an effective tool in solving Western coal disputes, but its
existence reflected Ottawa's commitment to minimizing labour
unrest in the industry.
6
William N.T. Wylie, "Coal-Mining Landscapes:
Commemorating Coal Mining in Alberta and Southeastern British
Columbia," a report prepared for the Historic Sites and
Monuments Board of Canada, Parks Canada Agency, 2001.
See Also: The Coal
IndustryOverview, Rapid Expansion,
Domestic and Steam Coalfields,
1914-1947: The Struggling Industry,
Collapse and Rebirth,
Settlement of the West,
Issues and ChallengesOverview,
Entrepreneurship, Technology,
Underground Techniques,
Surface Technology,
Surface Mining,
Social Impacts,
Unions,
1882-1913: Unionization and Early Gains,
1914-1920: Revolutionary Movement,
1921-1950s: Labour Unrest and
Setbacks, Mining Companies, People of
the Coal Mines,
The Middle Class,
Miners and Local
Government,
Politics and Economics ,
Mineral
Rights,
Health and Safety-HistoricOverview,
The State and
Labour Relations,
The State and
Development after 1918.
|