Full text of Work Stoppages in Contract Construction, 1962-73 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1847

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Work Stoppages
in Contract
Construction, 1962-73




Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

U n ite d S t a t e s . Bureau o f Labor S t a t i s t i c s .
Work sto p p ag es in c o n tr a c t c o n s tr u c tio n .
(Bu l l e t i n - Bureau o f Labor S t a t i s t i c s ; 18^7)
"U pdates and expands in scope Bureau o f Labor S t a t i s ­
t i c s R eport 3U6 , Work sto p p ag es in c o n tr a c t c o n s tr u c tio n ,
I 9I+6 - 66 ."
B ib lio g ra p h y : p .
S u p t. o f D ocs, n o .: L 2 .3:18^7
1 . S tr ik e s and lo c k o u ts —C o n s tru c tio n w o rk e rs—U n it­
ed S t a t e s . 2 . C o lle c tiv e b a rg a in in g —C o n stru c tio n
in d u s tr y —U n ite d S t a t e s . I . S o d er, J o n . I I . T i t l e .
I I I . S e r ie s : U n ite d S t a t e s . Bureau o f Labor S t a t i s ­
t i c s . B u lle tin ; 18^7.




Work Stoppages
in Contract
Construction, 1962-73
U.S. Department of Labor
John T. Dunlop, Secretary
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Julius Shiskin, Commissioner
1975
Bulletin 1'8I4i7

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, GPO Bookstores, or
BLS Regional Offices listed on inside back cover. Price $1.50
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents




Stock Number 029-001-01788-0
Catalog Number L 2.3:1847




Preface
This bulletin provides a detailed account of work stoppages in the contract
construction industry since 1962. It updates and expands in scope Bureau of Labor
Statistics Report 346, Work Stoppages in Contract Construction, 1946-66. While some
of the information provided in the tables included in this bulletin has been published in
the BLS annual Analysis o f Work Stoppages, much of the material is based on
previously unpublished data.
The definition of this major industry group conforms to classifications 15, 16, and
17, in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1967 edition.
This bulletin was prepared in the Bureau’s Division of Industrial Relations by Jon
Soder under the direction of Albert A. Belman. Technical assistance was provided by
James T. Hall, Jr., and William M. Pugh.







Chapters:
I. Review of the fin d in g s..........................................................................................................................................
Introduction ........................................................................................
Interindustry comparisons .............................................................................................................................
Trends in work stoppages................................................................................................................................
Major issu e s.......................................................................................................................................................
II.

Background on the construction i n d u s tr y .........................................................................................................
Nature of the industry ...................................................................................................................................
Conditions of employment:
Seasonality .................................................................................................................................................
Hazardous c o n d itio n s ................................................................................................................................

1
1
1
2
3
5
5
7

8

III.

Collective bargaining in the construction in d u s try ....................... r .................................................................. 9
The bargaining environment .......................................................................................................................... 9
Structual changes affecting bargaining.........................................................................................................10
The bargaining fram ew ork............................................................................................................................ 10
National agreem ents...................................................................................................................................... 11
Jurisdictional d isp u te s...................................................................................................................................11

IV.

Settlement m a c h in e ry .............................................................................................................................................13
New national b o a r d ............................................................................................................ ; . ; ...................14
Electrical industry p l a n ............................................................................................................
15
M ediation.......................................................
15
Settlement ..........................................................................................................................................................17
Procedures for handling unsettled issues .........................................................................................................17

V.

Analysis of work stoppages .................................................................................................................................. 20
Trends in strike activity ...................................................................................................................................20
1971: The Turning p o i n t .................................................................................................................................. 22
Worker involvement in strikes .........................................................................................................................23
Major s trik e s.........................................................................................................................
25
Duration .............................................................................................................................................................27
Contract s t a t u s ...................................................................................................................................................29
Contract term stoppages............................................................................................................................... 29
Renegotiation stoppages............................................................................................................................... 31
Union recognition stoppages ..................................................................................................................... 31
Major issu e s......................................................................................................................................................... 31
Economic is s u e s ............................................................................................................................................ 31
Jurisdictional d isp u te s.................................................................................................................................. 32
Union se c u rity ............................................................................................................................................... 34
Working conditions ......................................................................................................................................34




Stoppages by location ......................................................................................................................................34
States ............................................................................................................................................................. 35
Metropolitan a r e a s ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Tables:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

Chart 1.

Workers involved in strikes as a percent of industry employment,
selected industries, 1962-73..............................................................................................................................
Selected economic statistics, 1962-73..............................................................................................................
Extent to which employment in August exceeded that in February,
selected years, 1960-73......................................................................................................................................
Government mediation by contract status, selectedyears, 1965-72..............................................................
Settlement of construction work stoppages by contract status,
1969-72................................................................................................................................................................
Percentage of contract term stoppages by procedure for handling
unsettled issues, 1965-72...................................................................................................................................
Quarterly days of idleness and annual rate of change,1967-72......................................................................
Work stoppages in contract construction by mean and median days
duration, 1962-73............................................................. .................................................................................
Percent of change in monthly days of idleness, 1969-72...............................................................................
Work stoppages in contract construction by size and duration,
1965-72................................................................................................................................................................
Average number of workers involved per stoppages for selected
size groups, 1965-72...........................................................................................................................................
Work stoppages in contract construction by duration and major
issue, selected years, 1965-72............................................................................................................................
Percent of idleness by major issue group, 1962-73.........................................................................................
Work stoppages in contract construction by major issue group,
1962-73................................................................................................................................................................
Selected States ranked by value of private, nonresidential
construction, and by level of idleness, 1962-71..............................................................................................

2

6
7
16
18
19
20
21
21
24
25
28
32
33
36

Mean proportion of stoppages and idleness by contract status for all industry
and construction, 1962-71.................................................................................................................................. 30

Appendixes:
A. Tables:
Work stoppages:
A-l. In contract construction, 1946-73...................................................................................
A-2. By month, 1962-72.............................................................................................................
A-3. Involving 10,000 workers or more, 1962-73...................................................................
A 4. By size, 1965-72..................................................................................................................
A-5. By duration, 1965-72..........................................................................................................
A-6 . By contract status, 1962-73...............................................................................................
A-7. By contract status and major issue, 1965-72............................
A-8 . By major issue, 1962-73.....................................................................................................
A-9. By States, 1946-72..............................................................................................................
A-10. By large metropolitan areas, 1962-72...............................................................................
A -ll. By mediation, 1965-72.......................................................................................................




39
40
42
57
58
59
60
63
65
74
77

B.
C.

A-12. By settlement, 1965-72...................................................................................................... 78
A-13. By procedure for resolving unsettled issues, 1965-72..................................................... 79
A-14. By selected industries,1962-73............................................................................................. 80
Scope, definitions, and methods ......................................................................................................................81
Selected bibliography......................................................................................................................................... 83







Chapter I. Review of the Findings
Introduction

This bulletin provides a quantitative measure of work
stoppages in contract construction, one of the Nation’s
largest industries. At the same time, the bulletin presents
an overview of the institutional framework and working
environment which influences the substance of collective
bargaining between the building trades unions and
contractor associations. Three basic measures are em­
ployed to indicate the direction and intensity of labor
disputes. The first of these, the number of work
stoppages, provides a measure of the frequency of
disputes. Next, the severity of such actions are measured
by the number of workers involved. Finally, the resul­
tant man-days of idleness acts as a direct measure of the
interruption of services resulting from these stoppages.1
Primary work stoppage data for the 11-year period
1962 to 1972 are included in this report. Limited data
for 1973 have been included in a number of the series.
Data extending back to 1962, however, are provided
only where information has been previously tabulated
for existing Bureau of Labor Statistics work stoppage
bulletins.1
2 Many of the tables in this report provide data
which were not available prior to 1965.
For purposes o f this analysis, 1967-71 was selected as
the basic reference period. This 5-year period was chosen
because it is viewed as being especially indicative of the
favorable economic conditions which prevailed immedi­
ately before and during the noticeable surge in strike
activity that commenced in 1968. Where a broader scope
is warranted, the 10-year period 1962 to 1971 is used as
a reference period.
Some significant findings have emerged from the
data. The industry has experienced a substantial share of
the Nation’s strike activity. For example, while only 4
percent of the Nation’s civilian labor force were em­
ployed by the construction industry between 1962 and
1971, these workers accounted for an average of almost
17 percent of all striking employees in the United
1 See appendix B for a discussion of the scope and definition
of these measures of strike activity, as well as limitations on their
use and interpretation.
2 See Work Stoppages in Contract Construction, 1946-66,
Rept. 346 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1967).



States.3 Moreover, the industry was responsible for
about one-fifth of all strikes and nearly 19 percent of
total strike idleness during the 10 year period.
These proportions suggest that construction tends to
be a relatively strike-prone industry. According to the
Bureau’s standard measurement of idleness as a percent
of total working time in the construction industry, as
shown in appendix table A-l, the average estimated
amount of time not worked due to strike activity
between 1962 and 1971 was eight-tenths of 1 percent.
This figure needs cautious interpretation. It is based
upon the assumption of a “standard year” of 255
working days.4 But the evidence cited in chapter III
indicates that the average construction worker is em­
ployed only 200 days in a typical year. The difference is
attributed largely to the seasonal nature of the industry.
Hence, the formula used to estimate days of idleness as a
percent of estimated total working time in table A-l
understates the proportion of idleness in the industry .5
Interindustry comparisons

In terms of absolute man-days of idleness, the
construction industry ranked first during the 1962-71
decade, having an annual average of 6.6 million man-days
of idleness. Construction was followed by the trans­
portation equipment industry with 4.2 million mandays. On the other hand, the building industry might be
3This estimate o f the construction industry’s share of the
civilian labor force includes both union and nonunion em­
ployees. According to the Bureau’s biannual estimates, there
were almost 2.8 million union members in the industry in 1972.
Since unions often report retired and unemployed members as
part of the active membership, it is difficult to accurately
estimate union labor’s share of the employed labor force.
4Due to the presence o f leap years and annual variation in
the number o f observed holidays, the number of working days
varies from year to year. Over the last decade, American workers
have averaged 255.1 annual days worked.
5Estimated working time is computed by multiplying the
average employment (or available jobs) for the year by the
number of days typically worked by most employed workers
during that year. When annual idleness in man-days is divided by
the estimated working time and the result multiplied by 100, the
proportion of idleness to working time is determined.

expected to have a large absolute amount of idleness,
simply because of the size of its work force. Relatively
speaking, construction lags behind both the mining
industry and the transportation equipment industry in
terms of strike intensity. While nearly one-quarter of all
miners and over 12 percent of the employees of
transportation equipment manufacturers took part in
work stoppages between 1962 and 1971, only 11.3
percent of construction workers were involved in work
stoppages over the same decade. Nearly half of all miners
struck during 1972 and 1973; the proportion of striking
transportation equipment workers declined, and there
was a slight increase in the proportion of construction
workers who were strike participants. Table 1 presents
the number of workers involved in strikes as a percent of
employment in four selected industries. It should be
noted that the mining industry has experienced a large
number of small stoppages in recent years with some
workers striking more than once.
Even though the building industry ranked third in the
relative number of striking workers during the 1962-71
period, it had a strike participation rate nearly double
that in manufacturing, almost half again as many as in
primary metals, and more than three times that of the
all-industry average.6
Trends in work stoppages

A relatively steady growth in construction idleness
began in 1964 and, aside from a slight dip in 1967,

6 Such a “strike participation rate” is subject to one
important limitation. If a worker is involved in more than one
strike during the year, he is counted more than once. Whenever
this occurs, the number of workers involved is increased relative
to total employment, thus causing a disproportionate increase in
the strike participation rate.
Table 1.

continued through the end of the decade. Beginning in
January 1971, a noticeable decline in strike intensity was
recorded. Due to the combined effects of high unem­
ployment, growing nonunion competition, and the wage
stabilization program in construction, the frequency of
work stoppages in 1971 was reduced to its lowest level
in a decade. In 1972, there was only a modest reduction
in the number of strikes, partly due to an increase in
contract expirations that year. The number of strikers
fell by almost one-quarter during 1973 and idleness
decreased by almost one-half.
The timing of contract expirations determines the
monthly pattern of construction strikes. Since the bulk
of agreements expire during the second quarter of the
year, idleness tends to peak in May and June. Almost
half of the industry’s strike idleness occurs during these
two months.
Typically, construction strikes do not involve many
workers. The majority, in fact, involve less than 100
employees, because more than one-third of all strikes
are jurisdictional disputes involving a single craft union
only, usually at a single site. Another third involve more
than 100, but less than 500 workers. Strikes of 500
workers or more occur infrequently and comprise only
about 14 percent of all stoppages.
Ordinarily, construction strikes do not last very long.
Between 1965 and 1972, half of them continued for less
than a week and a half. The use of averages is
inappropriate when attempting to describe strike dura­
tion because of the wide variation in the length of
strikes. The mean duration between 1965 and 1972 was
15.4 days, for example, while the median was only 8
days. This difference in “average” duration indicates
that one-half of all strikes remained unsettled for a
long period. A better measure of duration is shown in
table A-l in the column headed “Man-days idle per

Workers involved in strikes as a percent of industry employment, selected industries, 1962-73
Year

Industry
1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

All industries.......................................................

2.2

1.7

2.8

2.5

3.1

4.4

Manufacturing.......................................................................
Primary metals .....................................................................
M ining.....................................................................................
Transportation equipment ...............................................
Contract construction.........................................................

3.8
7.3
8.0
5.3
9.8

3.3
4.7
7.2
4.4
7.0

5.8
7.1
13.2
24.1
8.1

5.1
6.8
11.3
11.3
9.5

4.8
7.3
15.3
7.8
13.9

6.9
8.9
16.6
17.8
9.5

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

All industries.......................................................

3.9

3.5

4.7

4.6

2.3

3.0

Manufacturing.......................................................................
Primary metals .....................................................................
M ining.....................................................................................
Transportation equipment ................................................
Contract construction.........................................................

6.0
10.4
35.1
12.5
11.1

6.5
7.8
35.6
12.8
12.6

5.8
6.2
33.9
18.0
18.4

4.7
8.2
63.7
6.9
13.2

3.4
4.3
44.0
6.7
12.9

4.9
4.3
48.2
11.1
10.1




to disagreement over wage and benefit changes from
1962-1971. This is true even though such disputes make
up somewhat over one-third of all strikes. That so few
stoppages are responsible for so much idleness attests to
the lengthy duration of economic strikes.
Jurisdictional strikes are frequent but brief. They
involved relatively few workers (one-tenth of all strikers)
between 1962 and 1971 and fewer man-days of idlenea
(3.6 percent of all idleness). They constituted more than
one-third of all strikes in construction, but these
stoppages have become more common in recent years,
possibly due to the increasing use of new materials and
technology which has blurred traditional craft lines and
intensified the problem of work assignments.
When classified by amount of idleness, most of the
Nation’s strike activity was limited to just a few States
during the 10-year period. For example, more than
one-third of the Nation’s construction idleness occurred
in California, Missouri, and Michigan. Another one-third
of the strikes occurred in seven additional States-Ohio,
New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Illinois, Washington,
and Louisiana. The fact that some less populous States
such as Missouri and Louisiana rank so high on the
listing can usually be traced to one or two record
breaking strikes that disproportionately raised that
particular State to near the top of the ranking.
While the New York metropolitan area ranked second
after Pittsburgh in the number of stoppages, it ranked
ninth in total idleness largely due to its relatively
effective homebred methods of resolving contract
expiration disputes. As with the States, metropolitan
area idleness is heavily concentrated. The top four areas
bore more than one-fifth of all big area idleness.
Of those strikes qualifying for Government mediatory
assistance, well over half were settled without the help
of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
Federal mediators did provide assistance in over onefifth of building industry disputes, however, while State,
and sometimes local Government mediators helped settle
about 3 percent of these disputes. Only 1.5 percent of
all mediated strikes were handled privately.
Private settlement machinery, such as the new Impar­
tial Jurisdictional Disputes Board (formerly the National
Joint Board), already exists to establish jurisdictional
awards. Government mediation agencies are seldom
called to help settle work assignment disputes, although
Major issues
some of these disputes are handled by the National
Labor Relations Board.
Economic issues rank far above jurisdictional disputes
While major strikes, those involving 10,000 workers
as a cause of serious and lengthy strikes. More than
or
more, are rare, accounting for only 1 percent of all
four-fifths of all strike-related idleness can be attributed
stoppages, these conflicts involve nearly 40 percent of all
7
A reliable count of total contract expirations resulting in a strike participants. Moreover, such disputes became
increasingly severe during the 1962-71 period. The
strike is not available before 1970.
worker involved.” This statistic indicates simply the
number of days the “average” employee spent on strike
in a given year. By this measure, the “average” striker
was away from his job for 16.9 days over the decade
1962-71. Average idleness ranged from 14.6 days per
worker involved in 1962, to 24.5 days in 1970. Idleness
hen declined abruptly to 15.2 days in 1971 as the wage
itabilization program reduced the probable advantage a
union or a contractor association might gain from
prolonging a dispute. Strike duration rose to 17.3 days
in 1972, and then dropped again to 10.0 days per
worker in 1973, the lowest in a decade.
To evaluate the true significance of an industrial
dispute, it is necessary to group work stoppages by the
point at which they occur in the life of the collective
bargaining agreement. Thus, a walkout called while the
contract is being negotiated or renegotiated indicates
that the parties are unable to agree to a proposed change
in one or more of the numerous provisions contained in
the agreement. If, on the other hand, one craft union on
the jobsite decides to withhold its services while the
contract is still in effect, this implies that a disagreement
has arisen over job assignments, working conditions or,
perhaps, safety considerations. Worker dissatisfaction
over economic issues is probably best revealed by the
pattern of renegotiation disputes. It is here that accords
on wages and working conditions are hammered out.
Largely as a result of wage stabilization measures,
prompted by the Construction Industry Stabilization
Committee, less than one out of seven contract expira­
tions were followed by a strike in 1972. This was a
significant improvement over the record in 1970, before
the stabilization program, when more than one out of
three expirations resulted in a strike .7 As a proportion
of all strikes, renegotiation stoppages vary with the state
of economic conditions in the industry. In 1967, at the
beginning of a sizable expansion in construction activity,
an estimated 69 percent of all workers who struck did so
because of a failure to agree on a new contract. Over the
next 3 years, this proportion continued to rise until, in
1970, 88 percent chose to do so. Undoubtedly, during
this period construction workers correctly perceived that
they could achieve substantial wage increases by main­
taining a resolute bargaining stance.




number of these large scale stoppages has doubled over
the last 8 years. Since 1967, however, the industry has
experienced a three-fold increase in the number of
workers participating in major strikes and between 1967
and 1973 almost 1,218,000 workers were so involved.
This upturn was probably influenced by the favorable
economic conditions of the period which encouraged
and rewarded persistent strike behavior and the fact that
the industry has experienced a slow, but steady, trend
toward the formation of larger bargaining units. In
Chicago and New York, for example, the practice of
area-wide bargaining has meant that more workers are
likely to become involved in any given dispute. In




addition, the construction labor force has been increas­
ing: In fact, the number of jobs available to construction
workers has risen about 15 percent between 1962 and
1971. There has been a smaller increase in the number of
union members in the industry over the same period, as
shown in table 1.
During the 1962-71 decade, a formal settlement
terminated 9 out of 10 construction work stoppages
with the parties either reaching complete agreement on
all issues or, in some cases, agreeing to establish a
procedure, usually arbitration, to resolve remaining
issues. In less than one-tenth of all stoppages, no
settlement is reached and the workers return to work.

Chapter II. Background on the Construction Industry
In terms of employment and production, the contract
construction industry was a major contributor to the
Nation’s economy in 1973. It provided more than 3.0
million jobs for construction workers while contributing
an estimated $135.6 billion to the Nation’s Gross
National Product,8 or nearly 11 percent of GNP in
1973.9 Despite its imposing national stature, the indus­
try’s organizational structure as well as its collective
bargaining framework display little of the cohesiveness
and integration which characterize other large industries.
In the process of fulfilling public and private demand
for highways, buildings, waterways, residential homes,
and other construction projects, the building industry
acts as a major purchaser of goods and supplies from
many other primary industries. Among these are pro­
ducers of lumber and wood products; steel, aluminum,
and copper; sand, building stone, and gravel; earthmoving machinery, and other power equipment; paints and
allied products; and heating and plumbing equipment, to
name a few.
This major dependence on other industries means
that a prolonged interruption in construction activity
can result in serious economic dislocations throughout
the strike area, particularly when thousands of workers
are involved.10 This was the case in the 1970 building
trades work stoppage in Kansas City when 27,000
workers were idled for 197 days.
Nature of the industry

Contract construction is unlike other sizeable busi8Employment and Earnings (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
March 1974), and Construction Review (U.S. Department of
Commerce, February 1974).
9The Bureau of the Census’ definition of the “value o f new
construction put in place” excludes broker’s sales commissions
on the transfer of dwelling ownership as well as any below
ground construction not directly connected to human occupa­
tion such as oil well drilling and exploration-both of which are
counted in the national product accounts as “total structures.”
Thus the true GNP figure will be slightly larger than the figure
cited here. Neither measure, however, includes routine mainte­
nance of existing structures such as periodic painting and new
roofing.
10 See G. Burck, “The Building Trades Versus the People,”
Fortune, October 1970, pp. 98-101.



ness sectors. It consists of a wide spread group of
enterprises made up of many local, isolated firms;
794,838 were identified during the 1967 census of
construction. Of this number, less than one-half were
large enough to maintain a payroll and pay Federal
Insurance Contribution Act taxes.11 The remaining
firms were predominantly special trade contractors
established as sole proprietors; they earned only 6
percent of the industry’s total receipts.
The industry’s largest construction firm accounted
for only 2.3 percent of the industry’s annual receipts in
1972.12 On the other hand, there exists a high level of
market control among the largest firms in the industry.
In fact, of 900,832 establishments reporting taxable
income in 1969, less than 2 percent, 17,662 companies,
earned more than $1 million each, and accounted for
over one-half of all expenditures for contract construc­
tion. Only a quarter of 1 percent of all firms reported
receipts in excess of $5 million. These 2,336 companies
shared almost $33 billion worth of building contracts
during 1969, close to 30 percent of the industry’s total
receipts.13 Among the smallest firms in 1969 were
358,000 that earned more than $10,000 but less than
$ 100,000 in annual receipts.14
There is evidence that keen intra-industry competi­
tion prevails. A pronounced characteristic of the indus­
try is the large number of firms constantly entering and
leaving the field.15 Table 2 illustrates the irregular
growth in the number of firms in the industry since
11
Census o f Construction Industries, 1967, Vol. 1 (Bureau of
the Census, 1967), p. 1 A-l. An update o f this survey, containing
data for 1972, will be published in August 1974.
12Engineering News-Record, Apr. 12,1973, p. 46.
13Statistics o f Income, 1969, Business Income Tax Returns
(U.S. Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, 1972),
pp. 3 5 ,1 1 6 ,2 1 4 .
14 Ibid.
1
s Peter J. Cassimatis, Economics o f the Construction Indus­
try (New York, National Industrial Conference Board, 1969),
p. 3, and Daniel Quinn Mills, Industrial Relations and Manpower
in Construction (Cambridge, MIT Press, 1972), p. 26. It should
be noted that the Bureau o f the Census’ count of the number of
construction firms excludes dummy firms, those set up on paper
for the administration o f special projects. They do not create
new employment or new tax revenue and, as such, are excluded
from the census count.

New construction
put in place
Year

1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................

Value
(in millions)

Percent
increase

59,965
64,563
67,413
73,412
76,002
77,503
86,626
9 3,368
9 4,167
109,238
123,836
135,604

7.7
4.4
8.9
3.5
2.0
11.8
7.8
.9
16.0
13.4
9 .5

_

Unemployment Rate3

Number
of
construction
firms
(thousands)1

Construction
worker
employment
(thousands)

A ll men
20 years
and over

Carpenters and
other
construction
crafts2

Contract
construction

836.0
848.5
856.8
876.4
856.3
856.0
839.0
900.8
874.5
932.0
1,019.9
( 5)

2,462
2,523
2,597
2,710
2,784
2,708
2,768
2,896
2,820
2,832
2,908
3,011

4.6
4.5
3.9
3.2
2.5
2.3
2.2
2.1
3.5
4.4
4.0
3.2

5.5
5.7
5.2
4 .5
3.8
3.8
3.6
3.5
4.9
5.4
5.6
4.9

13.5
13.3
11.2
10.1
8.0
7.4
6.9
6.0
9.7
10.4
10.3
8.8

1 Internal Revenue Service annual count of the number of proprietorships,
partnerships, and corporations reporting taxable income.
2 According to the Bureau of the Census, fewer than 4 percent of construction
workers were under 20 years of age in 1960.
3These data have been adjusted to reflect seasonal experience. For a discussion of
seasonal adjustment procedures, see the February 1974 issue of Employment and
Earnings.
4 Includes members in Canada.




Construction
union
membership
(thousands)4

Consumer
price
index
1967 = 100

2,417
(6)
2,323
(‘ )
2,463

90.6
91.7
92.9
94.5
97.2
100.0
104.2
109.8
116.3
121.3
125.3
133.1

( 6)
2,541
(*)
2,576
(6)
2,752
(‘ )

5 Data not yet available.
6 The survey of union membership is conducted on a biennial basis.
SOURCES: Business Statistics, 1973, U.S. Dept, of Commerce; Statistics o f
Income, Internal Revenue Service, Employment and Earnings, Directory o f National
Unions and Employee Associations, and Handbook o f Labor Statistics, 1972, Bureau
of Labor Statistics.

1962. Interestingly, there were only 395,000 firms in
1947, according to IRS income statistics, less than
one-half the number in 1962.
Low capital requirements and overhead facilitates
easy entry into the field by small operators who often
lack adequate working capital. This in turn affects the
ability of these operators to continue in business under
adverse conditions.
While many of these small firms are primarily engaged
in residential construction and employ nonunion work
crews, a substantial number, notably specialty contrac­
tors, operate under a union contract. To the extent that
this occurs, such small undercapitalized union shop
contractors will possess minimal capacity to resist strong
union wage demands and may have to discontinue
operations during a determined and prolonged work
stoppage.
In a period of high construction investment, some
firms are reported to have shown little concern for the
longrun inflationary effects of their labor agreements.
When faced with costly wage settlements it has not been
difficult for builders to increasingly shift the burden of
their labor agreements to the investor or speculator who
may be more interested in future returns than upon
present labor costs. Thus contractors may have agreed to
what would ordinarily be considered unreasonable de­
mands rather than face a stoppage by their employees.
Unlike other industries, the demand for private
nonresidential and public construction (which accounted
for 57 percent of all new construction in 1973) is
relatively inelastic and unresponsive to fluctuations in
building costs in periods when the economy is expand­
ing.16 As a result, large cost increases frequently have
not affected the immediate level of construction activ­
ity. Moreover, since each commercial or industrial site
has its own unique design, the building process does not
lend itself to standardization or mass production tech­
niques comparable to those prevailing in manufacturing.
One result of this customized production is the large
number of skilled craft workers who are required in the
industry. Journeymen, working in many different crafts,
according to one estimate, make up approximately 62
percent of total construction employment.17 This inten­
sive utilization of skilled labor in the work process is one
factor which causes' the unionized sector of the industry
to be vulnerable to work stoppages. Crafts not involved
in the dispute usually honor a picket line and super­
visory personnel cannot continue building activity in the
absence of the craft labor force.
16Annual Report (Council of Economic Advisers, 1974),
p. 292, and Cassimatis, Economics o f Construction p. 115.
11 Compensation in the Construction Industry, Bull. 1656
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1970), p. 6.




Table 3.
Extent to which employment in Augu$t
exceeded that in February
Selected years, 1960-73

Year

1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1973

............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............

SOURCE:

Contract
construc­
tion

General
building
contrac­
tors

Heavy
construc­
tion

Special
trades
contrac­
tors

28.0
35.8
32.3
28.6
22.8
18.9
33.3
25.0

25.8
30.0
32.6
24.1
16.7
13.2
33.0
22.2

63.9
69.3
65.8
64.8
55.9
53.4
65.6
53.1

17.3
21.8
20.9
19.0
14.9
10.4
22.1
16.9

Employment

and

Earnings,

United

States,

1909- 72, Bull. 1312-9 and monthly issues (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1972-74).

Many construction projects have fixed contract com­
pletion dates and carry contract clauses which specify
penalties for late performance. Accordingly, a strike over
work assignments or other issues called prior to a project
completion date may induce an employer to settle rather
than be subject to penalties.
Conditions of employment: seasonality

In construction negotiations, the wage structure is
influenced by the industry’s unique working environ­
ment as well as by its complex organizational structure.
For example, construction employment is often seasonal
and intermittent. For nearly one-third of the industry’s
work force, this means unemployment and loss of
earnings during winter months. Table 3 describes the
extent to which employment in August exceeded that in
February for selected years. As can be seen, seasonal
fluctuations in employment are most severe in heavy
construction. As might be expected, due to cold
weather, seasonal fluctuations are much more pro­
nounced in the North than in the South.
Generally, construction laborers experience a greater
degree of unemployment during the peak building
season than do craft workers.18
That unemployment is higher among laborers at this
time is probably due to the influx of male college
students and others who often have only limited success
in finding summer construction work. As a result, these
workers tend to retard the normal seasonal decline in the
18Seasonality and Manpower in Construction, Bull. 1642
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1970), p. 43.

unemployment rate among unskilled workers. Moreover,
craft workers often can find employment in residential
construction and repair work if they are faced with a
layoff from their primary employer.
Some insight into the work patterns of construction
workers in areas of both severe and mild winter weather
was obtained during a special BLS study of annual hours
worked for the period 1966-67, covering 13 occupations
in four metropolitan areas.19 Since the data were
obtained from pension fund records, it relates specifi­
cally to occupation, locality, and individual hours of
work. Therefore, it is more appropriate than the more
commonly used Social Security data, which gives only
quarters of coverage in the industry and provides no
information by occupation. The study was designed to
exclude “short-hours” workers, i.e., those workers not
firmly attached to the industry who worked fewer than
700 hours in the 12-month period .20 The report
concluded that a number of factors including weather
conditions, level and composition of construction activ­
ity, and institutional practices inhibit winter work, and
that the median number of hours of work reported for
the construction trades in the crafts and areas studied
was only 1,535 hours, about 10 months of paid
employment each year.21
The study indicates that the reported average annual
hours worked in construction was approximately 500
below the standard 2,041 hour full work year or, for
example at an average hourly wage rate of $6 , $3000 less
than if the worker had been employed the full work
year. Thus, with the inability of the average construction
worker to obtain full-year work, it is inappropriate to
compare the absolute hourly earnings of construction
workers with the hourly wage rates of workers in
industries not restricted by similar conditions.22

Hazardous conditions

Together with these disadvantages, the existence of
often adverse working conditions is mutually recognized
as a legitimate reason for paying substantially higher
hourly earnings than normally found in other sectors of
the economy. Construction activity is often potentially
hazardous, or of an unpleasant nature. Members of the
building trades not only face outdoor exposure in all
seasons but also remain vulnerable to the risk of personal
injury. Both the frequency and severity rates of injury in
construction far exceed the risks in manufacturing. For
example, in 1972, (the last period for which data are
available), the incidence rate of construction work
injuries and illnesses was 19.0 disabling injuries and
illnesses per 100 full-time workers—nearly twice as high
as in all industries. In addition, the severity rate, which
measures the number of days of disability, was nearly
three times as high as in manufacturing.2 3 Preliminary
results from a recently completed BLS survey show that
the building industry suffered almost 570,000 injuries
and illnesses during 1972.24 In terms of reduced
production, these nonfatal afflictions cost the industry a
loss of approximately 2.6 million man-days—equal to
one-third of the industry’s idleness due to strike activity
in that year.
Another inconvenience usually encountered by em­
ployees of heavy construction contractors, in such fields
as road building, cable laying, dams and pipeline
construction, is extended travel time to and from the
jobsite.
Moreover, as each contract is completed, the jobsite
changes. Accordingly, construction workers must be
readily mobile and, on occasion, willing to endure
lengthy commuting time between home and the new
jobsite. In some types of speciality construction involv­
ing repair work of an urgent nature, such as maintenance
of a water supply system in an outlying town, a crew
may be required to work more than normally scheduled
hours and be separated from family for an extended
period.

___ 19Ibid, pp. 68-72.
20 Yet in several occupations and areas, these short-hours
workers accounted for almost one-half of all workers. In Omaha,
for example, 37 percent of the cement masons, 30 percent of the
carpenters, and about 43 percent o f the operating engineers
reported fewer than 700 hours of work.
21 Seasonality, op. cit. p. 69.
23Injury Rates by Industry, Rept. 406 (Bureau of Labor
2
2 For additional information on the industry affiliation,
Statistics, 1972), pp. 7 and 15. This series has been discontinued.
occupation, race, age, and other characteristics of union mem­
2
4First Annual Survey o f Occupational Injuries and Illnesses,
bers, see Selected Earnings and Demographic Characteristics o f
Preliminary Results, News Release 74-16 (Bureau of Labor
Union Members, 1970, Rept. 417 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Statistics, Jan. 21,1974).
1972).




Chapter III. Collective Bargaining in the Construction industry
The bargaining environment

As the prosperous economic period of the late 1960’s
drew to a close, a number of construction industry
indicators were recording the disturbing-consequences of
an economy which was rapidly approaching its fullcapacity and full-employment ceiling. The costs of
financing, machinery, land, and building materials were
increasing steadily. These trends, when combined with a
rapidly rising level of consumer prices, placed a severe
strain on the collective bargaining process in the building
industry, as union negotiators sought to maintain, and
where possible, increase the buying power of their
members’ wages. In an effort to curtail the mounting
inflationary spiral in construction costs, in September
1969, the Federal Government announced a temporary
75 percent cutback in new contracts for Federally
financed public works projects.25 This restriction re­
mained in effect until March 17, 1970.
By the end of 1970, following an unprecedented
number of work stoppages, the upward trend in wage
increases was accelerated. As a result of the year’s
negotiations, nearly 700,000 union construction workers
won wage and benefit increases averaging 19.6 percent in
the first contract year and 15.6 percent annually during
the life of the contract.26 The Administration believed
these increases to be a major factor in the sharp rise in
construction costs and prices as well as contributing to
inflationary wage demands in other sectors of the
economy. On February 23, 1971, the President sus­
pended the Davis-Bacon Act for 37 days, thus tempor­
arily halting the requirement that prevailing (usually
union) wages be paid on Federal construction proj­
ects.2 7 The next step in this process was the reinstate­
ment of the Davis-Bacon Act on March 29, 1971,
coordinated with the President’s announcement of Exec­
utive Order 11588, which created the Construction
Industry Stabilization Committee (CISC).

Under the authority provided by the Economic
Stabilization Act of 1970, EO 11588 established admin­
istrative rules and procedures to be used in the stabiliza­
tion of wages and prices in the construction industry. A
tripartite industry committee (the CISC) was formed,
representing labor, contractors, and the public. The
CISC was responsible for reviewing all negotiated agree­
ments to insure that they properly reflected the follow­
ing basic criteria for approving proposed increases in
compensation. First, the Executive Order states that
“ acceptable economic adjustments in labor contracts
negotiated on or after the date of this order will be those
normally considered supportable by productivity im­
provement and cost-of-living trends, but not in excess of
the average of the median increases in wages and benefits
over the life of the contract negotiated in major
construction settlements in the period 1961-1968.”
Second, “equity adjustments .. . may, where carefully
identified, be considered over the life of the contract to
restore traditional relationships among crafts in a single
locality and within the same craft in surrounding
localities.”2 8 In the event that a proposed contract
failed to meet these criteria, special Craft Dispute
Boards, jointly established by the international unions
and contractor associations, were to be employed to
determine appropriate contract modifications. In effect,
the CISC returned the contracts to the parties for
renegotiation in accordance with its guidelines. As of
September 1973, the CISC had reviewed and approved
over 6,500 construction agreements covering more than
2.8 million workers since the original 90-day wage-price
freeze ended on November 15, 1971.
The CISC has pursued a course of administrative
independence since its inception ,29 although it had been
formally under the jurisdiction of the Cost-of-Living
Council, a cabinet-level group charged with the responsi­
bility to provide overall supervision of the stabilization
program. With regard to wage stabilization, its record of
achievement during this time had been noteworthy. For

2
5Construction Labor Report, The Bureau of National
2
8 Weekly Compilation o f Presidential Documents, Apr. 5,
Affairs, Inc., Sept. 10,1969, pp. Al-2.
2
6Annual Report o f the Council o f Economic Advisors, 1971, p.583.
2 9 From an address by former CISC Chairman JohnT.
1 9 7 2 ,p .74.
Dunlop before the 56th convention of the Building Trades
21 Weekly Compilation o f Presidential Documents, Mar. 1,
Department, AFL-CIO, Nov. 8,1971.
1971, p .286.




example, construction industry collective bargaining
agreements settled and approved in 1971 provided first
year wage and benefit increases of 12.6 percent, a
significant reduction from 1970, when such increases
averaged 17.6 percent.30 The situation further improved
in 1972, as the same lst-year increases dropped to 6.9
percent. First-year increases for 1973 averaged 5.2
percent.31 According to the Council of Economic
Advisors, the CISC retarded the rate of growth in the
compensation of unionized construction workers and
therefore appears to have been an important factor in a
reduction of strike activity in the industry .32
Structural changes affecting bargaining

The transition in the composition and demand for
construction activity altered the structure of the indus­
try during the 1960’s, and created additional pressure
for substantial wage settlements. During the decade
there developed a growing demand for industrial and
commercial construction relative to all private construc­
tion, and the annual value of nonresidential construction
put in place increased nearly 118 percent from 1960 to
1970. In contrast, the annual value of residential
building rose by only 38 percent over the same
period .33 It is widely believed that this shift in industry
demand toward more nonresidentiai construction re­
sulted in an intensified demand for the skilled speciality
crafts who are employed predominantly in this sector.
As a consequence, such crafts as the iron workers,
plumbers, pipefitters, electricians, and sheet metal
workers, generally designated as the mechanical trades,
were able to exercise particular leverage on their wages
during collective negotiations.34
Also affecting bargaining was the inability of union
and employer representatives to successfully resolve
disputes involving work assignments. In contrast to an
earlier period, the degree of cohesion and cooperation
between the major contractor associations and their

union counterparts are reported to have diminished in
recent years.35
The bargaining framework

For union construction workers in the United States
and their employers, collective bargaining has evolved
into a remarkably standard pattern despite wide varia­
tion in the geographical area encompassed by the
industry’s many agreements.36 Unlike other industries,
few contracts are negotiated directly by a local union
representative with a single employer. In most situations,
employers in a relatively confined geographic area have
banded together to form an association to represent
contractors engaged in a particular craft operation.
Generally, the structure of bargaining is on a city-by­
city, craft-by-craft basis. In Boston, for example, the
International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades,
District 35, has negotiated an agreement with the
Painting and Decorating Employers Association of
Boston which sets standards for wages and working
conditions throughout the metropolitan area. This con­
tract forms a binding agreement between approximately
100 contractors and their 2,500 employees.
There are a number of instances in which more than
one union will negotiate a single agreement with an
association of employers. Such is the case, for example,
in Phoenix, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Allentown, Pa., New
Orleans, Birmingham, Mobile, Ala., and Knoxville, Tenn.
Typically the union bargaining team will consist of a
coalition of Teamsters, Laborers, and Carpenters, occa­
sionally accompanied by the Cement Masons. In each of
these cities there are multiunion contracts covering
1,000 workers or more. In like manner, it is not
uncommon for one local of a union to join other locals
of the same union in negotiations. The Carpenters in

3
5For example see Daniel Quinn Mills, op. cit., p. 40. Also
see Construction Labor Report, Oct. 1,1969, pp. A-13-14.
3
6 This estimate of the number of union construction
workers is based on the results of the March 1971 Current
Population Survey, conducted and tabulated by the Bureau of
the Census which contained a supplementary question regarding
30 Current Wage Developments (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
union membership. It represents 39.2 percent of the 4,975,000
September 1972), p. 41.
wage and salary workers reportedly employed in the industry in
31 Current Wage Developments (April 1974), p. 30.
that month. This estimate, based on a sample of about 47,000
32Annual Report o f the Council o f Economic Advisors,
households, differs considerably from the estimate of employ­
1972, p. 75.
3
3Annual Report o f the Council o f Economic Advisors, ment in table 1 which is based on payroll records from a sample
of establishments. Estimates of industry employment from these
Table B -40,1972, p. 240.
2 sources differ from each other primarily because the annual
34 This trend toward building more public, commercial, and
employment figures in table 1 are derived by averaging monthly
industrial facilities tapered off during the last half of the 60’s, as
estimates of names on payrolls and fail to account for turnover
a result of a rising shortage o f residential dwelling units
among those names. In other words, while construction contrac­
exacerbated by a substantial growth of new family formations.
tors provided more than 3.4 million year-long jobs in 1971,
Still, the expansion in industrial and commercial building
because of turnover, approximately 5 million persons were
activity during the early part of the decade had already tightened
employed in the industry at one time or another during the year.
the market for skilled labor.




New York, for example, combine 139 locals into 16
district councils for bargaining purposes.
These amalgamations may represent employers and
employees that operate in a city, a metropolitan area, or
may even encompass several counties or sections of a
State. Strictly local or metropolitan bargaining units are
most often found in the basic trades—carpenters, glazers,
plumbers, roofers, sheet metal workers, and electricians.
In Southern California, the Carpenters’ District Council
has signed a single agreement with the Southern Cali­
fornia Chapter of the Associated General Contractors,
the Engineering and Grading Contractors Association,
and the Building Industry Association of California. The
geographical scope of this agreement extends across the
county lines of Los Angeles, Inyo, Mono, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, Imperial, Ventura, Santa
Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Kern counties. The
agreement provides wages and working conditions for an
estimated 45,000 carpenters.
An employer association representing contractors
engaged in a single craft activity is not normally
concerned with the effect its settlement may have on
bargaining in other crafts. On the other hand, when an
association has members that bargain with several or all
crafts in an area, it must realize that a settlement
reached with one craft union may have a considerable
impact on the outcome of bargaining with the other
crafts. Consequently, employer associations attempt to
provide a measure of bargaining coordination among
contractors in the same trade, particularly when negotia­
tions involving several crafts closely follow one another.
Such leadership is advantageous to members of the
employers association in so far as it counteracts upward
pressure on wages exerted by whipsawing settlements as
each craft strives to improve on the terms achieved by its
bargaining predecessor. If successful, coordination of
bargaining in this fashion may also avoid the succession
of work stoppages that may occur during contract
renegotiations.3 7
Each member of an association is bound by the terms
of the agreement negotiated by the parties. The impact
of the agreement may, however, be considerably wider
since not all union contractors are association members.
In some instances, an “industry-area” contract is nego­
tiated by a temporary alliance of independent con­
tractors with the provisions of the agreement being
incorporated into a single document which each em­
ployer signs. Cases of an agreement being negotiated
with a single contracting firm are relatively rare in
construction.
On the union side, negotiations are largely decentral­
ized. Usually, negotiations are conducted by the business
3 7Daniel Quinn Mills, op. cit., p. 32.




manager who is accompanied by other representatives of
the local union. National union officials seldom partici­
pate in local negotiations but may consult with local
representatives in the event a particular agreement is
expected to set a pattern that may have a pervading
influence on other settlements. Currently, most of the
17 international building trades unions have authority
under their constitutions to give final approval to local
strikes, but in many unions such authority can be
exercised only when strike benefits are requested .38
National agreements

A handful of large firms bid for and secure contracts
on a nationwide basis. Often this requires moving
equipment and supervisory personnel into a new area
where a local union work force must be recruited. To
facilitate union-management cooperation with a visiting
contractor, international unions in a number of crafts,
most notably in elevator, pipeline, boiler erection, and
sprinkler system construction, negotiate standard nation­
wide agreements. In each, the contractor agrees to
subcontract all work to union firms and to meet
prevailing wage levels and working conditions in the
local bargaining area. In return, the international union
will not only assist the visiting contractor in acquiring a
local labor pool, but will also offer its assistance in
disposing of any disputes that may arise during the
course of the agreement. Furthermore, such agreements
usually include a “ no-strike” clause which prohibits
work stoppages during the term of the agreement.
Despite these advantages, the national agreement has
been criticised, particularly by local contractors who
complain that the large builders, protected by a national
agreement prohibiting work stoppages, will continue
operations during local negotiations, occasionally em­
ploying workers who are striking against local con­
tractors. This animosity is understandably reinforced if
the national contractor has won his contract in a
competitive letting with local builders.
Jurisdictional disputes

A recurring outgrowth of the operational methods
and union structure (craft rather than industrial) of the
construction industry is a multiplicity of disputes,
arising over issues involving work jurisdiction.
To union members, the essence of work jurisdiction is
the exclusive right to perform all work which they
believe to be traditionally associated with their craft. As
a consequence, a jurisdictional dispute often results
3 8Ibid.

when two or more unions contend that their members
are exclusively entitled to perform a certain job. While
issues involving work assignments are not unique to the
construction industry, such conflicts are recurrent in this
sector for a number of reasons.39 First, the construction
industry has the problem of interunion factionalization
in which each craft insists on regarding its job function
as a proprietary right. This means that any incursion by
members of another craft, perhaps either through a
misassignment of work, or a change in work technology
involving the use of new methods or materials, may
potentially lead to a work stoppage. Second, since
construction fabrication requires that work proceed in
specific stages, nearly every craft occupies a strategic
position on the job. Before cement workers can pour
concrete, for example, the carpenters must have already
constructed the required supporting framework to hold
the concrete while it sets. Thus a work stoppage by
carpenters will halt the cement worker’s activities along
with other craft operations which follow the initial
3 9This section draws heavily upon an excellent discussion of
the root causes of interunion conflict in W. Haber and H. Levin­
son, Labor Relations and Productivity in the Building Trades
(Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1956), ch. 11.




pouring of concrete. Third, many job assignments on
construction projects are completed in a relatively short
period of time. An aggrieved craft union must seek
immediate settlement of disputed work assignment. It
cannot await a lengthy period of consideration of its
claims, lest many paid hours of employment be lost. The
local union members may feel that an immediate strike
is the only effective way to settle the issue. Fourth, the
incidence of jurisdictional work stoppages seem to vary
directly with project size.40 This is because larger
projects contain many work assignments which must be
repeated over and over. Accordingly, a union will resist
competition from another craft more tenaciously where
many jobs are at stake. Lastly, certain tasks have vague
job boundaries. Which craft, for example, should have
the responsibility for putting up acoustical tile: the
painters or the carpenters? As a result, unclear work
assignments between speciality contractors over who
should perform those undefined tasks outside the
subcontractor’s nominal field may lead to jurisdictional
disputes between the unions representing each craft.
40Ibid, p .233 See also Dunlop, John T. “Jurisdictional
Disputes: 10 types.” The Constructor (Journal of the Assoc­
iated . General Contractors, July 1953), p. 165.

Chapter IV. Settlement Machinery
In the construction industry, as in industry generally,
the terms of an estimated 90 percent of all new
contracts are agreed to by the parties without resort to a
strike. A large proportion of all contract negotiations
also are successfully concluded without the assistance of
Government or private mediators. Even when the em­
ployees of a company have decided to press demands for
contract improvements by withholding their services, the
parties themselves frequently settle on a new agreement
or use the assistance of Federal or State mediators. Some
work stoppages—particularly those that occur while the
contract is in effect—are not easily settled by standard
methods. A preponderance of construction strikes are of
this type and a large proportion of these are disputes by
two unions over work assignments. Since they generally
concern two crafts, these jurisdictional disputes involve
considerably fewer workers than stoppages over new
contract terms. In 1972, jurisdictional strikes accounted
for 38 percent of all construction work stoppages; they
included only for 1.6 percent of all construction workers
who participated in strikes.
Jurisdictional disputes have been a matter of particu­
lar concern to the industry and the unions that represent
construction workers. No other industry has experienced
disputes of the same magnitude. Over the years, various
approaches to solving problems of work assignments
have been jointly developed by the parties since these
disputes are costly to contractors in terms of delayed
project completion dates and to workers in terms of lost
or delayed wages.
Although Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Taft-Hartley
Act makes it an unfair labor practice for a union to
strike over work assignments, the Act’s settlement
machinery is too complex to resolve such issues speedily.
For example, few contractors can afford to take the
time required to adequately prepare for an NLRB
investigation, hearing, and initial 10(k) determination of
an unfair labor practice while incurring a work stoppage.
Even after such a determination has been made, the
union may still refuse to abide by the decision, in which
case a formal charge of an unfair labor practice must be
filed and then proceed through lengthy Board pro­
cedures before an injunction can be obtained.
At the same time section 10 (k) of the Taft-Hartley



amendments permit private resolution of disputes on a
voluntary basis. In brief, the NLRB will not make a
jurisdictional determination if the parties themselves
have “ agreed upon methods for the voluntary adjust­
ment of the dispute.” This provision subsequently
resulted in the establishment of the National Joint Board
for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in 1948
through an agreement between the Building and Con­
struction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, the
Associated General Contractors (AGC), and eight speci­
ality contractor associations.41 The Board consisted of
an impartial chairman, four union members, and four
employer members, each of whom “had experience and
were actively engaged in the building and construction
industry .”42
Briefly, when the Board received a notice of a
jurisdictional work stoppage, its chairman first asked the
president of the striking union to direct its members to
return to work pending a settlement of the dispute. At
the same time, the Board investigated the claims of the
disputing parties to determine if a precedent existed in
any previous decisions of record which would indicate
the party that had a rightful claim to the disputed work.
If no precedent existed, the Board rendered a job
decision after careful consideration of the “established
trade practice and prevailing practice in the locality .”43
An appeals procedure was added in 1965 which gave
each party the privilege of requesting an oral hearing and
the right to present witnesses in support of its case.
Unfortunately, these carefully developed procedures
have met with only partial success.
As evidence of the Joint Board’s inability to enforce
its determinations, in the 5-year period following the
reconstitution of the Board in 1965, man-days of
idleness resulting from interunion conflict more than
41 These additional participants were the National Electrical
Contractors Association; Insulation Distributor-Contractors Na­
tional Association; National Association of Plumbing-HeatingCooling Contractors; Mechanical Contractors Association of
America; Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National
Association; and Glazing Contractors Labor Jurisdiction Com­
mittee.
4
2Plan for Settling Jurisdictional Disputes Nationally and
Locally (National Board for Jurisdictional Awards, Apr. 3,
1970).

doubled. Moreover, such disputes have shown a rela­
tively steady rate of increase throughout the 1950’s and
1960’s.
Partly as a consequence of the Board’s inability to
reduce interunion conflict, the AGC, the Nation’s largest
building employers association, abandoned the plan in
September 1969. It advised its members to “direct their
efforts toward settlement at the local level, and failing
this, to use the procedures available through the
NLRB.” Foremost among the AGC’s complaints
against the Joint Board’s operation was the practice of
hearing cases where at least one of the parties, particu­
larly the contractor, had not agreed to use its procedures
and had decided not to adhere to its job awards. In the
event that the Board reversed such a “nonstipulated”
contractor’s assignment, the union to whom the work
was originally given could be placed in a “status of
noncompliance” by the Board, thus losing its right to get
a favorable ruling in any future case-despite the fact
that the union might have a valid bargaining agreement
with the nonstipulated employer.44 A second source of
dissatisfaction was a lack of effective enforcement
procedures. As previously constituted, the Board’s
method of enforcing compliance with its rulings was
limited solely to persuasion.
New National Board

Upon the AGC’s withdrawal from the National Joint
Board in September 1969, an interim plan with essen­
tially the same procedures became operational for some
months until the Joint Board was reconstituted in April
1970. The Participating Contractors Employers’ Associa­
tion (PCEA) then replaced the AGC as the primary
employer party 4 5 Upon its expiration 1 year later, the
April agreement was extended several times while a new
agreement was being hammered out—the first major
change in the industry’s method of resolving jurisdic­
tional disputes since the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act
25 years earlier.
In a major departure from past practice, the new
plan, which became effective June 1, 1973, substitutes a

three-member panel of neutral public members for the
old nine-member Joint Board which consisted of labor
and management representatives. The panel has been
designated as the “Impartial Jurisdictional Disputes
Board.” Each of the three members is selected by a Joint
Administrative Committee representing the Building and
Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, and the
signatory employer associations, who also designate one
of the members as the impartial chairman.
Over the Disputes Board is an appeals board, also
composed of three impartial members. This body has the
discretionary authority to hear an appeal from a
determination of the Disputes Board, and must base its
decision entirely on the record developed in the lower
panel. The Appeals Board decision relates only to the
dispute under review, and is not considered a decision of
record which could be used in establishing a precedent
for future cases.
In recognition of the impact of technological changes
in materials, methods, and machinery upon the industry,
the revised plan sets up a new Technological Change
Committee which will review changes that may affect
jurisdiction.
Both labor and management are given responsibilities
for good faith compliance under the plan. Employer
associations, for instance, must urge their members to
adhere to the plan and members are supposed to use
their “best efforts” to assure compliance with the terms
of the plan by their subcontractors. Moreover, it is
understood that contractors will not make job assign­
ments that are widely at variance with area or national

jurisdictional practices.4 6

On the union side, the revised plan has discarded an
ineffective “ noncompliance” procedure as a means of
compelling unions to abide by its decisions. In its place,
the Building Trades Department has set up an internal
system calling for substantial financial penalties—from
$250 to $1,000 per day—against unions that engage in
jurisdictional strikes or otherwise ignore Board rulings.
In addition, if a local union violates the plan’s unequiv­
ocal ban on coercive activity or work stoppages, its
international headquarters must attempt to end the
strike, and the internationals of other unions at the
4
3The Associated General Contractors o f America, Jurisdic­ jobsite must instruct their members to ignore the picket
lines.4 7
tional Disputes Bulletin, No. 1-72, Jan. 10,1972.
44 Construction Labor Report, Mar. 19,1969.
Despite the promising effectiveness of the financial
4
5In 1970, the PCEA included the 8 speciality contractors
penalties, the determinations of special hearings panels
associations listed in footnote 41, with the addition of the
are expected to have even greater impact. The panels will
Gypsum Drywall Contractors International; Painting and Deco­
rule
on disputes of a repetitive nature which the
rating Contractors of America; National Constructors Associa­
responsible international* unions have been unable to
tion; National Erectors Association, National Association of
Miscellaneous Ornamental and Architectural Products Contrac­
tors; National Association of Reinforcing Steel Contractors; and
Crane and Rigging Division, Heavy Specification Carriers Con­
ference.




46Construction Labor Report, No. 922, June 6, 1973, p.
A-16.
4 7 Ibid.

resolve by themselves. The decisions of the hearings
panels become matters of record and effectively set
future jurisdictional boundaries throughout the industry.
Clearly, such a procedure contains a strong incentive for
the respective international unions to resolve jurisdic­
tional disagreements before they reach the level of the
hearings panel, where a single job dispute may ultimately
result in the loss of thousands of jobs to a rival’s
jurisdiction.
Electrical industry plan

The most successful arrangement for the adjudica­
tion of contract disputes has been the agreement
negotiated between the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers and the National Electrical Con­
tractors Association. Since 1921, the electrical industry’s
Council on Industrial Relations has rendered private
judicial determinations on a variety of disputed matters
including wage rate determination. While it has no
mandatory powers to enforce compliance, its record is
unique—never in the more than 48 years of the Council’s
existence has a decision been violated.48 Its success,
however, is the product of many years of experience and
may not be readily duplicated in other branches of the
industry.
Mediation

Government mediation, principally by the Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), was em­
ployed to render third party assistance in 2,091 work
stoppages (28.8 percent of all disputes) during 1965-72.
Under the law the FMCS, an independent agency, enters
a bargaining situation only when, in its judgment, a
dispute threatens to interrupt interstate commerce to a
considerable extent.49*Mediation of local disputes is left
to State and local agencies wherever they are available.
The FMCS primarily offers its services as a last resort,
thus placing the burden of accomodation squarely upon
the parties to the agreement. In addition, Sec. 8(d) (3)
of the National Labor Relations Act specifies that a
party to an existing agreement must file a dispute notice
with the FMCS in the event that an agreement has not
been reached 30 days in advance of a contract termina­
tion or reopening. Upon receipt of this notice, the FMCS
decides whether the facts warrant intervention.
FMCS mediation is a free and voluntary process:
48Rules and Procedures, 10th ed. (Council on Industrial
Relations for the Electrical Contracting Industry, Washington,
1971).
4 9 Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947, Sec. 203(b).




Either party in a dispute may ask the FMCS for
assistance , but in no case does its recommendations bind
the parties.
According to the FMCS, in more than 9 out of 10
cases in which (30-day) notices are filed, the parties
reach agreement on their own .50
Despite the fact that short-lived jurisdictional dis­
putes account for about 38 percent of strikes, effectively
removing these stoppages from those which could
require mediation, Federal mediators were called to help
settle 23 percent of all construction industry disputes
during the years 1965 to 1972. State, and sometimes
local Government mediators provided assistance, some­
times in conjunction with Federal officials, in 5.8
percent of construction strikes; private mediators re­
solved an even smaller share, 1.4 percent. (See Table
A-l 1.) Of those strikes in which there was held to be an
opportunity for Government mediation, approximately
57 percent were resolved without mediatory assistance
from any outside party .51
During 3 representative years, 1967, 1969, and 1971,
Government mediators assisted in the resolution of 746
stoppages, nearly 92 percent of which occurred during
the renegotiation of an agreement. (See table 4.) This
concentration of conciliatory efforts toward the settle­
ment of renegotiation stoppages results from the fact
that the FMCS, as a rule, does not intervene in a
representation dispute since the employer’s refusal to
recognize the union raises a question of whether the
union does represent his employees—a question for the
National Labor Relations Board, rather than the FMCS,
to settle.
In the event that a jurisdictional dispute occurs
during the contract term, Federal mediators generally do
not become involved since problems of this nature most
frequently are handled by the Impartial Jurisdictional
Disputes Board (formerly the National Joint Board) or
the NLRB. As a consequence, of those stoppages that
occurred during the term of the agreement, just 3.6
percent involved any form of Government mediation in
the years 1965 through 1972 (table 4). As might be
expected, in these cases such disputes accounted for less
than 1 percent of total workers and man-days of
idleness.
Renegotiation stoppages, on the other hand, ac­
counted for 98.6 percent of the workers involved and
50 Twenty-five years of Service to Labor and Management
(Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, 1972), p. 5.
51 Prior to 1969, settlement arrangements were classed
simply as “formal settlement,” “no formal settlement,” and
“employer out of business.” For this reason, table A-l 3 which
covers the period 1965-72 is restricted to this brief classification
system.

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

1972

1971

1969

1967

1965

Contract status

Percent

Percent

Number

Percent

209
11
188
9

100.0
5.3
90.0
4.3

196
11
169
15

100.0
5.6
86.2
7.7

1

.5

1

.5

Number

Number of stoppages ending in the year
Government mediation e m p lo y e d .................
Negotiation of first agreem ent............
Renegotiation of agreement.................
During term of ag re e m e n t...................
No information on contract
status........................................................

227
11
198
17

100.0
4.8
87.2
7.5

1

.4

240
14
219
7
-

100.0
2.7
93.6
3.7

297
8
278
11

100.0
5.8
91.3
2.9

-

-

-

Workers involved (in thousands)
Government mediation e m p lo y e d .................
Negotiation of first agreem ent............
Renegotiation of agreem ent.................
During term of a g re e m e n t...................
No information on contract
status........................................................

214.5
1.4
204.3
8.9

100.0
.7
95.2
4.1

(2)

( 3)

206.3
2.2
201.8
2.1
-

320.1
1.9
317.0
1.0

100.0
1.1
97.8
1.0
-

100.0
.6
99.0
.3

351.8
3.7
346.9
.7

100.0
1.1
98.6
.2

315.0
1.2
298.7
15.3

100.0
.4
94.8
4.9

_

.5

.1

.4

.1

100.0
.1
99.8
( 3)

6,144.3
25.9
6,094.2
4.6

100.0
.4
99.2
( 3)

5,787.0
18.7
5,690.0
77.1

100.0
.3
98.3
1.3

—

19.6

.3

1.2

(3)

-

Days idle (in thousands)
Government mediation e m p lo y e d .................
Negotiation of first agreem ent............
Renegotiation of agreement.................
During term of agre e m e n t...................
No information on contract
status........................................................

4,146.2
20.2
4,093.3
32.2

100.0
.5
98.7
.8

.3

( 3)

4,416.0
28.5
4,369.2
18.3
-

t o t a l s in this table may differ from those in preceding tables because these
stoppages include strikes that ended during the stated year and may include idleness
occurring in prior years.
2 Fewer than 100.




9,550.8
10.7
9,531.8
8.2

100.0
.6
98.9
.4
—

-

3 Less than 0.1 percent.
NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.
Dashes denote zeros.

99.4 percent of all idleness in those strikes where
Government mediation was employed.
As a proportion of all stoppages, it is uncommon for
strikes to occur during the negotiation of the first
agreement. They account for less than 9 percent of all
construction stoppages. Of stoppages requiring Govern­
ment mediatory assistance during 1967, 1969, and 1971,
only 4.4 percent were caused by union recognition
disputes. These stoppages affected less than 1 percent of
the industry’s work force.
Settlement

During the 1967-71 reference period, more than 9 of
every 10 construction stoppages were terminated by
either a formal settlement or by the establishment of a
procedure to resolve remaining differences. In the latter
case, the parties have reached agreement on most issues,
and have generally terminated the strike. They also
agreed to submit all unresolved issues to final and
binding arbitration, or to continue with direct negotia­
tions, or possibly to submit remaining issues to a
government agency where applicable.
About 5 percent of the industry’s strikes ended
without a formal settlement; in these, workers either
returned to their jobs after participating in a short
protest or sympathy strike, or their efforts were unsuc­
cessful (See table A-12.)
Since a detailed breakdown of construction settle­
ment arrangements was not available before 1969, table
5 presents a cross-tabulation between methods of settle­
ments and contract status for the period 1969-72. A
f o r m a l s e t t l e m e n t was reached wi th all
issues resolved in more than 87 percent of all strikes
staged during renegotiations or reopenings of an existing
agreement. The number of stoppages that ended with
some unresolved issues remaining decreased sharply from
nearly one-third of all formal settlements in 1969 to less
than one-twentieth in 1972.52
Of those few stoppages where no formal settlement
was reached, 22 cases of a broken strike were recorded
which occurred during the attempted renegotiation of an
existing agreement. There were no reports of a con­
tractor being forced out of business during such stop­
pages. In five additional cases, all occurring during 1971,
work was resumed pending a decision by the Construc­
tion Industry Stabilization Committee.
In almost three-quarters of all construction stoppages
that occurred during the term of an existing agreement a

formal settlement was reached, but some issues remained
unresolved. In contrast to contract renegotiation dis­
putes where more than four-fifths of all strikes are
concluded with all issues resolved, only about one-fifth
of contract term disputes are concluded in the same
manner. This clearly resulted from the fact that the
National Joint Board did not issue its decision until after
the disputing parties had returned to work. Thus, in
four-fifths of all contract term stoppages, the strike was
ended before the issue was resolved. In an additional 5
percent of these stoppages, the workers returned to their
jobs following a short protest or sympathy strike.
According to table 5, between 1969 and 1972,
three-quarters of all strikes that occurred during at­
tempts to establish a collective bargaining relationship
were concluded with a formal settlement. In an addi­
tional 18 percent of such stoppages, no settlement was
reached, and the strike was broken.
Procedures for handling unsettled issues

From 1965 to 1972, there were 2,623 situations
where the disputing parties agreed to resume work
before all disagreements had been resolved. (See Table
A-13.) In 95.5 percent of such instances, these agree­
ments occurred in work stoppages which arose during
the contract term. Table 6 indicates what proportion of
these unsettled contract term stoppages were resolved by
each of the procedures listed. Disputes of this nature,
usually interunion disagreements over work assignments,
are seldom resolved by either arbitration or by direct
negotiations.
Private settlement, notably by the former National
Joint Board for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Dis­
putes, effectively handled 95 percent of these stoppages
between 1965 and 1968. In that latter year, however,
growing employer dissatisfaction with the Board’s pro­
cedures, as well as its effectiveness, began to reduce the
number of cases submitted for resolution. As explained
in Chapter V, from 1965 to 1969, strike idleness
resulting from interunion conflict more than doubled.
Part of this rapid increase can be traced to a lack of
machinery required by the Joint Board to enforce its
decisions.
On September 30, 1969, the Associated General
Contractors abandoned the Joint Board and advised
their members to use the procedures available through
the National Labor Relations Board. By the end of the
following year, 1970, the number of unsettled disputes
referred to a Government agency (the NLRB), had risen
5
2 Since 1969 was the first year in which such a detailed
more than three-fold. Correspondingly, workers involved
record of settlement data was maintained, some of the rapid
and man-days of idleness had doubled. Private methods
decrease in this category is possibly due to an improvement in
methods of data classification.
of settlement now received only 35 percent of the cases




in which some unsettled issues were present. This
conspicuous rise in referrals to the NLRB leveled off in
1971, with about three-fifths of all unsettled issues being

Table 5.

handled by that agency. Most of the remaining twofifths of these disputes were resolved by private settle­
ment machinery.

Settlement o f construction work stoppages by contract status,1 1969-1972
1970

1969
Settlement and contract status

1971

1972

Number of stoppages ending in the year
Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

All stoppages ending in the y e a r...................
Negotiation of first agreement ......................................
Formal settlement reached:
all issues resolved.............................................
Unresolved issues
rem aining...............................................
No formal settlement reached: short
protest or sympathy s trik e ............................
Strike broken .............................................
Work resumed under court
injunction .........................................................
Work resumed pending CISC
action2 ................................................................
Employer out of business....................................

968
58

100.0
100.0

1133
53

100.0
100.0

754
51

100.0
100.0

705
34

100.0
100.0

18

31.0

26

49.1

30

58.8

15

44.1

26

44.8

11

20.8

11

21.6

7

20.6

2
10

3.4
17.2

6
9

11.3
17.0

2
6

3.9
11.8

2
10

5.9
29.4

2

3.4

—

—

—

—

—

—
-

—
1

—
1.9

—
2

—
3.9

—
-

—

Renegotiation of agreement ...........................................
Formal settlement reached:
All issues resolved......................................
Unresolved issues
rem aining................................................
No formal settlement reached:
Short protest or
sympathy s tr ik e ....................................
Strike broken .............................................
Work resumed under court
injunction .........................................................
Work resumed pending CISC
action2 ................................................................
Employer out of business....................................

368

100.0

514

100.0

286

100.0

290

100.0

245

66.6

489

95.1

258

90.2

266

91.7

119

32.4

21

4.1

12

4.2

13

4.5

2
2

0.4
0.4

1
8

0.3
2.8

2
8

.7
2.8

—

2

0.7

1

.3

—
-

5
—

1.7
-

During term of agreement................................................
Formal settlement reached:
All issues resolved......................................
Unresolved issues remaining ...............................
No formal settlement reached:
Short protest or
sympathy s tr ik e ....................................
Strike broken .............................................
Work resumed under court
injunction .........................................................
Work resumed pending CISC
action2 ................................................................
Employer out of business....................................

531

100.0

546

100.0

392

100.0

365

100.0

76
409

14.3
77.0

109
394

20.0
72.2

76
281

19.4
71.7

85
247

23.3
67.7

23
15

4.0
2.8

33
7

6.0
1.3

15
6

3.8
1.5

18
5

4.9
1.4

8

1.5

3

0.5

13

3.3

9

2.5

1

—
0.2

—
-

11

100.0

No contract or no information on
contract s ta tu s ..............................................................

—

-

—

4
—

-

—

—

—

—

-

-

—

—

1 See footnote 1, table 4.
2The Construction Industry Stabilization Committee (CISC)
was empowered to review the amount of each settlement, and
would allow it or disallow it in accordance with its guidelines. If




—

1.1

20

—

—
-

—
1

—
0.3

100.0

25

100.0

—

-

-

—
-

1

—
.3

16

100.0

—

disallowed, it would be returned to the parties for renegotiation.
NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros.

Table 6.

Percentage of contract term work stoppages by procedure for handling unsettled issues, 1965-72
Procedure for handling
unsettled issues

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

100.0
.7
.4
61.6
37.3

100.0
1.7
.4
58.3
39.7

100.0
.4
4.0
61.4
34.2

100.0
1.2
4.3
56.2
38.3

100.0
1.7
.5
46.9
50.9

100.0
.6
2.5
63.7
33.2

100.0
.9
2.9
62.9
33.4

100.0
2.9
.1
60.2
36.8

Percent of stoppages ending in the year
During term of agreement................................................
A rb itra tio n ..............................................................
Direct negotiations................................................
Referral to a government agency........................
Private and other means ......................................

100.0
1.6
2.5
1.6
94.3

100.0
1.5
.9
1.8
95.9

100.0
.4
.4
1.1
97.8

100.0
3.8
.3
1.9
94.0

100.0
2.2
.6
17.1
80.1

100.0
1.0
.8
63.2
35.0

Percent of workers involved
During term of agreem ent................................................
A rb itra tio n ..............................................................
Direct negotiations................................................
Referral to a government agency........................
Private and other m e a n s ......................................

100.0
1.0
16.2
13.7
69.0

100.0
3.1
3.7
8.2
85.0

100.0
2.1
3.7
2.1
92.1

During term of agreement................................................
A rb itra tio n ..............................................................
Direct negotiations.......................................... . .
Referral to a government agency........................
Private and other means ......................................

100.0
1.2
11.4
10.3
77.1

100.0
4.3
3.8
18.2
73.7

100.0
1.8
2.4
2.5
93.2

100.0
6.8
1.5
2.8
88.9

100.0
4.0
1.7
23.3
71.0

Percent of Days idle

NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals.




100.0
6.0
.8
2.9
90.4

100.0
2.5
1.0
31.5
65.0

Trends in strike activity

A monthly distribution of construction work stop­
pages closely reflects the prevailing pattern of contract
expirations in the industry. The bulk of construction
agreements expire during the second quarter of the year;
levels of idleness peak in May and June. In fact, more
than 45 percent of the total man-days of idleness from
1967-71 occurred during these 2 months. In terms of the
number of strikes, the single most active month was
May, having an annual average of 151 beginning strikes
during the 5-year period. (See table A-2.) On the other
hand all strikes do not end in the month they began.
When the total number of strikes in effect are counted—
those that began in a month combined with those that
continued from previous months—June was the peak
month. Over the 5-year period, June averaged 195 such
stoppages involving approximately 156,000 workers who
on the average accumulated more than 2 million days of
idleness each year.
A comparison of rates of change in quarterly mandays of idleness points up the existence of variations
among quarters in the intensity of strike activity. First
quarter idleness, for example, varied widely over the
1967-72 period, according to table 7. Idleness during
this quarter rose abruptly from 1967 to 1968 and 1969
to 1970, but fell sharply between 1968 and 1969. It
declined modestly during 1970-71, and somewhat more
in the 1971-72 period. Since few contracts are renego­
Table 7.

tiated during the first quarter, it is probable that a
significant proportion of that idleness was due to
jurisdictional disputes and other noncontract issues.
During the second and third quarters, however, the
direction of the patterns of idleness is much more
consistent. Man-days of idleness during the second and
third quarters climbed steadily each year from 1967 to
1970. In both quarters there was a substantial decline in
1971. Second and third quarter idleness increased 74
and 30 percent respectively in 1972. While idleness
climbed substantially during the second quarter of
1967-68, this same quarter’s idleness grew much more
slowly during 1968-69 and 1969-70. Again, this is the
period which had the greatest number of contract
expirations. It is evident that economic forces were at
work as early as 1968, which were very effective in
sharply reducing the rate of increases in comparison with
the 1967-68 experience. The fact that idleness rose
substantially during the third quarter of each year from
1967 through 1970, illustrates the increasing duration of
these stoppages as well as the rising numbers of workers
involved over 1967 levels. This tendency toward longer
stoppages may also be substantiated by reference to
table 8 . As was the case with the first quarter, the fourth
quarter experienced an uneven pattern of idleness with a
very conspicuous increase during 1969-70. The cause of
this increase is traceable to four major strikes which
were in process during the fourth quarter of 1970. Table
A-3 describes these stoppages in detail.

Quarterly days of idleness and annual rates of change, 1967-72

Quarter

1967

1968

172.8
3286.4
1374.9
331.2

305.4
5531.4
2599.1
287.1

1969

1970

1971

1972

295.5
2368.9
2485.7
1702.4

147.4
4110.3
3209.5
376.7

Days of idleness (in thousands)
I .................................
II ...............................
I l l ...............................
I V ...............................

143.4
6214.7
3723.8
303.7

343.1
7025.3
5944.5
1927.4

Rates of change

I .................................
II ...............................
I l l ...............................
I V ...............................




1967-68

1968-69

1969-70

1970-71

1971-72

+76.7
+68.3
+89.0
- 1 3 .3

- 5 3 .0
+12.4
+43.3
+5.8

+139.3
+13.0
+59.6
+534.6

- 1 4 .7
- 6 6 .3
- 5 8 .2
- 1 1 .7

-5 0 .1
+73.5
+29.5
- 7 7 .9

Table 8.
Work stoppages ending during the year in contract construction and all industry, by mean and median
duration, 1962-73
Contract Construction
Year

Mean
duration
(calendar
days)

Median
duration

14
12
14
13
13
15
17
18
21
19
17
( 3)

7
6
6
7
7
7
9
9
11
8
8
(3)

1962 .............................
1963 .............................
1964 .............................
1965 .............................
1966 ............................
1967 ............................
1968 ............................
1969 .............................
1970 .............................
1 9 7 1 .............................
1972 ..................... .. . .
1973 ............................

All Industry
Weighted
mean
duration1

Mean
duration

Median
duration

(2)
(2)

25
23
23
25
22
23
25
23
25
27
24
24

9
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
8
9

(2)
15
23
30
36
41
37
28
25
28

Weighted
mean
duration1

(2>
<2)
( 2)
( 2>
(2>
(2>
30
28
29
22
28
20

W eighted by multiplying the duration of each stoppage by
the number of workers involved.

2 Data for weighted mean is not available during these years.
3 Data not available.

Table A-l shows the annual rate of change in
man-days of idleness. Prior to 1964, the industry had
experienced an irregular pattern of annual changes in the
rate of idleness. That year, 1964, signaled the start of a
relatively steady growth in strike idleness which, aside
from a modest dip in 1967, was to continue through the
end of the decade. Specifically, idleness rose from less
than 2 million man-days in 1963 to more than 15
million during the peak year, 1970. The rate of annual
increase was most pronounced in 1968, when idleness
was more than two-thirds higher than in the previous
year.
While the number of stoppages increased only 5.2
percent, the 1968 surge in idleness was the combined
result of a 20 percent growth in the number of workers
involved along with a 13 percent rise in average duration.
Idleness continued to rise over the next 2 years, but at a

much reduced rate. In 1970, however, the number of
workers participating in these strikes rose 43.4 percent
while average duration increased nearly 17 percent. The
net effect was to push the level of idleness higher than it
had been in any year in the post-war period.
In contrast, data for 1971 showed marked reductions
in all three strike measures. In that year the number of
stoppages dropped by more than one-third, workers
involved decreased by more than 1-quarter, and idleness
fell sharply by more than one-half. While total idleness
remained nearly 205 percent over the January 1970
level, by 1971, January idleness had actually decreased
55.9 percent over the previous month’s level. More
importantly, this decline continued into February, when
idleness dropped 77.7 percent under the January level
and was down 18 percent from a year before. Even
though idleness increased a seasonal 138.7 percent in

Table 9.

Percent change in monthly days of idleness, 1969-72
1969

1971

1970

1972

Month

From the
previous
month

From
1 year
ago

From the
previous
month

From
1 year
ago

From the
previous
month

From
1 year
ago

From the
previous
month

From
1 year
ago

January .............................
February ..........................
M arc h .................................
A p r il....................................
M a y ....................................
J u n e ....................................

+
9.9
21.4
+ 21.7
+3248.0
+ 35.3
+
0.4

- 40.4
- 64.9
- 50.3
+208.0
- 14.4
3.2

- 16.8
- 16.5
+432.7
+451.0
+108.5
+ 3.8

+ 4.4
+ 10.9
+385.8
- 20.1
+ 23.2
+ 27.2

- 55.9
- 77.7
+138.7
+141.0
+362.7
+ 17.6

+205
- 18
- 63.4
- 84.0
- 64.5
- 59.8

~ 94.1
- 65.9
+222.3
+916.7
+ 83.5
+ 77.3

- 63.7
- 44.6
- 25.2
+215.5
+ 25.1
+ 88.6

July ....................................
A u g u s t...............................
September ........................
O c to b e r.............................
Novem ber..........................
December..........................

-

+
+
+
+
-

+
-

+ 19.6
+ 16.3
+760.2
+524.0
+439.0
+731.5

- 22.7
+ 45.0
- 78.6
- 75.3
+776.6
+ 69.7

- 65.6
- 15.6
- 84.3
- 94.0
+ 54.4
+172.2

- 12.6
- 51.3
- 62.0
- 56.9
- 25.3
4.9

+113.1
- 28.4
+ 19.5
+121.9
- 81.1
- 89.4




3.9
39.2
- 84.4
10.5
60.8
37.6

47.1
40.2
26.7
57.7
40.3
4.6

9.7
40.9
15.2
35.1
66.1
3.8

March 1971, this was less than one-third of the previous
year’s increase during the same month, and a drop of
63.4 percent from the March 1970 level. This trend
continued during April 1971; the rise in idleness was
once again less than one-third of the previous year’s
increase in April while absolute idleness had dropped 84
percent from 1 year before. Compared to the April level,
idleness increased sharply in May, yet in absolute
amounts it remained at only 35 percent of the May,
1970 level. During the heavy bargaining months of June
and July 1971, strike idleness continued at only twofifths of that recorded a year before. It would appear
that the impact of the CISC and other factors were felt
early and throughout 1971.
1971: The turning point

Idleness began its initial decline in January 1971,
several months before the CISC came into being. This, in
comparison to the first quarter of 1970, when idleness
was high, the decrease in idleness during January,
February, and March of 1971 as well as a 21-percent
decline in the number of new strikes during these 3
months suggests that factors other than the CISC were at
work which contributed to a drop in strike activity early
in 1971. Foremost among these was continued high
unemployment in the industry.
From an annual average of 6 percent in 1969, the rate
of construction unemployment climbed to 9.7 percent
in 1970 and reached a high of 10.4 percent during 1971.
In comparison, the national rate for men, 20 years old
and over, ranged from a low of 2.1 percent in 1969, to
4.4 percent during 1971. (See table 2.) Historically, high
unemployment has often been associated with a marked
drop in strike intensity, as measured by a reduction in
monthly man-days of idleness.
Next, nonunion contractors are reported to have been
gaining a rapidly increasing share of new contract
awards.53 Union leaders were becoming increasingly
aware of this trend and realized that continued large
general wage increases, often associated with lengthy
work stoppages, would further weaken the union’s
competitive position .54 Finally, many national unions
5 3For example, see Damon Stetson, “Building Trades’
Leaders Voice Worry as Nonunion Hiring Rises,” The New York
Times, Feb. 11, 1972. Also, Howard G. Foster, “Unions, Resi­
dential Construction, and Public Policy,” Quarterly Review o f
Economics and Business, Vol. 12, No. 4 Winter, 1972, pp. 45-55.
54 For detailed discussion of 1 union’s reaction to growing
nonunion competition, see the statement of Edward J. Carlough,
President of the Sheet Metal Workers International Association
to the New York Building Congress on Mar. 8, 1972, available
from the union’s international headquarters at 1000 Connecticut
Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.




and contractors anticipated the development of Federal
regulation of the industry early in 1971. There were,
however, few indications of the comprehensive system
of wage regulation which was finally implemented. The
temporary suspension of the Davis-Bacon Act on Feb­
ruary 23, 1971 for example, was dismissed by a majority
of industry representatives as having no more than a
marginal effect on 1971 negotiations.55 Even though
the President conferred on the subject with industry
leaders at the White House on January 18, 1971, in the
judgement of CISC Chairman D. Quinn Mills, these
private discussions merely “established that national
leadership in the industry was incapable of applying
effective restraints to local collective bargaining.”56
Such unresponsiveness on the part of local union
negotiators implies that prior to the actual establishment
of the CISC on March 29, the several attempts by public
officials to encourage voluntary participation in an
effective program of wage stabilization and dispute
settlement were unseccessful. After April, unions could
not help but realize the futility of striking for excessive
wage increases which would later be rejected by the
CISC. At the same time, contractors were reluctant to
hold the line against costly union bargaining demands
and thus incur a lengthy strike when they expected the
committee to ultimately roll back any wage settlement
not in keeping with CISC guidelines.
The effect of CISC’s contribution to 197l ’s reduced
strike activity probably was not fully felt until the third
and fourth quarters of the year, when work stoppages
were reduced by more than 27 percent from 1970 levels
while idleness fell considerably. (See table 7.) Due to the
combined effects of high unemployment, growing non­
union competition, and the wage stabilization program,
the frequency of work stoppages in 1971 was reduced to
its lowest level in over a decade.
This favorable downward trend tapered off in 1972,
however, as the number of strikes recorded decreased by
just 6.7 percent while workers who withheld their
services increased by less than 1 percent. Man-days of
idleness increased about 15 percent over the preceeding
year’s record high.
Part of the reason for 1972’s only modest reduction
in the number of strikes may have been a reported 55
percent increase in contract expirations over the pre­
ceeding year.
First quarter idleness, shown in table 7, dropped
considerably in 1972 in comparison with the previous
year; it is during the second quarter that the greatest
5 5Daniel Quinn Mills, “Construction Industry Wage Stabiliza­
tion,” Proceedings, Industrial Relations Research Association,
May, 1972, p. 353.
56Ibid., p. 352.

part of 1972’s increase in idleness accrued. Here, idleness
rose nearly 74 percent over that recorded during 1971,
while the number of workers involved rose almost 109
percent. During the third quarter, idleness advanced at a
much more modest rate, up nearly 30 percent over the
third quarter of 1971. Workers involved rose 25 percent.
Finally, fourth quarter idleness dropped abruptly, down
almost 78 percent from 1 year earlier, along with a
similar, sharp reduction in workers involved.
While construction employment has grown steadily,
the 701 stoppages experienced in 1972 was the smallest
n umb er the i n d u s t r y had seen since 1951
when only 651 stoppages were recorded. Nineteen
seventy-three results indicate a further reduction in
strike activity. Only 539 stoppages were recorded during
the year, a 23 percent reduction over 1972. The number
of workers involved decreased to 367, 354, the lowest
since 1968. Days of idleness in 1973 were less than half
the number recorded in 1972. (See table A-l.) Clearly,
the 1972-73 performance is indicative of the effective­
ness of the industry’s wage control program as well a s,
the factors previously discussed.
Worker involvement in strikes

The number of workers involved in strikes is a
primary measure of the seriousness of a work stoppage.
However, for a number of reasons, it is an indicator that
should be used cautiously. In the first place, the statistic
indicates only the numerical aspect of involvement, but
gives little insight into the nature of worker dissatisfac­
tion. For example, in years when the size of strikes
appears to rise (as was the case in the 1964-65 period
and again in 1968-70), it is necessary to ask whether this
was the result of a change in the kinds of issues that
induce workers to strike. Worker involvement rose
almost 22 percent between 1964 and 1965. But this
increase in strike participation was rooted in disagree­
ments over survival issues such as union security,
working conditions, and work assignments, rather than
wage issues as in the preceeding year. Thus, the
aforementioned 22 percent increase in the number of
workers striking over survival issues may imply an
entirely different kind of worker dissatisfaction than a
similar increase in workers striking over economic issues.
Second, although the term “workers involved” is
often popularly interpreted as being equivalent to the
number of “ strikers,” the statistics are actually inclusive
of employees in the same establishment who became
involuntarily unemployed because their fellow-workers
were on strike. Because of the difficulties involved, no
attempt has been made to estimate the number of such
workers who became indirectly involved in strikes.



Moreover, there is no data available to indicate that
there have been significant year-to-year changes in
involuntary participation. Third, there may be some
workers who strike more than once in a year and hence
would be counted more than once in the figures for total
worker involvement. Finally, the number of workers
involved needs to be interpreted in terms of changes in
the size of the labor force and changes in the number of
workers belonging to trade unions, since both of these
parameters clearly set limits on the number of potential
strikers. Between 1962 and 1972, union membership in
the building trades rose from 2.4 million to nearly 2.8
million, while the number of available jobs increased
from 2.9 million to over 3.5 million.57
In addition to these statistical qualifications, the
distribution of worker involvement varies considerably
just as the size of establishments in the economy varies.
Just as there are many more small than large establish­
ments, there are many more small than large strikes.
During the period 1965-72, according to table A-4,
well over one-half of all construction stoppages involved
less than 100 workers. Even though prevalent, these
small strikes accounted for only slightly over 4 percent
of total worker involvement in building industry dis­
putes. Almost half were settled within 1 week. (See table
10.) They were responsible for only 2.4 percent of the
industry’s idleness over the 8-year period. During 1971,
for example, the proportion of small strikes in construc­
tion was about 20 percent greater than in the rest of the
economy, while the proportion of workers involved was
more than 1-quarter lower, and days of idleness re­
mained more than six times lower.58
About 30 percent of all stoppages involved more than
100, but less than 500, workers. These strikes of
moderate size were responsible for 13.2 percent of all
workers involved and 9.1 percent of all man-days of
idleness that accumulated during 1965-72. The building
industry’s share of these moderate size strikes is 25
percent below the proportion attained by all American
industry, indicating that strikes of this size are relatively
less common in construction.
While these small and moderately sized strikes are the
most frequent, their impact, in terms of workers and
idleness, is relatively small. Stoppages involving more
51Directory o f National Unions and Employee Associations
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1974 and past years), and Employ­
ment and Earnings, United States 1909-72. Bull. 1312-9 (BLS,
1972). Care should be used in comparing these figures since the
population the figures are drawn from differs in several aspects.
Unions, for example, often count retired members in their active
membership figures. They would not, of course, be counted as
employees by the BLS.
58Analysis o f Work Stoppages, Bull. 1777, Table A-6
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1971).

Size and duration
(calendar days)

1967

1966

1965

1968

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

All stoppages....................................................

944

100.0

973

100.0

874

100.0

911

100.0

Under 100 w o rk e rs ...........................................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
100 and under 500 workers ...........................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
500 and under 10,000 w o rk e rs ......................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
10,000 workers and o v e r..................................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................

623
311

100.0
49.9

570
315

100.0
55.3

532
254

100.0
47.7

496
239

100.0
48.2

260

41.7

214

37.5

223

41.9

203

40.9

41
11
217
118

6.6
1.8
100.0
54.4

35
6
292
133

6.1
1.1
100.0
45.5

46
9
231
101

8.6
1.7
100.0
43.7

48
6
280
89

9.7
1.2
100.0
31.8

78

35.9

129

44.2

100

43.3

126

45.0

19
2
100
33

8.8
0.9
100.0
33.0

25
5
99
35

8.6
1.7
100.0
35.4

28
2
107
38

12.1
.9
100.0
35.5

59
6
130
31

21.1
2.1
100.0
23.8

47

47.0

44

44.4

40

37.4

61

46.9

20
—
4
—

20.0
100.0
—

19
1
12
1

19.2
1.0
100.0
8.3

25
4
4
—

23.4
3.7
100.0
—

36
2
5
—

27.7
1.5
100.0
—

1

25.0

6

50.0

1

25.0

2

40.0

3
—

75.0
—

5
—

41.7
—

3
—

75.0
—

3
—

60.0
—

1970

1969

1971

1972

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

All stoppages....................................................

968

100.0

1133

100.0

754

100.0

705

100.0

Under 100 w o rk e rs ...........................................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
100 and under 500 workers ...........................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
500 and under 10,000 w o rk e rs ......................................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................
10,000 workers and over ................................. ................
Less than 7 d a y s ....................................................
7 days but less than
30 days ..............................................................
30 days but less than
90 days ..............................................................
90 days and o v e r....................................................

550
252

100.0
45.8

624
267

100.0
42.8

450
197

100.0
43.8

409
187

100.0
45.7

212

38.5

253

40.5

185

41.1

162

39.6

78
8
277
96

14.2
1.5
100.0
34.7

92
12
323
104

14.7
1.9
100.0
32.2

54
14
216
86

12.0
3.1
100.0
39.8

54
6
200
74

13.2
1.5
100.0
37.0

110

39.7

141

43.7

78

36.1

81

40.5

62
9
133
42

22.4
3.2
100.0
31.6

69
9
159
38

21.4
2.8
100.0
23.9

48
4
79
21

22.2
1.9
100.0
26.6

37
8
87
37

18.5
4.0
100.0
42.6

53

39.8

50

31.4

33

41.8

35

40.2

35
3
8

26.3
2.3
100.0

60
11
9
3

37.7
6.9
100.0
33.3

22
3
9
1

27.8
3.8
100.0
11.1

13
2
9
2

14.9
2.3
100.0
22.2

1

12.5

2

22.2

4

44.4

3

33.3

6
1

75.0
12.5

3
1

33.3
11.1

3
1

33.3
11.1

3
1

33.3
11.1

1 Totals in this table differ from those in table A-1 because
these stoppages ended during the year and thus include idleness
occurring in prior years.




NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros,

than 500 but less than 10,000 workers constitute only
13 percent of all construction stoppages, yet they
account for 42 percent of all participating workers and
almost 40 percent of all days idle during the period 1965
to 1972.
The average size of construction work stoppages has
remained relatively constant since 1965. Since there
exists a relatively high concentration of workers (almost
two-fifths) involved in strikes of 10,000 or more, any
measure of the average number of strikers will tend to be
heavily influenced by these major stoppages. In view of
this, table 11 stratifies the average number of strikers by
size groups, thereby reducing the effect of wide variance
in the number of workers.
The average number of workers involved per stoppage
(excluding major strikes) remained relatively constant
over the years 1965-72. Yet, 1971 and 1972 show a
considerable increase in the average measure in the more
than 100 but less than 500 workers size group due to a
64 percent decrease in the number o f stoppages com­
bined with only a 33 percent drop in the number of
workers.
Major strikes

In marked contrast, as a percent of all striking
employees, the number of workers involved in major
strikes (10,000 workers or more) has grown noticeably,
especially since 1967. Even in 1971, a modest year for
strike activity due in part to the restraint furnished by
the CISC’s wage control policies, over 60 percent of all
striking employees participated in major strikes. The
number of striking workers climbed 303 percent be­
tween 1967 and 1971. In like manner, the proportion of
idleness attributable to major strikes rose 240 percent
over this period.
Major strikes are relatively rare, accounting for less
than 1 percent of all construction stoppages. NevertheTable 11.
Average number o f workers involved per
stoppage, for selected size groups, 1965-72
Size group
Year

Under
100
workers

100 and
under
500
workers

500 and
under
10,000
workers

10,000
workers
and
over

1965 ...................
1966 ...................
1967 ...................
1968 ...................
1969 ...................
1970 ...................
1 9 7 1 ...................
1972 ...................

33.4
33.7
33.6
35.9
32.7
34.4
34.0
35.2

217.1
216.1
222.1
226.4
227.1
220.4
407.8
406.9

1581.0
1806.1
1563.6
1403.8
1438.3
1696.2
1510.1
1842.5

18,900.0
15,700.0
17,500.0
20,200.0
20,000.0
27,000.0
31,400.0
24,100.0




less, these disputes involved an average of somewhat
under two-fifths of all workers and one-half o f all
idleness during 1965-72. In relative terms, this level of
idleness approximates the total economy average for
major work stoppages of nearly one-half of all idleness
over the same period.
Prolonged duration is a characteristic of major strikes,
apparently because such strikes are more difficult to
settle than those of smaller size. Frequently, there may
be several crafts negotiating with the struck employer’s
association, with each craft trying to equal or better the
gains achieved by its bargaining predecessor. At the same
time, employers are trying to maintain existing wage and
fringe benefit relationships.
Where only 485,000 workers took part in major
stoppages from 1962-66, nearly 857,000 did so during
the 1967-71 period. This marked rise in workers
participating in major strikes came largely after 1969. In
that year, an average of 20,000 workers took part in
each of eight major work stoppages. Even though the
number of these stoppages increased to a total of 9 in
1970 and 1971, the average number of workers partici­
pating in major strikes rose to 27,000 in 1970 and
reached over 31,000 during 1971, and then dropped
sharply to almost 24,000 in 1972. (See table 11.)
Similarly, average idleness due to major stoppages
rose unevenly from 1.6 million man-days in 1967 to a
5-year high of over 6 million man-days in 1969. The
substantially higher idleness in this year was primarily
the result of two prolonged and sizable strikes, one in
Kansas City, Missouri, which lasted 119 calendar days
and idled 37,000 workers; the other in St. Louis, which
continued for 84 days and involved 20,000 employees.
These strikes for wage increases and improved supple­
mentary benefits accounted for over half of the mandays of idleness attributed to major stoppages during
1969.
Again, due to a strike in Kansas City, major strike
idleness declined only slightly in 1970. This dispute
began on April 1, and kept 27,000 construction workers
off their jobs for 197 days. A similar stoppage in
Birmingham, Alabama, which began in September, idled
15,000 workers for 135 days. These two strikes, over
wages and working conditions, accounted for more than
one-half of the recorded major strike idleness in 1970.
Total idleness in construction decreased by two-fifths
between 1970 and 1971. However, idleness due to major
strikes decreased only 7.5 percent from 1970 to 1971,
but the number of workers involved in these stoppages
rose from 243,000 in 1970 to nearly 283,000 in 1971,
indicating a moderate decrease in duration. There are
indications that both contractors and unions realized the
futility of their participation in lengthy strikes and

negotiations resulting in excessive settlements which
would ultimately be rejected by the CISC.
As a proportion of all days of idleness, major strike
idleness rose sharply from 41.5 percent in 1970 to
nearly 65 percent in 1971, and then decreased to 59.4
percent in 1972.
A leading cause of this substantial rise in relative
idleness during 1971 was the occurrence of two massive
work stoppages, each larger in terms of workers involved
than any strike in recent decades. The first of these
occurred on August 2, 1971, when 65,000 building trade
workers walked off their jobs in support of striking
teamsters on construction sites in Northern and Central
California. This dispute, over wages and working condi­
tions, lasted 33 days and was responsible for over
1,200,000 man-days of idleness during 1971. The strike
was settled on November 3, and was followed by an even
larger stoppage which began on November 28 when
approximately 3,500 teamsters struck construction sites
in 11 Southern California counties. During the dispute’s
15 days’ duration, more than 116,000 other construc­
tion workers refused to cross the Teamster’s picket lines,
resulting in more than 1.5 million man-days of idleness.
(See table A-3.)
Major strike idleness continued to decline from the
decade’s record high of over 6 million days in 1969 to
less than 4 million during 1972. In contrast to the
preceding year, the number of workers involved de­
creased in 1972. Only 217,000 workers participated, a
reduction of more than 23 percent over 1971.
As in recent years, nearly half of all major strike
idleness in 1972 resulted from two stoppages, each
responsible for more than 1 million days of idleness. The
first of these began on June 12 when 50,000 building
trade workers did not report to work in support of
striking Cement Masons and Iron Workers in Minneapolis
and vicinity. This strike lasted 39 days. It resulted
primarily from a dispute over hiring practices, as well as
economic issues. Negotiations were stalled for some time
as management sought to eliminate a clause in the old
contract which required subcontractors to abide by the
same hiring agreement the general contractor pledged to
follow. In the new agreement, the subcontracting clause
remained unchanged. The dispute accounted for 1.4
million days of idleness in 1972.
The longest major strike of the year began on July 1,
when 22,600 construction workers struck against the
Building Trades Employers Association in New York
City. A major issue in the dispute, particularly among
the Elevator Constructors, was the treatment of senior­
ity. The union demanded that length of service be the
sole determining factor whenever job cutbacks are
necessary. The unions also sought an increase in wages




and benefits. This dispute lasted 110 days and was
responsible for over 1 million man-days of idleness in
1972.
According to preliminary data, major strike idleness
again dropped sharply in 1973, to just over two-thirds of
the 1972 level.
The estimated 1.2 million days of major strike
idleness accumulated in 1973 is the lowest level since
1964. Moreover, in 1973 only 143,600 workers were
involved compared to 217,000 in the previous year. The
majority of 1973’s idleness could be traced to just two
lengthy stoppages. The first major strike of the year was
also the longest. On May 1, New Jersey contracts
covering carpenters, bricklayers, and laborers expired,
resulting in a 22-day walkout which idled 15,000
workers. According to news reports, a major issue in the
negotiations was management’s demand for an 8-hour
work day from the carpenters, who had been working
7-hour days for several years. This stoppage resulted in
240,000 man-days of idleness.
The New Jersey stoppage was followed by a much
larger strike which began in June when 300 members of
the Operating Engineers Local 701 in the vicinity of
Portland, Oregon, initiated a 20-day work stoppage
following unsuccessful efforts to negotiate a new con­
tract. During an exchange of suit and counter-suit filed
with the NLRB over alleged “refusals to bargain,” the
engineers’ strike ultimately caused 15,000 workers to
withhold their services at about 20 construction sites in
Oregon and southwestern Washington. Nonwage issues
highlighted the engineers’ demands. For example, the
union asked for a morning and afternoon “stretch
break” for men working on heavy machinery. Another
request was for soundproofing and air conditioning of
cabs to reduce noise, heat, dust, and smoke inhalation.
The union contended that scraper operators, for ex­
ample, endured 122-degree temperatures inside the cabs
on some days. By the strike’s end, 63 days later, this
stoppage, the largest during 1973, totalled over 660,000
days of idleness.
At the same time the Portland engineers were
protesting their working conditions, laborers struck in
Chicago on June 1, following the expiration of their
1972-73 contract. In addition to wage demands, chief
issues were requests by the contractor association to
alter the existing agreement under which laborers were
paid time and a half for Saturday work, regardless of
how many hours they worked during the week. The
contractors wanted a different arrangement: If a day’s
work is rained out during the week the contractor could
require men to work on Saturday with no special
compensation and pay them for a straight 40-hour week.
Moreover, the contractors wanted a 2-year agreement

while the union insisted on a 1-year contract. Neither
was to prevail, however, since the CISC finally approved
a 3-year agreement which gave the laborers a 40-centsper-hour wage increase over the term of the contract.
The final agreement contained no changes in Saturday
work rules. This short strike, called by 15,000 laborers,
ultimately involved an additional 85,000 carpenters,
cement masons, and iron workers, resulting in approxi­
mately 200,000 days of idleness.
On August 13, the same day Operating Engineers
Local 701 in Oregon and Washington ratified their
settlement, the final major strike of the year began. This
time 13,600 carpenters and laborers in the same locality
struck, shutting down approximately 80 percent of all
major construction jobs in Oregon and Southwestern
Washington, according to a spokesperson for the Asso­
ciated General Contractors.59 A number of issues were
involved, including length of contract, overtime pro­
visions and the basic wage scale. But the chief issue
seemed to be a dispute over the union’s demand for a
new dues checkoff procedure.
After 7 days on the picket lines, the carpenters and
laborers withdrew their demands for the new dues
checkoff and reported back to work, ending a strike that
resulted in almost 100,000 days of idleness.
Duration

Like worker involvement, strike duration provides a
measure of the parties’ temporary incapacity to resolve
their differences. Because of wide variation in the size of
strikes, the significance of this measure is difficult to
interpret.60 The average strike duration for both con­
struction and total industry is shown in table 8. There
was only minor variation in mean duration between
1962 and 1966, from 12 days in 1963 to 14 days in
1962 and 1964. During the next 4 years this average rose
each year, reaching a high of 21 days in 1970. Mean
duration then declined to 19 days in 1971, and 17 days
in 1972. The average duration of construction work
stoppages has been noticeably below the rest of Ameri­
can industry, primarily because of the higher proportion
of brief jurisdictional disputes.
59 Dan Mercer, chairman of the AGC’s wage-labor committee
quoted in Portland’s Journal o f Commerce, Aug. 14, 1973.
6 °This simple average provides an inadequate summary figure
of the true impact of strike duration because the values being
averaged, i.e., the number of days a strike continues, are of
widely varying degrees of importance. For example, a work
stoppage of 3 days duration involving only 50 workers has a
much lesser impact on man-days of idleness than a second
stoppage also lasting 3 days but involving 5,000 workers. Yet the
simple average duration treats each of these strikes as statistically
equivalent.




Median duration in construction generally followed
the pattern set by the mean. It ranged narrowly between
6 and 7 days from 1962 to 1966. Over the next 6 years
the median rose to a peak of 11 days in 1970 and then
declined to 8 days during 1971 and 1972. Thus one-half
of all construction industry strikes continued for less
than a week and a half. The divergence between the
mean and the median indicates that some lengthy
stoppages remained unsettled for a much longer period
than did the median strike. This result is even more
pronounced for industry generally with mean duration
reaching two-and-a-half times the median, according to
table 8.
To overcome the deficiencies characteristic of the
simple mean, table 8 also presents mean duration
weighted by workers involved. In this parameter, strike
duration is directly related to size of stoppage. Both
measures of mean strike duration climbed sharply during
the expansionary period 1966-69. Mean duration rose
nearly 40 percent between 1966 and 1969, but weighted
mean duration rose even faster, reaching a peak of 41
days in 1969, almost 80 percent above the 1966 level.
This suggests that the larger stoppages, especially those
involving 10,000 workers or more, tended to be of
longer duration than stoppages involving smaller num­
bers of workers. The observed longer duration of larger
stoppages may be due to the fact that they often involve
contract negotiations while the smaller stoppages are
frequently associated with a large proportion of jurisdic­
tional disputes which are usually resolved in a short
period of time. Unlike the building industry, mean
duration rose unevenly in all American industry during
this period, from 22 days in 1966 to 25 days in 1968
and dropped back to 23 days in 1969. Mean duration
then rose by 2 days in 1970 and again by the same
amount in 1971, before returning to 24 days in 1972.
Following 1970, the mean and weighted mean dura­
tions experienced sharp declines in construction as rising
unemployment and consumer prices may have made it
more expensive for workers to remain off the jobsite for
extended periods. Unemployment in the industry rose
from 206,100 in 1969 to 354,700 in 1971, an increase
of more than 72 percent. Such rising unemployment is
in sharp contrast with the steady decline in joblessness
experienced during the first half of the decade. During
the 1969-71 period, the Consumer Price Index advanced
10.5 percent, a rate of increase slightly above the already
record-high advance of the previous 2-year period. In
addition, the economic stabilization program initiated in
early 1971 probably helped to further accelerate the
decline in both mean and weighted mean duration.
While median duration ranged from 7 to 11 days
during 1967-71, the basic reference period, 40 percent

o f all construction stoppages during this period ended in
less than 1 week. Of those brief stoppages, almost 24
percent were resolved within 3 days, while nearly 10
percent lasted only 1 day. Of stoppages lasting more
than 1 week, 64 percent were settled within 2 weeks.
Stoppages ending within 2 weeks accounted for only
34.7 percent of the workers involved and 7.1 percent of
the man-days idle during the half-decade.
In terms of days of idleness it is the longer stoppages-those extending beyond 30 days-which account
for the greatest share of industry idleness. These
stoppages were responsible for only 19 percent of all
strikes, yet nearly 44 percent of workers involved and
almost 79 percent of all idleness is attributed to them.
Between 1965 and 1972, the proportion of workers
involved and man-days of idleness traceable to these
stoppages have remained essentially similar with the
exception of 1966, when the number of workers
involved dipped to 26.4 percent while man-days of
idleness dropped to 56.4 percent.61
Beginning in 1967, the proportion of workers in­

Table 12.

volved in prolonged strikes—those lasting 90 days or
longer—increased significantly. (See table A-5). During
that year, over 10,000 construction workers accumu­
lated more than 837,000 man-days of idleness-more
than a three-fold increase in worker involvement and
idleness over the preceeding year. This trend continued
during the next 3 years, as the number of workers
involved in these stoppages climbed to more than 61,000
in 1970. Idleness in prolonged strikes reached nearly 5
million man-days in that year; such stoppages were
responsible for 36 percent of all man-days of idleness
incurred by the industry. In contrast, during 1965-66,
prolonged strikes accounted for only 2.7 percent of all
construction idleness.
During the inflationary upturn of the late 60’s and
early 70’s an increasing proportion of prolonged strikes
were attributable to economic issues. Table 12 illustrates
61 1966 was not a year o f moderation for construction strikes
generally. In that year the industry registered the highest level of
workers involved and man-days of idleness since 1953, as well as
the third highest level on record to that date.

Work stoppages in contract construction by duration and major issue, selected years,

1965-721
Duration and major issue
(calendar day)

1967

1965
Number

Percent

1971

1969

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

1972

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

944

100.0

874

100.0

968

100.0

754

100.0

705

100.0

Less than 30 d a y s ........................
Economic issues..............
Union organization and
security ........................
Working conditions..........
Interunion or Intraunion
m atters..........................
Other contractual matters
& not rep orted ............

848
230

100.0
27.1

757
212

100.0
28.0

766
229

100.0
29.9

605
175

100.0
28.9

581
205

100.0
35.3

109
107

12.9
12.6

91
71

12.0
9.4

56
81

7.3
10.6

66
63

10.9
10.4

45
66

7.7
11.4

391

46.1

378

49.9

392

51.2

281

46.4

252

43.4

11

1.3

5

.6

8

1.0

20

3.3

13

2.2

30 days but less than 90 days . .
Economic issues..............
Union organization and
security ........................
Working conditions..........
Interunion or Intraunion
matters ..........................
Other contractual matters
& not rep orted ............

83
40

100.0
48.2

102
72

100.0
70.6

181
128

100.0
70.7

127
84

100.0
66.1

107
72

100.0
67.3

13
8

15.7
9.6

9
6

8.8
5.9

17
6

9.4
3.3

9
5

7.1
3.9

9
7

8.4
6.5

18

21.7

13

12.7

21

11.6

22

17.3

19

17.8

4

4.8

2

2.0

9

5.0

7

5.5

90 days and o v e r..........................
Economic issues..............
Union organization and
security ........................
Working conditions..........
Interunion or Intraunion
m atters..........................
Other contractual matters
& not rep orted ............

13
4

100.0
30.8

15
7

100.0
46.7

21
12

100.0
57.1

22
15

100.0
68.2

17
10

100.0
58.8

5
3

38.5
23.1

5
1

33.3
6.7

3
2

14.3
9.5

5
1

22.7
4.5

1
5

5.9
29.4

1

7.8

2

13.3

3

14.3

_

_

1

6.0

_

_

_

_

1

4.8

1

4.5

_

_

All stoppages..............

t o t a l s in this table differ from those in Table A-1 because
these stoppages ended during the year and thus include idleness
occurring in prior years.




-

-

NOTE: Because or rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros,

this trend. In 1967, nearly 47 percent of prolonged
stoppages occurred over economic issues. By 1971,
economic issues, particularly demands for general wage
increases, were responsible for more than 68 percent of
these stoppages. Only 17 such stoppages were recorded
in 1972, five less than in the previous year. Again,
economic issues dominated, but working conditions
were at issue in more than 1-quarter of the disputes.
Like all stoppages, workers involved and man-days of
idleness peaked in 1970, when over 58,000 workers
accumulated an excess of 4.7 million man-days of
idleness in prolonged contract renegotiation disputes.
Following that year, workers involved in prolonged
stoppages dropped abruptly to 18,400 in 1971, while at
the same time, idleness decreased to 1.7 million mandays.
In 1972, worker involvement in stoppages lasting
longer than 90. days decreased again to 17,300 while
idleness fell to almost 1.2 million. Thus, while economic
issues remain the major issue in both longer and
prolonged stoppages, their impact in terms of workers
involved and man-days of idleness have significantly
decreased since 1970.
Contract status

To evaluate the significance of an industrial dispute,
it is necessary to group work stoppages by the point at
which they occur in the life of the collective bargaining
agreement. Thus, a walkout called while the contract is
being negotiated or renegotiated indicates that the
parties are unable to agree to a proposed change in one
or more of the provisions contained in the agreement. If,
on the other hand, a union chooses to withhold its
services while its contract is still in effect, this implies
that a disagreement has arisen over job assignments,
working conditions or, perhaps safety considerations.
Occasionally a group of unorganized employees will
strike while attempting to compel their employer to
grant bargaining rights to a union which they favor. By
classifying stoppages in this manner, it is possible to
obtain a more accurate idea of the direction, character,
and extent of industrial unrest.
Contract term stoppages. More than one-half of the
9,257 strikes, which idled nearly 3.7 million construc­
tion workers in the 10-year period, 1962-71, occurred
during the term of the existing agreement (table A-6).
Yet less than 19 percent of all construction workers
took part in these frequent strikes and their walkouts
were responsible for only 5.7 percent of all idleness over
the same period. The majority of these strikes were
settled in less than 7 days. This suggests that the bulk of



construction idleness occurs when the parties are unable
to agree on the terms o f a new contract. The proportion
of idleness resulting from contract-term stoppages is
lower than the corresponding figure recorded (8.6
percent) for all American industry.
Strikes occur much more frequently during the
contract term in construction than in most other
industries. The chart on page 30 illustrates these
relationships. While more than half of all construction
strikes occur while the current agreement is in effect,
little more than a third of all U.S. industry stoppages
occur at this time. As a consequence, the contract
construction industry alone was responsible for more
than one-fourth of all U.S. industry walkouts during
1962-71 that occurred while the contract was in effect.
During the late 60’s there was a moderate decline in
both the average number of these strikes, as well as in
the proportion they represented of the total. Through­
out 1962-66 contract-term stoppages constituted more
than 60 percent of all construction strikes, while from
1967-71, the proportion dropped to 53 percent. In like
manner, during 1962-66, while 22.8 percent of all
workers were involved in stoppages during the contract
term, only 15.4 percent were involved in such walkouts
during the latter half of the decade. Man-days of idleness
resulting from contract-term stoppages as a proportion
of all construction idleness declined by about one-half of
that accumulated during the earlier period.
These data suggest that there was no improvement in
settlement machinery during the last half of the decade.
While these average reductions in strike measures may
appear significant, table A-6 indicates that the 1967-71
period experienced only a modest 11.4 percent decline,
in absolute terms, in number of contract term strikes
over 1962-66. At the same time there was only a 1.6
percent absolute fall in workers involved. On the other
hand, man-days of idleness increased absolutely by
nearly 31 percent, indicating a marked rise in strike
duration during 1967-71, in comparison with the earlier
5-year period.
Almost 71 percent of construction workers who
struck during the term of the contract in 1967-71 did so
due to disputes concerning interunion or intraunion
matters; 9 out of every 10 of these stoppages involved a
jurisdictional dispute. (See table A-8.) These disagree­
ments usually arise when a contractor assigns a job to
one organized group of workers but finds his decision
contested by another craft group who insist that their
members are entitled to perform the work assigned.
Plant administration disputes often involve disagree­
ment over work rules. This was the second most
frequent issue in strikes while the agreement was in
effect; more than 17 percent of the workers and 12




percent of contract term idleness are traceable to these
disputes. As an example of such a dispute, the carpenters
in Philadelphia struck a large housing project in 1967 by
refusing to install 3,600 prefabricated doors which were
previously cut to the correct size and came with holes
and mortices ready for knobs and hinges. The carpen­
ter’s boycott forced the contractor to return the doors
to the manufacturer, obtain blank ones, and let the
carpenters do their customary cutting and fitting.6 2
Renegotiation stoppages. During the latter part of the
decade, the number of renegotiation strikes as a propor­
tion of all construction stoppages has risen considerably.
(See table A-6.) This reflects a pattern of increasing
concern over economic issues. While 69 percent of
workers were involved in these stoppages in 1967, more
than 88 percent were involved in 1970. Similarly, the
proportion of man-days of idleness attributable to these
strikes climbed from 82.6 percent in 1967 to over 97
percent during 1970. In 4 of the previous 5 years over
90 percent of the idleness could be traced to these
strikes.
The introduction of wage regulation in 1971 brought
a conspicious reduction in the number of workers on
strike because of renegotiation disputes. In relative terms
these strikes declined almost 45 percent from the
previous year, while the number of workers involved
dropped nearly 30 percent. Days of idleness fell by more
than 56 percent, indicating a corresponding reduction in
strike duration as well. Despite an increase in the
number of contract expirations between 1970 and 1972,
the proportion of these expirations resulting in a work
stoppage decreased from more than 1 out of 3 during
1970 to less than 1 out of 7 in 1972, according to the
Construction Industry Stabilization Committee.
Nearly 89 percent of contract expiration walkouts
during 1967-71 were caused by disputes over the size of
general wage increases. During 1967-69, the average
number of workers involved and days of idleness
remained noticeably constant. The proportion of
workers and idleness attributable to general wage in­
crease strikes declined abruptly in 1971 due, in large
part, to the effect of a 120,000-worker stoppage over
union security. Parallel to the relative decline in disputes
over wages during 1970-71, a pronounced growth in the
number of contracts being awarded to nonunion con­
tractors probably contributed to the increase in union
security strikes toward the end of the decade.63
6 2Wolf Von Eckardt, The Washington Post, Jan. 14,1968.
63Tom Joyce, “Lumps in the Featherbed,” Newsweek
Aug. 14, 1972, pp. 67-68. Joyce’s article reports that as of
August 1972, the 9,000 member Associated General Contractors
had increased its nonunion membership by 1,000 firms over the
previous 3-year period.



Union recognition stoppages. A third major contract
status category involves strikes occurring during the
negotiation of an initial agreement or for union recogni­
tion. Such stoppages are relatively rare in the industry,
constituting only 6.8 percent of all stoppages and less
than 1.5 percent of the workers and man-days idle from
1962-71. There has been a noticeably sharp drop in
union recognition idleness since 1967. Averaging 1.7
percent during the 5 previous years, such stoppages
accounted for only 0.6 percent of 1967-71 idleness.
Finally, only a handful of stoppages—usually less than
12 each year—take place in establishments which do not
have any collective bargaining relationship with their
employees. Less than 0.2 percent of all striking workers
are involved in this kind of stoppage.

Major issues

When classified by the most prominent issues in
dispute, both the incidence and the intensity of con­
struction industry stoppages become more evident. For
the purpose of the study, prominent issues have been
defined as those involving economic matters, such as
wages, supplementary benefits, and wage adjustments;
job assignments and jurisdictional disputes; and those
involving working conditions, e.g., job security, plant
administration, and miscellaneous issues concerning
worker’s security. Other categories, listed separately,
include issues involving union organization and security;
and other interunion or intraunion matters. Finally,
there are a few disputes involving contract duration,
local issues not covered by the national contract if a
national agreement is in effect, and other unspecified
issues grouped under the category of other contractual
matters.
Economic issues. Of these issues, economic problems
have been the major cause of strikes, more so than
survival issues, including union organization and secur­
ity. As a percent of all idleness, the proportion of
man-days idle due to strikes over economic issues has
ranged from 58.0 to 93.3 percent since the beginning of
1962. Table 13 illustrates the relationship between
economic and other issues.
More than four-fifths of all recorded idleness during
1967-71 occurred as a result of disputes over economic
issues. The mean incidence of this idleness has risen
almost 15 percentage points over the previous 5-year
period, (table 13.) Perhaps even more significant, during
the expansionary period of 1965-70, the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) rose 23 percent. This increase in the CPI
coincided with a four-fold increase in strike idleness

Year

All
issues

Economic
issues1

Union
organization
and
security2

1 9 6 2 .............................................
1 9 6 3 .............................................
1 9 6 4 .............................................
1 9 6 5 .............................................
1 9 6 6 .............................................
1967 .............................................
1 9 6 8 .............................................
1 9 6 9 .............................................
1 9 7 0 .............................................
1 9 7 1 .............................................
1 9 7 2 .............................................
1 9 7 3 .............................................
Totals 1 9 6 2 -6 6 ..........................
1967-71 ..........................

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

86.5
69.9
73.5
58.2
64.5
80.8
92.8
93.3
88.3
70.9
79.4
53.8
70.0
86.9

9.1
16.6
14.5
26.1
20.9
2.3
.6
8.1
5.5
23.8
6.3
13.8
( 5)
( 5)

Working
conditions3

Jurisdictional
disputes

Other
interunion
or
intraunion
matters4

1.3
5.5
3.0
6.6
9.4
2.8
.7
1.9
1.5
2.1
11.3
29.2
( 5)
( s)

1.8
5.7
5.2
3.7
3.8
13.5
2.6
2.4
2.3
1.6
1.2
1.2
(5)
( 5)

1.2
2.0
2.8
1.1
1.1
.4
.4
.4
1.2
.3
.8
1.3
( 5)
( 5)

Other
contractual
matters
and not
reported
.3
—

1.1
2.0
.4
—

2.5
.5
.3
1.4
.3
.8
( 5)
( 5)

1 Includes general wage changes, supplementary benefits,
wage rate adjustments, and hours of work.
2 Includes recognition (certification), attempts to strengthen
a bargaining position or refusal to sign an agreement, and
demands for a union shop.
3 Includes job security (new methods, seniority, and subcon­
tracting), plant administration (Safety, Work rules, Overtime and
disciplinary matters), and unspecified contract violations.
4 Includes union rivalry, for example, disputes between

unions of different affiliation, such as those of AFL-CIO
affiliates and independent organizations.
5 Five-year averages are not reliable statistics for these data
due to the presence of extreme values and a lack of clustering
about the population median.

attributable to disputes over economic issues.
Though economic concerns were responsible for an
overwhelming portion of the industry’s idleness, and a
substantial majority of the workers involved, they
accounted for only two-fifths of all strikes during
1967-71. (See table 14.)
Such a disproportionately small number of stoppages
in relation to both workers involved and idleness attests
to the long duration of economic disputes. As noted in
table 9, during 1967, 1969, and 1971, for example,
more than 66 percent of strikes lasting 30 days but less
than 90 days were caused by disputes over economic
issues. Demands for wage increases have been responsible
for much of the idleness and have caused the longest
strikes. During the last half of the decade, both the
number of economic strikes and the workers involved in
them climbed moderately over the previous 5-year
period. Where 63 percent of strikers were protesting
economic issues in 1962-66, their ranks had grown to
over 74 percent by 1967-71. During 1972 and 1973,
only 62.7 percent of the workers followed this pattern.

during 1967-71. Nevertheless, only one-tenth of con­
struction workers who struck were involved in a jurisdic­
tional dispute. The disputes generally were of such short
duration that they were responsible for only 2.4 percent
of all construction idleness in 1967-71.
During the earlier part of the decade, 1962-66, they
comprised only 36.2 percent of the industry’s stop­
pages. But during the entire period, 1962-71, the average
number of workers involved as well as the mean
man-days of idleness have remained relatively constant.
An exception to the rule was 1967 (table 12). That year,
jurisdictional idleness climbed to over 13 percent of all
idleness, largely as a result of a single strike in Baton
Rouge, La., which involved 18,000 building tradesworkers. They accumulated over half a million days of
idleness before the strike was over 41 days later.
Despite the relatively high incidence of jurisdictional
disputes in construction, such disagreements comprised
only 7.3 percent of all U.S. industry stoppages in 1970,
a fairly typical figure in recent years. Chapter II
describes in detail the reasons why the construction
industry is so susceptible to jurisdictional conflict.
Briefly restated, these include craft unionism, with each
craft occupying a strategic position in the production
process, the blurring of craft lines as a result of new
technology, and vague job boundaries which may cause
serious difficulties in making clear work assignments.
To make pre-1961 figures comparable to post 1961
data, these earlier figures must be adjusted to provide an
estimate of the jurisdictional stoppages contained within

If the number of strikes over
economic issues is proportionately lower than the level
of idleness, this uneven situation may be traced directly
to the industry’s frequent, but brief, conflicts over work
assignments—jurisdictional disputes. When such disputes
are not resolved immediately, a work stoppage often
follows. Table A-8 shows that jurisdictional disputes
accounted for an average of 38.5 percent of all stoppages

J u r is d ic tio n a l d is p u te s .




NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros.

the interunion-intraunion category during this earlier
period.64 To do this, the 1952-61 interunion-intraunion
6 4Jurisdictional strikes constituted 91.2 percent, 82.3 per­
cent, and 80.2 percent o f the interunion category’s strikes,
workers, and man-days respectively during 1962-71. Knowing
this, estimates of jurisdictional statistics can be computed for
earlier periods.
Table 14.

figures are deflated in proportion to the ratio of
jurisdictional stoppages to the total interunion-intra­
union classification during 1962-71. As a result, it is
estimated that during 1952-61, jurisdictional disputes
comprised 25.6 percent, 13.8 percent, and 4.9 percent
of the industry’s strikes, workers involved, and days of
idleness respectively.

Work stoppages in contract construction by major issue group, 1962-73

Year

All
issues

Economic
issues1

Union
organization
and
security2

Working
conditions3

Jurisdictional
disputes

Other
interunion
or
intraunion
matters4

Other
contractual
matters
and not
reported

Number of stoppages
1 9 6 2 .............................................
1 9 6 3 .............................................
1 9 6 4 .............................................
1 9 6 5 .............................................
1 9 6 6 .............................................
1 9 6 7 .............................................
1 9 6 8 ............................... .............
1 9 6 9 .............................................
1 9 7 0 .............................................
1 9 7 1 .............................................
1 9 7 2 .............................................
1 9 7 3 .............................................
Totals 1962-66 ..........................
1967-71 ..........................

913
840
944
943
977
867
912
973
1,137
751
701
539
4,617
4,640

336
269
278
274
310
290
384
369
502
273
285
253
1,467
1,818

1 9 6 2 .............................................
1963 .............................................
1 9 6 4 .............................................
1 9 6 5 .............................................
1 9 6 6 .............................................
1 9 6 7 .............................................
1 9 6 8 .............................................
1 9 6 9 .............................................
1 9 7 0 .............................................
1 9 7 1 .............................................
1 9 7 2 .............................................
1 9 7 3 .............................................
Totals 1962-66 ..........................
1967-71 ..........................

284.2
208.0
247.8
301.4
455.2
304.5
364.2
433.1
621.0
451.3
454.2
367.4
1,496.6
2,174.1

213.5
115.1
161.5
155.2
298.4
208.3
292.7
333.1
517.9
259.0
261.0
253.8
943.7
1,611.0

129
123
142
126
114
105
57
77
74
77
56
53
634
390

146
121
116
119
100
78
56
90
90
68
78
54
602
382

257
280
342
385
407
359
361
383
395
288
238
125
1,671
1,786

31
39
54
25
30
28
31
34
43
18
28
31
179
154

14
8
12
15
16
7
23
20
33
27
16
23
65
110

Number of workers involved (in thousands)
28.8
35.4
25.0
71.7
53.8
10.9
5.4
21.5
19.1
129.1
42.8
42.8
214.7
186.0

14.6
23.0
12.7
21.1
45.8
19.7
11.6
18.7
17.5
26.6
115.9
39.5
122.2
94.1

20.4
26.4
24.2
38.8
46.6
60.5
39.9
51.0
49.2
24.8
25.1
14.3
156.4
228.4

5.5
7.3
21.8
11.1
6.8
4.8
5.1
6.2
8.6
4.7
3.9
7.6
52.5
29.4

1.2
.8
2.6
3.5
3.8
.3
9.4
2.4
8.3
7.2
5.4
9.4
11.9
27.6

75.0
110.4
144.9
169.5
231.9
696.1
227.3
244.6
394.1
107.3
96.4
44.5
731.7
1,669.4

48.3
37.8
78.7
51.2
68.6
20.7
36.7
45.1
186.4
17.3
65.3
46.0
284.6
306.2

11.2
3.7
29.9
95.7
24.6
2.3
216.1
51.1
126.7
96.6
26.1
28.4
165.1
492.8

Days of idleness (in thousands)
1 9 6 2 .............................................
1 9 6 3 .............................................
1 9 6 4 .............................................
1 9 6 5 .............................................
1 9 6 6 .............................................
1 9 6 7 .............................................
1 9 6 8 .............................................
1 9 6 9 .............................................
1 9 7 0 .............................................
1 9 7 1 .............................................
1 9 7 2 .............................................
1973 .............................................
Totals 1962-66 ..........................
1967-71 ..........................
1 See footnote 1, table 13.
2 See footnote 2, table 13.
3See footnote 3, table 13.




4,154.6
1,932.2
2,788.3
4,627.5
6,135.9
5,155.4
8,722.9
10,385.8
15,240.4
6,849.6
7,843.7
3,663.4
19,638.5
46,354.1

3,585.2
1,353.6
2,048.0
2,800.0
3,959.6
4,169.0
8,121.1
9,687.8
13,457.3
4,861.9
6,232.2
1,971.0
13,746.4
40,297.1

379.9
321.0
403.9
1,206.0
1,280.6
120.0
59.6
158.7
844.4
1,628.2
492.8
505.0
3,591.4
2,810.9

52.0
105.7
82.9
306.1
570.6
146.6
62.1
198.4
231.5
142.1
930.4
1,068.5
1,117.3
780.7

4 See footnote 4, table 13.
NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may
not equal totals.

In comparison, during 1962-71, these same disputes
were responsible for 37.4 percent, 10.4 percent, and 3.6
percent respectively of the strikes, workers involved, and
days of idleness in the industry. Clearly, while strikes
have increased moderately during the 60’s, the number
of workers and days of idleness as a proportion of the
industry’s totals have decreased slightly.
A possible reason for the moderate rise in the number
of these disputes during the 1960’s is the growing use of
prefabricated materials and other new technology which
has blurred traditional craft lines and intensified the
problem of work assignments.
Union security. Other than economic issues and job
assignments, only the issue of union organization and
security ranks significantly as a source of work stoppages
in the industry. Such stoppages accounted for only 8.4
percent of 1967-71 strikes, 8.6 percent of the workers
involved, and 6.1 percent of the industry idleness. These
stoppages have assumed a special significance in recent
years as public discussion has focused increasing atten­
tion upon the issue of nonunion contractors receiving
contract awards for speciality work to be completed on
a predominantly unionized jobsite. The evidence indi­
cates that such situations have been an important cause
of strikes categorized under the heading “union organi­
zation and security.”
In fact, during 1967-71 more than 41 percent of the
union security disputes listed in table A-8 were the result
of nonunion workers present on the jobsite. While the
number of workers and man-days of idleness attributed
to these stoppages have fluctuated widely over the
decade, the number of strikes (over the issue of
nonunion workers present on a union worksite) as a
proportion of all union security stoppages has remained
relatively constant. For example, in comparison with the
1967-71 period, during 1962-66, fully 45 percent of
union security stoppages involved a dispute over non­
union workers. Thus the relative frequency of these
conflicts has actually decreased. The same findings hold
true for both the number of workers, and the level of
idleness. In fact, the proportion of idleness caused by
nonunion employees present on the job has fallen
abruptly, from 6.2 percent during 1962-66, to 3.4
percent of all union organization and security stoppages
during 1967-71.65
Working conditions,. As a proportion of all strike
6 s Levels of idleness in a single major issue category should be
interpreted with caution, however. For example, o f the 1.6
million man-days attributed to stoppages involving union organi­
zation and security in 1971, over 93 percent was the result o f 1
strike involving a dispute over the establishment of a union shop.



idleness, disputes over working conditions were respon­
sible for levels of idleness that ranged from 0.7 to 9.4
percent over 1962-71. Most of these strikes involved
disputes over plant administration. Within this category,
over 31 percent of the stoppages involved questions of
discharge or disciplinary suspension. An additional 25
percent occurred during a conflict over an alleged unfair
distribution of overtime and questions of management
rights. Finally, over 11 percent of administrative dis­
putes could be traced to conflict over the size of the
work crew and the workload.
About two-fifths of all strikes over working condi­
tions involve questions of job security. Foremost among
these are disagreements over seniority, subcontracting,
and the employment of new methods and machinery.
Despite wide discussion in the public press about the
“serious” problems involved in the adaptation of new
methods and machinery designed to improve produc­
tivity, of 9,257 stoppages in the industry between 1962
and 1971, only 30 involved technological issues. This
figure may be deceiving, however, since disputes of this
nature are sometimes publically disguised as a disagree­
ment over “wages and working conditions,” while the
gut issues may in fact be of a technological nature.
Stoppages by location

Five factors are known to influence the variation in
construction strike incidence among the States. Fore­
most among these is the annual value of new construc­
tion put in place which had a direct effect on employ­
ment.66 Generally, States which average less than the
estimated industry median of $130 million annually of
private, nonresidential construction activity are not
likely to experience a substantial amount of strike
idleness.6 7 Another important determinant of potential
strike activity is the level of union penetration into the
State’s work force. With the exception of Texas and
Louisiana, each of the 10 States with the greatest
6 6The “value of new construction put in place” includes the
total U.S. expenditures for private and public nonresidential and
residential buildings and housing units, as well as outlays for
farm buildings, public utilities, military facilities, sewer systems,
water supply facilities, and other heavy construction. It excludes
broker’s sales commissions on the transfer of ownership as well
as routine maintenance o f existing structures.
6 7Only an estimate of private nonresidential construction
activity is available for each State. In addition, coverage of the
estimate is incomplete because it is based on a count of the
valuation of building permits, which are not issued in every
metropolitan area. It is believed that the values given represent
about 80 percent of private nonresidential construction for each
State. These limitations do not affect the relative ranking of the
States.

amount of idleness have at least 30 percent of their
nonagricultural work force represented by a union.
Closely associated to the degree of unionization is a
third factor, the existence of State laws prohibiting
union security provisions in the labor contract. Cur­
rently, 19 States have enacted “right-to-work” statutes
which prohibit agreements requiring employees to be­
come union members as a condition of employment and
probably encourage many contractors in these States to
employ nonunion labor. Significantly, five of these
right-to-work States are included among those 10 States
with the least idleness. One of them, however, Texas,
ranked seventh in the Nation among those States with
the most idleness. A fourth precondition for strike
activity is the level of employment. The number of jobs
available in a particular State is largely determined by
the volume of building activity.
Finally, the degree of maturity of the collective
bargaining relationship may strongly influence the occur­
rence and severity of work stoppages. Detroit, for
example, has experienced a notable decrease in strike
activity since 1970—the year 25 building trades em­
ployers formed an association which is engaged in
“multitrade bargaining” with local building unions.
Detroit had accounted for more than one-half of
Michigan’s days of idleness between 1962 and 1971, but
has not incurred a prolonged work stoppage for the last
3 years.
States. California led the Nation in construction idleness
over the last decade, followed closely by Missouri and
Michigan. These three States had more than one-third of
the industry’s total idleness from 1962-71. A ranking of
all States by level of idleness is shown in table 15. In
addition, the table presents the proportion of total
idleness attributable to each State, together with an
estimate of the mean annual 1967-71 valuation of
private nonresidential construction activity. Over the
decade, more than two-thirds of the building industry’s
idleness was accumulated by the “upper ten” States.
California occupied the number one position because
of 4 massive strike years—1962, 1965, 1969, and 1971.
More than 1 million days of idleness were recorded in
each of these years. Over 89 percent of the State’s
10-year total idleness resulted from six major strikes
during these 4 years; over one-third of the State’s total
idleness occurred in 1971 as a result of two walkouts
initiated by the Teamsters, the first beginning on August
2 in the northern and central portions of the State and
the second on November 28 in the southern half of the
State. An estimated 185,000 workers participated in
these two stoppages.
On the basis of the estimated average annual value of



new construction activity, one would expect California
to accumulate a much greater share of construction
strike idleness than any other State. However, this is not
the case. California real estate investors averaged an
estimated $1.9 billion annually (3.1 percent of total U.S.
construction investment) in private nonresidential con­
struction expenditures from 1967 to 1971, but the State
experienced only 11.8 percent of the industry’s total
idleness. Missouri accumulated virtually an equal amount
of idleness yet received less than one-seventh the number
of construction dollars as did California. While the value
of this estimated construction investment may not be an
all-inclusive predictor of strike potential, the five highest
ranking States, in terms of private, nonresidential invest­
ment, also ranked among the top 10 in terms of idleness.
Missouri, the second ranked State, recorded more
than four-fifths of its 10-year total of 7 million
man-days of idleness together with almost one-half of its
workers involved during 1969 and 1970, as a result of
three major stoppages. The first, in Kansas City, began
on April 1, 1969, and involved a strike by 37,000 iron
workers and painters which lasted 119 days. A second
strike began on May 26, 1969, involving 20,000 iron
workers in St. Louis, and continued nearly 3 months. In
the State’s third major stoppage, 27,000 laborers,
cement masons, bricklayers, and lathers struck on April
1, 1970, in Kansas City. The dispute lasted a recordbreaking 197 days. Together, these three stoppages were
responsible for about 85 percent of idleness in the State
for the 10 year period. In most other years, Missouri,
and possibly other States such as Michigan and Ohio,
would have ranked lower on the scale.
Michigan, which ranked third in idleness, recorded
more than one-half of its idleness for the decade during
1968. Most of this idleness can be traced to one 73-day
strike, which started May 1, when 50,000 construction
workers struck in support of a walkout by carpenters,
operating engineers, and bricklayers. By the end of the
strike, the State’s construction workers had given up the
equivalent of over 2.2 million man-days of labor.
Ranking 4th through 8th place in idleness—Ohio,
New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Illinois—reported
an annual average of more than $400 million in new
private nonresidential construction. As such, they
ranked in the top nine States nationally in terms of value
of new construction. Each of these eight States earned
their high position in the ranking as the result of
experiencing a small number of relatively large, lengthy
strikes. On the other hand, two other States, Washington
and Louisiana, ranked 16th and 19th, respectively, in
terms of estimated valuation, but 10th and 9th in
idleness. Their unbalanced positions in the rankings
resulted largely from a handful of major strikes coupled

with numerous smaller stoppages. Louisiana, in ninth
place, recorded only two major strikes (10,000 workers
or more) from 1962 to 1971. Both stoppages occurred
in the Baton Rouge metropolitan area during the
1966-67 period; they involved 30,000 workers and were
Table 15.

responsible for 645,500 man-days of idleness. These two
major stoppages accounted for 31 percent of the 2.1
million man-days of idleness that occurred in Louisiana
over the decade. Similarly, tenth-ranked Washington
incurred four major stoppages between 1962 and 1971.

Ranking of States by Level of Idleness and Value o f Private Non-residential construction 1962-71

State

T o ta l...........................................
California....................................................
M issouri.......................................................
Michigan ....................................................
Ohio ............................................................
New York ..................................................
Pennsylvania .............................................
Texas2 .........................................................
Illin o is .........................................................
Louisiana....................................................
Washington ................................................
Florida2 .......................................................
Alabama2 ..................................................
Indiana .......................................................
New Jersey ................................................
Georgia2 ....................................................
Wisconsin....................................................
Connecticut................................................
Massachusetts ...........................................
West V irg in ia .............................................
Minnesota ..................................................
Arizona2 ....................................................
Iowa2 .........................................................
Nevada2 .......................................................
D e la w are ....................................................
M ary la n d ....................................................
O regon.........................................................
Kentucky ....................................................
C o lo ra d o ....................................................
Tennessee2 ................................................
Arkansas2 ..................................................
Nebraska2 ..................................................
District of Columbia ...............................
Virginia2 ....................................................
Rhode Is la n d .............................................
Idaho ...........................................................
Kansas2 .......................................................
Utah2 .........................................................
Oklahoma ..................................................
New M exico ................................................
Mississippi2 ................................................
Montana ....................................................
Wyoming2 ..................................................
South Dakota2 ........................................
Vermont ....................................................
H a w a ii.........................................................
New Ham pshire........................................
A la s k a .........................................................
North Dakota2 .........................................
M aine............................................................
North Carolina2 ...................................... 1
South Carolina2 .........................................

Days
of
idleness
(in thousands)

Mean
valuation1
(in
millions)

65,992.6

12,311.6

7,758.2
7,717.5
7,113.9
4,955.3
4,495.4
3,319.5
3,016.8
2,999.9
2,057.7
1,789.7
1,735.1
1,653.1
1,618.8
1,420.4
1,405.8
1,320.6
1,253.9
1,088.4
852.2
835.9
827.3
720.2
619.0
550.2
461.5
412.7
368.4
351.2
341.9
317.6
294.6
258.2
253.8
225.5
197.6
147.0
138.4
134.8
128.0
108.1
108.1
89.7
82.0
76.2
74.0
69.7
60.5
51.7
38.2
27.7
24.9

1,919.9
282.1
524.5
618.7
886.9
431.9
792.0
768.3
171.4
235.7
610.4
137.2
226.0
408.7
293.7
196.0
238.8
477.0
25.8
239.0
137.3
119.4
56.9
31.7
298.7
129.3
111.2
164.4
212.3
55.8
66.1
68.1
348.4
47.9
27.9
89.1
58.0
132.5
37.0
17.7
57.9
7.5
18.6
13.3
91.2
44.4
14.0
17.8
37.4
249.9
66.0

1 As authorized in 3,014 permit—issuing places in the United
States, 1967-71. Includes value of nonresidential additions and
alterations.




Rank
Idleness

Valuation

Percent
of
industry
idleness
100

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1*7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51

1
14
7
5
2
9
3
4
22
18
6
26
19
10
13
21
17
8
45
16
24
28
37
43
12
27
29
23
20
38
33
32
11
39
44
31
35
25
42
36
48
51
46
50
30
40
49
47
41
15
34

11.8
11.7
10.8
7.5
6.8
5.0
4.6
4.5
3.1
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.6
.5
.5
.5
.4
.4
.4
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.13
.12
.12
.11
.10
.09
.07
.05
.04
.03

2 "Right-to-work" states.
SOURCE: Bureau of the Census, Construction and Forest
Products Division; Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Each of these occurred in the vicinity of the Seattle or
Spokane metropolitan areas during 1966, 1968, and
1971. These four strikes caused more than 58,000
workers to withhold their services and generated almost
750,000 man-days of idleness. Nearly 42 percent of
Washington’s idleness over the decade can be traced to
these disputes.
Among the 10 States with the least idleness, fiveNorth and South Carolina, North and South Dakota, and
Wyoming-preclude the union shop through the exis­
tence of State “right-to-work” laws. Most right-to-work
States are located in the less heavily populated regions of
the central and southern U.S., but this does not imply a
scarcity o f building investment dollars in those States. In
fact, eight of them—Texas, Florida, Virginia, Georgia,
North Carolina, Tennessee, Arizona, and Alabamaranked in the upper half of the Nation in terms of the
estimated value of new private nonresidential construc­
tion put in place during 1967-71. Thus each of these
nine States received more than $130 million of annual
new construction activity during this period.68
Five of the 10 States with the least idleness do not
have “right-to-work” laws. The limited strike record of
these States, with the exception of Hawaii, is probably
due to the relatively low level of building activity in each
State. In Hawaii, which ranked 29th in valuation, but
only 44th in idleness, the reason is less clear. In 1970,
over 28 percent of the island’s nonagricultural labor
force were union members-about the same as the rest of
the United States.
One “open shop” State, North Carolina, which
ranked 49th in idleness, earned a larger value of private
nonresidential construction contracts during 1967-71
than did Louisiana and Washington, ranking 9th and
10th on the table of most idleness. These latter States
permit the union shop. Texas, on the other hand, is an
“open shop” State, yet it ranked 7th in idleness,
suggesting that its high level of construction activity
(averaging $768.3 million annually) more than offset the
restraining influence of the State’s “right-to-work” law.
Certainly there are many collective bargaining agree­
ments in effect in the Texas building industry.
Metropolitan areas. Just as the “upper ten” States
accounted for more than two-thirds of the Nation’s
construction idleness, among the 247 metropolitan
areas,69 the 10 areas with the most idleness were
6 8The range of expenditures varied widely, from $137.2
million in Alabama to $768.3 million in Texas.
6 9To qualify as one of the 247 Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (SMSA’s), an urban area must contain a city
with at least 50,000 inhabitants or have 2 contiguous cities of
the same population size that are economically and socially
integrated.



responsible for almost 35 percent of the country’s
reduced workingtime. The four top ranked SMSA’s
alone accounted for more than 21 percent of all big city
idleness.
For the purpose of this study, 33 metropolitan areas
were selected, each containing more than 1 million
inhabitants. All regions in the Nation are represented.
These areas are presented in table A-10.
Among the metropolitan areas, none have experi­
enced as much strike activity in recent years as has the
Kansas City SMSA. Prior to 1969, the city experienced
minor levels of strike idleness-it averaged slightly over
10.000 man-days idle annually. During the next 2 years,
however, Kansas City reported two massive strikes
involving 64,000 workers who were responsible for
almost 5 million days of idleness. This repre^c ts nearly
one-fifth of the total strike idleness for the entire
industry during 1969-70.
Largely as a result of a 1968 strike involving 40,000
building trades unionists, the Detroit SMSA ranked
second in metropolitan idleness during 1962-71. Again,
more than one-fifth of the industry’s total idleness in
1968, almost 1.8 million days, accrued as a result of this
walkout.
In like manner, Los Angeles ranked third among the
cities primarily because of a 1971 stoppage in which
80.000 workers withheld their services for 15 days while
accumulating more than 1 million man-days of idleness.
This strike alone accounted for more than 43 percent of
the city’s idleness over the decade, as well as represent­
ing nearly 15 percent of all construction idleness in
1971.
While St. Louis ranked fourth in terms of big city
idleness, it also ranked fourth in number of stoppages,
reporting 154 during the decade, behind Pittsburgh
(178), New York (169), and Philadelphia (157). In
1969, a strike by 20,000 St. Louis iron workers was
responsible for more than 1.1 million days of idle­
ness—1 1 percent of all construction idleness in that year.
In terms of most idleness during the decade these
four cities were followed by Cleveland, Chicago, Phila­
delphia, San Francisco, New York, and Atlanta, respec­
tively. For more than 12 years, the New York SMSA has
had the highest incidence of all-industry strikes in the
Nation. In the construction industry, however, New
York ranks ninth in overall idleness even though it
remains second (after Pittsburgh) in number of stoppages.
In contrast to other metropolitan areas, New York
possesses an industrywide mechanism for consultation
among the parties regarding contract expiration disputes.
At the same time, it has its own board for jurisdictional
awards. Undoubtedly, these settlement procedures have
been instrumental in reducing both the number and
duration of New York strikes.




Appendix A.

Tables

Work stoppages
Year in which
stoppages began

1 9 4 6 ..............................................................................
1 9 4 7 ..............................................................................
1 9 4 8 ..............................................................................
1 9 4 9 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 0 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 1 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 2 ..............................................................................
1 953..............................................................................
1 9 5 4 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 5 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 6 ..............................................................................
1957 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 8 ..............................................................................
1 9 5 9 ..............................................................................
1 9 6 0 ..............................................................................
1 9 6 1 ..............................................................................
1962 ................................. ............................................
1 9 6 3 ..............................................................................
1 9 6 4 .............................................................................
1 9 6 5 ..............................................................................
1 9 6 6 ..............................................................................
1 9 6 7 .............................................................................
1 9 6 8 .............................................................................
1969 .............................................................................
1 9 7 0 ..............................................................................
1 9 7 1 ..............................................................................
1 9 7 2 .............................................................................
1973P.............................................................. ..
J

Workers involved2

Number

Percent
of all
U.S.
stoppages

Number
(in thousands)

Percent
of
construction
employment3

Number
(in thousands)

351
382
380
615
611
651
794
1,039
804
733
784
785
844
771
773
824
913
840
944
943
977
867
912
973
1,137
751
701
539

7.0
10.3
11.1
17.1
12.6
13.7
15.5
20.4
23.2
17.0
20.5
21.4
22.8
20.8
23.2
24.5
25.3
25.0
25.8
23.8
22.2
18.9
18.1
17.1
19.9
14.6
14.0
10.1

146.0
175.0
108.0
197.0
237.0
232.0
634.0
574.0
437.0
204.0
231.0
308.0
326.0
251.0
269.0
216.7
284.2
208.0
247.8
301.4
455.2
304.5
364.2
433.1
621.0
451.3
454.2
367.4

8.8
8.8
5.0
9.1
10.2
8.9
24.0
21.9
16.7
7.3
7.7
10.5
11.7
8.5
9.3
7.7
9.8
7.0
8.1
9.5
13.9
9.5
11.1
12.6
18.4
13.2
12.9
10.1

1,450.0
2,770.0
1,430.0
2,760.0
2,460.0
1,190.0
6,700.0
8,000.0
4,800.0
1,810.0
2,680.0
3,970.0
4,790.0
4,120.0
4,470.0
3,491.4
4,154.6
1,932.2
2,788.3
4,627.5
6,135.9
5,155.4
8,722.9
10,385.8
15,240.4
6,849.6
7,843.7
3,663.4

.40
.66
.29
.53
.44
.18
1.03
1.22
.71
.28
.35
.51
.71
.58
.63
0.48
.56
.25
.35
.57
.73
.63
1.03
1.18
1.76
.79
.88
.39

^ h e number of stoppages and workers relate to those stoppages beginning in the year; man-days of
idleness included all stoppages in effect during a year. Workers are counted more than once if involved in
more than one stoppage during the year.
2 Due to adjustments in the method of rounding, figures for workers involved and man-days of idleness
for the years 1961-1967 may differ from previously published data. Due to continual updating of
employment data, figures for the years 1967 to 1973 may not agree with those published in previous




Days idle during year2
Percent of
estimated
total
working
time4

Per
worker
involved

9.9
15.8
13.2
14.0
10.4
5.1
10.6
13.9
11.0
8.9
11.6
12.9
14.7
16.4
16.6
16.1
14.6
9.3
11.3
15.4
13.5
16.9
24.0
24.0
24.5
15.2
17.3
10.0

Rate of
change from
previous
year
(in percent)
_
+ 91.0
- 48.4
+ 93.0
- 10.9
- 51.6
+463.0
+ 19.4
- 40.0
- 62.3
+ 48.1
+ 48.1
+ 20.7
- 14.0
+ 8.5
- 21.9
+19.0
- 53.5
+ 44.3
+ 66.0
+ 32.6
- 16.0
+ 69.2
+ 19.1
+ 46.7
- 55.1
+ 14.5
- 53.5

annual work stoppage bulletins.
3 Based on employment figures in table 1. See footnote 2, table 1.
4The estimate of total working time assumes a "standard workyear" of 255 working days, or about
2,040 hours. It probably understates the true proportion of idleness in the industry.
pPreliminary estimate. Final figures may vary considerably from this estimate.

Stoppages beginning
Year

All stoppages in
effect
Workers

Workers
Number

involved

Number

1962 ...............................
1963 ...............................
1964 ...............................
1965 ...............................
1966 ...............................
1967 ...............................
1968 ...............................
1969 ...............................
1970 ...............................
1 9 7 1 ...............................
1972 ................................

59
54
51
43
60
68
58
53
44
51
48

15.7
5.8
8.6
10.0
11.5
7.6
7.5
7.9
7.0
6.8
4.3

Stoppages beginning

involved

69
55
71
82
65
59
55
67
61

100
67
96
112
86
81
109
106
142
71
68

See footnotes at end of table.




25.3
28.0
23.1
32.3
86.4
27.9
42.5
104.5
95.2
22.3
49.8

Days

Stoppages beginning

idle during
month
(thousands)
91.9
29.2
58.0
30.2
107.7
46.8
87.8
52.3
54.6
166.5
60.4

All stoppages in
effect
Workers

Workers
Number

involved

Number

(thousands)

(thousands)
38
36
57
58
62
44
60
59
42
25
47

2.8
7.2
8.3
5.4
29.2
4.6
21.6
6.2
5.6
5.2
5.7

involved

5.3
7.9
8.8
11.7
35.2
6.3
25.0
7.6
7.9
6.9
6.3

60
45
70
76
82
76
80
75
59
48
58
May

All stoppages in

All stoppages in

effect
Workers
Number

involved
(thousands)

122
78
119
134
101
98
126
129
171
87
80

27.4
28.7
24.3
34.6
87.9
29.7
46.1
106.7
103.7
25.1
64.9

Days

Stoppages beginning

idle during
month
(thousands)
203.0
201.0
204.3
371.8
872.8
283.0
534.8
1,674.0
1,338.3
214.0
675.1

effect

Workers
Number

involved

Workers
Number

(thousands)
142
115
147
116
132
132
145
165
200
114
127

122.0
64.1
86.1
30.9
101.3
119.5
136.0
95.5
157.8
48.5
73.3

involved
(thousands)

170
127
180
141
151
160
194
205
272
137
153

Days

Stoppages beginning

idle during
month
(thousands)

All stoppages in
effect
Workers

Workers
Number

involved

Number

(thousands)

25.4
18.9
36.7
44.1
212.3
26.9
117.0
41.1
45.6

68
43
60
79
59
70
43
51
74

37.2
20.6

50
46

8.5
5.0
3.8
14.6
7.5
14.0
8.9
5.0
34.6
11.4
19.3

involved
(thousands)

85
56
80
97
86
86
62
69
89
62
65

9.5
7.1
7.5
15.5
13.8
15.8
10.7
8.1
36.1
13.7
22.5

Days
idle during
month
(thousands)
60.5
22.6
29.6
57.7
58.9
89.1
100.6
50.0
242.9
88.8
66.4

June

April

(thousands)
1962 ...............................
1963 ...............................
1964 ...............................
1965 ...............................
1966 ...............................
1967 ...............................
1968 ...............................
1969 ...............................
1970 ................................
1 9 7 1 ...............................
1972 ...............................

16.2
6.1
10.1
10.8
11.9
10.7
8.6
8.4
8.7
23.7
8.2

73
64

Workers
Number

involved
(thousands)

(thousands)

March

February

January

127.2
65.4
98.8
44.2
158.6
129.3
153.6
165.4
240.0
52.0
107.5

Days

Stoppages beginning

idle during
month
(thousands)
1,357.7
662.1
1,157.1
514.7
1,421.5
1,635.1
2,645.3
2,264.7
2,790.9
990.2
1,239.0

All stoppages in
effect
Workers

Workers
Number

involved

Number

(thousands)
132
110
126
104
145
103
113
129
180
110
102

49.4
36.1
33.6
79.2
37.9
47.1
32.5
48.9
109.0
83.0
185.8

involved
(thousands)

183
144
171
131
180
147
168
202
297
159
145

153.1
54.3
82.2
107.4
73.6
109.7
139.4
176.2
237.0
117.8
234.9

Days
idle during
month
(thousands)
1,517.0
360.7
556.3
626.8
481.6
1,368.3
2,351.3
2,276.0
2,896.1
1,164.7
2,196.2

July
Stoppages beginning

August

All stoppages in
effect

Year
Workers
Number

involved

Number

(thousands)
1962 ...............................
1963 ...............................
1964 ...............................
1965 ...............................
1966 ...............................
1967 ...............................
1968 ...............................
1969 ...............................
1970 ...............................
1 9 7 1 ...............................
1972 ...............................

103
117
127
121
117
88
136
119
149
92
82

19.1
24.4
39.0
57.4
102.0
22.4
64.7
105.9
71.9
38.0
42.4

Days

Stoppages beginning

Workers

month
(thousands)

Workers
Number

(thousands)

involved

51.3

479.3

146
175
158
151
137
203
182
237
145
135

36.1
51.7
113.6
111.9
79.8
164.6
201.2
198.0
119.0
233.8

210.0
332.8
1,707.6
871.6
757.2
1,487.0
2,186.7
2,615.3
900.7
1,919.5

81
80
74
94
94
57
68
84
92
66
65

20.9
9.1
13.7
25.2
18.2
12.3
24.8
17.0
15.7
81.4
44.8

involved

effect

Number

(thousands)
1962 ...............................
1963 ...............................
1964 ...............................
1965 ...............................
1966 ...............................
1967 ...............................
1968 ...............................
1969 ...............................
1970 ...............................
1 9 7 1 ...............................
1972 ...............................

NOTE:

57
73
59
57
70
71
48
62
65

44
35

4.5
8.1
13.6
23.4
31.8
16.0
7.9
15.1
67.5
6.7
13.6

Days

Workers

idle during
month

involved

(thousands)

Stoppages beginning

Workers

month

involved

(thousands)

122
118
118
133
138
98
119
147
182
114
102

25.7
23.6
19.6
58.3
83.5
28.7
71.4
116.0
109.1
94.7
75.5

6.7
14.5
15.8
31.0
37.1
27.1
9.9
19.6
125.7
8.8
55.4

involved

effort

Number

31.1
58.6
55.7
366.2
582.3
264.3
117.6
185.5
1,157.5
69.1
153.3

47
40
38
54
47
47
48
43
34
42
26

5.7
3.7
2.7
7.8
9.0
5.4
6.1
7.9
4.7
126.6
3.3

effect

Workers
Number

involved

Number

(thousands)
230.4
179.5
140.1
650.9
867.5
326.0
948.6
1,329.9
1,546.9
1,306.0
934.7

52
70
71
66
70
72
52
71
78
48
39

Days

8.0
13.5
7.8
13.7
16.1
24.8
6.4
13.5
48.3
8.1
9.3

Workers

idle during
month

involved

(thousands)

Stoppages beginning

Days
idle during

Workers

month

involved

(thousands)

(thousands)
79

10.6
20.6
15.9
27.3
51.5
32.9
33.4
31.9
132JQ
76.9
52.9

95
93
108
105
92
77
106
144
78
70

All stoppages in
effect

Workers
Number

(thousands)
65
59
54
72
72
62
67
69
63
60
45

All stoppages in

63.7
132.7
161.7
195.1
397.3
291.7
163.5
207.2
1,782.3
279.3
355.3

December

All stoppages in

(thousands)

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals shown in table A-1.




Stoppages beginning

(thousands)

Workers
Number

(thousands)
75
103
81
85
88
90
65
99
105
67
57

Days
idle during

November

All stoppages in

Workers
Number

Number

(thousands)

144

October
Stoppages beginning

effect

idle during

involved

September

All stoppages in

involved

Number

(thousands)

6.5
9.5
3.6
9.3
34.9
14.7
11.7
10.5
24.2
129.4

25.4
29.6
20.8
34.8
184.7
41.6
121.9
72.8
392.4
605.7

28.9

114.5

34
35
38
39
35
34
32
31
37
38
16

2.3
3.0
7.6
1.4
4.0
3.0
5.5
5.7
3.8
13.2
2.9

Days

Workers

idle during
month

involved

(thousands)

(thousands)
47
47
51
58
51
54
49
46
54
50
30

3.2
4.0
8.4
3.9
7.7
4.6
12.2
9.1
21.6
133.9
28.3

15.3
-27.6
35.3
27.7
77.7
25.3
47.6
45.4
377.5
1,027.6
108.9

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1

1962
Jan.11

8

Construction industry,
York City, N.Y.

New

International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers.

10,000

2-year contract, effective July 1,
1962, provides for a 56-cent hourly
increase, and a 5-hour day with an
additional hour mandatory overtime at
time and a half; continuation of fringe
benefits, including payments of 5 per­
cent to welfare and pensions, 1 percent
to National Benefit Fund, V k percent to
security fund, 4 percent for vacations, 1
percent Joint Industry Board Assess­
ment, and $4-a-day annuity contribu­
tion.

Apr. 16

7

Construction industry, Portland, Eugene, and Salem,
Oreg., areas.

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners.

12,000

3-year contract provides for a 60cent-an-hour package increase-first year,
10 cents for wages and 10 cents for
pensions; second year, 10 cents for
wages, 5 cents for pensions, and 5 cents
for health and welfare; third year, 20
cents for wages.

57

Construction industry, north­
ern California.

Plasterers and Cement Masons'
International Association;
Laborers' International
Union of North America.4

38,000

L a b o re rs : 3-year contract provides
for a 70-cent-an-hour package increase in
wages and fringe benefits—40 cents for
wage increases, 5-cent increase in welfare
contributions, 15 cents for new vacation
fund, and 10 cents for new pension
fund.

May 1

P la s te re rs a n d c e m e n t m a s o n s : 3-year
contract providing a 74!4-cent package
increase in wages and fringe benefits—
291/z cents for wage increases, 5-cent
increase in welfare contributions, 30
cents for new vacation fund, and 10
cents for new pension fund.

May 1




52

Construction industry, eastern
Michigan.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners; Inter­
national Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers.

25,000

C a rp e n te rs : 2-year contract providing a
10-cent-an-hour wage increase each year,
and a 1-percent increase each year in em­
ployers' pension fund contribution. Welfare
benefits for carpenters and other area
tradesmen are handled in separate agree­
ment with 6 employer associations.
Ir o n w o r k e r s : 2-year contract providing a
391/z-cent package increase in wages and
benefits in the Detroit area, and a 34!4-cent
package in other Michigan areas; establish­
ment of a new employer-financed pension

fund. The question of the legality of the
union-proposed fabrication clause, requiring
that all assembly work be done at job site,
referred to the National Labor Relations
Board.

Beginning
date

Approximate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1
1962Con't.
May 16

28

Construction industry, eastern
Washington and northern
Idaho.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners; Inter­
national Brotherhood of
T eamsters.

14,000

C a rp e n te rs : 3-year contract providing
a 60-cent-an-hour package increase, in­
cluding a 23-cent-an-hour wage increase
and a 2-cent increase in employer con­
tribution for health and welfare and
apprenticeship program, retroactive to
June 1, an 18-cent-an-hour wage increase
in June 1963, and a 17-cent increase in
June 1964; and increased travel allow­
ance.
T e a m s te rs : 3-year contract providing
an immediate 15-cent-an-hour wage in­
crease, 20 cents May 1, 1963, and 15
cents May 1, 1964; a 5-cent increase in
employer contribution to health and
welfare fund Dec. 1, 1962; and a 5-centan-hour increase in contractors' pay­
ments to pension fund April 1965; and a
union hiring hall clause.

May 22

61

Construction industry, west­
ern Washington, Oregon,
and northern Idaho.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers.

15,000

3-year contract providing 71-cent
package increase in wages and benefitsfirst year, 26-cent wage increase; second
year, 19-cent wage increase, 5 cents for
new pension fund, and 1 cent for ap­
prenticeship training; third year, 15-cent
wage increase and 5 cents additional for
pension fund; 10-cent welfare fund con­
tinued pending review toward merging 3
separate funds presently operating in
area.

June 18

10

Construction industry, south­
ern California.

P la s te re rs
Mason's;
hood of
Joiners;
Union of
neers.

20,000

O p e r a tin g e n g in e e rs : 3-year contract
providing 85-cent package increase in
wages and fringe benefits during the
period of the contract: 271/2 cents retro­
active to June 15, 1962, 27)4 cents
effective June 1963, and 30 cents effec­
tive June 1964.




and
Cement
United Brother­
Carpenters and
In ternatio nal
Operating Engi­

C e m e n t m a s o n s : 5-year contract pro­
viding for a 10-cent-an-hour contribution
to new vacation fund, 3-cent increase in
health and welfare contribution, and
7-cent increase in foreman differential,
effective July 1, 1962; a 10-cent contri­
bution for new pension fund, effective
Jan. 1, 1963; and 20 cents additional for
wages in June 1963 and June 1964.
C a r p e n te r s : 5-year contract providing
for a 10-cent wage increase, 10-cent
contribution to welfare fund, 10 cents
for pension, % cent increase in appren­
ticeship program fund, and 7-cent in­
crease in foreman differential, effective
July 1, 1962; 5-cent per man contribu­
tion to new vacation fund, effective
Aug. 1, 1962; 8-cent increase in health
and welfare contribution, effective
Jan. 1, 1963; and 20 cents additional for
wages in June 1963 and June 1964.

Approx­
imate

Beginning

duration

date

(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1

1963
Apr. 1

16

Construction industry, upstate
New York.

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters (Ind.); Laborers'
International Union of
North America.4

11,000

2year contract providing for an
18-cent hourly package increase, retro­
active to Jan. 1, 1963, and an additional
18 cents an hour in January 1964.
Laborers in 4 counties will receive addi­
tional adjustment in 1964. The Team­
sters contract includes a penalty pro­
vision requiring contractors to pay 4 or 8
hours' pay if a member of another craft
is assigned to work within Teamsters'
jurisdiction.

May 1

26

Construction industry,
Louis, Mo., area.

St.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

20,000

3year contract retroactive to May 1,
providing a 20-cent-an-hour increase the
first year, divided equally between wages
and pension benefits; 20 cents the sec­
ond year similarly divided between
wages and fringe benefits; the union has
the option of taking any or all of the
final 20 cents, payable the third year, in
fringe benefits; hiring hall issue resolved
by the adoption of a "modified referral
system," under which 4 hiring categories
are established.

June 1

8

Buf­

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers;
Laborers' International
Union of North America4
Bricklayers, Masons and
Plasterers' International
Union; United Brother­
hood of Carpenters; Inter­
national Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

11,000

3-year contract providing a 55-cent
package increase, 20 cents an hour in
1963, 20 cents an hour, 1964, and the
remaining 15 cents in 1965; it was left to
the unions to determine how the money
would be allocated between wages and
fringes. 40-hour workweek retained.

Construction industry, Cleve­
land, Ohio, area.

United Association of Jour­
neymen and Apprentices
of the Plumbing and Pipe
fittin g
Industry; Sheet
M etal W orkers' Inter­
n a tio n a l Association;
Bricklayers, Masons and

22,000

1964
May 1 .........




39

Construction
falo, N.Y.

industry,

Plasterers' International
Union; International Asso­
ciation of Bridge, Struc­
tural and Ornamental Iron
Workers.

P lu m b e rs a n d p ip e fitte r s , a n d s h e e t -

3-year contract providing
a 95-cent-an-hour wage increase: 25
cents effective immediately; 5 cents ef­
fective in November 1964; 30 cents
effective in May 1965; and 35 cents
effective in May 1966. The sheet-metal
workers' agreement includes an increase
of V /a cents per hour in employer contri­
butions to the industry promotion fund.

m e ta l w o rke rs :

B r ic k la y e r s : 3-year contract provid­
ing an increase of $1,005 an hour: 30.5
cents effective the first year, and in­
creases of 30 and 40 cents in the second
and third years, respectively.
Ir o n w o r k e r s : 3-year contract provid­
ing an hourly increase of $1.05: 30 cents
effective immediately, and increases of
35 and 40 cents in the second and third
years, respectively.

Beginning
date

Approximate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1
1964
Con't.
July 1 3 ....................

1

Ohio Contractors Association,
statewide.

International Union of Operating Engineers.

20,000

3-year contract providing a 75-centan-hour increase in wage and fringe
benefits in the Cleveland area, and 55
cents an hour throughout the remainder
of the State; earth-spreading equipment
operators will receive an additional 15
cents over the 3-year period.

1965
May 1 ......................

89

Eastern New York Construetion
Employers Asso­
ciation, upstate New York.

Building trades unions.

10,000

5-year agreements, all but 2 of which
provided for a graduated reduction in
the worksheet (from 40 to 35 hours),
and a total increase of $1.40 an hour in
wages and fringe benefits.

June 8 ....................

76

Construction industry, state­
wide, Arizona.

Building trades' unions.

16,000

5-year agreements generally providing
for a 5-percent annual increase in wages
and fringe benefits.

June 17 .................

33

Construction industry, south­
ern California.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

35,000

4-year agreement providing for an
immediate hourly wage increase of 35.5
cents, and an annual increase of 30 cents
to be divided between wages and fringe
benefits in each of the remaining years.
The contract provides for the establish­
ment of a bipartite Permanent Labor
Relations Committee, and the joint se­
lection of a permanent arbitrator. A
special committee was also established to
resolve the existing differences regarding
the status of owner-operators.

Oct. 1 ......................

24

Construction industry, Ari­
zona, California, Idaho,
Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and
Washington.

International Brotherhood of
Boilermakers, Iron Ship­
builders, Blacksmiths,
Forgers and Helpers.

16,000

3-year agreement providing for an
immediate 20-cent hourly wage increase,
and additional increases of 30 cents and
25 cents on Oct. 1, 1966, and Oct. 1,
1967, respectively; increases in employer
contributions to the pension, vacation,
and welfare funds; higher mileage and
subsistence allowances.

1966
Feb. 1 ......................

4

Construction
cago, III.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

20,000

4-year contract retroactive to Jan. 1,
providing a 20-cent-an-hour increase in
each of the first 2 years, and a 30-centan-hour increase in each of the last 2
years. Employer contributions to the
welfare fund were increased from 10 to
20 cents; contributions for the pension
fund increased to 15 cents the first year
and 20 cents the second; and a vacation

industry,

Chi­

fund of 10 cents was to be established in
1967.
Apr. 1 ......................

47




Construction industry, Miami,
Fla.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America.

13,000

3-year contract providing for an im­
mediate wage increase of 20 cents an
hour; 15-cent increases in October 1966,
1967, and 1968; and 20-cent increases in
April 1967 and 1968. Payments to the
health and welfare fund will be increased
to 20 cents an hour, and in April 1967,
the companies will pay 10 cents an hour
to establish a pension fund.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

days)1

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

1 96 6 Con’t.
Apr. 1

39

Construction industry, Baton
Rouge, La.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America.

12,000

3-year contract providing for an im­
mediate increase of 37.5 cents an hour, a
20-cent increase January 1967, a 25-cent
increase October 1967, and a 22.5-cent
increase April 1968. In addition, the
contract includes a new 2-hour reporting
time pay clause.

Apr. 19

27

Construction industry, Seat­
tle-Everett, Wash.

Operative Plasterers and
Cement Masons' Inter­
national Association of the
United States and Canada.

20,000

2-year contract providing for a 30cent-an-hour wage increase the first year
and a 33-cent-an-hour increase the sec­
ond. Payments to the welfare fund in­
creased 5 cents an hour the first year. A
new subcontracting clause also was pro­
vided.

May 1

22

Construction industry,
central Ohio.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America; Laborers' Inter­
national Union of North
America; International As­
sociation of Bridge, Struc­
tural and Ornamental Iron
Workers; Operative Plas­
terers and Cement Masons'
International Association
of the United States and
Canada.

12,000

C a rp e n te rs : 2-year contract providing
for wage increases of 18 cents, May 1,
1966; 18 cents, November 1966; 18
cents, May 1967; and 20 cents, Novem­
ber 1967.

west

L a b o re rs : 2-year contract providing
for a 15-cent increase each May and
November of the contract. The agree­
ment also provides that employers will
give the laborer's hiring hall preference
when hiring additional workers.
I r o n w o r k e r s : 2-year contract provid­
ing for a 30-cent wage increase May 1,
1966; a 15-cent increase in pensions, a
5-cent increase in health and welfare
November 1966, a 20-cent wage increase
May 1967, and a 15-cent increase No­
vember 1967.
C e m e n t m a s o n s : 2-year contract pro­
viding for a 10-cent wage and a 5-cent
health and welfare increase May 1,1966,
a 20-cent wage increase November 1966,
a 15-cent wage increase May 1967. The
contract also provides for double time
for all overtime in excess of 4 hours a
day Monday through Friday.

May 2




28

Construction industry,
troit, Mich.

De­

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers; Laborers

12,000

International Union of
North America4 Brick­

O p e r a tin g e n g in e e rs : 2-year contract
providing for a 25-cent-an-hour increase
each year for firemen and oilers, 30
cents an hour each year for compressor

layers, Masons and Plas­
terers' International Union.

operators, and 50 cents the first year and
40 cents the second for other operators.
L a b o re rs : 2-year contract providing
for a 31-cent-an-hour increase in wages

and fringe benefits in 1966, and 32 cents
an hour in 1967.
B r ic k la y e r s : 2-year contract provid­
ing for a 41-cent-an-hour wage and fringe
benefit increase in 1966, and 49 cents an
hour in 1967.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location

involved2

days)1

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

1 96 6 Con't.
Construction industry, Minne­
apolis-St. Paul, Minn.,
western Wisconsin.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers.

18,000

3-year contract providing for an im­
mediate wage increase of 18 cents an
hour, 17 cents in October 1966, and 35
cents May 1967 and 1968.

80

Construction
lanta, Ga.

industry,

At­

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America.

10,000

3-year contract providing for an im­
mediate increase of 25 cents; an increase
of 15 cents, March 1967; 25 cents,
September 1967; and 20 cents each in
March and September 1968. Any por­
tion of the increase can go into fringe
benefits. No fringe benefits existed pre­
viously. An apprenticeship fund was
started. Several work rule changes or
clarifications were included in the con­
tract. The contract was approved by the
general president under a provision
allowing him to issue a return-to-work
order and ratify a contract without local
agreement.

July 1 ......................

73

Construction
Louis, Mo.

industry,

St.

Sheet Metal Workers' Inter­
national Association.

15,000

3-year contract establishing a primary
referral system. The contract provides
for 20-cent wage increases immediately;
20 cents, January 1967; 25 cents, July
1967; and 20 cents each in January and
July 1968 and January 1969. In July
1967, the employer contribution in­
creases to 8 percent for the vacation
fund, 5 percent for the pension fund,
and 3 percent for the health and welfare
fund.

July 5 ......................

24

Construction industry, Hous­

Laborers' International Union
of North America4

17,000

3-year contract providing for an im­
mediate wage increase of 2014 cents an
hour, 15 cents in July 1967, and 10
cents in July 1968; and 10 cents an hour
in July 1967 to establish a health and
welfare fund.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

22,000

3-year contract providing for a 20cent-an-hour increase retroactive to
July 1, and additional increases of 10
cents on Jan. 1, 1967, July 1,1967, and
Jan. 1, 1968; and 32 cents on July 1,
1968. The differentials for workers oper­
ating cranes having long booms were
modified to allow payment for shorter
booms. Agreement was reached to estab­
lish a vacation bonus fund July 1967
with a 35-cent-an-hour employer contri­
bution. The contract retained the 4-percent employer contribution to the health

May 2 5 ....................

9

July 1 ......................

ton, Tex.

July 2 5 ....................

14




Construction industry,
York City, N.Y.

New

and welfare fund and the 6 percent
contribution to the pension fund.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1

1966Con't.
Oct. 3 ......................

32

Construction industry, Detroit
and 5 southeast Michigan
counties.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America.

21,000

The stoppage, which occurred during
a reopening for health and welfare of the
basic 4-year contract, was terminated by
a 19-month contract that established a
Carpenters' Welfare Fund to which the
employers contribute 30 cents for each
hour worked, retroactive to Oct. 1,
1966. The agreement also added an
immediate 10-cent-an-hour increase in
wages and an additional 10 cents to the
23-cent increase scheduled for M ay1,
1967, under the basic agreement.

1967
May 1 ......................

14

C o n s tr u c tio n
in dustry,
Rochester, N.Y.

Bricklayers, Masons and Plas­
terers' International Union
of America.

11,000

3-year contract providing a $1.40-anhour package increase; a 40-cent increase
in welfare and vacation benefits effective
May 1, 1967; and an increase of 5 cents
an hour in 1968 and 1969.

May 4 ......................

775

Heavy and Highway Construc­
tio n
Industry, O hiostatewide.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

20,000

5-year contract providing an im­
mediate wage increase of 30 cents an
hour; 10 cents additional increase in
November 1967; 30 cents in May 1968;
10 cents in November 1968; and 50
cents effective May 1969, November
1969, May 1970, and May 1971. The
Cleveland schedule increments are dif­
ferent, but the $2.08-total-wage package
is the same; the union has the opinion to
allocate wage increases to benefits.

May 1 6 ....................

43

Connecticut Ready-mix Con­
crete Association, New
England Road Builders As­
sociation, and Connecticut
In-Plant Operators Associa­
tio n , Connecticut-state­
wide.

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers
i f America (Ind.).

20,000

5-year contract providing an im­
mediate 30-cent-an-hour wage increase;
25 cents additional in each of the next 3
years; and 30 cents in 1971; employers'
pension fund contribution will be in­
creased by 5 cents in each of the first
3-contract years; and health and welfare
contributions will be increased V A cents
immediately, 2'A cents in 1968, and V A
cents in 1969.

June 20 ..................

41

Construction industry, Baton
Rouge, La., area.

International Brotherhood of

18,000

The stoppage, which resulted from a
dispute over work assignments, was ter­
minated following the signing of a mem­
orandum of understanding agreeing to
abide by terms of contracts and to use
established procedures for settling griev­
ances and jurisdictional disputes.

Electrical Workers and in­
ternational Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers
of America (Ind.).

1968
Feb. 1 5 ....................

7

Apr. 1 ......................

14




Construction industry, Seattle,
Spokane, and Tacoma,
Wash.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of Am­
erica.

14,000

40-month agreement providing $1.42
in wages and 10 cents for health and
welfare.

Construction industry,
kane, Wash.

Laborers' International Union
of North America.

12,000

39-month contract providing a pack­
age increase of $1.47 an hour.

Spo­

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1
1968Con't.

2-year contracts providing: Carpenters—$1.90 in wages and benefits; oper­
ating engineers and bricklayers—$1.92 in

May 1 ......................

73

Construction industry, State
of Michigan.

Building Trades Unions.

50,000

May 1 6 ....................

33

Heavy and Highway Construc­
tion industry, Missouri.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

10,000

3-year contract providing: Immediate
increase of 60 cents an hour; 25 cents in
1969; 75 cents in 1969; 85 cents in
1970; upgrading of specified job classifi­
cations.

July 1 9 ....................

50

Construction industry,
waukee, Wis.

Mil­

Laborers' International Union
of North America.

15,000

2-year contract providing: Immediate
increase of 25 cents an hour; 20 cents in
1968, and 25 cents June and December
of 1969; increase in employer payments
to pension, health and welfare, and
vacation funds.

1969
Apr. 1 ......................

119

Construction industry Kansas
City, Mo.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers and
the Brotherhood of Paint­
ers, Decorators and Paperhangers.

37,000

3-year contracts providing: $1 an
hour wage increase effective Aug. 1,
1969, additional 50 cents effective
Jan. 1, 1970, 85 cents effective July 1,
1970, 75 cents effective Jan. 1, 1971 to
all employees; 75 cents for structural
and ornamental iron workers, 90 cents
for rodworkers effective July 1, 1971;
union option to divert part of increases
to benefit fund; companies pay 5 cents
to create apprenticeship fund effective
Jan. 1,1970.

wages and benefits.

Painters: 75 cents an hour wage
increase effective July 14, 1969, addi­
tional 61 cents effective January 1970,
82 cents effective June, 1970, $1 effec­
tive April 1971; union option to divert
part of increase to benefit fund; 1 cent
increase to apprentice training fund and
to industry advance fund.
Apr. 2 ......................

26




Construction industry, Miami,
Fla.

Bricklayers, Masons and Plas­
terers' International Union
of America; Laborers' In­
ternational Union of North
America.

13,000

3-year contract providing: B M P immediate wage increase of 45 cents an
hour, additional 15 cents October 1969,
35 cents April 1970, 50 cents October
1970, and 45 cents April and October
1971; 25 cents to establish vacation fund
October 1969; 30 cents to both pension
and health and welfare funds April 1970;
and 5 cents to establish apprentice train­
ing fund.
L U I N A -immediate wage increase of
50 cents an hour; additional 50 cents
October 1969, April and October 1970,
and April 1971; union has option to
divert part of increase to benefit funds.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1

1 96 9 Con't.
Apr. 3 ......................

79

Construction industry, Gal­
veston, Houston, Texas
City and Others, Tex.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers.

15,000

3-year contract providing: Wage in­
crease of 75 cents an hour effective
June 21, 1969, 65 cents effective April
1970 and 60 cents effective April 1971.
Union option to divert a total of 20
cents from the April 1970 and April
1971 increases to benefit funds; rodworkers to receive additional 12.5 cents
over the contract term, 4.5 cents effec­
tive immediately, 4 cents in April 1970
and another 4 cents April 1971.

May 1 ......................

43

Construction industry, Boston

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of Amer­

15,000

3-year contract providing: A wage
increase of 60 cents per hour effective
May 1, 1969, additional 40 cents effec­
tive Dec. 15, 1969, 30 cents effective
June 15, 1970, 50 cents effective both
Dec. 15, 1970 and June 15, 1971, 55
cents effective Dec. 15, 1971; union
option to divert a total of 40 cents from
1970 and 1971 increases to benefit
funds.

and vicinity, Mass.

ica.

May 2 6 ....................

84

Construction
Louis, Mo.

St.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural Orna­
mental IronWorkers.

20,000

39-month contract providing: 90
cents an hour wage increase retroactive
to May 1, 1969, additional 95 cents on
Aug. 1, 1970, and $1 on Aug. 1, 1971;
union option to divert part of increases
to benefit funds.

July 1 ......................

49

Construction industry, Conn.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural Orna­
mental Ironworkers.

20,000

3-year contract providing: $1 per
hour wage increase effective July 1,
1969, additional $1.28 on July 1,1970,
and $1.25, July 1,1971; union option to
divert part of 1970 and 1971 increases
to benefit funds; 3-cent increase to
health and welfare fund (now 17 cents);
25 cents to create a travel pay fund
effective Oct. 1, 1969, 25 cents increase
effective Jan. 1,1970.

July 1 ......................

80

Construction industry, South­
ern California.

United Association of Jour­
neymen and Apprentices
of the Plumbing and Pipe
fitting industry of the
United States and Canada.

10,000

3-year contract providing: A package
increase of $3.51 an hour in wages and
fringe benefits over the life of the
contract: 81 cents an hour increase in
wages effective July 1, 1969, additional
85 cents on both July 1, 1970 and
July 1, 1971; plus 40 percent increase in
fringe benefits; 36-hour week starting in
1971.

July 2 1 ....................

38

Construction industry, South­
ern California.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

30,000

5-year contract providing: Wage in­
crease of 50 cents an hour effective
Aug. 27, 1969, additional 35 cents on
Oct. 21, 1969, 85 cents effective each of
August 1970, August 1971, August
1972, and August 1973; union option to
divert part of increases to benefit funds;
NLRB to determine if strike insurance is
bargainable issue.




industry,

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

days)1

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

1970
Chi­

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

20,000

41-month agreement providing the
following hourly increases to operators,
retroactive to Jan. 1, 1970: Class I,
$1.50; Class II, $1.20; Class III, $0.90;
and Class IV, $0.75. Additional increases
of the same respective amounts effective
Jan. 1, 1971, and Jan. 1, 1972. Fifty
cents of the package increase applied to
fringes; health-welfare and pension fund
contributions increased 10 cents per
man-hour effective Jan. 1, 1970; addi­
tional 10 cents effective Jan. 1, 1971,
and Jan. 1, 1972. On Jan. 1,1971, vaca­
tion contribution rose 10 cents. Wage
increases of 40 to 45 cents beyond the
general settlement to be awarded to
several categories of operators upgraded
by this agreement.

197

Construction industry, Kansas
City, Mo.

Laborers' International Union
of North America; Opera­
tive Plasterers' and Cement
Masons' In tern a tio n a l
Association; Bricklayers,
Masons, and Plasterers' In­
te rn atio n a l Union of
America; Lathers Inter­
national Union.

27,000

4-year agreement providing: Hourly
wage increases over the term of the
agreement totaling $4.50 for lathers;
$4.5772 for cement masons; $4.50 for
bricklayers; and $4.15 for laborers.

May 1

42

Construction industry Phila­
delphia, Pa. and vicinity.

Laborers' International Union
of North America.

17,000

1-year agreement providing: $1 per
hour increase effective May 1, 1970;
additional 15 cents payment by the
companies to the health and welfare
fund.

May 4

1

Construction industry, Calif.

Laborers' International Union
of North America.

35,000

4-year agreement providing: Four
annual increases of 85 cents per hour in
wages and benefits; increase during first

Mar. 9

3

Apr. 1

Construction
cago, III.

industry,

two years to be paid in several install­
ments; third and fourth increases will be
paid at beginning of third and fourth
years.
May 4

36




Construction industry, Cleve­
land, Ohio.

Bricklayers, Masons, and Plas­
terers' International Union
of America; Operative Plas­
terers' and Cement Masons'
International Association;
United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of
America; Laborers' Inter­
national Union of North
America.

14,000

B M P , O P C M , C J A -agreed to 3-year
pact providing: $1 per hour increase
effective May 1, 1970; additional $1 per
hour effective both M a y l, 1971, and
May 1,1972.

/. 6///V/4 —signed a 3-year agreement
providing: 70 cents per hour increase
effective May 1, 1970: additional 95
cents effective May 1, 1970; additional
95 cents effective May 1, 1971, and 90
cents effective May 1, 1972; companies
contribute 35 cents per hour to health
and welfare fund effective May 1, 1971,
and 40 cents per hour to pension fund
effective May 1,1972; companies pay 20
cents per hour to establish SUB fund.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1
197 0 Con't.
June 15 ..................

27

Construction industry, Illinois.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

45,000

5 38-month agreement providing: In­
creases totaling $4.75 per hour in wages
and benefits to Class 1 engineers and
$5.05 per hour to Class II engineers;
both increases to be paid in several
increments over the term of the agree­
ment.

July 1 ......................

82

Construction
lanta, Ga.

At­

Laborers' International Union
of North America and Op­
erative Plasterers' and Ce­
ment Masons' International
Association.

10,000

3-year agreement providing: A 40cent-an-hour increase effective Sept. 21,
1970; additional increases of 15 cents
per hour effective Jan. 1, 1971, and 25
cents effective each July 1,1971, Jan. 1,
1972, July 1, 1972, and Jan. 1, 1973;
company contribution to health and
welfare fund to be 5 cents per hour
effective Jan. 1, 1972; an additional 5
cents effective both June 1, 1972, and
Jan. 1,1973.

Sept. 1 ....................

18

Construction industry, Mich­
igan.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers.

25,000

3-year agreement providing: 75 cents
per hour effective Sept. 19, 1970; addi­
tional $1 effective Sept. 1, 1971, and
Sept. 1, 1972; union option to divert
part of increase to benefit funds.

Sept. 1 ....................

6 135

Construction industry,
mingham, Ala.

Bir­

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen, and Help­
ers (Ind.): International
Union of Operating Engi­
neers; International Associ­
ation of Bridge, Structural
and
Ornam ental Iron
W orkers; Bricklayers,
Masons, and Plasterers' In­
ternational Union of Amer­
ica; United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of
America; Operative Plas­
terers' and Cement Masons'
International Association;
and Laborers' International
Union of North America.

15,000

3-year agreement providing: Total
hourly increases over the term of the
contract amounting to: $2.35 for car­
penters; $2.15 for plasterers and cement
masons; $2.45 for bricklayers; $2.95 for
ironworkers; $2.70 for operating engi­
neers and millwrights; $1.75 for team­
sters and iaborers.

Oct. 1 2 ....................

5

Construction industry, South­

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen, and Help­

50,000

Management agreed to place owneroperators on the payroll after one day's
employment-after 4 days was the cur­
rent practice; owner-operators to receive

industry,

ern California.

ers (Ind.).

$2.05 in wages and fringes under the
agreement.
1971
May 1 ......................




73

Construction industry, Pa. and
Del.

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers

11,000

2-year contract providing: 9 percent
wage increase, retroactive to May 1,
1971; additional 9 percent effective No­
vember 1, 1971 and V A percent effective
May 1, 1972. Fringe benefits totaling 95
cents per hour were also provided in the
new agreement.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1

1971Con't.
50

Construction industry, Seattle
and Tacoma, Washington

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
Am erica; International
Union of Operating Engi­
neers; United Slate, Tile,
and Composition Roofers,
Damp and Waterproof
Workers Association; Paint­
ers and Allied Trades;
Sheet Metal Workers' Intern a tio n a l Association;
Laborers' International
Union of North America;
Bricklayers, Masons and
Plasterers' International
Union of America; Inter­
national Brotherhood of
Team sters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers
of America (Ind.)

15,000

Although contract terms varied by
union, most agreements were to extend
for 3 years and were to provide for wage
increases of between 6 and 9 percent in
each year.

June 1

15

Construction industry,
falo, New York

Buf­

International Brotherhood of
Painters and Allied Trades

10,000

1year agreement providing: Wage in­
creases and improved fringe benefits
amounting to $2.05 an hour.

June 18

27

Construction industry, North­
ern California

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America

20,000

3-year contract providing: A 9.8 per­
cent increase in wages and fringes the
first year, 9.2 percent in the second year
and 8.9 percent in the third year.

June 28

16

Construction industry, Oregon
and Southwestern Washing­
ton

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America

12,000

2year contract providing: Pay in­
creases of 65 cents per hour in wages and
fringe benefits for each of the 2 years.
The first increase, retroactive to June 1,
was not to be received pending approval
by the Construction Industry Stabiliza­
tion Committee. Improved health and
welfare benefits included a new dental
insurance plan; increased pensions and
additional vacation time.

July 1

5

Construction industry, Hous­
ton, Tex. and vicinity

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America

16,000

1year contract providing: Wage in­
crease of 45 cents per hour effective
July 8, 1971 and 35 cents per hour
effective January 1,1972.

Aug. 2

33

Construction industry, North­
ern and Central California

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers
of America (Ind.)

65,000

2year contract providing: Wage and
fringe benefit increases of 80 cents an
hour each year; first year increase retro­
active to June 16,1971. Contractors also
agreed to classify independent truck

June 1

owner-operators as "employees" as the
union had demanded.
Nov. 28

15




Construction industry, South­
ern California

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffers,
Warehousemen and Helpers
(Ind.)

120,000

3-year contract providing: 85 cents
an hour increase each year. Stoppage by
3,500 Teamsters was supported by the
other construction workers in the area.

Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Apr. 3 ......................

65

2

Major terms of settlement

number of
workers
involved3

days)1
1972
Apr. 1 ......................

Approx­
imate

Associated General Contractors of America (heavy and
highway construction), 44
counties, upstate N.Y.

International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffers,
Warehousemen and Helpers

Associated General Contractors of America; Con­
struction Employers Asso­
ciation; Gulf Coast Em­
ployers Association, Hous­
ton, Tex. and vicinity.

Operative Plasterers' and Cement Masons'; Inter­
national Association of the
United States and Canada;
International Union of Op­
erating Engineers

10,000

Contract provided an additional 38
cents per hour in wages effective
August 1, 1973; 35 cents per hour for
pensions (was 30 cents) which increased
to 40 cents effective April 1, 1973; 40
cents per hour to health and welfare
(was 35 cents) and 45 cents effective
Apr. 1,1973.

15,000

l U O E - 3-year agreement providing:
Wage increase of 40 cents per hour
effective April 6, 1972. The agreement
was subject to wage and benefit reopen­
ing on March 31, 1973 and March 31,
1974.

of America (Ind.)

O P C M -Settlement

terms not avail­

able.
May 1 ......................

10

Building and Construction
Contractors Association,
San Diego, Cal. and vicin­
ity

Laborers' International Union
of North America

11,000

As of January, 1974 the LIUNA
agreement had not received complete
approval from the CISC. The approved
sections of the 2-year agreement pro­
vided wage and fringe benefits of 55
cents effective May 1, 1972 with an
incremental 15 cents on November 1,
1972 and an additional 15 cents on
March 16, 1973. By November 1, 1973
an additional 71.5 cents had been ap­
proved.

June 12 ..................

39

Associated General Contrac­
tors, Minneapolis, Minn,
and vicinity

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers;
Bricklayers, Masons and
Plasterers' International
Union of America: Labor­
ers' International Union of
North America; Operative
Plasterers' and Cement
Masons' International As­
sociation of the United
States and Canada

50,000

B S O IW - 2 - y Q a r contract providing: 30
cents per hour wage increase effective
July 20, 1972 and 20 cents on May 1,
1973 plus an additional 5 cents on
October 1, bringing the hourly rate to
$8.10 by the end of 1973. Presettlement
scale was $7.55. Subsistence pay
dropped from a presettlement level of
$10.00 per day on jobs 3 0 -5 0 miles
from home to $8 per day. For jobs more
than 50 miles away, the rate remained at
$10.

£Af/,-34-month contract providing:
Total wage and benefit package of $8.85
effective July 3,1972, rising to $9.05 on
May 1,1973.
0 P C M - 3 Z -month agreement provid­
ing: Total wage and benefit package of
$8.63 effective May 1, 1973. Presettle­
ment scale was $8.20.
L IU N A

-Settlement terms are not

available.
June 22 ..................




15

Builders Association of Chi­
cago, Chicago, III.

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners; Oper­
ative Plasterers' and Ce­
ment Masons' International
Association

70,000

£/A -1-year agreement providing: 65
cents per hour wage increase retroactive
to June 1 and 35 cents on December 1,
bringing the hourly rate to $8.65. In
addition, the employer payment for
benefits was increased to $1.15 an hour
from $1.

Beginning
date

Approximate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

days)1

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

1 97 2 Con't.
O P C M - 1-year agreement providing
20 cents per hour wage increase retro­
active to June 1,1972.

June 28 ..................

July 1 ......................

12

C onstruction
Contractors
Council, Inc., Washington,
D.C.

Laborers' International Union
of North America

20,000

212s

Building Trades Employers As­
sociations, New York City
and vicinity

International Union of Ele­
vator Constructors; Inter­
national Brotherhood of
Boilermakers, Iron Ship­
builders, Blacksmiths,
Forgers and Helpers; Inter­
national Association of
Sheet Metal Workers; and
the Wood, Wire and Metal
Lathers In tern a tio n a l
Union, were the principal
participants, along with
nine other unions.

22,600

3-year contract providing 30 cents
per hour wage increase effective May 1,
1972 with an additional 25 cents and 33
cents 1 and 2 years later respectively.
I U E C - 3-year agreement providing:
32 cents per hour wage increase effective
July 1 with an additional 42 cents on
July 1, 1973 and the same increment
again in 1974.
S M W , W W M L -These two agreements
have not been approved by the CISC.

ZW -S ettlem ent terms are not avail­
able.

Aug. 9 ....................

61

Associated General Contrac­
tors, St. Louis, Mo.

International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Or­
namental Iron Workers

15,000

3-year contract providing: wage in­
crease of $1.35 per hour over the life of
the agreement. Pre-settlement wages
were $7.98 per hour.

Oct. 2 3 ....................

4

Connecticut Building Con­
struction Association, As­
sociated
General Con­
tractors of Connecticut,
statewide

Laborers' International Union
of North America

12,000

101
/ 2-m onth agreement provided 10
cents per hour retroactive to May 10,
1972, with a 30-cent contribution to the
pension fund (was 25 cents).

1973
May 1 ......................

22

Building Contractors Associa­
tion, New Jersey

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
A m erica; B ricklayers,
Masons and Plasterers' In­
ternational Union of Amer­
ica, Laborers' International
Union of North America.

15,000

CJM-1-yr agreement providing: wage
increase of 41 cents per hour effective
May 1, 1973 with an additional 44 cents
becoming effective May 1, 1974. The
increase in the benefit package totaled
10 cents per hour. Pre-settlement scale
ranged from $8.88 in Newark to $9.37
in Camden.
B M P and
not available.

UUNA

-settlement data is

June 1 ....................

20

Associated General Contrac­
tors Washington and
Oregon

International Union of Oper­
ating Engineers

15,000

1-year contract providing: 15 cents
per hour effective June 1,1973, with 10
cents allotted to health and welfare, 25
cents to pensions, and 10 cents for
vacation time.

June 1 ....................

5

Construction Contractors As­
sociation, Chicago

Laborers' International Union
of North America

100,000

3-year settlement providing: 40 cents
per hour wage increase effective June 1,
1973. Pre-settlement scale was $6.50




Beginning
date

Approx­
imate
duration
(calendar

Establishment(s)

Union(s)

and location(s)

involved2

Approx­
imate
number of

Major terms of settlement

workers
involved3

days)1
1973Con't.
Aug. 13 ..................

9

Associated General Contrac­
tors Washington and
Oregon

United Brotherhood of Car­
penters and Joiners of
America; Laborers' Inter­
national Union of North
America

1 Includes nonworkdays, such as Saturdays, Sundays, and established
holidays.
2 The unions listed are those directly involved in the dispute, but the number
of workers involved may include members of other unions or nonunion workers
idled by disputes in the same establishments. The unions are affiliated with the
A F L -C IO , except where they are noted as independent (Ind.).
3 Number of workers involved is the maximum number made idle for 1 shift
or longer in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. This figure does not
measure the indirect or secondary effect on other establishments or industries




£/>4-1-year agreement providing: 51
cents per hour effective June 1, 1973.
Pre-settlement scale was $6.78.
U U N A - ^ - y m agreement providing:
50 cents per hour wage increase effective
Junel, 1973. Pre-settlement scale in
Portland was $5.60.

whose employees are made idle as a result of material or service shortage.
4 Formerly the International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers'
Union.
5 A lockout of 5,000 operating engineers prevented 40,000 other craftsmen
from working.
^Strike was still in progress at the end of the year; settled January 13,1971.
7 All trades except the Elevator Constructors settled on or about October 18.
The IUEC remained on strike until January 17, preventing other construction
workers from resuming work on upper floors.

1965

1966

1967

1968

Size of stoppage
(number of workers involved)

1970

1969

1971

1972

Number of stoppages
Number

Percent

Number

Number

Percent

Number

All sizes ..........................................

944

100.0

973

100.0

874

100.0

911

100.0

968

100.0

1133

100.0

754

100.0

705

100.0

6 and under 2 0 ...............................................
20 and under 100 ..........................................
100 and under 250 ..........................................
250 and under 500 ..........................................
500 and under 1000 .......................................
1,000 and under 5,000 ..................................
5,000 and under 10,000 ...............................
10,000 and over ............................................

230
393
140
77
60
33
7
4

24.4
41.6
14.8
8.2
6.4

229
341
193
99
48
40
11
12

23.5
35.0
19.8
10.2
4.9
4.1
1.1
1.2

192
340
145
86
56
42
9
4

22.0
38.9
16.6
9.8
6.4
4.8
1.0
.5

146
350
172
108
75
48
7
5

16.0
38.4
18.8
11.8
8.2
5.3
.8
.5

202
348
175
102
69
58
6
8

20.8
35.9
18.1
10.5
7.1
6.0
.6
.8

212
430
202
121
74
73
12
9

18.7
38.0
17.8
10.7
6.5
6.4
1.1
.8

159
291
137
79
37
38
4
9

21.1
38.6
18.2
10.5
4.9
5.0
.5
1.2

137
272
135
65
37
41
9
9

19.4
38.6
19.1
9.2
5.2
5.8
1.3
1.3

Number

Percent

3.5
.7
.4

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Percent

Percent

Workers involved (in thousands)
All sizes ..........................................

301.6

100.0

452.4

100.0

306.5

100.0

364.7

100.0

431.9

100.0

605.9

100.0

464.4

100.0

433.3

100.0

6 and under 2 0 ...............................................
20 and under 100 ..........................................
100 and under 250 ..........................................
250 and under 500 ..........................................
500 and under 1,000 .....................................
1,000 and under 5,000 ..................................
5,000 and under 10,000 ...............................
10,000 and over ............................................

2.6
18.2
21.7
25.4
39.9
70.3
47.9
75.7

.9
6.0
7.2
8.4
13.2
23.3
15.9
25.1

2.7
16.5
29.5
33.6
30.9
72.0
75.9
191.3

.6
3.7
6.5
7.4
6.8
15.9
16.8
42.3

2.3
15.6
22.4
28.9
36.4
74.4
56.5
70.1

.7
5.1
7.3
9.4
11.9
24.3
18.4
22.9

1.6
16.2
26.0
37.4
49.3
89.7
43.5
101.0

.4
4.4
7.1
10.2
13.5
24.6
11.9
27.7

2.3
15.7
27.9
35.0
46.8
102.4
42.1
160.0

.5
3.6
6.5
8.1
10.8
23.7
9.7
37.0

2.4
19.7
29.9
41.3
49.9
144.8
75.0
243.0

.4
3.3
4.9
6.8
8.2
23.9
12.4
40.1

1.9
13.4
21.0
26.3
26.1
69.2
24.0
282.5

.4
2.9
4.5
5.7
5.6
14.9
5.4
60.8

1.6
12.8
20.4
21.1
25.1
72.2
63.0
217.1

.4
3.0
4.7
4.9
5.8
16.7
14.5
50.1

All sizes .......................................... 4,664.6

100.0

5,850.1

100.0

5,431.3

100.0

8,732.9

100.0

10,376.0

100.0

13,872.3

100.0

8,221.4

100.0

6,626.3

100.0

.4
4.0
3.5
4.8
8.9
15.1
23.2
39.9

23.2
114.0
262.4
360.6
287.6
1,005.5
942.1
2,854.4

.4
1.9
4.5
6.2
4.9
17.2
16.1
48.8

19.6
156.7
235.0
296.1
413.0
1,304.9
1,440.7
1,565.4

.4
2.9
4.3
5.5
7.6
24.0
26.5
28.8

13.3
178.0
354.0
590.7
606.6
1,936.7
1,833.6
3,220.0

.2
2.0
4.1
6.8
6.9
22.2
21.0
36.9

20.6
193.2
387.3
555.9
736.0
1,402.8
940.1
6,140.0

.2
1.9
3.7
5.4
7.1
13.5
9.1
59.2

28.2
249.1
438.5
677.3
958.2
3,725.5
2,020.5
5,755.0

.2
1.8
3.2
4.9
6.9
26.9
14.6
41.5

23.4
158.9
242.1
461.5
445.2
1,186.6
378.0
5,325.7

.3
1.9
2.9
5.6
5.4
14.4
4.6
64.8

15.9
138.4
315.0
303.1
316.1
692.1
905.8
3,939.2

.2
2.1
4.8
4.6
4.8
10.4
13.7
59.4

Days idle (in thousands)

6 and under 2 0 ...............................................
20 and under 100 ..........................................
100 and under 250 ..........................................
250 and under 500 ..........................................
500 and under 1,000 .....................................
1,000 and under 5,000 ..................................
5,000 and under 10,000 ...............................
10,000 and over ............................................

19.7
187.5
162.8
221.6
415.2
703.7
1,079.3
1,855.2

1Totals in this table differ from those in preceeding tables because these stoppages
year, and thus included idleness occurring in prior years.




ended

during the

1966

1965

1967

1968

Duration

1970

1969

1971

1972

Number of stoppages
Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

All periods.......................................

944

100.0

973

100.0

874

100.0

911

100.0

968

100.0

1,133

100.0

754

100.0

705

100.0

1 d a y .................................................................
2 to 3 d a y s .......................................................
4 to 6 d a y s .......................................................
7 to 14 d a y s ....................................................
15 to 29 d a y s .................................................
30 to 59 d a y s .................................................
60 to 89 d a y s .................................................
90 days and o v e r ............................................

123
160
179
234
152
65
18
13

13.0
16.9
19.0
24.8
16.1
6.9
1.9
1.3

100
171
213
253
140
68
16
12

10.3
17.6
21.9
26.0
14.4
7.0
1.6
1.2

89
148
156
226
138
79
23
15

10.2
17.0
17.8
25.9
15.8
9.0
2.6
1.7

83
128
148
231
161
109
37
14

9.1
14.1
16.2
25.4
17.7
12.0
4.1

87
148
155
233
143
146
35
21

9.0
15.3
16.0
24.1
14.8
15.1
3.6
2.1

96
138
182
237
218
166
62
34

8.4
12.2
16.1
20.9
19.2
14.7
5.5
3.0

59
118
128
183
117
93
34
22

7.8
15.6
17.0
24.3
15.5
12.3
4.5
2.9

69
105
126
175
106
85
22
17

9.8
14.9
17.9
24.8
15.0
12.1
3.1
2.4

All periods.......................................

301.6

100.0

452.4

100.0

306.5

100.0

364.7

100.0

431.9

100.0

605.9

100.0

464.3

100.0

433.3

100.0

1 d a y .................................................................
2 to 3 d a y s .......................................................
4 to 6 d a y s .......................................................
7 to 14 d a y s ....................................................
15 to 29 days . : ............................................
30 to 59 d a y s .................................................
60 to 89 d a y s .................................................
90 days and o v e r ............................................

17.1
25.9
35.6
33.5
76.8
73.8
38.0
1.0

5.7
8.6
11.8
11.1
25.5
24.5
12.6
.3

22.2
22.1
61.2
104.6
122.7
86.1
31.3
2.3

4.9
4.9
13.5
23.1
27.1
19.0
6.9
.5

13.3
33.0
29.6
64.5
21.3
101.3
33.1
10.4

4.3
10.8
9.7
21.0
6.9
33.1
10.8
3.4

13.2
19.6
26.7
81.7
50.1
70.9
89.3
13.2

3.6
5.4
7.3
22.4
13.7
19.4
24.5
3.6

11.2
30.5
27.1
58.6

2.6
7.1
6.3
13.6
15.3
32.6
12.9
9.7

53.8
44.6
82.9
54.2
140.2
119.8
49.1
61.2

8.9
7.4
13.7
8.9
23.1
19.8
8.1
10.1

9.6
24.4
34.5
40.3
196.4
101.1
39.3
18.7

2.1
5.3
7.4
8.7
42.3
21.8
8.5
4.0

16.3
40.0
45.5
77.0
121.0
78.0
38.1
17.3

3.8
9.2
10.5
17.8
27.9
18.0
8.8
4.0

1.5

Workers involved (in thousands)

CJI
00

66.0
140.7
55.8
42.0

Days idle (in thousands)
All periods....................................... 4,664.6

100.0

5,850.1

100.0

5,431.3

100.0

8,732.9

100.0

10,376.0

100.0

13,872.3

100.0

8,221.4

100.0

6,626.3

100.0

17.1
1 d a y .................................................................
58.7
2 to 3 d a y s .......................................................
117.7
4 to 6 d a y s .......................................................
210.0
7 to 14 d a y s ....................................................
1 5 t o 2 9 d a y s .................................................
925.6
30 to 59 d a y s ................................................. 1,732.2
60 to 89 d a y s ................................................. 1,494.8
90 days and o v e r ............................................
88.5

.4
1.3
2.5
4.5
19.8
37.1
32.0
1.9

22.2
47.4
190.8
649.4
1,639.8
2,085.0
1,025.3
190.3

.4
.8
3.3
11.1
28.0
35.6
17.5
3.3

13.3
67.8
105.7
476.6
319.5
2,424.5
1,186.1
837.7

.2
1.2
1.9
8.8
5.9
44.6
21.8
15.4

13.2
42.7
92.9
590.9
700.2
2,132.8
4,136.4
996.8

.2
.5
1.1
6.8
8.0
24.4
47.4
11.4

11.2
71.3
94.2
387.6
1,011.5
3,417.9
2,748.0
2,634.3

.1
.7
.9
3.7
9.7
32.9
26.5
25.4

53.8
121.2
369.0
386.3
2,191.8
3,410.5
2,343.5
4,996.2

.4
.9
2.7
2.8
15.8
24.6
16.9
36.0

9.6
54.1
94.8
257.0
2,367.2
2,044.2
1,720.7
1,673.6

.1
.7
1.2
3.1
28.8
24.9
20.9
20.4

16.3
87.7
145.0
503.5
1,190.7
2,285.2
1,164.9
1,233.0

.2
1.3
2.2
7.6
18.0
34.5
17.6
18.6




All stoppages
Year

1962 .............
1963 .............
1964 .............
1965 .............
1966 .............
1967 .............
1968 .............
1969 .............
1970 .............
1 9 7 1 .............
1972 .............
1973 .............

Number
Workers
of
involved
stoppages
913
840
944
943
977
867
912
973
1,137
751
701
539

284.2
208.0
247.8
301.4
455.2
304.5
364.2
433.1
621.0
451.3
454.2
367.4

Negotiation of first agreement or union recognition
Days
idle

4,154.6
1,932.2
2,788.3
4,627.5
6,135.9
5,155.4
8,722.9
10,385.8
15,240.4
6,849.6
7,843.7
3,663.4

Stoppages beginning
in year

Workers involved

1962 .............
1963 .............
1964 .............
1965 .............
1966 .............
1967 .............
1968 .............
1969 .............
1970 .............
1 9 7 1 .............
1972 .............
1973 .............

Stoppages beginning
in year

Workers involved

Days idle
during year

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

82
64
87
72
52
73
40
56
56
47
35
28

9.0
7.6
9.2
7.6
5.3
8.4
4.4
5.8
4.9
6.3
5.0
5.2

6.1
5.5
4.5
5.5
4.1
4.8
3.6
7.5
2.7
5.7
4.5
3.6

2.1
2.6
1.8
1.8
.9
1.6
1.0
1.7
.4

53.0
36.2
36.7
88.8
45.0
78.2

1.3
1.9
1.3
1.9
.7
1.5
.5
.6
.2
.6
.4
1.1

307
245
279
245
293
275
384
369
517
286
289
284

33.6
29.2
29.6
26.0
30.0
31.7
42.1
37.9
45.4
38.0
41.2
52.7

232.0
134.0
172.0
215.3
368.3
210.8
303.2
349.4
548.9
385.7
373.4
325.3

81.6
64.4
69.4
71.4
80.9
69.2
83.3
80.7
88.4

3,880.0
1,600.0
2,410.0
4,176.1
5,623.8
4,259.5
8,352.0
9,908.4
14,824.5
6,509.6
7,423.1
3,267.4

93.3
82.8
86.4
90.2
91.6
82.6
95.7
95.4
97.2
95.0
94.6
89.2

1.3
1.0
1.0

During term of agreement (negotiation of
new agreement not involved)
Stoppages beginning
in year

Renegotiation of agreement (expiratio n or reopening)

Days idle
during year

Workers involved

45.1
61.0
33.1
40.6
35.2
41.2

85.5
82.2
88.5

No contract or other contract status

Days idle
during year

Stoppages beginning
in year

Workers involved

No information on contract status

Days idle
during year

Stoppages beginning
in year

Workers involved

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

434
524
570
618
629
508
478
536
544
394
361
197

47.5
62.4
60.4
65.5
64.4
58.6
52.4
55.0
47.9
52.4
51.5
36.5

38.0
68.1
70.4
80.3
82.6
87.7
56.5
75.6
64.1
56.0
72.3
31.9

13.4
32.7
28.4
26.6
18.1
28.8
15.5
17.5
10.3
12.4
15.9
8.7

171.0
294.0
340.0
356.6
465.9
815.0
321.1
412.0
337.9
245.0
362.2
271.3

4.1
15.2
12.2
7.7
7.6
15.8
3.7
4.0
2.2
3.6
4.6
7.4

36
1
6
6
2
5
4
7
5
11
14
8

3.9
.1
.6
.6
.2
.6
.4
.7
.4
1.5
2.0
1.5

4.6

1.6

24.9

.6

C1)

-

-

.2
.1

C1)

-

.6
.1
.5
.5
2.4
4.1
.2

.2
-

5.9
.7
.2
.2
.1
.2
.7
.5
1.3
1.7
.3
4.1

3.8
.3

.4
.2

C)
2.8
6.0
1.2
1.3
1.6
2.5
5.3
14.4
22.9
1.4

54
6
2
2
1
2
6
5
15
13
2
22




.1
.1
.5
.9
-

.1
.1
-

.3
.2
.3
-

, Percent
1.3
.1
_
-

(*)

C1)
o
C)
.7
(’ )
4.9
1.5
C)
6.4

.

-

.2
.8
.3
-

1.7

Days idle
during year
Number
19.8
1.7

o
(*)
(*)
.3
3.0
1.8
39.5
40.1
.2
82.0

Percent
.5
.1
-

_
-

.3
.6
-

2.2

Contract status and
major issue

Days
idle

Workers
involved

Beginning in year

Beginning in year

Beginning in year

Beginning in year

1968

1967

1966

1965

Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

All stoppages....................................................

943

301.4

4,627.5

977

455.2

6,135.9

867

304.5

5,155.4

912

364.2

8,722.9

Negotiation of first agreement.......................................
General Wage changes..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments..................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization & Security ..........................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions....................................
Interunion or intraunion m atters.......................
Not rep o rted .........................................................

72
4
2
-

5.5
.4

88.8
1.1

4.1
.2

78.2
5.1

40
7

3.6
.6

45.1
9.3

87.3

(')

1

3.7
-

40.0
.5

(" )
.2

C1)
1.0

26
7

25.1

o
<*)
.1

C1)
.5
68.3
3.3

2.2

C)

C1)
C1)
4.0
.2

-

4.9

73
2
1
2
60
2
3
3

4.8
.4

(‘)
.1
-

45.0
3.1
.3
1.1
-

62
1
1
-

52
3
2
2
44

.9

10.7

C)

( ')

-

-

-

-

-

1
1

-

o
-

o
-

215.3
136.2
5.3

Number

.1
-

4,176.0
2,232.7
87.4
1.3
456.6
94.2
1,052.1
249.7
-

Renegotiation of agreement ..........................................
General wage changes ..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments.................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization and security ........................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions.....................................
Interunion or intraunion m atters........................
Not rep o rted .........................................................

245
208
14
1
2
8
6
5

During term of agreement ............................................
General wage changes ..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments.................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization and security .......................

618
-

80.3
-

39
-

2.7
-

356.6
20.5
-

57
15
90
4
407
6

15.3
1.7
10.5

66.3
9.2
41.1

(*)

.5
217.4
1.5

Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions.....................................
Interunion or Intraunion m atters........................
Not rep o rted .........................................................




-

(’ )
10.2
3.2
51.4
8.8
-

1
-

.1
-

49.7
.3

2.1
-

-

293
252
8
1
1
7
12
5
4
1
-

368.3
265.2
22.7
5.0
1.2
3.3
40.9
22.0
.7
7.0
-

5,623.8
3,239.5
587.6
25.8
34.8
15.8
1,192.9
344.8
6.7
168.0
-

2

.3

8.0

629

82.6

465.9

38
1
58
10
75
5
436
6

3.4
.5
9.2
2.4
13.4
.3
53.3
.2

49.6
16.7
47.7
4.1
46.0
.9
300.1
.9

275
243
8
2
1
3
9
4
4
1
508
27
35
10
52
1
384
2

-

-

3.5
2.7
1.2
.1

4,259.5
4,126.2
12.5
4.2
.8
.7
26.0
64.5
24.5
.1

384
350
5

87.7

815.0

478

56.6

4.3

18.2
25.7
6.4
45.2
2.2
716.5
1.2

22

1.9
1.5
.6
8.3
.1
44.1

210.8
201.6
1.2
.2
.1

C)

3.4
1.9
12.7
.5
64.7
.1

17
7
3
1
1
-

22
5
43
3
383
-

303.2
287.6
2.7
8.7
1.7
2.2
.1
.2
-

-

8,352.0
8,085.2
15.6
-

213.1
21.9
10.9
1.4
4.0
321.1
11.0
11.3
7.7
37.5
.7
252.9
-

1965
Contract status and
maior issue

Number
No c o n tra ct.................................................... .................
General wage changes .......................... ..............
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments.................................................
Hours of w o r k ......................................................
Other contractual matters .................................
Union organization and security .......................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions....................................
Interunion or Intraunion m atters.......................
Not re p o rte d .........................................................
No information on contract s ta tu s ...............................

1966

Beginning in year
Workers
involved

6

3

1
1
1

.2

1967

Beginning in year
Days
idle

Number

6.0

f 1)

.2

2

2

Workers
involved
o

C~)

Days
idle

Number

1.2

1.2

C)

7
(

1)

1968

Beginning in year

5
1

Workers
involved
.6

Beginning in year
Man-days
idle

( ')

1.3
.2

1

C)

( l_)

1
1

(r)
.5

.1
.5

1

(*)

.4

( ')

.3

Number

C1)

Days
idle

4

.1

1.6

2

.1

1.3

C1)

.4

.7

3.0

4.8
2

2

Workers
involved

o

1

1969

o

(*)

2

1970

Beginning in year

Beginning in year
Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

6

1971

1972

Beginning in year
Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

Beginning in year
Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle

Number

Workers
involved

AH stoppages....................................................

973

433.1

10,385.8

1,137

621.0

15,240.4

751

451.3

6,849.6

701

454.2

7,843.7

Negotiation of first agreement.......................................
General wage changes .........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments.................................................
Hours of w o r k ......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization and security .......................
Job security............................................................
Plant administration ............................................
Other working conditions....................................
Interunion or intraunion m atters.......................
Not rep o rted .........................................................

56
13

7.5
2.3

61.0
21.5

56
13
1

2.7
1.2

33.1
12.3
.6

47
11

5.7
3.9

40.6
23.2

35
6

4.5
.8

2

.1

3.6

1

C1")

O
C)

1
2

l 1)

35.2
15.7
.5
.5

1

o
V /
4.4

1.9
27.8

38

1.3

18.6

1
33

.3
1.3

1.7
14.8

1
5

2.4
1.1

4.9
13.2

C
V 1))
.3

(’ )
2.4

1

C)

.6

.3

3.8

3

.1

1.0

1

( r)

1.0

2

C)

.4

See footnotes at end of table.




33
1
1
5

rV 1))

1970

1969
Contract status and
major issue

Renegotiation of agreement ..........................................
General wage changes ..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments..................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization and security ........................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions.....................................
Interunion or Intraunion m atters........................
Not rep o rted .........................................................
During term of Agreement ............................................
General wage changes ..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments..................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organizatiomand security ........................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions.....................................
Interunion or Intraunion m atters........................
Not rep o rted .........................................................

369
328
8
2
-

349.4
323.5
4.1
.4
-

9,908.4
9,553.8
84.2
2.0
-

517
466
5
2
-

548.9
461.1
51.8
1.3
-

14
11
3
3
-

2.4

47.3
106.2
23.9
90.9
-

20
9
5
7
-

4.6
14.7
1.7
2.7
-

3

11.0

-

-

Number

-

12
-

75.6
2.4
-

412.0
21.6
-

30
8
56
18
412

4.0
1.0
9.4
2.0
56.9

23.4
14.7
58.6
7.9
285.9

536
-

-

-

-

.5
.2

2.5
.7

(’)

C1)

3
-

.3
-

1.3
-

-

-

-

1

-

.5
1.8

7
2
1
-

No information on contract s ta tu s ...............................

5




Workers
involved

Workers
involved

No c o n tra ct......................................................................
General wage changes ..........................................
Supplementary benefits.......................................
Wage adjustments.................................................
Hours of w o r k .......................................................
Other contractual matters ..................................
Union organization and security ........................
Job security............................................................
Plant adm inistration............................................
Other working conditions.....................................
Interunion or Intraunion m atters........................
Not rep o rted .........................................................

1 Fewer than 100 workers or man-days.

Days
idle

Number

12.9
.9
5.2
-

o
o

1971

Beginning in year

Beginning in year

-

-

1972

Beginning in year
Days
idle

Number

14,824.5
13,155.3
269.4
7.3
93.3

286
238
2
4

809.6
38.7
125.9
-

20
2
3
2
-

325.1
-

1
14

-

Workers
involved

Beginning in year
Days
idle

C1)

C1)

5.8
125.6
1.7
.4
.4
-

70.5

289
227
9
7
1
12

1,605.5
20.6
5.5
1.0
-

10
9
9
4
1

385.7
250.4
.8
C)

-

6,509.6
4,795.6
10.3
.6

-

544

64.1

337.9

394

56.0

245.0

12
24
6
60
10
432

2.8

11.0
11.1
10.9
44.5
6.0
254.5

1.8
.1
1.6
5.6
17.0
1.6
28.3

-

2.6
.8
10.6
.6
46.7

11
1
-

-

18
11
40
10
303

-

-

-

2.4
.8

8.3
.5
5.6
34.3
72.4
8.4
115.4
14.4
3.8
2.3

.5

5.3

(’)

(’)

11
3

.4

5.2

6

.5

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

1.1

8.3

-

-

-

-

-

-

15

4.9

13

1.5

5
2
3
-

NOTE:

39.5

Number

40.1

-

Workers
involved
373.4
244.6
6.7
1.2
.1
3.0
17.1
26.8
72.3
.7
.8

Days
idle
7,423.1
6,137.0
16.1
16.7
2.0
20.6
339.4
208.2
616.1
31.9
35.2
-

-

361
1

72.3
.3

362.2

27

7.0

22.3

17
8
36
8
264

22.4
.3
11.7
2.3
28.3

131.8
3.0
54.3
5.3
126.4

-

19.1

—

14
2

4.1

(’)

22.9
1.9

2

.1

1.0

6
1
1
2

2.2

8.4
.5
.4
10.9

-

-

2

C1)
(*)
1.6

C )

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros.

.2

1962

1963

1964

Major issue
Number

Percent

913
271
25
40
-

100.0
29.7
2.7
4.4
-

Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security.................................
Job security ...................................................................

8
129
25
115
6
257
31
6

284.2
207.1
2.8
3.6

Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................
Not reported .................................................................

1966

1967

Number of Stoppages

All stoppages.................................................
General wage changes....................................................
Supplementary b e n e fits ..............................................
Wage adjustments.........................................................
Hours of work ..............................................................

Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................

1965

Number

Percent

.9
14.1

840
208
17
42
2
3
123

100.0
24.8
2.0
5.0
.2
.4
14.6

2.7
12.6
.7
28.1
3.4
.7

29
85
7
280
39
5

3.5
10.1
.8
33.3
4.6
.6

100.0
72.9
1.0
1.3

208.0
103.0
3.5
7.9
.7
.2
35.4
6.1
15.2
1.7
26.4
7.3
.6

100.0
49.5
1.7
3.8
.3

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

944
234
20
23
1

100.0
24.8
2.1
2.4

100.0
26.1
1.0
4.4

867
248
9
32

100.0
28.6
1.0
3.7

9
142
24

1.0
15.0
2.5
9.1
.6
36.2
5.7
.3

8
126
23
92
4
385
25
7

100.0
22.5
1.5
4.9
.2
.8
13.4
2.4
9.8
.4

977
255
10
43

.1

943
212
14
46
2

2
7
114
15
79
6
407
30
9

.2
.7
11.7
1.5
8.1
.6
41.7
3.1
.9

1
3
105
18
59
1
359
28
4

.1
.3
12.1
2.1
6.8
.1
41.4
3.2
.5

455.2
265.3
22.8
8.6
1.7
3.2
53.8
24.4
14.1
7.3
46.6
6.8
.6

100.0
58.2
5.0
1.9
.4
.7
11.8
5.4
3.1
1.6
10.2
1.5
.1

304.5
202.4
1.2
4.6
.1

100.0
66.5
.4
1.5

10.9
5.3
13.9
.5
60.5
4.8
.3

3.6
1.7
4.6
.2
19.9
1.6
.1

6,135.9
3,242.6
587.9
n.i
51.5
15.7
1,280.6
348.9
52.8
168.9
231.9
68.6
8.9

100.0
52.8
9.6
1.3

5,155.4
4,133.3

100.0
80.2
.2
.4

86
6
342
54
3

40.8
2.7
.7

Workers involved (in thousands)
All w o rkers....................................................
General wage changes....................................................
Supplementary b e n e fits ..............................................
Wage adjustm ents.........................................................
Hours of work ..............................................................
Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security..................................
Job secu rity...................................................................
Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................
Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................
Not reported .................................................................

-

1.1
28.8
7.2
12.1
.3
20.4
5.5
.1

-

.4
10.1
.8
4.3
.1
7.2
1.9

(2)

(2)
17.0
2.9
7.3
.8
12.7
3.5
.3

247.8
153.5
3.1
2.8
2.1
2.6
25.0
1.7
10.3
.7
24.2
21.8

C1)

100.0
61.9
1.3
1.1
.9
1.0
10.1
.7
4.2
.3
9.8
8.8

(2)

301.4
136.8
5.3
2.9
10.2
3.2
71.7
10.5
10.6
C)
38.8
11.1
.3

100.0
45.4
1.8
1.0
3.4
1.1
23.8
3.5
3.5
_
12.9
3.7

C2)

(*)

C)

<*)

Days idle (in thousands)
All idleness....................................................
General wage changes....................................................
Supplementary benef i t s ..............................................
Wage adjustm ents.........................................................
Hours of work ..............................................................
Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security..................................
Job security...................................................................
Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................
Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................
Not reported .........................................................




4,154.6
3,531.3
36.0
17.9
-

100.0
85.0
.9
.4
-

10.5
379.9

.3
9.1
.3
.8
.2
1.8
1.2

11.5
34.2
6.3
75.0
48.3
.7

(2)

1,932.2
1,273.4
29.9
29.0
21.3
1.9
321.0
30.9
71.8
3.0
110.4
37.8
1.8

100.0
65.9
1.5
1.5
1.1
( 2)
16.6
1.6
3.7
.2
5.7
2.0

(2)

2,788.3
1,957.9
54.8
20.5
14.8
28.4
403.9
22.4
55.7
4.8
144.9
78.7
1.5

100.0
70.2
2.0
.7
.5
1.0
14.5
.8
2.0
.2
5.2
2.8
.1

4,627.5
2,233.8
87.4
22.2
456.6
94.2
1,206.0
259.6
46.0
.5
169.5
51.2
1.5

100.0
48.3
1.9
.5
9.9
2.0
26.1
5.6
1.0
_
3.7
1.1

(2)

.8
.3
20.9
5.7
.9
2.8
3.8
1.1
.1

12.6
22.9
.2
.7
120.0
74.7
69.7
2.2
696.1
20.7
1.6

(2)
<*)
2.3
1.4
1.4

(2)
13.5
.4

C2)

1969

1968

1971

1970

1972

1973

Number of Stoppages

Major issue
Number

Percent

Number

Number

Percent

All stoppages ................................................
General wage changes....................................................
Supplementary b e n e fits ...............................................
Wage adjustments.........................................................
Hours of work ..............................................................
Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security..................................
Job security...................................................................
Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................
Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................
Not reported .................................................................

912
357
5
22
-

100.0
39.1
.5
2.4
-

973
344
9
16
-

100.0
35.4
.9
1.6
-

1,137
482
6
14
-

17
57
8
44
4
361
31
6

1.9
6.3
.9
4.8
.4
39.6
3.4
.7

15
77
12
60
18
383
34
5

1.5
7.9
1.2
6.2
1.8
39.4
3.5
.5

20
74

All w orkers....................................................
General wage changes....................................... ............
Supplementary b e n e fits ...............................................
Wage adjustments.........................................................
Hours of w o r k ...............................................................
Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security..................................
Job security...................................................................
Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................
Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................

364.2
288.1
2.7
1.9
-

100.0
79.1
.7
.5
-

8.7
5.4
2.8
8.5
.3
39.9
5.1
.7

2.4

433.1
326.1
4.1
2.9
2.4

100.0
75.3
1.0
.7
.6
5.0
.4
3.4
.5
11.8
1.4
-

11
69
10
395
43
13

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

100.0
42.4
.5
1.2
1.8
6.5
1.0
6.1
.9
34.7
3.8
1.1

751
253
2
16
2
16
77
13
43
12
288
18
11

TOO.O
33.7
.3
2.1
.3
2.1
10.3
1.7
5.7
1.6
38.3
2.4
1.5

701
236
10
38
1
13
56
18
46
14
238
28
3

100.0
33.7
1.4
5.4
.1
1.9
8.0
2.6
6.6
2.0
34.0
4.0
.4

539
227
11
12
3
13
53
15
39
125
31
10

100.0
42.1
2.0
2.2
.6
2.4
9.8
2.8
7.2
23.2
5.8
1.9

100.0
56.8
.2
.1
1.4
28.6
1.0
3.8
.4
5.5
1.0
.2

454.2
245.8
6.7
8.4
.1
5.4

100.0
54.1

367.4
245.2
5.9
2.1
.6
2.2
42.8
11.7
27.8
14.3
7.6
.5

100.0
66.7
1.6
.6
.2
.6
11.6
3.2
7.6

100.0
70.7
.1
.1
-

7,843.7
6,173.7
16.1
40.4
2.0
25.5
492.8
211.6
670.8
48.0
96.4
65.3
.6

3,663.4
1,842.3
104.3
12.6
11.8
25.4
505.0
199.6
868.9
-

100.0
50.3
2.8
.3
.3
.7
13.8
5.4
23.7
1.2
1.3
.1

Workers involved (in thousands)

Not reported .................................................................

1.5
.8
2.3
.1
11.0
1.4
.2

21.5
1.9
14.8
2.0
51.0
6.2
C1)

621.0
462.0
51.8
4.1
4.6
19.1
2.4
14.5
.6
49.2
8.6
3.7

100.0
74.4
8.3
.7
.7
3.1
.4
2.3
.1
7.9
1.4
.6

451.3
256.2
.8
1.9
.1
6.2
129.1
7.2
17.4
2.0
24.8
4.7
1.0

42.8
27.2
84.1
4.6
25.1
3.9
(')

1.5
1.8
1.2
9.4
6.0
18.5
1.0
5.5
.9
-

3.9
2.1
.1

Days idle (in thousands)
All idleness....................................................
General wage changes....................................................
Supplementary b e n e fits ...............................................
Wage adjustments.........................................................
Hours of work ..............................................................
Other contractual m atters............................................
Union organization and security..................................
Job security...................................................................
Plant administration ....................................................
Other working conditions............................................
Jurisdictional disputes.................................................
Interunion or intraunion m a tte rs ...............................
Not reported .................................................................
Fewer than 100 workers.
Less than 0.1 percent.




8,722.9
8,094.5
15.6
11.0
-

100.0
92.8
.2
.1
-

213.1
59.6
18.6
38.8
4.7
227.3
36.7
3.0

2.4
.7
.2
.4
.1
2.6
.4
-

10,385.8
9,576.4
84.2
27.2
49.2
158.7
38.6
151.9
7.9
244.6
45.1
1.9

100.0
92.2
.8
.3
-

15,240.4
13,169.0
270.0
18.3
-

.5
1.5
.4
1.5
.1
2.4
.4

93.3
844.4
49.6
175.9
6.0
394.1
186.4
33.4

-

NOTE:

100.0
86.4
1.8
.1
.6
5.5
.3
1.2
2.3
1.2
.2

6,849.6
4,842.1
10.3
9.0
.5
72.3
1,628.2
54.8
77.9
9.4
107.3
17.3
20.3

1.1
23.8
.8
1.1
.1
1.6
.3
.3

100.0
78.7
.2
.5
.3
6.3
2.7
8.6
.6
1.2
.8
-

44.5
46.0
3.0

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros.

Alaska2

Alabama
Stoppages
beginning
in year

Year

Days
idle during
year (all)
stoppages)

Number

Workers
involved

......................................
......................................
.......................................
......................................

8
7
5
4

8,500
2,430
4,230
840

21,200
27,700
124,000
3,810

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................

5
19
9
11
13

1,190
3,390
4,240
3,430
3,980

18,700
16,400

1946
1947
1948
1949

18,700
17,000
122,000

Stoppages
beginning
in year
Number

Workers
involved

_

_

-

-

-

-

Arizona
Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)
—
-

_

_

_

-

-

-

-

-

-

—
-

-

_

-

-

Stoppages
beginning
in year

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

Number

Workers
involved

4
6
1
2

460
5,160
230
210

2,050
79,600
2,510
470

4
5
4
7
3

410
270
280
1,760
530

4,760
2,070
3,310
41,900
13,700

220
600
150
990
19,600
310

2,370
3,350
4,170
7,860
520,000
830

1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

1955 ......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

8
10
15
11
12
9

1,730
12,500
6,050
2,100
2,520
5,100

16,500
40,200
155,000
26,100
11,800
21,100

8
10

4,840
490

259,000
3,300

4
3
4
7
15
5

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

7
5
7
12
9
11

380
1,580
360
1,370
1,890
1,840

1,030
10,300
1,300
4,320
4,730
6,110

2
4
3
6
5
1

2,010
220
150
110
360
30

15,100
2,070
790
7,260
5,830
420

8
15
6
9
13
5

680
15,200
1,030
510
16,000
400

2,650
139,000
9,760
2,840
521,000
1,790

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

13
8
7
19
7
9

3,500
2,700
3,800
23,800
1,200
1,800

73,800
41,500
38,700
1,349,100
130,300
18,800

5
4
8
6
3
6

600
1,100
1,400

8,700
4,600
29,200
1,100
500
2,300

3
7
10
9
9
12

200
1,000
2,400
2,500
2,000
1,900

1,200
8,700
15,300
110,000
17,700
19,600

1946 ......................................
1947 ......................................

7
7
4
4

510
390
1,170
80

5,520
5,880
25,200
50,100

19
18
27
43

2,990
2,450
7,110
15,100

28,900
41,600
72,300
109,000

5
7
1

1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................

6
12
25
24
14

700
3,260
28,200
4,130
3,010

4,090
10,600
91,400
35,500
46,000

38
37
36
54
45

59,000
15.000
97,500
88,500
37,500

668,000
88,700
2,110,000
1,280,000
111,000

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

......................................
......................................
......................................
.......................................
.......................................
......................................

5
8
7
11
6
8

1,400
420
2,980
2,650
290
1,280

10,400
4,390
5,380
24,200
2,860
4,940

50
55
47
34
53
53

30,800
25,800
38,200
4,860
9,020
14,800

164,000
179,000
703,000
39,100
101,000
94,700

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

15
14
10
13
14

1,420
2,050
1,520
4,770

55
71
77
77

10,300
74,900
12,800
9,690

89
67

74,200

93,400
1,600,000
161,000
82,500
1,200,000

10

420
340

7,960
8,420
5,510
32,100
7,880
860

6,860

35,200

8
9
11
10
6
4

2,400
2,200
900
4,900
300
300

10,400
44,600
8,400
196,000
3,400
4,100

40
49
50
57
33

7,600
9,400
48,100
96,100
209,500
23,000

27,800
93,600

-

Arkansas

1948 ......................................
1949 ......................................
1950 ......................................

1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................
1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................




200
(3)
400

-

California

45

Colorado

1,186,600
430,800
2,940,700
348,300

8

830
1,730
100
3,580

2,090
21,600
310
80,200

8
2
9
13
15

11,100
1,400
6,470
2,320
4,240

340,000
2,300
29,900
19,500
72,500

6
11

1,530
1,670
8,390
370
11,500
4,420

13,000
9,180
43,700
5,660
57,500
71,600

10,200
1,650
1,150
1,160
2,320

163,000
5,040
15,900
6,880
18,100

8,140

175,000

100
2,800
5,800
1,500
900
10,200

59,600
55,100
4,800
10,100
271,300

13
6
13
16
21
15
14
12
10
14
4
17
30
12
9
9

700

Delaware

Connecticut
Stoppages
beginning

Year

Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during

in year

year (all
stoppages)

District of Columbia
Days
idle during

in year

year (all
stoppages)

7,350
20,700
23,500
37,300

1
2
2
3

100
720
260
470

600
17,300
4,150
3,000

5
3
5
5

2,090
560
750
10,300

4,560
14,700
6,140
121,000

1,310
1,210
3,140
5,730
6,500

17,100
13,300
48,200
91,500
42,400

5
6
4

1,930
750
290
7,100

3
2
1
2
4

900
800
150
500
1,430

5,270
7,200

5,700
14,500
23,600
74,100
36,800
2,260

4

1946 .......................................
1947 .......................................
1 9 4 8 .......................................
1949 .......................................

7
9
10
12

1,230
2,670
1,600
5,600

1950 .......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 ......................................

16

230

8,400
5,370
3,320
298,000
2,730

2
4
3
-

5,250
1,530
990
1,150
-

46,300
6,380
23,200
7,240
-

8

750

6,610

276,000
23,600
23,100
17,200
92,900
75,500

10
6
8
9
6
6

1,390
4,110
1,650
590
740
890

406,600
120,700
287,500
29,400
117,400
152,800

6
5
9
4
13
3

200
400
7,700
600
5,400
100

800
4,720
1,240
750

8,880
33,600
12,900
8,920

6
4
2
1

8
11
10
33
26

2,470
1,620
1,810
15,900
6,070

34,500
50,200
23,800
136,000
26,400

21
27
40
43
43
51

2,060
4,880
11,400
12,800
10,500
13,500

35
27
53
82
68
65

......................................
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................

43
32
34

1 9 7 1 .......................................
1972 .......................................

26
27

......................................
.......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

9
14
15
13
16
6

990
1,770
3,300
5,630
3,490
940

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 .......................................
1966 ......................................

16
17
9
13
23
23

11,000
2,040
2,090
1,280
6,150
3,750

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 .......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

15
26
21
22
15
19

25,500
6,200
24,900
2,500
3,200
15,300

1946
1947
1948
1949

5
12
8
7

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 ......................................
1954 ......................................
1954 .......................................
1955 ......................................
1956 ......................................
1957 ......................................

2
4

1958 .......................................
1959 ......................................
1960 ......................................
1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................
1967
1968
1969
1970




55

Number

Workers
involved

1,650
310
40
5,400
450

28,700
5,480
6,020
90
37,100
8,690

4,990
33,400
8,000
2,700
9,730
6,770

3
1
4
2
-

3,820
20
1,140
150
-

30,200
120
6,810
410
-

4

5,600

87,700

3,600
3,900
191,600
42,900
247,600
2,600

2
4
5
4

200
3,200
4,500
800
600
13,600

1,900
13,900
128,700
5,400
13,300
109,400

570
750
330
140

8,930
17,200
12,400
1,400

_

_

_

-

-

-

-

-

-

7
10
7
25
9

1,020
2,810
710
10,300
8,610

5,150
13,500
4,420
59,700
296,000

_
-

_

—

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

37,200
20,800
89,300
148,000
53,000
163,000

9
9
8
12
6
8

1,510
1,460
1,730
1,280
1,230
810

14,600
10,300
23,700
11,700
20,700
4,280

—

_

_

-

-

-

4

640

1,720

2,750
2,610
9,090
26,800
26,300
34,800

61,800
17,600
35,300
88,400
114,000
442,000

5
3
5
11
18
16

7,800
420
860
1,440
11,100
12,500

124,000
2,500
8,340
15,100
131,000
479,000

4
3
5
1

540
290
770
120
40
290

3,660
770

72,00
5,200
38,800
12,300
7,700
5,600

46,000
67,000
724,900
168,000
41,900
87,700

17
18
10
16
10

2,300
5,100
2,000
13,700
1,600
4,200

5
6

Georgia

8

1,430

2,360
7,200
17,600

6
3
3
2
6
1

Florida
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

year (all
stoppages)

Workers
involved

Workers
involved

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

Days
idle during

in year

Number

Number

8
15
16
16

Stoppages
beginning

Hawaii2

2
2

-

16.3
43.6
18.8
673.9

5
1
1
3

5,800

17.9

2
3

( 3)
1,600

51.6

( 3)
(3)
600

-

11,200
2,760
4,100
8,130
44,400
1,000
(3)
1,500
200
40,000

Year

Number
1946 .......................................
1947 .......................................

Workers
involved

in year
Workers
involved

Number

1,800
6,110
5,730

year (all
stoppages)

in year
Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

18,900
53,300
45,600
138,000

11
9
5
22

1,970
5,320
820
5,860

14,600
126,000
5,180

5
5

380
1,530

4,150
27,900

1950 .......................................

4
1
1
6
6

250
60
130
2,670
750

2,330
270
250
18,300
3,330

52
48
60
72
48

8,150
15,800
20,200
23,300
10,700

62,400
66,600
152,000
254,000
184,000

15
26
21
38
26

1,800
8,200
17,500
24,800
22,300

17,600
70,700
80,600
361,000
128,000

.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
......................................

6
7
3
4
4
14

850
1,690
2,000
370
750
750

11,700
9,790
58,400
700
4,780
2,550

37
51
52
56
55
34

5,160
8,610
20,500
6,960
38,300
7,950

60,200
108,000
350,000
89,800
928,000
133,000

17
21
10
12
26
22

8,160
2,470
1,610
3,210
4,140
7,910

35,800
15,200
21,200
14,500
64,000
147,000

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 .......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

13
13
4
9
13
10

890
1,820
620
1,050
2,310
5,130

7,730
22,400
2,500
8,120
12,100
88,400

47
59
50
76
38
66

6,160
5,160
9,260
9,780
4,370
36,700

77,100
44,500
113,000
315,000
26,400
431,000

14
32
25
21
32
30

2,720
8,910
7,160
4,120
16,300
5,120

14,800
116,000
69,100
28,900
310,000
37,900

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

2
3
8
3
6
6

300
2,800
800
1,700
1,300
800

300
37,200
16,400
3,500
6,700
7,600

53
51
74
69
47
49

15,000
10,200
24,900
81,700
7,300
91,800

149,400
128,300
415,800
1,333,100
43,400
868,600

19
50
17
46
32
22

7,000
15,900
2,100
17,400
8,600
3,900

152,000
185,000
26,800
638,300
123,800
44,000

1946 ......................................
1947 ......................................
1948 ......................................
1949 ......................................

7
9
4
5

690
2,960
1,470
1,400

6,270
25,200
14,500
23,100

5
3
3
7

1,850
1,210
180
1,340

15,000
32,300
2,010
19,700

10
13
7
21

1,730
1,670
2,100
4,510

7,200
27,000
27,500
104,000

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 .......................................

7
4
5
21
9

510
430
1,490
7,250
2,350

1,700
2,520
11,700
217,000
22,000

9
5
14
12
9

3,050
1,350
2,350
6,890
3,080

87,200
5,000
10,300
228,000
112,000

12
41
32
43
28

1,470
65,700
80,200
49,200
16,600

15,500
142,000
324,000
193,000
82,200

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

.......................................
......................................
......................................
.......................................
......................................
......................................

13
18
8
25
17
18

5,720
2,990
1,960
5,690
6,170
7,900

28,700
26,500
22,700
67,100
107,000
62,900

6
18
14
13
6
12

220
1,930
6,070
1,950
200
682

1,350
15,600
192,000
11,900
1,120
412,000

21
20
13
10
16
11

6,760
2,470
3,030
960
930
530

53,600
12,500
21,800
8,760
7,770
1,270

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 .......................................
1964 ......................................

15
10
16
18
14

4,410
680
1,520
5,080
1,250
3,200

69,200
3,120
19,900
81,700
6,920
20,800

19
5
9
6
9
9

950
270
1,280
540
870
850

6,960
5,050
9,240
7,730
5,430
8,080

12
20
13
6
17
23

3,010
4,950
1,790
460
2,800
5,480

22,400
17,000
21,900
2,630
26,300
27,600

10,200
4,800
7,300
9,700
3,900
8,100

114,700
59,000
133,400
243,500
37,200
83,000

7
9
2
13
7
7

2,300
500
200
3,400
400
500

28,800
13,500
7,100
54,300
7,800
10,600

16
23
16
20
10
7

2,700
5,400

36,200
62,500
9,900
105,100
59,300
21,700

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

-

300

Days
idle during

1948 .......................................
1949 .......................................

-

80

year (all
stoppages)

Stoppages
beginning

27
27
36
49

1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 .......................................

2

Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during

in year

Indiana

Illinois

Idaho
Stoppages
beginning

-

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................




19
21
17
36
21
17
39

m

Kansas

Iowa

1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

\

155,000

Kentucky

2,300
9,600
2,800
3,400

Louisiana
Stoppages
beginning

Year

in year

Maine
Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

Number

Workers
involved

.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................

5
4
3
12

1,420
3,620
7,420
2,500

8,840
55,300
63,500
39,400

1950 .......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 ......................................

12
11
17
24
18

4,760
2,780
23,700
8,480
14,200

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

.......................................
.......................................
......................................
.......................................
......................................
......................................

7
17
13
36
11
18

1 9 6 1 .......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 .......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................
1967 ......................................

Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during

in year
Number

Maryland

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

in year
Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

_

_

_

2
4
3

1,120
200
680

10,800
1,960
12,000

2
3
6
10

10
1,070
500
2,800

150
11,700
2,860
37,500

24,200
8,180
306,000
73,800
305,000

3
6
6
6
7

310
1,250
570
1,630
420

5,160
3,350
2,980
12,500
3,510

8
7
6
5
9

1,210
2,350
1,520
3,330
1,400

9,280
15,300
18,500
38,500
10,400

2,610
11,600
10,800
17,300
1,860
2,700

10,200
360,000
112,000
195,000
19,300
34,500

8
5
8
7
9
7

1,060
240
920
1,090
730
580

10,800
3,240
3,750
6,970
5,610
1,800

10
4

1,060

8
6
6
6

180
9,450
620
3,110
5,000

13,900
2,120
261,000
2,490
23,400
26,500

14
26
22
19
25
27

1,690
4,920
3,560
5,260
13,300
17,800

31,200
50,200
45,100
69,600
383,000
197,000

3
6
4
6
3
3

90
230
160
310
340
140

760
3,550
900
2,030
9,230
470

16
6
5
10
8
6

3,840
560
920
12,100
1,840
2,720

62,900
7,500
2,490
53,600
34,200
39,600

1968 .......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

33
25
23
14
13
15

27,600
5,100
6,700
9,000
5,200
2,400

855,000
49,000
166,500
229,300
13,000
77,500

8
6
7
7
2
3

500
600
800
1,700
400
100

3,200
3,500
3,800
8,100.
3,600
7,500

11
7
19
17
12
18

1,500
1,100
3,600
12,400
6,500
7,800

4,400
19,600
75,900
210,700
13,500
64,100

1946
1947
1948
1949

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

13
16
18
18

2,240
9,390
2,870
2,060

42,700
52,700
56,300
21,000

13
15
4
12

3,240
22,400
550
1,370

20,100
631,000
3,470
12,500

6
7
5
13

1,090
1,000
1,780
22,900

43,100
6,060
21,700
394,000

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 ......................................

28
22
17
29
25

2,710
4,780
3,290
2,890
2,980

23,800
37,600
14,800
42,600
26,900

24
21
28
38
28

2,980
3,880
83,000
40,100
29,800

29,100
14,500
1,160,000
850,000
321,000

12
6
18
15
11

490
550
2,750
3,920
1,300

1,460
3,040
45,800
41,100
212,000

1955 ......................................
1956 .......................................
1957 .......................................

25
23
30

29
28
29
41

103,000
83,700
148,000
277,000

4,170
2,430
1,800
1,690

14,900
42,300
21,200
16,000

3,350
2,720

31,200
94,000

48
36

21,400
18,100
7,690

13
6
13
14

1959 ......................................
1960 .......................................

30
21
17

28,800
20,500
58,700
185,000

10,700
9,020
14,000

1958 ......................................

3,060
5,860
6,200
18,300

201,000
76,800

19
7

5,100
20,500

64,800
188,000

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 .......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

25
30
29
34

54,200
59,600
25,500

45
42
33

37,000
73,600
26,300

48
40
45

143,000
936,000

9
15
15
6
7
11

11,000
1,940
1,680
410
300
21,400

273,000
7,880
15,800
3,950

37
22

16,600
31,300
15,400
17,600
11,400
61,600

169,000
608,000
253,000
309,000

1965 ......................................
1966 .......................................

5,060
3,640
2,580
4,390
6,190
3,240

1967 .......................................
1968 .......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ...............................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

20
30
31
32
30
26

1,900
5,400
20,000
9,300
2,700
7,700

35,000
92,000
491,100
197,600
50,700
119,000

44
38
32
54
23
13

129,300
3,918,800
114,600
665,200
37,000
78,500

10
3
18
33
12
16

3,300
400
4,100
16,800
800
49,900

22,200
4,200
30,600
622,400
7,100

1946
1947
1948
1949

Michigan

Massachusetts




14,700
86,100
12,900
43,200
6,300
2,100

Minnesota

3,740
118,000

1,397,500

Mississippi
Stoppages
beginning

Year

Missouri
Stoppages
beginning

Oays
idle during

in year

year (all
stoppages)

Workers
involved

.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
......................................

4
2
3
9

1,850
460
150
980

11,800
3,680
4,040
6,060

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................

5
21
11
10
6

850
6,870

15,400
43,200
32,000
5,550
8,920

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

650
870
2,160
380
220
1,550

9,840

20

9
7
5
6
11

3,030
10,600
1,670
2,180
15,900

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

6
2
2
9
19
19

510
1,110
260
450
2,400
6,500

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

5
6
6
10
4
4

200
3,800
1,000
3,100
600
600

1946
1947
1948
1949

7

2,410
500
990

Number

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

3
-

4
-

year (all
stoppages)

Number

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

2,500
196,000
18,300
141,000

_

_

_

2
6
3

80
640
540

1,110
1,810
2,090

4,820
7,750
18,100
19,500
12,800

28,800
61,100
154,000
748,000
427,000'

6
7
4
5
3

350
330
200
3,100
1,360

4,850
1,990
8,470
83,000
63,200

3,120
6,410
14,200
2,060
1,580
37,600

55,900

4

320

3,010

33
15
23
20
13

57,000
483,000
11,800
4,130
851,000

6
3

650
250
650
1,230
660

7,810
1,770
2,450
13,100
5,320

6,760
12,400
660
1,540
4,640
38,000

16
21
33
24
36
24

1,610
960
25,400
1,880
4,400
20,200

13,900
7,870
294,000
6,780
32,000
520,000

9
13
13
11
8
7

600
1,940
4,360
1,600
520
440

5,500
7,620
19,000
4,150
6,730
6,130

800
36,600
5,900
21,100
14,800
14,100

15
24
30
29
31
20

1,800
12,300
61,000
40,600
4,300
17,200

61,500
295,200
3,400,400
3,024,000
75,700
331,400

10
11
5
5
9
17

1,200
3,100
500
200
500
1,400

8,700
26,900
11,500
1,000
16,400
9,300

22
19
20
23
20
15

7
8
8

Nevada

300
-

1,660

1,470

16,800

-

Workers
involved

Days
idle during

in year

70
7,720
1,550
10,400

2
10
14

Nebraska
1946
1947
1948
1949

Days
idle during

in year

Number

Montana
Stoppages
beginning

-

-

New Hampshire

1
2
6
2

20
170
2,720
20

60
10,600
38,400
160

1
2
5
3

20
120
910
180

20
300
8,170
1,210

6
3
7
4
3

2,480
170
1,230
1,440
600

31,400
1,590
27,000
48,800
7,560

3
7
3
11
6

330
330
300
3,050
1,160

3,880
4,350
4,270
28,000
2,760

5
4
7
5
6

170
150
740
360
1,670

680
790
7,760
3,200
14,700

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

8
8
10
9
14
28

3,290
1,320
1,520
6,310
1,410
2,220

38,300
4,050
4,160
160,000
4,490
10,500

10
7
7
6
8
4

1,830
1,130
1,930
990
3,210
1,850

13,100
6,120
12,100
2,950
73,700
18,900

3
2
5
9
3

1,730
40
250
710
280

8,150
330
660
4,330
1,700

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

16
16
7
9
13
11

1,690
1,010
1,240
250
4,580
1,360

34,800
7,260
11,000
2,470
63,200
23,500

4
23
15
13
20
12

2,240
2,520
10,500
4,600
8,060
1,630

10,700
36,400
40,300
26,500
171,000
81,300

1
5
5
3
6
9

40
460
230
60
340
550

1,000
2,940
760
720
3,180
5,710

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

5
8
16
11
12
2

200
6,200
4,000
1,200
4,000
400

800
54,900
59,300
10,700
61,400
12,800

4

300
400
6,300
6,500
1,500
1,000

3,900
4,600
53,900
189,700
11,400
35,500

7
5
9
6
3
7

300
2,200
600
700
200
1,600

3,500
31,300

1950 .......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960




6
14
9
10
8

-

-

-

8,000
11,300
2,300
33,200

New Jersey
Stoppages
beginning

Year

1946 .......................................
1947 ......................................

Days
idle during

in year
Number

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

Days
idle during

in year
Number

New York
Stoppages
beginning

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

Days
idle during

in year
Number

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

7,340
9,230
1,630
11,500

97,300
222,000
140,000
139,000

2
4
5
2

210
820
5,230
1,610

2,640
4,330
28,500
19,300

36
37
30
40

32,000
7,640
15,500
8,170

354,000
112,000
234,000
73,900

7,500

6
12
13
7
9

32,400

376,000

3,970
1,760
280
860

3,150
17,700
7,980
5,900
5,200

48

33
15

46,500
38,000
21,200
50,500
36,300

410

1,870
2,870
4,860
5,230

32
51
54
50

4,250
9,590
12,500
18,300

28,800
167,000
208,000
180,000

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

32
21
24
46
30
36

6,060
8,980
8,060
15,200
9,240
9,170

130,000
81,000
125,000
240,000
135,000
149,000

4
4
3
10
5
10

120
1,170
220
940
750
1,710

490
6,480
3,500
13,800
12,400
39,900

48
46
70
59
43
40

29,500
9,410
30,900
41,900
5,400
43,400

387,000
75,600
223,000
547,000
47,300
1,280,000

1 9 6 1 .......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

36
44
28
27
32
30

5,150
3,870
1,600
9,570
2,300
2,910

50,700
43,300
28,800
164,000
29,000
31,800

11
7
8
5
8
5

880
910
630
1,070
1,030
540

4,570
1,640
5,140
7,170
14,600
3,110

48
58
64
51
51
52

18,200
19,600
34,400
22,900
22,200
44,200

397,000
134,000
248,000
333,000
615,000
667,000

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

22
15
21
21
28
20

4,300
1,600
6,900
7,200
6,800
8,300

32,300
26,700
110,400
200,600
134,500
89,100

10
10
13
11
6
6

800
400
3,800
1,700
1,400
800

8,100
6,000
24,200
23,600
34,500
8,700

56
46
78
92
53
51

31,800
19,200
29,400
41,400
25,400
57,800

386,800
268,600
510,700
1,074,800
257,500
2,035,440

1948 .......................................
1949 ......................................
1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 ......................................
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

23

New Mexico
Stoppages
beginning

30
18
23
32
12
14

North Carolina
1946
1947
1948
1949

North Dakota

Ohio

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

1
1
3
2

360
150
950
380

2,130
1,520
7,900
1,390

1
1
4
7

20
120
110
770

90
360
690
8,140

21
19
14
31

47,100
4,630
4,060
6,480

199,000
80,100
29,600
67,600

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................

6
10
10
5
7

1,550
2,170
3,960
490
1,120

13,900
30,300
17,500
4,050
6,160

1
1
5
6
8

250
210
380
740
1,510

350
520
1,510
3,220
2,940

34
18
54
112
59

13,100
4,990
42,400
35,400
57,900

90,900
43,400
201,000
442,000
396,000

1955 ......................................
1956 ......................................
1957 ......................................

9
3

1,140
830

6,110
3,600

310
40

3,380
240

9
2

590
140

5,410
1,510

4
2
1

40
880
1,050
860

440
4,640
2,560
4,300
880
16,600
760
7,470
3,880
2,110

62
60
47
70
49
36
42
37
40
76
46
63

15,900
51,000
17,900
42,000
18,000
3,490
6,950
3,110
7,880
56,800
6,370
20,200

71,700
550,000
84,900
697,000
240,000
42,800
111,000
41,600
43,500
537,000
65,200
175,000

93
93
88
100
33
47

64,100
28,900
12,200
41,100

1,629,200
1,086,600
120,500
1,150,100
106,600
211,100

1958 ......................................
1959 ......................................
1960 ......................................
1 9 6 1 ......................................

-

-

1

90

90

7
4
2

1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

3
3
3
3

1965 ......................................
1966 ....................................\

2
4

830
380
390
70
350
290

2,170
1,630
1,080
840
760
2,380

1
4
2
8
9
3

80
960
50
1,230
570
350

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

3
4
5
12
3
1

400
800
200
1,000
700
200

800
1,900
3,400
9,500
5,400
11,700

1
6
2
5
2
3

100
300
200




-

400
1,400
100

800
7,500
700
6,800
5,000
1,900

11,500
22,700

Oregon

Oklahoma
Stoppages
beginning
Year

Days

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

Days

beginning

idle during

in year
Number

Pennsylvania
Stoppages

Days

beginning

idle during

in year
Number

Stoppages

idle during

in year
Number

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

......................................
.......................................
.......................................
......................................

3
4
4
19

260
290
460
2,070

1,090
2,990
5,410
47,200

4
5
12
9

290
430
2,470
380

4,640
7,090
56,800
11,500

28
31
28
64

1,740
31,700 .
5,310
22,500

130,000
470,000
62,000
284,000

1950 .......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................

8
10
14

3,410
7,890
15,900
41,300
102,000
16,500

2
6
1
5
7
7

160
730
20
330
290
2,240

620
33,300
20
5,890
3,260
36,800

40
44
66
61
63
57

7,830
13,200
71,900
39,000

1955 ......................................

28
18
13

970
660
3,130
7,080
6,140
1,100

29,800
6,210

84,200
109,000
713,000
773,000
435,000
72,300

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

18
11
12
3
7

4,600
3,130
3,820
320
370

40,200
52,800
42,300
4,550
1,960

3
7
8
12
3

250
540
28,900
1,090
70

3,210
9,070
513,000
20,600
1,190

60
70
67
56
54

10,500
15,600
22,700
11,100
9,500

192,000
208,000
262,000
206,000
132,000

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

9
7
7
9
14
5

1,880
620
1,340
700
1,150
350

8,050
740
17,300
3,500
13,700
2,080

6
10
10
7
8
7

7,220
14,100
1,730
8,330
2,110
1,310

162,000
90,800
4,360
97,000
10,600
5,350

65
67
64
58
46
75

17,900
7,590
11,900
9,490
9,100
20,900

591,000
171,000
226,000
96,600
83,600
117,000

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

8
17
8
5
9
11

200
3,400
700
500
1,300
1,100

1,000
66,100
13,500
1,600
15,300
19,000

7
8
7
5
10
6

400
2,500
1,100
200
12,900
700

4,400
39,500
7,000
800
152,800
11,900

52
51
79
90
67
65

11,000
10,900
15,800
30,600
29,700
14,000

334,600
208,000
296,400
637,200
1,149,100
217,900

1
1

1946
1947
1948
1949

1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

South Carolina

Rhode Island

South Dakota

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

2
6
7
5

230
1,110
790
930

2,640
12,300
14,800
30,600

2
3
-

130
260
-

1,050
1,780
-

2

5

850

3,520

-

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................
1955 ......................................

2
4
6
10
7
6

60
280
780
790
630
2,640

320
3,570
5,540
10,100
4,500
15,500

2
8
10
11
3

120
1,030
21,500
23,900
370

680
7,190
24,300
79,700
930

.......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

5
4
1
6
1

920
2,190
90
610
170

8,360
39,900
720
9,480
170

4
2
9
1
1

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

5
7
5
8
4
4

420
670
280
1,900

2,570
11,100
1,390
25,500

-

-

-

-

-

-

520
800

7
5
6
7
4
3

400
600
2,000
3,900
300
500

1946
1947
1948
1949

1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................
1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................




-

480
400
2,190
200
170

4,250
1,600
11,000
3,550
860

-

270
520
3,110
-

1
4
1
3
2
3

280
280
40
500
330
890

2,620
2,420
1,370
18,900
350
6,370

3
-

570
-

2,890
-

3
1
6

160
40
1,400

810
160
5,280

2,620
2,040
610

7,130
5,480
2,460
45,100
1,590
1,720

(3)
200
300
1,100

3,530
19,500

1
5
1
3

110
400
-

5,400
-

160

1,730

13
5
9
2
6
3

5,000
12,200
137,900
7,800
1,600
15,000

1
4
1
2
2
1

(3)
200
400
600
100
200

300
3,000
400
9,600
4,200
12,100

1
3
1
11
1
5

340

50
40
170

650
330
440

(3)
200

700
900
2,400
20,700
900
9,500

Tennessee
Stoppages
beginning

Year

Texas
Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during

in year

year (all
stoppages)

Days
idle during

in year

Number

Workers
involved

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

6
4
3
17

990
6,560
130
9,010

6,730
73,000
1,100
153,000

10
14
12
28

8,310
11,000
10,900
9,690

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 .......................................
1955 ......................................

19
44
24
36
38
32

10,300
21,500
9,810
38,000
33,800
12,500

61,400
59,700
129,000
330,000
151,000
51,000

30
27
42
40
46
30

1956 ......................................
1957 ......................................

35
21
11
19
29

6,130
5,840
5,190
1,270
5,440

113,000
19,600
73,500
3,990
44,600

1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

18
19
16
12
11
17

2,450
1,820
3,650
920
740
7,710

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

14
16
16
19
10
13

7,400
4,800
2,800
11,900
3,300
16,300

1946 ......................................
1947 ......................................

1

1946
1947
1948
1949

1958 ......................................
1959 ......................................
1960 ......................................
1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

-

Workers
involved

year (all
stoppages)

Days
idle during

in year

year (all
stoppages)

Number

Workers
involved

293,000
109,000
55,900
99,300

2
4
6
2

40
480
980
440

250
4,250
8,410
9,510

12,900
6,510
12,200
20,100
32,600
6,910

73,000
33,800
171,000
332,000
375,000
99,900

5
1
3

37,100
260
1,860

6
2
2

12,100
100
630
10,400
790
260

39
39
31
24
28

17,400
6,610
21,200
9,000
12,400

454,000
42,600
750,000
327,000
191,000

7
2
6
3
5

6,390
340
3,620
710
350

33,100
1,340
31,600
2,120
4,210

28,700
25,800
17,700
17,100
8,710
39,700

39
33
34
42
51
61

19,400
10,200
3,530
4,170
20,400
34,900

304,000
75,800
21,200
32,400
229,000
461,000

6
5
8
3
5
10

1,220
610
8,540
240
2,470
5,560

7,900
2,160
52,100
450
18,900
58,900

124,700
28,500
46,400
509,900
33,200
136,400

60
71
46
70
44
24

20,700
25,400
35,400
25,000
27,600
23,900

193,800
442,600
991,600
330,800
238,600
251,600

4
_

400
-

430

5
3
2
7

2,500
100
400
1,300

19,600
600
1,300
11,000

100

10
2
4
15

710
380
140
3,660

6,400
5,710
1,020
44,500

3
2
11
12

290
250
2,180
4,770

2,250
1,010
34,200

Number

Vermont
20

Utah
Stoppages
beginning

Virginia

-

-

-

131,000
12,100
2,520

-

Washington

1948 ......................................
1949 ......................................

-

-

-

-

1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 ......................................
1952 ......................................
1953 ......................................
1954 ......................................
1955 .......................................

2
1
1
2
5
1

40
70
70
20
520
10

150
650
260
230
4,650
20

10
14
14
17
9
14

1,590
3,730
3,950
4,410
2,000
2,940

15,200
13,500
18,800
81,800
27,900
14,000

8
18
22
20
35
11

300
6,490
14,900
18,800
24,300
1,700

1,650
30,000
48,800
78,800
223,000
13,300

1956 ......................................
1957 ......................................

4
4

16
20
12
10
9

1,260
3,000
1,410
3,350
660

2,380
1,890
6,680
16,800
2,770

75,100

16,000
8,330
25,500
5,900

10
11

5
4
1

450
1,310
2,130
1,440

11,600

1958 ......................................
1959 ......................................
1960 ......................................

160
210
230
70
40

20,200
126,000
258,000
10,700

9
10
9
11
5
8

1,610
1,630
1,260
1,120
710
2,210

18,900
3,270
14,300
19,600
25,300

18
15
19

8,210
33,100
5,770
5,380
5,570
24,400

94,200
587,000
14,200
112,000
62,500
352,000

7
10
17
12
10
11

700
1,200
3,100
4,200
1,800
8,300

3,500
11,600
61,900
59,200
36,200
69,300

33
17
12
5
14
13

6,000
28,600
2,000
600
25,700
4,300

31,700
244,800
46,900
3,800
334,800
39,800

1 9 6 1 ......................................

3

1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................

6
4
2
2
4

1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................
1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 .......................................
1972 .......................................




-

40

170
590
390
50
320
2,260

4,380
2,210
160
940
59,100

1,110

2
2
4
9

( 3)
100
1,200
1,800
-

100
300
4,000
5,100
-

7

2,200

226,100

12,200

11
19
22
39
40
14

57,600

West Virginia
Stoppages
beginning

Year

in year
Number

1 9 4 6 .......................................
1947 ......................................

Workers
involved

Wisconsin
Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

in year
Number

Workers
involved

Wyoming
Stoppages
beginning

Days
idle during
year (all
stoppages)

in year
Number

Workers
involved

Days
idle during
year (ail
stoppages)

10

960

19,700
67,100
16,600
44,000

2,070

10
15
23

2,710
5,730
1,860
2,530

330

7,460
6,660
7,010

4,380
70,200
111,000
106,000

4

6
13
23

3
2
5

420
40
660

1,120
150
8,160

5,100
3,690
6,650
2,910
9,530
3,560

33,200
19,500
28,600
114,000
104,000
19,600

19
9
25
23
20
22

12,300
2,760
24,000
3,890
3,790
2,910

142,000
13,900
415,000
40,400
40,200
24,900

4

800
80
1,590

5,370
1,140
18,500

1955 ......................................

15
16
29
19
12
23

1,180
100
50

14,900
200
100

1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

17
29
20
14
14

2,790
30,200
3,060
5,920
1,230

15,400
142,000
28,900
89,500
11,100

21
19
18
8
18

3,630
8,400
2,490
3,060
8,510

38,000
111,000
34,700
33,100
42,100

30
350
160
3,190
8,300

100
700
1,130
32,400
38,400

1 9 6 1 ......................................
1962 ......................................
1963 ......................................
1964 ......................................
1965 ......................................
1966 ......................................

21
20
17
21
25
28

3,570
2,100
3,230
2,790
2,330
4,340

47,100
25,700
10,300
20,600
8,970
19,000

8
20
3
14
12
14

650
2,550
170
2,150
1,420
5,250

11,100
32,400
500
44,900
12,700
80,900

11
6
6
2
4
6

1,810
320
250
120
170
1,810

3,640
4,500
1,190
250
2,020
36,000

1967 ......................................
1968 ......................................
1969 ......................................
1970 ......................................
1 9 7 1 ......................................
1972 ......................................

33
19
19
41
27
26

5,500
3,500

70,100
63,800

2,700
13,200
6,500
8,000

23,400
508,600
101,700
38,000

9
28
11
22
23
10

3,100
24,300
9,600
5,200
4,200
3,500

70,200
671,400
214,800
81,100
111,700
97,200

3
3
6
2
3
4

300
1,400
1,200
200
400
900

1,300
8,100
34,100
800
1,400
6,700

1948 ......................................
1949 ......................................
1950 ......................................
1 9 5 1 .......................................
1952 .......................................
1953 .......................................
1954 ......................................

1After 1966, workers involved and man-days idle are rounded to the nearest
hundred.
2 Data were not collected for Alaska prior to 1959, or for Hawaii prior to
1960.
3 Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.




11

3
4
9
4
1
1
1
3
6
13

Stoppages extending into two States or more are counted separately for each
State affected; workers involved and man-days idle have been allocated to the
respective States. Dashes denote zeros or, in the case of Alaska and Hawaii, data
not collected.

Metropolitan area

Alls
stoppages

All
days

Area
rank

idle

by
idleness

Number
of
stoppages

1964

1963

1962

1962-71

Workers

Days

involved

idle

Anaheim-Santa AnaGarden Grove, Calif. . .
Atlanta, Ga..........................
Baltimore, Md.....................
Boston, Mass........................
Buffalo, N .Y........................
Chicago, III...........................

28
38
57
101
100
81

514.5
1,199.1
347.4
559.2
796.3
1,659.1

19
10
24
15
12
6

-

-

5
7
8
10

.5
1.4
.2
2.1

7.4
17.7
1.3
19.7

Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind. .
Cleveland, Ohio ................
Dallas, Tex...........................
Denver, Colo........................

80
79
29
36

549.5
1,702.0
423.9
267.0

17
5
21
27

(3)
5
2
6

.4
.6
.2
.6

7.6
5.1
5.0
2.3

Detroit, Mich.......................
Houston, Tex.......................
Indianapolis, Ind.................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kans. . .
Los Angeles-Long Beach,
Calif.................................

112
99
39
59

3,962.2
1,082.1
179.3
5,174.8

2
11
31
1

13
7
3
3

27.3
4.9
.6
.3

124

2,674.2

3

18

Miami, Fla............................
Milwaukee, Wis....................
Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Minn................................
New Orleans, La..................
New York, N.Y...................

70
22

699.9
654.1

14
16

7
3

60
49
169

522.0
73.9
1,410.3

18
33
9

8
7
21

67

304.9

25

12

70
157
178
26

181.9
1,604.5
427.7
224.7

30
7
20
28

154

2,134.0

47
42

Number
of
stoppages

Workers

Days

involved

idle

Number
of
stoppages

1966

1965

Workers

Days

involved

idle

Number
of
stoppages

Workers

Days

involved

idle

Number
of
stoppages

Workers

Days

involved

idle

22.1
90.2
4.4

4
6
8
13
3
9

.2
1.1
11.9
3.0
.4
1.4

2.1
11.4
53.2
22.6
2.6
30.6

5
5
3
11
11
5

6.0
6.9
1.1
1.6
2.3
.4

111.3
102.7
20.0
10.8
17.6
1.2

( 3)
5
3
6
5
11

.4
9.7
.5
1.3
1.8
28.3

1.4
422.6
7.3
11.0
7.0
325.3

( 3)
8

.8
.5
.7
.5

1.9
1.8
2.0
5.3

9
17
4
3

2.2
32.8
.6
.2

12.0
460.9
3.6
2.6

6
7
5
5

1.9
.4
8.1
1.4

36.4
2.6
127.4
10.4

( 3)
4
5
8

.2
.2
1.5
7.2

1.0
1.7
8.2
157.7

527.3
35.0
12.2
3.3

10
9
6
8

2.4
1.2
1.2
.8

86.5
8.9
8.5
1.8

18
3

9.6
.1

194.4
.4

( 3)
9

ft

ft
1.7

4.5
4.1
1.0
2.0

79.5
36.8
7.6
10.6

12
14
4
4

36.3
22.1
.6

1.2

7
10
4
11

643.4
316.6
5.5
.6

13.6

109.3

20

1.9

29.1

18

1.0

8.3

12

25.8

499.8

11

1.3

3.8

1.7
.1

12.0
.7

12

20.6
-

10
3

.9
1.4

7.8
40.3

4

.6

-

2.8
-

( 3)

(2)

7.6
.1

8
4

15.0
2.5

310.7
68.7

1.5
1.4

5
5
20

.3
1.0
3.3

15
28.7
27.3

3
3
17

.1

15.5

6.1
3.3
100.5

( 2)
4.8

.3
.7
42.9

6
6
16

.2
1.5
1.7

3.2
9.4
51.0

8
7
20

18.0
1.1
38.1

94.6
6.4
624.7

1.3

24.8

6

.1

1.2

9

2.9

32.9

6

.6

4.2

8

.5

2.1

7
16
11
4

.2
1.7
.9
8.7

1.6
53.1
7.8
73.3

( 3)
18
16

.3
6.7
2.0

6.1
193.9
22.8

5
19

117.7
20.3
66.9

ft
12.1
1.0

3

13.2

.06

8.2
50.8
6.3
.5

( 3)
20
20

-

4
11
13
3

.2
3.5
1.3

-

5.1
3.6
4.4
1.1

( 3)

ft

ft
38.4
6.2
1.4

4

12

.6

13.3

18

23.5

287.3

12

.4

3.2

20

2.1

7.3

25

20.9

520.2

410.1
218.5

22
29

10
4

2.4
8.5

16.4
130.3

4
12

1.0
2.1

14.8
25.7

( 3)
3

.2
.1

13.8
.5

12
3

5.9
.5

93.8
7.2

( 3)
5

.5
.5

1.8
1.4

136
23

1,540.8
319.3

8
26

8
3

24.0
4.1

657.4
118.6

11
4

1.0
.1

8.8
.8

13

1.7

7.2

-

-

-

34
3

18.6
1.5

264.4
33.8

20
4

1.5
.2

15.2
2.0

Seattle-Everett, Wash. . . .
Tampa-St. Petersburg,

47

732.1

13

( 3)

5.0

131.0

( 3)

ft

ft

5

2.0

49.7

( 3)

.02

.1

9

20.6

335.9

Fla...................................
Washington, D.C.-Md.Va....................................

72

76.8

32

6

.4

3.0

4

.2

.8

11

.6

7.7

7

.6

6.1

8

3.1

30.6

40

403.3

23

(3)

ft

.2

5

1.9

9.1

( 3)

.4

.8

( 3)

.7

13.8

4

8.8

136.1

Newark, N.J.........................
Paterson-CliftonPassaic, N.J.....................
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J...........
Pittsburg, Pa........................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash. . . .
St. Louis, Mo.-lll.................
San Bernardino-RiversideOntario, Calif.................
San Diego, Calif...................
San Francisco-Oakland,
Calif.................................
San Jose, Calif.....................


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
See footnotes at end of table.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

-

( 3)

.3

17
14
9

2.0
14.7
.7

9
6

-

5.2
-

-

ft

ft

1967
Metropolitan
area

Number
of
stoppages

Anaheim-Santa AnaGarden Grove, Calif. . .
Atlanta, Ga..........................
Baltimore, Md......................
Boston, Mass........................
Buffalo, N .Y........................
Chicago, III...........................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.Ind...................................
Cleveland, Ohio ................
Dallas, Tex...........................
Denver, Colo........................
Detroit, Mich.......................
Houston, Tex.......................
Indianapolis, Ind.................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kans. . .
Los Angeles-Long Beach,
Calif.................................
Miami, Fla............................
Milwaukee, Wis....................
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Minn................................
New Orleans, La..................
New York, N.Y....................
Newark, N.J.........................
Paterson-CliftonPassaic, N.J.....................
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J...........
Pittsburgh, fti.......................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash. . . .
St. Louis, Mo.-lll.................
San Bernardino-RiversideOntario, Calif.................
San Diego, Calif...................
San Francisco-Oakland,
Calif.................................
San Jose, Calif.....................
Seattle-Everett, Wash. . . .
Tam pa-St. Petersburg,
Fla...................................
Washington, D.C.-Md.Va....................................
See footnotes on next page.




1968

Workers
involved

Days
idle

Number
of
stoppages

Workers
involved

1969
Days
idle

Number
Workers
of
involved
stoppages

1970
Days
idle

Number
Workers
of
involved
stoppages

1971
Days
idle

Number
Workers
of
involved
stoppages

1972
Days
idle

Number
of
stoppages

Workers
involved

Days
idle

219.5
5.6
5.7
7.5
112.1

3
1
9
11
16

.5
.1
.5
5.1
12.8

3.6
9.7
17.6
84.5
464.4

8
5
5
9

2.6
.8
2.0
.5

.8
11.4
17.9
41.7
5.8

6
4
10
12
11

4.6
.8
1.2
12.1
11.2

114.4
13.9
33.1
307.3
275.9

6
4
11
10
27

14.8
11.0
11.6
4.9
15.0

61.4
618.0
200.5
96.5
269.1

(3)
(3)
6
14
5

17.4
.2
3.5
1.0
10.5

45.8

5

.6

8.7

6

1.8

56.0

13

70.7

1,163.2

7

.5

4.2

17

5.7

144.5

159.5
359.3
2.0
.7

11
3
6
14

6.3

1.9
.3
.2
4.4

8.5
18.5
.3
29.1

11
22
4
5

2.2
25.7
4.7
.2

40.9
850.6
61.3
.2

3

(2)
<*>

.4
.5
42.2
6.9

5

5.5
2.5

281.3
1.0
172.2
51.8

9
6

(3)
(3)

3

7.1
16.2
.2
.1

3

.5
.3
.5
3.3

20.1
22.8
30.9
64.5

19
13

6.3
6.0

93.1
92.8

7
9
3
6

11
14
4
4

1.7
28.1

.9
16.0
2.6
.8

49.5
54.3

.8
39.3

71.8
4973
143
2,258.2

351.8
22.0

51.6

1,898.6
17.5
67.8
2.0

21.2

1.0

45.1
1.8
4.1
.5

6.8
17.0

(3)
(3>

11
14
7
5

(3)
3
6
6
7

.4
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.9

3.6
8.3
2.3
22.0
14.7

6

3.6

14
8

f)

o

<*)

o

<*)

<*)

(3)
20

22

(3)
5
5

1.4
.4

20.8
2,841.5

4
6
6
7

1.0
16.1
2.2
.4

42.0
3.5

5
5
4
4

15.8
54.2

19.8
16.9

7

4.7

15.5

11

1.3

12.0

10

28.3

755.3

9

55.3

224.4

8

80.4

1,016.7

9

4.7

201.7

4
-

.8
-

5.1
-

5
6

1.4
15.9

24.2
539.3

7
-

13.6
-

256.0
-

7
4

1.9
.7

44.9
4.5

6

1.4

(3)

(*)

11.0
.5

4
4

.9
1.2

29.3
32.6

(3)

.8
.2
4.5

1.6
1.7
33.1

(3)

<*)

3
14

4
17

.6
10.8

.5
2.1
196.1

8
7
17

2.0
.9
11.8

15.4
16.3
147.2

13
3
15

10.5
.2
6.2

392.9
.2
147.0

6
4
12

.5
2.6
5.4

5.5
5.1
40.5

4
5
11

23.3
.8
24.8

666.1
15.3
1,068.8

4

.6

13.4

(3)

.2

2.7

5

.7

8.3

7

4.7

167.2

8

1.3

48.1

C4)

(*)

1.6

.3
(3)
1.4
12.0
6.0 268.9
.3
4.0

(3)

10
18
3

8
9
3

.1
2.8
1.2
2.0

11.0
128.0
6.3
29.5

4
15
21
3

1.1
4.9
1.0
.3

28.2
127.3
6.0
1.6

3
16
33

6.1
573.1
31.8
.3

3
24
16
4

.3
13.6
1.9
8.4

2.7
407.6
4.7
102.5

4
16
16

.5
6.3
21

14.7
96.6
24.0

( 3)

.8
19.4
4.9
.1

16

3.3

16.2

14

1.6

57.2

19

22.5

1,201.4

7

1.3

22.5

11

1.3

5.4

15

27.0

395.6

3

<*)

.6

(3)

.2
.3

.4
1.4

6
5

3.4
1.8

78.0
42.5

6

(3_)

(3)

13.4
.4

49.0
2.7

3
5

11.5
.7

142.1
6.2

4
4

.1
11.8

1.0
76.5

3
-

C)

.5
-

83
14.3
31.1

(3)
(3)

4

28.3
7.9
8.7

507.8
145.0
117.1

12
4

.1

21.8
.8
.1

13

4

.8
1.7
1.2

(3)

20.7

9
5
6

C)

3.0

48.0
4.0
46.4

1.8

12

2.7
1.0
7.3

12

(3)

3

1.8
1.6
.5

43.1
10.1
21.5

9

1.2

9.9

7

.7

7.3

8

11.8

222.2

6

2.4

9.5

6

.8

1.9

4

.7

22.9

4

.4

3.7

5

3.8

17.0

6

7.5

198.7

5

1.1

10.5

6

.7

13.4

8

28.0

202.4

(3)

-

13

-

-

-

1Includes data for each metropolitan area with one million or more population in which three or more
stoppages began in the year. Some metropolitan areas include counties in more than one state, as a result,
an area total may equal or exceed the total for the State in which the major city is located.
2 Less than 100 workers or man-days.
3 Less than three strikes beginning in the year.
4 No new stoppages began in Newark during 1972. The 1.6 thousand man-days were carried over from a




stoppage which began in 1971 and continued into the following year.
sThe Bureau does not publish an annual count of work stoppages for any metropolitan area with less
than three strikes during the year. Thus, the total 1962-71 stoppages will often exceed the sum of
individual years.
NOTE:

Dashes denote zeros.

1967

1966

1965

1969

1968

1970

1971

1972

Number of stoppages

Mediation agency employed
Number

Percent

Number

Percent

AH stoppages..................................
Government m ediation..................................
Federal m ediation...............................
State mediation ..................................
Federal and state combined
m ed ia tio n .......................................
Other mediation, including
lo c a l..................................................
Private mediation............................................
No mediation rep o rted ..................................

944
227
173
29

100.0
24.0
18.3
3.1

973
263
197
12

100.0
27.0
20.2
1.2

14

1.5

41

10
19
698

1.1
2.1
73.9

All w o rk e rs .....................................
Government m ediation..................................
Federal m ediation................................
State mediation ..................................
Federal and state combined
m ed ia tio n .......................................
Other mediation, including
lo ca l..................................................
Private mediation............................................
No mediation re p o rte d ..................................

301.8
214.5
190.0
7.0

Number
874

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

' Percent

240
181
16

100.0
27.5
20.7
1.8

911
301
249
16

100.0
36.3
27.3
1.8

968
297
240
24

100.0
30.7
24.8
2.5

1,133
358
286
26

100.0
31.6
25.2
2.3

754
209
182
6

100.0
27.7
24.1
0.8

705
196
161
14

100.0
27.8
22.8
2.0

4.2

39

4.5

34

3.7

31

3.2

43

3.8

18

2.4

8

1.1

13
6
704

1.3
0.6
72.4

4
4
630

0.5
0.5
72.1

2
15
595

0.2
1.6
65.3

2
18
653

0.2
1.9
67.5

3
12
763

0.3
1.1
67.3

3
11
534

0.4
1.5
70.8

13
20
489

1.9
2.8
69.4

100.0
71.1
63.0
2.3

452.4

306.5
206.3
127.3
3.9

100.0
67.3
41.5
1.3

364.7
266.3
175.4
6.3

100.0
73.0
48.1
1.7

431.9
320.1
262.8
7.8

100.0
74.1
60.8
1.8

605.9
404.9
346.6
7.4

100.0
66.8
57.2
1.2

464.3
351.8
345.7
.4

100.0
75.8
74.5

433.3

356.8
227.8
3.0

100.0
78.9
50.4
0.7

( 2)

315.0
285.6
13.8

100.0
72.7
65.9
3.2

16.4

5.4

120.8

26.7

71.9

23.5

84.2

23.1

49.0

11.3

50.6

8.4

5.6

1.2

11.1

2.6

1.1
2.6
84.7

0.4
0.9
28.1

5.2
.6
95.0

1.1
0.1
21.0

3.1
.2
100.0

1.0

.4
2.6
95.8

0.1
0.7
26.3

.5
2.4
109.4

0.1
0.5
25.3

.3
1.6
199.4

<“ )
0.2
32.9

.1
.6
111.9

( 2)
0.1
24.1

4.5
11.0
107.3

1.0
2.5
24.8

100.0
87.4
78.5
1.0

Workers involved (in thousands)

(2)
32.6

Days idle (in thousands)
All idleness ..................................... 4,644.6
Government m ediation.................................. 4,146.2
Federal m ediation............................... 3,539.9
State mediation ..................................
93.7
Federal and state combined
m ed ia tio n .......................................
505.6
Other mediation, including
lo c a l.................................................
7.0
Private mediation............................................
23.6
No mediation re p o rte d ..................................
474.8
See footnote 1, table A-4.
Less than 0.1 percent.




100.0
89.4
76.2
2.0

5,850.1
5,315.2
3,611.2
26.3

100.0
90.9
61.7
0.4

10.9

1,561.7

26.7

0.2
0.5
10.2

116.0
2.1
532.8

2.0
<*)
9.1

5,431.3 '
4,416.0
2,460.3
45.4

100.0
81.3
45.3
0.8

8,732.9
7,774.9
3,878.4
67.3

100.0
89.0
44.4
0.8

10,376.0
9,550.8
8,443.6
118.3

100.0
92.0
81.4
1.1

13,872.3
11,867.5
10,414.3
228.3

100.0
85.5
75.1
1.6

8,221.3
6,144.3
5,960.7
5.6

100.0
74.7
72.5

C2)

6,626.3
5,787.0
5,198.9
68.3

1,613.9

29.7

3,822.3

43.8

986.2

9.5

1,219.7

8.8

177.5

2.2

480.7

7.3

296.5
1.8
1,013.4

5.5

6.9
12.3
945.7

C2)

2.7
12.9
812.3

(2)
0.1
7.8

5.2
29.2
1,975.6

O
0.2
14.2

.5
6.4
2,070.6

C2)

0.1
10.8

39.1
110.7
728.6

.6
1.7
11.0

( 2)
18.7

NOTE:

(2)
25.2

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

1967

1966

1965

1972

1971

1970

1969

1968

Number of stoppages

Method of settlement
Number
All stoppages..................................
Formal settlement reached ..........................

944
912

No formal settlement2 ..................................
Employer out of business .............................

32

All workers
..................................
Formal settlement reached ..........................
No formal settlement2 ..................................
Employer out of business .............................

301.8
297.9
3.8

-

Percent

Number

100.0
96.6

973
950

3.4

23

-

-

Percent

Number

100.0
97.6

874
846

2.4

28

-

Percent

-

Percent

Number

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

754
708

100.0
93.8

705
644

100.0
91.3

43
3

5.8
.4

60
1

8.5
.1

100.0
96.8

911
877

100.0
96.3

968
909

100.0
93.8

1,133
1,071

100.0
94.6

3.2
-

32
2

3.5
.2

58
1

6.0
.1

61
1

5.4
.1

Workers involved (in thousands)
100.0
98.7
1.3
-

452.4
449.7
2.7
-

100.0
99.4
.6
-

306.5
301.9
4.6
-

100.0
98.5
1.5
-

364.7
361.7
3.0

100.0
99.2
.8

-

-

431.9
422.1
9.7
-

100.0
97.8
2.3
-

605.9
599.9
6.0
-

100.0
98.9
1.0
-

464.4
450.5
13.6
.2

100.0
97.0
3.0
-

433.3
406.9
26.4
-

100.0
93.9
6.1
-

100.0
99.7
.3

8,221.4
8,105.2
113.9
2.2

100.0
98.5
1.4

6,626.3
6,451.2

100.0
97.3
2.6

Days idle (in thousands)
All idleness .................................... 4,644.6
Formal settlement reached .......................... 4,578.2
66.4
No formal settlement2 ..................................
Employer out of business.............................
-

100.0
98.6
1.4
-

5,850.1
5,815.8
34.3
-

100.0
99.4
.6
-

5,431.3
5,357.5'
73.8
-

See footnote 1, table A-4.
Includes short protest or sympathy strikes, broken strikes, or strikes settled by a court injunction.




100.0
98.6
1.4
-

8,732.9
8,692.4
38.8
1.7
NOTE:

100.0
99.5
.4
-

10,376.0
10,285.7
89.8
.5

100.0
99.1
.8
-

13,872.3
13,828.1
43.8
.4

-

-

175.0
.2

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dashes denote zeros.

-

1966

1965

1967

Procedure for handling unsettled issues

1970

1971

1972

Number of stoppages
Number

All stoppages2 ...............................
A rbitration.......................................................
Direct negotiations.........................................
Referral to a government
agency .........................................................
Private and other means ...............................

1969

1968

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

329
6
13

100.0
1.8
4.0

350
9
7

100.0
2.6
2.0

290
3
3

100.0
1.0
1.0

332
18
5

9
301

2.7
91.5

10
324

2.9
92.6

6
278

2.1
95.9

8
301

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

100.0
5.4
1.5

366
9
4

100.0
2.5
1.1

409
6
8

100.0
1.5
2.0

292
2
8

100.0
.7
2.7

255
6
6

100.0
2.4
2.4

2.4
90.7

68
285

18.6
77.9

258
137

63.1

181
101

62.0
34.6

145
98

56.9
38.4

33.5

Workers involved (in thousands)
All stoppages..................................
A rbitration.......................................................
Direct negotiations..........................................
Referral to a government agency..................
Private and other means ...............................

74.1
.5
6.2
7.1
60.2

100.0
.6
8.4
9.6
81.3

61.7
5.4
21.8
3.2
31.3

100.0
8.7
35.3
5.2
50.8

30.4
1.0
.9
1.1
27.4

100.0
3.3
3.0
3.6
90.1

35.9
3.7
1.3
1.0
29.9

100.0
10.4
3.5
2.7
83.4

42.5
1.6
.9
12.4
27.6

100.0
3.7
2.2
29.3
64.8

50.2
1.2
2.6
31.8
14.6

100.0
2.5
5.1
63.3
29.1

29.8
.3
5.1
15.7
8.7

100.0
.9
17.1
52.8
29.1

52.9
.8
22.9
13.9
15.3

100.0
1.6
43.2
26.3
28.9

100.0
1.8
1.3
50.6
46.3

454.9
43.8
9.4
324.6
77.1

100.0
9.6
2.1
71.3
17.0

176.4
.9
30.0
111.2
34.3

100.0
.5
17.0
63.0
19.4

297.7
5.2
134.2
65.9
92.3

100.0
1.8
45.1
22.1
31.0

Days idle (in thousands)
All stoppages..................................
A rbitration......................................................
Direct negotiations..........................................
Referral to a government agency..................
Private and other means ...............................

856.2
2.0
18.5
30.4
805.3

100.0
.2
2.2
3.6
94.1

664.2
170.3
342.6
31.6
119.7

100.0
25.6
51.6
4.8
18.0

151.0
4.3
4.7
18.4
123.6

100.0
2.9
3.1
12.2
81.8

*See footnote 1, table A-4.
NOTE:
2 Excludes stoppages on which there was no information on unsettled issues or no agreement on a
proceedure for handling these issues.




217.8
32.2
8.8
5.6
171.3

100.0
14.8
4.0
2.6
78.7

281.2
5.0
3.6
142.3
130.3

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

Stoppages
Year in which
stoppages began

1962 ...............................................
1963 ...............................................
1964 ...............................................
1965 ...............................................
1966 ...............................................
1967 ...............................................
1968 ...............................................
1969 ...............................................
1970 ...............................................
1 9 7 1 ..............................................
1972 ...............................................
1973 ...............................................

Number as a percent of all industries

Number
All
industries

Manufac­
turing

Primary
Metals

3,614
3,362
3,655
3,963
4,405
4,595
5,045
5,700
5,716
5,138
5,010
5,353

1,789
1,685
1,794
2,080
2,296
2,328
2,664
2,822
2,481
2,391
2,056
2,282

176
131
173
206
219
215
282
241
214
235
165
171

Mining
159
153
155
188
194
254
301
495
544
657
1,000
1,079

Transportation
equipment

Contract
construction

Manufac­
turing

Primary
metals

Mining

100
101
120
140
162
165
241
202
158
168
133
160

913
840
944
943
977
867
912
973
1,137
751
701
539

49.5
50.1
49.1
52.5
52.1
50.7
52.8
49.5
43.4
46.5
41.0
42.6

4.9
3.9
4.7
5.2
5.0
4.7
5.6
4.2
3.7
4.6
3.3
3.2

4.4
4.6
4.2
4.7
4.4
5.5
6.0
8.7
9.5
12.8
20.0
20.2

Transportation
equipment
2.8
3.0
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.6
4.8
3.5
2.8
3.3
2.7
3.0

Contract
construction
25.3
25.0
25.8
23.8
22.2
18.9
18.1
17.1
19.9
14.6
14.0
10.0

Workers involved (in thousands)
Number as a percent of all industries

Number
1962 ...............................................
1963 ...............................................
1964 ...............................................
1965 ...............................................
1966 ...............................................
1967 ...............................................
1968 ...............................................
1969 ...............................................
1970 ...............................................
1 9 7 1 ...............................................
1972 ...............................................
1973 ...............................................

1,230.0
941.0
1,640.0
1,550.0
1,960.0
2,870.0
2,649.0
2,481.0
3,305.2
3,279.6
1,705.7
2,250.7

638.0
555.0
994.0
913.0
922.0
1,350.0
1,180.0
1,308.0
1,128.1
862.7
645.9
963.4

51.8
45.8
83.4
71.6
96.1
102.0
213.0
220.4
211.4
383.2
267.1
301.0

84.8
55.4
87.7
88.0
98.6
118.0
137.0
106.8
81.0
100.9
53.0
56.6

81.5
71.5
386.0
196.0
150.0
347.0
255.0
2635
326.8
119.6
116.8
206.2

284.2
208.0
247.8
301.4
455.2
304.5
364.2
433.1
621.0
451.3
454.2
367.4

55.5
59.0
60.6
58.9
47.0
47.0
44.5
55.6
34.1
26.3
37.9
42.8

6.9
5.9
5.3
5.7
5.0
4.1
5.2
4.3
2.5
3.1
3.1
2.5

4.2
4.9
5.1
4.6
4.9
3.6
8.0
8.9
6.4
11.7
15.7
13.4

6.6
7.6
23.5
12.6
7.7
12.1
9.6
10.6
9.9
3.6
6.8
92

23.1
22.1
15.1
19.4
23.2
10.6
13.7
17.4
18.8
13.8
26.6
16.3

Days idle during year (in thousands)
Number as a percent of all industries

Number
1962 ...............................................
1963 ...............................................
1964 ...............................................
1965 ...............................................
1966 ...............................................
1967 ...............................................
1968 ..............................................
1969 ..............................................
1970 ..............................................
1 9 7 1 ...............................................
1972 ...............................................
1973 ...............................................




18,600.0
16,100.0
22,900.0
23,300.0
25,400.0
42,100.0
49,018.0
42,869.0
66,413.8
47,589.1
27,052.9
27,948.4

10,100.0
10,400.0
15,700.0
14,300.0
13,700.0
27,800.0
24,000.0
24,107.0
38,006.4
18,484.8
12,282.6
14,318.5

872.0
637.0
1,010.0
1,390.0
1,540.0
4,070.0
4,790.0
1,663.2
2,300.3
2,622.6
1,310.9
760.5

983.0
481.0
808.0
431.0
794.0
3,030.0
2,550.0
1,156.9
849.6
4,934.4
724.3
865.4

1,410.0
678.0
6,410.0
2,630.0
1,330.0
5,530.0
2,990.0
4,500.4
14,033.9
2,742.9
1,734.2
1,437.9

4,154.6
1,932.2
2,788.3
4,627.5
6,135.9
5,155.4
8,722.9
10,385.8
15,240.4
6,849.6
7,843.7
3,663.4

54.3
64.6
68.6
61.4
53.9
66.0
49.0
56.2
57.2
38.8
45.4
51.2

4.7
4.0
4.4
6.0
6.0
9.7
9.8
3.9
3.5
5.5
4.8
2.7

5.3
3.0
3.5
1.8
3.1
7.2
5.2
2.7
1.3
10.4
2.7
3.1

7.6
4.2
28.0
11.3
5.2
13.1
6.1
10.5
21.1
5.8
6.4
5.1

22.3
12.0
12.2
19.9
24.2
12.2
17.8
24.2
22.9
14.4
29.0
13.1

Appendix B.

Scope, Definitions, and Methods1

Work stoppage statistics

It is the purpose of this statistical series to report all
work stoppages in the United States that involve six
workers or more and last the equivalent of a full day or
shift or longer.
Definitions

Strike. A strike is defined as a temporary stoppage of
work by a group of employees (not necessarily members
of a union) to express a grievance or enforce a demand.
Workers and idleness. The figures on the number of
“workers involved” and “days idle” include all workers
made idle for one shift or longer in establishments
directly involved in a stoppage. They do not account for
secondary idleness-that is, the effects of a stoppage on
other establishments or industries whose employees may
be made idle as a result of material or service shortages.
The total number of workers involved in strikes in a
given year may include double counting of individual
workers if they were involved in more than one stoppage
during that year.
In some prolonged stoppages, the total days of
idleness are estimated if the number of workers idle each
day is not known. Significant changes in the number of
workers idle are secured from the parties for use in
computing man-days of idleness.
Duration. Although only workdays are used in comput­
ing man-days of total idleness, duration is expressed in
terms of calendar days, including nonworkdays.
State data. Stoppages occurring in more than one State
are listed separately in each State affected. The workers
and man-days of idleness are allocated among each of
the affected States.
Metropolitan area data. Information is tabulated separ­
ately for the areas that currently comprise the list of
standard metropolitan areas issued by the Office of
Management and Budget in addition to a few commun­



ities historically included in the strike series before the
standard metropolitan area list was compiled. Informa­
tion is published only for those areas in which at least
three stoppages were recorded during the year.
Some metropolitan areas include counties in more
than one State, and, hence, statistics for an area may
occasionally equal or exceed the total for the State in
which the major city is located.
Unions involved. Information includes the union(s)
directly participating in the dispute, although the count
of workers includes all who are made idle for one shift
or longer in establishments directly involved in the
dispute, including members of other unions and non­
union workers.
Sources of information

Occurrence o f strikes. Information as to actual or
probable existence of work stoppages is collected from a
number of sources. Clippings on labor disputes are
obtained from a comprehensive coverage of daily and
weekly newspapers throughout the country. Information
is received regularly from the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service. By a written notice, the Inpartial
Jurisdictional Disputes Board, formerly the National
Joint Board, identifies each party involved in a Juris­
dictional work stoppage. Similarly, when the National
Labor Relations Board files an unfair labor practice
charge against a union participating in an unlawful
jurisdictional strike, it notifies the BLS of the identity of
the parties.
Other sources of information include State boards of
mediation and arbitration; research divisions of State
labor departments; local offices of State employment
security agencies, and trade and union journals. Some
employer associations, companies, and unions also fur­
nish the Bureau with work stoppage information on a
voluntary cooperative basis, either as stoppages occur or
periodically.
1More detailed information is available in BLS Handbook o f
Methods for Surveys and Studies, Bulletin 1711 (1971), ch. 19.

Respondents to questionnaire. A questionnaire is mailed
to each of the parties reported as involved in work
stoppages to obtain information on the number of
workers involved, duration, major issues, location,
method of settlement, and other pertinent information.
Limitations o f data. Although the Bureau seeks to




obtain complete coverage, i.e., a “census” of all strikes
involving six workers or more and lasting a full shift or
more, information is undoubtedly missing on some
strikes involving small numbers of workers. Presumably,
these missing strikes do not substantially affect the
number of workers and days of idleness reported.

Appendix C.

Selected Bibliography

Aksen, Gerald, “Resolving Construction Contract Disputes Through Arbitration,” Arbitration Journal, Vol. 23, No. 3,
1968 pp. 141-161.
Bonadio, Frank, et. al., The Resolution o f Jurisdictional Disputes, Detroit: University of Michigan - Wayne State
University Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, 1958.
Cabinet Commission on Price Stability, “Studies by the Staff of the Cabinet Commission” , Study Paper No. 3,
January 1969, pp. 103-124.
Canterbury, Joe F., Jr., “Construction Industry Strikes” in Strikes and Other Concerted Activity ,N.YX.: Practicing
Law Institute, 1973, Chapt. 5, pp. 71-95.
Cassimates, Peter J., “Economics o f the Construction Industry” N.Y.C.: National Industrial Conference Board, 1969.
Clague, Ewan, “The Economics of the Construction Industry,” Constructor, February 1965, pp. 22-25.
Clough, Richard H., Construction Contracting, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1969.
Construction Labor Report, Washington: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. Published weekly, 1955 to date.
Dunlop, J. T., “The Industrial Relations System in Construction” in Arnold R. Weber, ed. The Structure o f Collective
Bargaining, Chicago: University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, 1961.
“Jurisdictional Disputes: 10 types,” The Constructor, (Journal of the Associated General Contractors,) July, 1953,
p. 165.
Foster, Howard G., “The Labor Market in Non-Union Construction.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 26,
No. 4, July 1973, pp. 1071-1085.
Foster, Howard G. and Strauss, George, “ Labor Problems in Construction: A Review” Industrial Relations, October
1972, pp. 289-313.
Haber, William & Levinson, Harold, Labor Relations and Productivity in the Building Trades, Ann Arbor; University
of Michigan, Bureau of Industrial Relations, 1956.
Joyce, John T., “Untitled,” The Federationist, .October 1973, pp. 9-15.
Lefkoe, M. R., The Crisis in Construction: There is an Answer, Washington: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. 1970.
Mandelstramm, Allan B., “The Effects of Unions on Efficiency in the Residential Construction Industry” : A Case
Study, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol 18, July 1965, pp. 503-521.
Mangum, Garth, The Operating Engineers: The Economic History o f a Trade Union, Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1964.
Mills, Daniel Quinn, Industrial Relations and Manpower in Construction, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1972.
Mills, Daniel Quinn, “The Construction Industry” Labor Law Journal, August 1970, pp. 498-505.
Mills, Daniel Quinn, “Construction Industry Wage Stabilization,” Industrial Relations Research Association, Spring
Meeting, May 1972.
Mills, Daniel Quinn, “Construction Wage Stabilization: A Historic Perspective,” Industrial Relations Vol. 11, No. 3,
October 1972, pp. 350-365.
Moskow, Michael H., “New Initiatives in Public Policy for the Construction Industry,” Industrial Relations Research
Association, 24th Annual Winter Proceedings, pp. 25-35.
O’Halon, Thomas “The Unchecked Power of the Building Trades,” Fortune, December 1968, pp. 102.
Strand, Kenneth T., Jurisdictional Disputes in Construction, Bulletin 33: Washington State University Press, 1961.




U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1967 Census o f Construction Industries, Washington, D.C.
1970.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Domestic and International Business Administration, Construction Review,
Washington: Published monthly, 1955 to date.
U.S. Department of Labor, Work Stoppages in Contract Construction, 1946-66. Report No. 346, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1967.
Analysis o f Work Stoppages, annual bulletins, 1950-73.
U.S. Department of Labor, Compensation in the Construction Industry, Bulletin 1656 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1970).
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, by Industry, 1972 Bulletin 1830 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1974).
U.S. Department of Labor, Injury Rates by Industry, Report 406 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1972).
U.S. Department of Labor, Seasonality and Manpower in Construction, Bulletin 1642 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1970).
Whelchel, Barry D., “ Informal Bargaining in Construction,” Industrial Relations, Vol. 10, February 1971, pp.
105-109.
White, Donald J., “Dispute Settlement in the Electrical Contracting Industry/’ Monthly Labor Review, April 1972, p.

21.




☆ U.S. G OVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1975

0 - 2 1 0 - 8 8 2 (23)

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
REGIONAL OFFICES

Region V
9th Floor
Federal Office Building
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago . III. 6 0 6 0 4
Phone: (312) 353-1880

Region I
1603 JFK Federal Building
Government Center
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
Region II
Suite 3400
1515 Broadway
New York, N.Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 971-5405

Region VI
Second Floor
555 Griffin Square Building
Dallas, Tex. 75202
Phone: (214) 749-3516

Region III
P.O. Box 13309
Philadelphia, Pa. 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154

Regions V II and V I I I *
911 Walnut Street
Kansas City, Mo. 64106
Phone: (816) 374-2481

' Region IV
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Ga. 30309
Phone: (404) 526-5418




Regions IX and X * *
450 Golden Gate Avenue
Box 36017
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678

Regions VII and VIII are serviced by Kansas City
Regions IX and X are serviced by San Francisco