pa1778data.pdf

U.S. STEEL DUQUESNE WORKS
HAER No. PA-115
(Page 40}
The animosity displayed between management representatives
and union officials over the interpretation of Section 2-B at the
Duquesne Works clearly reflected the state of affairs in the
steel industry nationwide. Less than two months after the
pipefitters' wildcat strike at Duquesne, the United Steelworkers
of America struck the entire industry when management
representatives, in an unquestionable reference to Section 2-B,
demanded an end to language that had "frozen inefficiency and
waste in the operation of steel production." Ironically, before
the industry's demands the union's national leadership was
confident that contract negotiations could be conducted
successfully without the need for a strike. Yet, when
management's position became known to the union's rank and file,
the national leadership, in recognition of the members militant
stance on the work practices issue, had no choice but to call a
walkout. The strike, which lasted a record setting 116 days,
ended in a significant victory for the union as Section 2-B
remained in force within the new contract.
Despite the union's victory, tensions over the effect of
Section 2-B continued to haunt labor-management relations
throughout the industry. This was particularly true with regard
to the massive plant shutdowns of the United States Steel
Corporation in the early and mid-1980s. When corporate officials
first announced in 1983 that they would permanently close down a
large number of mills throughout the nation, they stated that the
identity of the mills in question might be determined, to a
greater or lesser degree, by the ability of various local unions
to cooperate with the corporation in developing new work
practices and a new craft system. In response, a number of union
locals throughout the nation, fearing the imminent shut down of
their workplaces, agreed to workforce concessions. Union
representatives at the Clairton Works, for example, agreed to
eliminate sixty jobs by reducing crews at each of the mill's coke
batteries from twenty-one to fifteen workers. The new leverage
U.S. Steel possessed on work practices issue was especially
evident at the Fairfield Works in Birmingham, Alabama. Union
officials there agreed to eliminate all past practices with
respect to manning, crew sizes, and job assignments while giving
management the unilateral right to establish new practices.
U.S. Steel was so pleased with the concessions it gained
from the Fairfield agreement that it became the corporation's
model for negotiating with other mills. Not all local union
officials, however, were willing to make the compromises that
were made at Fairfield. Many were outraged because they believed
^fe Relations Records of the Duquesne Works at the Labor Archives,
University of Pittsburgh.