Havn't found anything on the forum about industrial disputes leading to strikes in the UK. What made me ask is the pages reproduced below from a book "Britain at War - unseen archives" which is a collection of Daily Mail photographs. These photos show so;diers and Army vehicles being used during the April 1944 London Bus Drivers strike. I have tried searching on Google but cane come up with little about this, or the other strikes which occurred during the war. Noel
There was a very well known coal miners strike, partly caused by guys being called up to go in the army...........and then being sent down the mines without any way of protesting. have a look at this link World War 2: Official secrets and this one Strikes during wartime
Some clippings from The Times for you. Fraid they all got out of order when I collated them ... and then I had to split the document to upload. Still there are some about the London Bus drivers strike. I ignored articles about events in other parts of the world.
Hang on! The Daily Mail and it cohorts thought Hitler a great fellow at one time.... if I recall correctly. perhaps someone will search this out?
Couldn't help but transcribe this one. The Times Thursday, Dec 28, 1944: A CHRISTMAS STRIKE To the Editor of The Times Sir, I am one of the few men lucky enough this Christmas to be at home on leave from service oversea. During the three years and more some of us have been away we have grown used to news of unofficial strikes for reasons that must always seem trivial to men in the forces, who see everything in the light of the supreme importance of finishing the war as quickly as possible. To-day, we at home cannot help remembering the many hundreds of thousands of men abroad, for whom there will be no leave at all this Christmas, and little or no respite from their daily work, often dangerous, hard, monotonous, lonely. It is against the background of the service of these men that we, who for a few short weeks are at home, see this latest strike by sections of London Transport Underground and Tube railway workers. What a Christmas present for men on leave in London! Yours faithfully, RONALD WOODHAM, Woodthorpe, Nottingham, Christmas Day.
Couldn't help but transcribe this one. The Times Thursday, Dec 28, 1944: Reminds me of the story of a vicar asking a merchant seaman what he mostly remembered about the Russian convoy he had just returned from. Reply - “The people complaining about having to line up for everything”.
I would be interested in learning if any of the overseas service papers (such as the Eights Army News) published news of any of these wartime strikes. I personally can't remember having my attention drawn to them whilst in foreign climes. Ron
In the interest of fairness. One should ask; What bloody idiot caused the strikes? Men do not go on strike and lose their wages unless they are forced into it. Specially in those days, when wages were so low that they barely afforded a living.
This table is reproduced from a very boring book, 'Labour in the munitions industries' by P.Inman, part of the epic HMSO History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Civil Series. and this following quote.The number of strikes, the numbers of workers involved and the working days lost through strikes in the metal, engineering, aircraft and shipbuilding industries between 1914 and 1945 are shown in Table 21. From this it will be seen that the number of working days lost through strikes in these industries increased during the war years 1939-45 compared with the period between 1927-39, The number of days lost increased not only absolutely but in proportion to the numbers employed. But the working days lost were not as high in proportion to the numbers employed as in some other industries, notably in coalmining. Coalmining accounted for approximately one-half of the total working days lost through strikes in 1943, two-thirds in 1944 and one-quarter in 1945 compared with figures for engineering and shipbuilding combined of one-third, one-quarter and one-sixth respectively.
In the interest of fairness. One should ask; What bloody idiot caused the strikes? Men do not go on strike and lose their wages unless they are forced into it. Specially in those days, when wages were so low that they barely afforded a living. Quite right Brian, up the workers! from the same publication, a table of causes of industrial action.
I've sorted the articles into years from 41 to 45 because the other files were a mess. These should be in date order, etc Although in no way conclusive there seems to be a very rough correlation with Bod's table for munitions, in that there is more reporting of strikes in 44 than any other year.
This one also caught my eye The Times, Jun 13, 1942SISTERS' WAGES CAUSE OF PIT STRIKE Young girls paid £4 a week at factories When making an order for payment of damages against 232 haulage workers in the MALTBY colliery, who had gone on strike, the chairman of the DONCASTER Bench, Mr. Mark Nokes, said yesterday that the trouble had arisen because many of the lads had sisters working at Government factories who earned twice as much as the lads themselves could earn in the mine. He added his opinion that it was unfair that a young girl should have £4 a week while youths who had to go down the mine earned only £2 or £2 10s. Originally summonses were also taken out against 734 miners and 148 surface workers, but Mr. A.S. Furniss, who prosecuted, said that because the men had done their best to maintain production and because of the efforts of the local miners' branch, the company had agreed that summonses should be withdrawn. The union officials did not accept responsibility for the action of the boys who were the instigators of the trouble and were responsible for a loss to the company of 8,510 tons in the course of one week. The boys had threatened to stop the pit for a day so that all of them might attend Court, but the advice of the union and the action of the company in reducing the amount of the claim had induced them to continue work.
I would be interested in learning if any of the overseas service papers (such as the Eights Army News) published news of any of these wartime strikes. They did. Opinions amongst the readership were divided. Not surprisingly, many servicemen expressed great umbrage at the thought of workers striking at home while they were abroad in the fighting services. Feelings between civilian war workers and the services were raw enough because of alleged disparities in pay and conditions. The crisis in industrial relations which developed in Britain from 1943 onwards only deepened these suspicions. But bear in mind that plenty of men in uniform were trade unionists themselves, and they were quick to defend their civilian colleagues at home. It's also worth remembering that wartime strikers were not only defying the law (strikes were illegal under the Emergency Powers Act) but in many cases their own unions and shop stewards too, who deferred to Ernest Bevin, the Minister of Labour. It must have taken pretty outrageous conditions to produce that kind of grass-roots rebellion. Best, Alan
There is a reference to the strike in the Mass Observation diary of Frank Edwards for the 19th and 20th April 1944. There is a facsimile of an Australian newspaper article here http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/49562978 where it is stated that the drivers were unhappy with new schedules introduced following the announcement of double Briitsh Summer Time. Getty images has two photos here http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/Search/Search.aspx?p=London+bus+strike+1944&family=editorial&contractUrl=1&ep=Popperfoto (if the location changes a search 'London 1944 bus strike' found it) images #79664748 and #79656422 I find M.O. is a good alternative source to the cliched received history.
good day noel burgess,sm,nov,08.2010.08:16pm.re:wartime labour strikes,i have read this old thread with interest,i find no reason for any strikes when our men and women are putting there lives on the line,they should have been stronger laws to stop the comy's.what would have happened if the merchant seaman had gone on strike,or maybe the army.it did not happen.and the strikers can thank them for the food on there tables,even today,the unions have striked there way out of a stable industry.they have it all made in china,ironic,a communist country helping british industrialist be strike free.your post is food for thought,have a good day.bernard85
I remember reading somewhere about a positive change in attitude by 'the workers' when the Germans turned on Russia. Not sure why, though - I'd have thought going from the dream scenario of 'socialist + communist alliance v capitalists' to 'capitalist + communist alliance v socialists' must have really confused them. I'm also fairly certain that some of the D-Day literature makes reference to dockers not quite entering into the spirit of things. It's odd that the state could compel blokes to fight but not to work. Why was the 'reserved occupation' route preferred? Why not simply call-up everyone and allocate key people back to their old jobs but under some form of military discipline and pay scale? Or was that getting that a bit too communist?
