The agricultural picture is admirably summed up by Prof. John A. Guthrie of Washington State College. "The outlook for agriculture in 1947 is clouded by the uncertainty of general business conditions and the threat of further labor troubles." Even if employment, production, and income are at a high level, he goes on to say

* * This may not result in a proportionate demand for farm products, inasmuch as there is still a tremendous accumulated demand for many manufactured goods which were not available during the war. Consumer spending may be directed heavily towards scarce durable consumer goods.

Prices of many farm products are expected to continue relatively high in 1947, although they may decline in the latter part of the year.15

Other authorities in the region are less optimistic about farm prices. However, large yields are anticipated which should mean substantial farm incomes even though prices are lower.

The outlook for the basic forest products industries is encouraging. Demand for housing is expected to insure a strong market for lumber for several years to come. New forest "access roads" have been opened up which permit logging operations not hitherto possible. There is also the technological development called "relogging" which enables cut-over areas to yield additional revenue by setting up small portable sawmills to use "small trees, broken logs, tops, etc., that were left by the first operation because the cost of transporting them to a mill was greater than their value." 16 Now only the lumber has to be taken out. Conservation and selective logging continue a part of the long-range program of the industry with the ultimate objective of a sustained yield from forest resources.

Fisheries is another Pacific Northwest industry with a promising future. Before the war the "take" of fish from the Pacific Northwest waters, including Alaska, was equal to that of the New England States, a 20-million-dollar industry. New developments for 1947 include factory ships, deep-sea trawlers equipped to catch the king crab, sole, and other bottom fish as far north as the Bering Sea, and also to clean, sharp freeze, and package the product, and return to port with as much as 200 tons of fish ready for market.

Foreign trade prospects of the Pacific Northwest should begin to materialize in 1947. New companies have been organized and plans laid to enter into aggressive promotion of foreign trade as international conditions permit. Plans are also afoot for a foreign trade zone in the Puget Sound area. An exhaustive study of the possibilities of such a zone has recently been completed."

18 Op. cit., p. 38.

16 Ballaine, op. cit., p. 55.

17 A Foreign-Trade Zone for Puget Sound: Its Economic Desirability and Feasibility, by Prof. Charles J. Miller, University of Washington, published by the Washington State Department of Conservation and Development, Olympia, 1947.

Finally, the tourist industry of the Pacific Northwest offers immediate prospects for 1947 and 1948 that may be measured in terms of millions of dollars annually. The findings of a recent survey indicate a 200-million-dollar annual potential tourist trade for the State of Washington alone, once the necessary accommodations for tourists. are provided.18

Summing up, the economic outlook for the Pacific Northwest for 1947 is as good as or somewhat better than for 1946, assuming no serious national recession. Population growth is expected to continue, with employment opportunities keeping pace. Unemployment, which has been low during 1946 despite serious problems of reconversion, including an influx of more than the region's prewar share of veterans, is not expected to rise greatly. In fact, labor shortages, which have held back certain industries, notably construction and building, are likely to continue. Incomes will probably remain high on a per capita basis, assuring a better than average as well as a growing market within the region.

18 The Tourist Industry of Washington, by Mr. Robert G. Seymour, Bureau of Business Research of the University of Washington, made for the State of Washington Department of Conservation and Development, 1946.

By CLARK KERR, University of California

TRADE-UNION activity is now almost a century old on the Pacific Coast, dating from the "Gold Rush" days in California. A diverse and increasingly powerful trade-union movement has developed. Organization is more complete than in most other parts of the Nation.2 The movement has a tradition of aggressive action as attested by the general strikes of Seattle (1919), San Francisco (1934), and Oakland (1946); the Wheatland hop riots (1913); the Everett (1916) and Centralia (1919) "massacres" in the days of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW); the union domination of politics on two occasions in the history of San Francisco and one in Seattle; and the episodes of the bombing of the Los Angeles Times (1910) and the Tom Mooney case in San Francisco (1916)-among other illustrations. Employers also have organized in strong and aggressive associations. In recent times the "master agreement" negotiated between a union and an employers' association has become the increasingly accepted instrument of collective bargaining. Multiemployer bargaining is sufficiently widespread to be the standard pattern.

Union Agreement Coverage

Collective bargaining is more widespread on the Pacific Coast than in the United States generally. In 1945 throughout the Nation, about 48 percent of the workers in occupations over which unions claim active jurisdiction were covered by written collective bargaining agreements. On the Pacific Coast, an estimated 57 to 63 percent of the workers "eligible" are covered by agreements.*

3

Approximately 3%1⁄2 million workers on the Pacific Coast are now "eligible" for coverage by union agreements. About 60 percent actually work under such arrangements.

This comparative strength of the trade-unions on the West Coast is even greater when examined in conjunction with the industrial structure of the region. Nation-wide, the greatest degree of organization generally exists in manufacturing employment. Such employment on

1 The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of the members of the staff of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California (Berkeley), and particularly of Carl Campbell.

* Already by the turn of the century San Francisco was considered "the most completely closed-shop community in the United States."-Ira B. Cross: History of the Labor Movement in California (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1935), p. 261.

U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Extent of Collective Bargaining and Union Recognition, 1945 (Bulletin No. 865, reprinted from Monthly Labor Review, April 1946, with additional data). Estimated from data obtained from government, union, and industry sources.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics definition of "eligibility" (Bulletin No. 865, op. cit.) and current estimates of total employment have been used.

the Pacific Coast at the time of the 1940 census accounted for 17.9 percent of the gainfully employed, as compared with 23.4 percent for the entire Nation. Although manufacturing has expanded comparatively in the Pacific Coast States since that time, it does not yet equal the national average. This means that despite the handicap of less industrialization, the unions have been able to surpass the national average in the degree of their influence over employment conditions. The nonmanufacturing industries are unusually well organized.*

The coverage of collective agreements is not uniformly distributed on the Coast. It is substantially more complete in Seattle and San Francisco, which are the oldest and strongest centers of union organization, than in Portland and Los Angeles. Employees in Alaska for some time and in Hawaii recently have been at least as fully covered by union agreements as those in California, Oregon, and Washington. The American Federation of Labor has a greater preponderance of union membership in this region than it has throughout the Nation. This is explained, in part, by the lesser development of manufacturing, in which field the Congress of Industrial Organizations has most of its members. The AFL also had progressed farther in its organizational efforts on the Pacific Coast, particularly in San Francisco and Seattle, by the time the CIO was established, than it had in most other parts of the Nation. The AFL has almost exclusively organized the building, the printing, the service, and the metal trades, local transportation, and retail and wholesale distribution. It has also been the dominant organizer of such prominent West Coast industries as motion picture production, fruit and vegetable canning, shipbuilding, and pulp and paper manufacturing. The textile, rubber, electrical products, steel, and automobile industries, in which the CIO predominates, are not of great importance on the Pacific Coast. The CIO is dominant on the Coast in the oil, longshore, and fishing industries, among others. The two organizations share jurisdiction in the lumber, aircraft, and water-transportation industries.

Development of Characteristic Collective Bargaining Systems

LONGSHORING

No collective bargaining system on the Pacific Coast has attracted as much continued public notice in the past decade and a half as that on the water front. The longshore industry is the connecting link between water-borne transportation and shore-side industries. When this link breaks down, both the maritime industry and many manufacturing industries are quickly affected. The economic life of San Francisco is particularly dependent on its water front.

See footnote 3.

Unionism on the water front dates back almost a century. Cargo handlers undertook their first strike in San Francisco in 1851.7 The Riggers and Stevedores Union Association, established in 1853, was a tightly knit organization with certain guild characteristics. Foremen were members of the association, and an initiation fee of $100 was charged. Until 1886 the Riggers and Stevedores Union Association was the only organization in the field. In that year two new groups appeared, one of them affiliated with the Knights of Labor.

National organization first developed in 1892, when the precursor of what is now the International Longshoremen's Association (AFL) was formed. Shortly thereafter the three West Coast unions, together with a fourth which had since come into being, affiliated with the national organization. Joint action in San Francisco of longshore locals and other maritime unions was attempted from 1891 to 1906 in the City Front Federation, and of longshore locals on a coastwise basis from 1908 to 1916 in the Longshoremen's Union of the Pacific. Pacific Coast unity came to an end with the coastwise strike of 1916, which was lost. "Rustling cards" were introduced; these contained a history of the individual longshoreman's union activity, if any, and had to be presented when employment was sought in employer-controlled hiring halls. The San Francisco longshoremen lost another strike in 1919 and organization virtually disappeared on the Pacific Coast, except for the "Blue Book Union" under employer sponsorship. With the Nation-wide stimulation which the National Industrial Recovery Act gave to union organizations, locals of the International Longshoremen's Association began to reappear in 1933. In February 1934 a coast-wide convention of ILA locals was held. Here emerged the two principal demands which led up to the 1934 waterfront strike the jointly controlled hiring hall and a coast-wide contract. The strike began on May 9 and lasted until July 31, 1934. When, on July 3, the Industrial Association of San Francisco attempted to open the port with strikebreakers and the Governor of California called out the National Guard, the spectacular general strike of July 16-19 resulted.o

The 1934 strike was concluded by arbitration before the National Longshoremen's Board, appointed by the President. The award of

'Robert C. Francis: History of Labor on the San Francisco Water Front (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1934). See also Ira B. Cross: History of the Labor Movement in California (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1935).

8 A short-lived Federated Council of Wharf and Wave Unions was organized in 1888.-Cross, op. cit., p. 198.

For accounts of the 1934 strike see Paul Eliel, The Waterfront and General Strikes (San Francisco, Hooper Printing Co., 1934); Paul S. Taylor and Norman Gold, San Francisco and the General Strike (m Survey Graphic, September 1934); and Dwight L. Palmer, Pacific Coast Maritime Labor (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1935).