Talk:Timeline of labour issues and events

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 12 July 2018 by reviewer L293D (talk · contribs).

Chicago

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Organized Labour Start‑class High‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act)

This major act seems to be omitted. In Wikipedia Here Comment added 4/20/10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.93.147.129 (talk) 23:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NO thanks I was looking for a place to add information about labor history, such as the the origin of profit sharing being in 1797, and a Timeline of Labor Issues and Events article would be perfect. That's basically what this article is about because it includes the child labor amendment which I don't think is a labor union issue, so how about changing this article's name.

Here it says that profit sharing "originated in Albert Gallatin's glass works in New Geneva, Pennsylvania in 1797." I'm not sure it would fit in this article unless the article's name is changed.

This is a link that I'd like to add to the external links section of a related page. Not sure where yet. -Barry- 21:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it, I made the article, and few people visit. If you are intersted, I suggest making a labor template too.Travb 01:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States

So, with the change of title, do you see this article becoming a world timeline? Or still related to the United States?--Bookandcoffee 22:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know enough about labor events, especially worldwide, to know whether that would double the size of the article or increase it 100 fold. We might have to be more selective if we did that, and somehow sort it by country. -Barry- 23:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Making a world timeline is one of the things on the list over at WikiProject Organized Labour. With this page being linked to template:labor I think people will slowly start to add international info, maybe just assuming that it was started by a US source. As for size - this is a huge topic. My first thought is to let it grow, and then eventually divide it by time (Timeline of labor issues and events (1880-1920)) instead of country. But I don't know if that's the right answer. --Bookandcoffee 00:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This] seems like it might make a good basis for a timeline of events of international importance. I'm going to have to make a bit more progress with my Italian lessons first though... As a general idea, it might be smart to look at some timelines compiled by non-US/UK organisations - might give a better idea of events considered important on an international level. Mattley ^(Chattley) 16:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For each year, entries are now grouped by country. If there's not enough support for this change, it can be changed back pretty easily. Lets try to decide how to do this while using search and replace to make the change is still practical. Once we get many entries for other countries, it may be harder. -Barry- 02:27, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted by a bot! Maybe I'll try the bot's shut off button. -Barry- 02:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks kind of odd right now, with all those "United States" headers! But personally, I like the idea. As it fills in it should be interesting/useful to see the comparisons. Just a thought, but do we need to divide each year right now, or just each decade, and then by year if/when it's larger? --Bookandcoffee 05:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, excellent idea, good job.Travb 07:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Internationalizing this Article

As part of the Wikipedia:GLAM initiative, I have begun adding items to this article drawing on reference resources held in the George Washington University's International Brotherhood of Teamsters Labor History Research Center (IBT LHRC). However, since the IBT LHRC focuses primarily on acquiring materials related to the North American labor movement, my efforts are making the page even more U.S.-centric. I would welcome the help of anyone who has reference resources related to non-U.S. labor events to enrich this article and make it truly international in scope. Stevenmg (talk) 12:56, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jamespencerjames (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC) i've added some international & european events pertaining to: IWMA / IWA / WFTU / IFCTU / ICFTU / WCL / ITUC Jamespencerjames (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New layout

I've reformatted the first few entries with a proposed new layout. Basically, it will make the article much more compact. I think that with this format, the article will still end up massive, and a more useful layout might be one similar to Timeline of clothing and textiles technology. Comments/reversion prior to discussion welcome. Noisy | Talk 16:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking more about your idea of putting a two letter country abbreviation in parentheses on the same line as the event, and eliminating the country name headings. I didn't like it at first because it doesn't stand out as much as a country name heading for those looking for a certain country, and the country it stands for wouldn't be obvious to some people. I also don't think this article will grow as much as some predict, but if it does grow significantly, saving a line for every country, for every year, could be significant. Now I think we should use the abbreviations, but also, in a small font, on the same line as the year, provide full-country-name links to the top event for the respective countries. Something like:

1797

United States | Canada

(U.S.) Event here...

I don't know how to make link text smaller, Wikipedia's colon indenting won't work, and I'll have to test the internal links I'm using. This needs further research. -Barry- 17:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And using the method in my example would actually increase the size of the article in terms of memory, even though it would display shorter. -Barry- 18:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it important to have the events broken out by country? Other timelines just incorporate the geographic location into the description. Can't that be done here? Something like

year

date - Description of event
next date - its descritpion

and so on. -The Gomm 02:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of the current layout, which looks like this:

1909

United States

22 November 1909

The New York shirtwaist strike of 1909 (Uprising of the 20,000). Female garment workers went on strike in New York; many were arrested. A judge told those arrested: "You are on strike against God."

1910s

1910

United States

October 1, 1910

Los Angeles Times building bombing killed twenty people and destroyed the building. Calling it "the crime of the century," the newspaper's owner Harrison Gray Otis blamed the bombing on the unions, a charge denied by unionists.

25 December 1910

A dynamite bomb destroyed a portion of the Llewellyn Iron works in Los Angeles, where a bitter strike was in progress. In April 1911 James McNamara and his brother John McNamara, secretary-treasurer of the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, were charged with the two crimes. James McNamara pleaded guilty to murder and John McNamara pleaded guilty to conspiracy in the dynamiting of the Llewellyn Iron Works.[1]

Perhaps we could do without all the section headers, and make it more like a timeline:

22 November 1909: The New York shirtwaist strike of 1909 (Uprising of the 20,000). Female garment workers went on strike in New York; many were arrested. A judge told those arrested: "You are on strike against God."

October 1, 1910: Los Angeles Times building bombing killed twenty people and destroyed the building. Calling it "the crime of the century," the newspaper's owner Harrison Gray Otis blamed the bombing on the unions, a charge denied by unionists.

25 December 1910: A dynamite bomb destroyed a portion of the Llewellyn Iron works in Los Angeles, where a bitter strike was in progress. In April 1911 James McNamara and his brother John McNamara, secretary-treasurer of the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, were charged with the two crimes. James McNamara pleaded guilty to murder and John McNamara pleaded guilty to conspiracy in the dynamiting of the Llewellyn Iron Works.[2]

This might have a better flow. Should we do this? The Gomm 23:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Country names

I agree that it would be nice to get a smoother flow without as many headings - but we still need to have a more overt indication of the country involved. Otherwise it could be misleading, as the "timeline" aspect assumes some continuity - and many events that follow each other here are not causally related.

22 November 1909 (United States): The New York shirtwaist strike of 1909 (Uprising of the 20,000). Female garment workers went on strike in New York; many were arrested. A judge told those arrested: "You are on strike against God."

--Bookandcoffee 00:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! We might also want to reverse the date formatting to Year Month Day, since some entries don't have day, and others don't even have a month. Any other suggestions, or should we just get to it? The Gomm 02:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm fine with just doing it now (although I'm not too keen on doing the work myself ;). -Barry- did quite a bit of work setting things up the way they are, but I don't think he's very active right now, and I don't know of anyone else that is very involved with this. Your idea to reverse the dates makes sense. If this page does eventually grow to a larger size I wouldn't be surprised to see headings creep back in, but I think that's how it should work. Info first - headings to follow. --Bookandcoffee 02:31, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and took care of this, keeping only the decade headings that are used as a makeshift table of contents at the top. I didn't bother reversing the dates, and I don't think that's really necessary, anyway. If need be, yearly headings can be added back in some decades if the sections get unwieldy, but for now I think things work well.

The first priority now is probably adding more information, especially that for the last 20 years and non-US (especially non-anglophone) history. Because of that, I changed the cleanup tag to an expand tag. However, I would like to get a uniform tense on the page. Right now it's a mixture of past and present tense; for timelines like this I personally prefer present tense. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 02:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are the Decade Sections really useful?

In a timeline, in which each entry starts with a date, are the sections for each decade really useful? I think the timeline would look cleaner and be easier to read without them. The Gomm 03:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS I think we can all scroll down the timeline quite fast enough.

I think they are. Even if people want to scroll down to a certain date instead of using the link, the decade headers make it easier to scroll faster, since they stand out more and are easier to read in a glance. I don't find them disruptive, and they make the article look more organized to me than would a flat list.

But I think they are most useful for editing, since with them we can edit separate sections and don't have to dig through the entire source if we want to add an event or fix a typo in, say, 1933. Both this and the organizational aspects will become more important as the article expands. It has the potential to get really massive, though I'm sure we'll all keep it within reason. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 01:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1913 Copper Country strike

http://www.hu.mtu.edu/vup/Strike/ This was a significant event. I don't at this time have the ability to add something useful about it to the article but thought it proper to make note of the event here. Peoplesunionpro 06:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typical article by American writers

That's a typical article by American writers who forogt all the events in ohter countries. 178.3.30.47 (talk) 13:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than insult other Wiki editors, you might find adding to the article a more productive way of correcting any unintentional biases. As several people who have worked on this article have indicated, the editors of this page welcome the participation of people who have resources that can make the article more non-U.S. centric. Making the article more international in scope could only strengthen it. Stevenmg (talk) 04:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Timeline of labour issues and events/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This is listed in the {{labor}} tag, but I was reluctant to tag it as "Top" importance.--Bookandcoffee 17:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 05:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC). Substituted at 08:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

1925 Glendale Gas and Coal Company

In the scheme of things the following item that appeared in this list is not notable:

"25 May 1925 (United States)

"Two company houses occupied by nonunion coal miners were blown up and destroyed by labor "racketeers" during a strike against the Glendale Gas and Coal Company in Wheeling, West Virginia."

Therefore I have removed it. Like many such occurrences of the day, this was a minor labor dispute of no great significance. It does not belong in this list. In searching for a citation, I found the identical three-sentence press service report in two newspapers:

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/129059106/ May 26, 1925 The Des Moines Register "Homes of Nonunion Are Wrecked by Explosions" Wheeling, W. Va May 25.

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/107055202/ May 26, 1925 The Courier-Journal from Louisville, Kentucky

"Two Blasts Wreck Non-Union Homes Families Escape Injury As Houses In West Virginia Are Destroyed." Wheeling, W. Va. May 25 "Two company houses occupied by non-union miners were partly wrecked by explosions early today at the settlement of the Glendale Gas & Coal Company near here. The explosions occurred fifteen minutes apart. Members of the two families escaped injury."

Other major labor disputes in the 1920s are not listed here but should appear on this list. Jeff in CA (talk) 04:33, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Timeline of labor issues and events. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too US-centric + single source

The article name, images and content are too heavily US-centric. Whilst the US has a long history of trade unionism, the current state of this article does not reflect a worldwide view on the subject. There are examples for the UK (2 which say "United Kingdom", 6 for England and one each for Wales and Scotland), three for Germany, two for Poland, two for France, one for China and none for Russia/Soviet Union. There are 467 examples of the United States This article is heavily biased. There arer ~577 entries, which means that 81% of the article contenrt is about events in the US. 12 of the 44 references are actually a single source, which is an encyclopædia about union conflicts in the US, there being inline citations to this source in total, spread out of 12 instances, most of these have red links and nearly all have it as their sole reference. There are 447 inline citations, 382 are from this single source, meaning that 85% of all citations are for the same source, which is greatly worrying. Below is the source, an online version would be helpful to access if anyone can find one.

Filippelli, Ronald L. (1990). Labor conflict in the United States : an encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing Co. pp. xxi. ISBN 082407968X.

Firstly I propose creating an article just for the US and including here only major events, especially ones with articles. Then adding more events from around the world, particularly of the larger industrialised nations.UaMaol (talk) 22:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]