Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:05:54.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Colliery Deputies in the British Coal Industry Before Nationalization*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2009

Peter Ackers
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This article challenges the militant and industrial unionist version of British coal mining trade union history, surrounding the Miners' Federation of Great Britain and the National Union of Mineworkers, by considering, for the first time, the case of the colliery deputies' trade union. Their national Federation was formed in 1910, and aimed to represent the three branches of coal mining supervisory management: the deputy (or fireman, or examiner), overman and shotfirer. First, the article discusses the treatment of moderate and craft traditions in British coal mining historiography. Second, it shows how the position of deputy was defined by changes in the underground labour process and the legal regulation of the industry. Third, it traces the history of deputies' union organization up until nationalization in 1947, and the formation of the National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies and Shotfirers (NACODS). The article concludes that the deputies represent a mainstream tradition of craft/professional identity and industrial moderation, in both the coal industry and the wider labour movement.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of Social History , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , December 1994 , pp. 383 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis 1994

References

1 Marx, K. and Engels, F., The Communist Manifesto (Peking, 1968)Google Scholar; Bernstein, E., Evolutionary Socialism (New York, 1961)Google Scholar.

2 Hobsbawm, E. J., Labouring Men (London, 1976)Google Scholar; Webb, S. and Webb, B., The History of Trade Unionism, 1666–1920 (London, 1920)Google Scholar.

3 Arnot, R. Page, The Miners: 1889–1946, 4 vols (London, 1949, 1953. 1961, 1979)Google Scholar; Braverman, H., Labour and Monopoly Capitalism (New York, 1974)Google Scholar.

4 Allen, V., The Militancy of British Miners (Shipley, 1981)Google Scholar.

5 Page Arnot, The Miners; Allen, The Militancy of British Miners.

6 Hunt, E. H., British Labour History, 1815–1914 (London, 1981)Google Scholar. See also, Saville, J., The Labour Movement in Britain (London, 1988)Google Scholar; and Hinton, J., Labour and Socialism: A History of the British Labour Movement (Brighton, 1983)Google Scholar.

7 Davies, P., A. J. Cook (Manchester, 1987), p. 9Google Scholar.

8 Francis, H. and Smith, D., The Fed: A History of the South Wales Miners in the Twentieth Century (London, 1980)Google Scholar.

9 Francis and Smith, The Fed, p. 37.

10 Davies, A. J. Cook, pp. 14–15.

11 Francis and Smith, The Fed, pp. 78 and 66.

12 Hinton, J. and Hyman, R., Trade Unions and Revolution: The Industrial Politics of the Early British Communist Party (London, 1975)Google Scholar.

13 Church, R., Quinton, Q. and Smith, D. N., “Towards a History of British Miners' Militancy, Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labour History, 54(1) (1989)Google Scholar.

14 Benson, J., British Coalminers in the Nineteenth Century: A Social History (London, 1989), pp. 204–205Google Scholar.

15 Williams, J. E., “Labour in the Coalfields: A Critical Bibliography”, Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labour History, 4 (1962)Google Scholar.

16 Neville, R. G. and Benson, J., “Labour in the Coalfields (ii): a Select Critical Bibliography”, Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labour History, 31 (1975), p. 46Google Scholar.

17 See Williams, J. E., The Derbyshire Miners: A Study in Industrial and Social History (London, 1962)Google Scholar; Long, P., “The Economic and Social History of the Scottish Coal Industry” (Ph.D., University of Strathclyde, 1978)Google Scholar; McCormick, B. J., “Managerial Unionism in the Coal Industry”, British Journal of Sociology, 11(4) (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tailby, S., “Labour Utilisation and Labour Management in the British Coal Mining Industry” (Ph.D., Warwick University, 1990)Google Scholar, ch. 6, “Colliery Deputies and Overmen”; Zweintger-Bargtelowska, I., “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation: The Experience in South Wales”, Business History, 34(4), pp. 59–78 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; R. Penn and R. Simpson, “The Development of Skilled Work in the British Coal Mining Industry, 1870–1985”, Industrial Relations Journal, 17 (4).

18 Benson, British Coalminers, p. 196.

19 Francis and Smith, The Fed.

20 Turner, H. A, Trade Union Growth, Structure and Policy: A Comparative Study of the Cotton Unions in England (London, 1962)Google Scholar.

21 Francis and Smith, The Fed.

22 Ibid., p. 21.

23 Ibid., p. 427.

24 Ibid., p. 486.

25 Ibid., p. 421.

26 Neville and Benson, “Labour in the Coalfields (ii)”, p. 49.

27 Zweiniger-Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, p. 60.

28 L. Jones, Cwmardy. See also, We Live (both London, 1986).

29 Jones, Cwmardy, p. 29.

30 Ibid., p. 194.

31 Benson, British Coalminers.

32 Jones, Cwmardy, p. 53.

33 Challinor, R., The Lancashire and Cheshire Miners (Newcastle, 1972)Google Scholar.

34 Zweiniger-Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, p. 60.

35 Melling, J., “Employers and the Rise of Supervisory Unionism, 1914–1939”, in Wrigley, C. (ed.), A History of British Industrial Relations. Volume 2, 1914–1939 (London, 1987)Google Scholar.

36 J. Winterton, “Technological Change and Flexibility in British Coalmining”, Paper to Conference on the Flexible Firm, Cardiff University, September 1988, p. 4.

37 Church, R., The History of the British Coal Industry. Volume 3, 1830–1913: Victorian Pre-eminence (Oxford, 1986)Google Scholar.

38 Ibid., ch. 5.

39 Comparative note: this refers to Dix, K., “Work Relations in the Coal Industry: The Handloading Era, 1880-1930”, in Zimbalist, A., Case Studies in the Labour Process (New York, 1979)Google Scholar. Another study of the Pennsylvania coalfield is Aurand, H. W., From the Molly Ataguires to the United Mine Workers: The Social Ecology of an Industrial Union, 1869–1897 (Temple, Penn., 1971)Google Scholar. Chapter 12 also describes statutory moves to legally regulate underground coal mining safety which echo those in the British industry, discussed below, both in timing and general approach. For instance, a Mines Inspectorate was introduced, followed in 1895 by a form of certification which, according to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, “made the foreman an agent of the state and not of the operator” (p. 153). However, there are obvious dangers in looking for similarities with the British experience. An inter-war commentator, Watkins, H. M., Coal and Men: An Economic and Social Study of the British and American Coalfields (London, 1934)Google Scholar, was more struck by the differences between British and US coalfields. He found US safety regulations “hardly so exacting or so strictly enforced” (p. 119) and, like Aurand, noted the remarkable ethnic divisions in the American mining work-force, and the levels of violence that employers were prepared to use. Likewise, Hickey, S. H. F., Workers in Imperial Germany: The Miners of the Ruhr (Oxford, 1985)Google Scholar describes confessional and political divisions in the German coal mining trade union movement which went far beyond those in Britain. None of these consider the position of mining supervisors in any detail. This suggests the scope for further comparative work on the occupational identity and trade union affiliations of coal mining supervisors outside Britain. There is the danger that a national study, such as this, suggests some inexorable, global trend in industrial structure, statutory regulation and professional identity, culminating in a separate supervisors' union. In reality, the historical possibilities are much more open: the management hierarchy may involve a less distinctive deputy role; the law may focus statutory responsibility elsewhere (for instance Pennsylvania legislated for “certified miners” in 1889); and, whatever the foregoing, supervisors may remain either non-union or within the industrial miners' union, depending on a host of factors. While certain structural dynamics, such as the “pig-in-the-middle” position of the supervisor and their ambivalent attitude to union organization are likely to recur, other sources of division, like religion and ethnicity may be more important in countries other than Britain, where they were of secondary significance

40 Church, The History of the British Coal Industry, p. 274.

41 Daunton, M. J., “Down the Pit: Work in the Great Northern and South Wales Coalfields, 1880-1914”, Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 34 (1981)Google Scholar.

42 Dix, “Work Relations in the Coal Industry”, p. 164.

43 Challinor, The Lancashire and Cheshire Miners, p. 19.

44 Dix, “Work Relations in the Coal Industry”, p. 169.

45 Zweiniger-Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, p. 74.

46 McCormick, B. J., Industrial Relations in the Coal Industry (London, 1979), p. 72CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 Note: Sources on British colliery deputies. The specialist material here on the colliery deputies is mainly from five internal trade union sources. Fellowes, G., Historical Records of the General Federation of Colliery Firemen of Great Britain (Barnsley, 1963)Google Scholar is a chronological summary of all the Federation's conferences and important executive meetings, compiled by a Yorkshire union President. The Trades Union Congress note, Salient Points in the History of NACODS (London, 1962) is a brief factual outline. England, J. W., NACODS: Midland Area, 1908–1963 (Nottingham, 1963)Google Scholar, and Crawford, J., Brief History of NACODS (London, 1963)Google Scholar are accounts by former Midlands and national union Secretaries, respectively, which duplicate much of Fellowes in a slightly more interpretative style. The former is easily the most rounded attempt at a history, this time concentrating on the Midlands coalfield. Lee, J., Lancashire and Cheshire Colliery Firemens' Association: A Brief History from its Commencement up to June 30th, 1914 (Wigan, 1914)Google Scholar, is an account of the early days in Lancashire by its first Secretary. All are in the author's possession. Specific references to these “histories” are made only when they add to the Fellows narrative, which is drawn on widely.

48 Challinor, The Lancashire and Cheshire Miners, p. 52.

49 Church, The History of the British Coal Industry, p. 424.

50 England, NACODS, p. 9.

51 Ibid., p. 16.

52 McCormick, Industrial Relations in the Coal Industry, p. 72.

53 Ibid.

54 Lee, Lancashire and Cheshire Colliery Firemans' Association.

55 England, NACODS.

56 Ibid.

57 Ibid., p. 11.

58 Ibid., p. 14.

59 Ibid.

60 Ibid., p. 25.

61 Lee, Lancashire and Cheshire Colliery Firemans' Association.

62 England, NACODS, p. 22.

63 Ibid., p. 31.

64 Marsh, A., Trade Union Handbook (3rd ed., London, 1984)Google Scholar. There is now a 1991 5th edition. See also Marsh, A. and Ryan, V., Historical Directory of Trade Unions: Volume 2 – Non-Manual Unions (London, 1980)Google Scholar.

65 Long, “The Economic and Social History of the Scottish Coal Industry”, pp. 350–357, discusses the Scottish miners' perspective.

66 Francis and Smith, The Fed, p. 66.

67 Zweiniger–Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”.

68 England, NACODS, p. 19.

69 McCormick, Industrial Relations in the Coal Industry, p. 71.

70 Crawford, Brief History of NACODS.

71 Miller, W. T. is the author's great-grandfather. This article arises from a biographical doctoral study, “Christian Brethren, Union Brother: A Study of the Relationship between Religious Nonconformity and Trade Union Leadership, in the Life of the Coal Mining Deputies' Official, W. T. Miller, 1880–1963” (Ph.D., Wolverhampton University, 1993)Google Scholar. See also, “Miller, William Thomas”, in Bellamy, J. and Saville, J., Dictionary of Labour Biography, Volume II (Oxford, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 Zweiniger–Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, p. 68.

73 Marsh, Trade Union Handbook.

74 England, NACODS, p. 29.

75 A. R. Griffin and C. P. Griffin, “The Non–Political Trade Union”, ch. 5 in Briggs, A. and Saville, J., Essays in Labour History, Volume 3, 1918–1939 (London, 1977)Google Scholar.

76 Zweiniger–Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, p. 67.

77 England, NACODS, pp. 18–19.

78 Ibid., p. 21.

79 Ibid., p. 18.

80 Ibid., p. 31.

81 Ibid., p. 32.

82 Marsh, Trade Union Handbook, p. 166.

83 England, NACODS, p. 11.

84 Melling, “Employers and the Rise of Supervisory Unionism'.

85 Zweiniger–Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”, pp. 60–61.

86 Page Arnot, The Miners, vol. 3, p. 434.

87 Melling, “Employers and the Rise of Supervisory Unionism”; Zweiniger–Bargielowska, “Colliery Managers and Nationalisation”.

88 T. Pattinson, “Thatcher Out to Smash Pit Safety Union”, the Daily Mirror, 13 April 1989; S. Milne, “Lives at Risk in Pit Safety Deregulation”, The Guardian, 24 August 1993.

89 McCormick, Industrial Relations in the Coal Industry.

90 Hunt, British Labour History; Clegg, H. A., Fox, A. and Thompson, A. F., A History of British Trade Unions Since 1889 (Oxford, 1964)Google Scholar.