lang: en
Summary
In 1919, immigrant textile workers in Lawrence, Massachusetts, struck for a 48-hour work week without a pay cut, using the slogan ‘54-48!’. The strike involved up to 30,000 workers, faced severe police repression, and ended after the United Textile Workers negotiated a 48-hour week with a 15% wage increase, exceeding the strikers’ original demand. The campaign achieved its main goal of maintaining wages while reducing hours.
Background
In 1919, the United Textile Workers and Central Labor Union negotiated a reduction of the work week from 54 to 48 hours, but with an overall wage cut. Immigrant workers in Lawrence, Massachusetts, already struggling with wages below the cost of living, could not afford the decrease. Inspired by a successful 1912 strike in Lawrence, they decided to strike to keep their pay while reducing hours.
What happened
On 3 February 1919, between 17,000 and 30,000 immigrant workers walked out of Lawrence mills, beginning the ‘54-48’ strike. [source: nv-database] The strikers organized among twenty ethnic groups with one leader per group and invited three pastors (A. [source: nv-database] J. [source: nv-database] Muste, Cedric Long, Harold Rotzel) as spokespeople. [source: nv-database] Ethnic stores supported the strikers by accepting coupons, and strikers boycotted non-supporting stores [source: nv-database]. The city administration, led by Mayor John Hurley, banned mass gatherings, restricted news coverage, regulated travel, and kept mills under police surveillance. [source: nv-database] Police beat strikers on the picket line; Muste and Long were beaten and arrested but acquitted a week later [source: nv-database]. On 18 February, women strikers appealed to Governor Coolidge, who refused to meet them. [source: nv-database] On 21 February, police beat and arrested about 3000 strikers at a meeting near a garbage dump. [source: nv-database] A machine gun was displayed for intimidation on 5 May, and on 6 May two immigrant leaders, Anthony Capraro and Nathan Kleinman, were kidnapped and beaten [source: nv-database]. Boston radicals and the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America donated thousands of dollars to the strike fund. [source: nv-database] Elizabeth Glendower Evans visited, gave money, led a silent march, and boosted morale. [source: nv-database] By mid-March, the city faced financial strain from policing and the boycott depressed store profits. [source: nv-database] Mayor Hurley formed a Business and Professional Men’s Committee to arrange a meeting, but mill owners refused. [source: nv-database] In early April, Governor Coolidge forced state arbitration; hearings lasted nearly a month but no compromise was reached, though it was the first direct communication between sides [source: nv-database]. In mid-May, the United Textile Workers negotiated with mill owners without the strikers’ knowledge, securing a 48-hour week and a 15% wage increase. [source: nv-database] The strike had run out of funding. [source: nv-database] On 19 May, as Muste prepared to announce failure, mill owners called him to the conference and explained the new agreement. [source: nv-database] Muste added a non-discrimination clause, and on 20 May 1919 the strike ended [source: nv-database].
Key people & organizations
- A. J. Muste
- Cedric Long
- Harold Rotzel
- Thomas G. Connolly
- Elizabeth Glendower Evans
- Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America
- United Textile Workers
- Mayor John Hurley
- Governor Calvin Coolidge
- Anthony Capraro
- Nathan Kleinman
- Angelo Rocco
Tactics used
The strikers used an industry-wide strike combined with a consumer boycott of non-supporting stores to pressure mill owners economically, while coalition-building with ethnic leaders, clergy, and Boston radicals provided moral and financial support. [source: nv-database]
Outcome
Verdict: won.
The campaign achieved its goal of a 48-hour work week with no pay cut, and even secured a 15% wage increase, exceeding the original demand. The outcome is considered a win because the strikers’ core demand was met, despite the strike ending through union negotiation rather than direct victory. [source: nv-database]
Lessons
- Building broad coalitions across ethnic groups and with external allies can sustain a strike financially and morally.
- Nonviolent discipline in the face of severe repression can attract sympathy and support from influential outsiders.
- Direct communication between strikers and opponents, even through arbitration, can open pathways to resolution.
Sources
- Global Nonviolent Action Database —
[[nv-database]]
Disclaimer: Included as a teaching example of campaign craft, not as endorsement.
Sources & verification
nv-database— grounding: primary — license: link-only- Rewritten: 2026-06-25 via
worker_casestudies_v2.py