Your search

Class has been a controversial category of historical analysis. Historians and social theorists have often attacked its relevance, but even those who find it a helpful way of understanding the past (and present) have had to deal with challenges from new theoretical perspectives, especially from those sensitive to gender and race. They have also had to recognize that there is no direct link between the material situation of members of a social class and their consciousness of their social situation. Diverse discourses emerge to give meaning to social experience, and are adopted, adapted, or rejected to varying degrees. This paper suggests that, after three decades of debate, we should now consider class formation as a fluid, dynamic process of social differentiation through which people’s lives are shaped by the pressures, constraints, and opportunities of their situation in relation to the means of production, the divisions of labour within patriarchy, and the racial distinctions in particular societies; but also one in which people negotiate their own understandings of the world and act on them. To illustrate this process at work, the paper discusses the lives of one working-class family in suburban Toronto from the 1940s to the 1970s and their engagement with new postwar social developments. They not only shaped distinctively working-class forms of gender, suburbanism, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, popular culture, meritocracy, and consumerism; but also wove all of those into a distinctively working-class identity.

Industrial capitalism was established in Canada in two distinct phases, as was the case in other Western countries. The ‘first industrial revolution’ — as it has been called — began in Canada around 1850 and 1860 and flourished in the 1880s due to the National Policy that was in effect at the time. The ‘second industrial revolution’ began in the early 20th century and was the result of a much more sophisticated capitalist economy, which saw the emergence of new and complex technologies and means of production, as well as corporate giants in the steel, automotive, paper and chemical industries, to name but a few. Although this second phase of industrial capitalism had a significant impact on the working conditions of thousands of men and women in Canada, recent historiography, despite being abundant in the field of labour history, has largely ignored the phenomenon of mass production that characterised this second phase. The author retraces part of this history through a study of the steel industry in Hamilton, Ontario, one of the three major centres of this industry in Canada. He examines the rise of the Steel Company of Canada and its predecessors between 1895 and 1930, the transformations that took place in steelworking methods at the time, and the labour relations that developed within this corporation in its Hamilton. --Translation of website summary in the French language

Recently the Toronto Star ran a story about a lavish new lakefront housing development in the eastern suburbs of Toronto owned by one of the Bronfman companies. Under the quaint name of “Port Union Village,” the developer is resurrecting the long-forgotten history of a tiny port that had existed on the spot in the nineteenth century in order to sell a myth of rural gentility in the 1990s. What the story failed to explain was that the new houses were rising on the site of the infamous Canadian Johns- Manville Company, where from the 1940s to the 1970s several hundred workers worked with asbestos. By 1980 43 CJM employées were dead of asbestos-related diseases. The company’s long suppression of information about these hazards became a national scandai before it collapsed into bankruptcy beneath a flood of lawsuits. The Star was thus complic- it in suppressing the memory of a significant industrial workplace, of the organized reistance of the men who worked there and the workplace culture that sustained them, and of their life with family and neighbours beyond the factory walls. For the residents of this new suburb, there never was a working-class expérience here (they might start asking questions when they find the asbestos in their backyard gardens).The Ontario Worker’s Arts and Heritage Centre exists so that this kind of historical white-washing and collective amnesia will not continue to take place. --Introduction

The article reviews the book, "The Real Dope: Social, Legal, and Historical Perspectives on the Regulation of Drugs in Canada," edited by Edgar-André Montigny.

The article reviews the book, "Industrial Relations under Liberal Democracy: North America in Comparative Perspective," by Roy J. Adams.

This article reviews the book, "Steel at the Sault: Francis H. Clergue, Sir James Dunn, and the Algoma Steel Corporation, 1901-1956," by Duncan McDowall.

This article reviews the book, "Steel and Steelworkers: The Sons of Vulcan," by Charles Docherty.

This article reviews the book, "Canada: A History in Photographs," by Roger Hall and Gordon Dodds.

This article reviews two books: "Embattled Shadows: A History of Canadian Cinema," by Peter Morris, and "John Grierson: A Documentary Biography," by Forsyth Hardy.

The article reviews the books, "Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process under Monopoly Capitalism," by Michael Burawoy, "Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century," by Richard Edwards, "Working For Capitalism," by Richard M. Pfeffer, and "Case Studies on the Labor Process," edited by Andrew Zimbalist.

The article reviews the book, "Manhood on the Line: Working-Class Masculinities in the American Heartland," by Stephen Meyer.

"What ever happened to the great Canadian labour-history debates of the early 1980s?" a well-informed Argentinian labour historian asked me recently. The gist of my rambling, uncertain response was "Things have become a lot more complex." Bryan Palmer must have had similar thoughts when he sat down to revise and update his nearly ten-year-old history of the Canadian working-class.' The publication of his self-styled "rethinking" of the field gives us all an opportunity to reflect on how the writing of working-class history has evolved and changed since those heady days and what a synthesis of the huge volume of new work ought to look like. It seems appropriate to place Palmer at the centre of such a historiographical review since the 1983 version of his Working-Class Experience was widely seen as the first synthesis of the new working-class history and, indeed, in his long series of books and articles, and through his penchant for confrontation and debate, Palmer has played a major role in defining what the rest of the historical profession (and many others) thought Canadian labour historians were up to. With this new book, he has returned to centre stage. --Author's introduction

The author reflects on his involvement with the Ontario Workers Arts and Heritage Centre in Hamilton, Ontario. Discusses historians' efforts to reach a wider audience, the use of artifacts and primary sources, and the competing arenas of historical interpretation. Concludes that working people could be involved with planning, development and organization of a presentation, and that presentations should be, at least to some extent, empowering.

The article reviews the book, "The CIO, 1935-1955," by Robert H. Zieger.

The article reviews the book, "America's Assembly Line," by David E. Nye.

The article reviews and comments on two books: "Against the Tide: The Story of the Canadian Seamen's Union," by Jim Green, and "Everything That Floats: Pat Sullivan, Hal Banks, and the Canadian Seamen's Unions of Canada," by William Kaplan.

Between 1880 and 1920 the dominant ideology of independent working-class politics east of the Rockies was labourism, a brand of reformism which resembled but remained distinct from other ideological currents on the Canadian left. It was the political expression of skilled workers, who set out to win over wider support in the working class. It remained, in essence, a form of working-class liberalism, which had existed as Radicalism on the left wing of the Liberal Party but which took on an independent life in Canadian politics as industrial conflict heated up. For a brief period at the end of World War I, labourists allied with Marxist and ethical socialists to produce the visionary political dimension in the unprecedented post-war upsurge of the Canadian working class. The political movement and its ideology quickly declined in the early 1920s, however, along with the craftsworkers who had propelled it for half a century.

This article describes the state of the two largest metal-working crafts in Hamilton at the end of the nineteenth century - the moulders and the machinists; the efforts of their employers to challenge the craftsmen's shop-floor power in order to transform their factories into more efficient, centrally managed workplaces; and the response of the craft workers to this crisis. The analysis of this response emphasizes the ambivalence of the artisanal legacy for the working class: on the one hand, an impassioned critique of the more dehumanizing tendencies of modernizing industry; on the other, an exclusivist strategy which aimed at defending only their craft interests. This experience suggests that the sweeping changes in the work process that accompanied the rise of monopoly capitalism in Canada prompted a highly fragmented response from the working class.

Labour Day became a statutory holiday in Canada in 1894, but labour days and craftsmen’s parades had been summer events in several Canadian cities and towns for a number of years. Its creation as an official holiday responded to two demands: one for public recognition of organized labour and its important role, and another for release from the pressures of work in capitalist industry. It was up to unions, however, to produce the parades and shape the day’s events, and this task could prove to be too much for local workers’ movements with limited resources. The tension between celebration and leisure eventually undermined the original grand ideals, as wage-earners and their families began to spend Labour Day pursuing private pleasures rather than participating in a display of cultural solidarity.

Historian Craig Heron introduces the 1945-48 memoir of Alfred Edwards, who worked at National Knitting MIlls, a textile mill in Hamilton, Ontario. Edwards, who had been a union activist prior to WWII, describes the changes in the relations of production that he observed upon his return to the plant from military service. He also discusses the decision of the shop union to join the Textile Workers Union of America, the struggle for local control in a bureaucratized international union, and the conflict between social democratic and communist unions at the Canadian Congress of Labour convention in Toronto in 1947.