A.F. L.의 trade unionism에 關한 硏究, 1886-1896

Abstract

美國의 勞動組合의 歷史는 獨立以前의 時期부터 거슬러 올라갈 수 있으며 時代에 따라 그 盛衰를 거듭해 오면서 19世紀 後半까지 이에져 내러 왔다. 南北戰爭을 고비로 終職과 함께 産業發展의 時期를 맞이란 美國社會는 이에 따른 勞動者들의 意識도 높아져서 점차로 勞動組合運動이 확고한 기반을 잡기 시작 하였다. 그리하여 1860年代 以後 「勞動組合全國聯盟」과 「勞動騎士團」을 거쳐 1886年에는 순수한 Trade Urionism에 기반을 둔 「美國勞動總聯盟」(Amertcan Federation of Labor : A.f.l.)이 登場하였다. 美國社會의 意識構造의 기반을 이루고 있는 個人主義와 民主主義思想은 勞動組合運動에도 그대로 反映되어 A.F.L.의 組合運動原則도 유럽의 勞動運動과는 그 性格을 달리하고 있다. 따라서 本稿는 이와 같은 美國的 特性을 지닌 初創期(1886-1896年) A.F.L.의 形成背景과 아울러 그 構造와 組織理論을 살펴본 후에 當時의 A.F.L.산하 組合들이 경험해야 했던 資本家와의 치열한 鬪爭과 이에 對處하는 A.F.L.의 態度, 또 勞動組合運動을 進行해 나가는데 있어서의 A.F.L.의 基本政策을 考察해 보았다. 美國의 勞動運動史에 대한 參考文獻은 많았지만 주로 經濟學의 立場에서 다룬 것이 많았고, 勞動組合이 지니는 多樣란 特性때문에 聯關學問에 대한 硏究를 함으로써 綜合的인 考察이 필요하다는 점을 인정할 수 밖에 없었다. 19世紀 후반 産業의 급속적인 발달로 美國의 經濟는 世界頂上을 向해 나아가고 있었으며 當時 經濟界는 몇몇 大財閥들에 의한 獨占企業들이 막강한 세력을 지니고 있었다. 그 결과 同業者들간의 過度한 競爭과 大資本이 小資本을 흡수하는 弱肉强食의 現象이 두드러지게 나타났다. 이러한 現象은 適者蛇存·自然淘汰·生存競爭을 내세운 Charles Darwin의 進化論을 바탕으로 한 Herbert Spencer의 社會的 Darwinism의 理論으로 合理化되었다. 또한 當時 政府는 個인의 企業活動에 一切 간섭하지 않는다는 經濟的 放任主義 政策을 取함으로써 이들의 自由競爭을 크게 뒷받침해 주었다. 이러한 政府의 自由放任的 政策으로 인해 大企業의 不當한 利潤追求와 勞動者의 착취는 아무런 規制도 받지 않았으며 자연히 勞膿者의 處遇改善을 위한 立法措置는 거의 取해지지 않고 있었다. 이러한 상황에서 A.F.L.은 勞動者들의 權益을 保護하고 代辯해줄 수 있는 全體的인 聯盟體로서 登場하였다.물론 A.F.L은 同一 職種의 熟練工을 中心으로 한 職能則 勞動組合主義(craft unionism)를 原則으로 하고 있었으므로 美國의 全體勞動者의 利益을 代表하지는 못하였으나 그 當時 美國社會에 적합한 勞動運動의 方向을 提示하였던 것이다. 고로 美國社會의 特性을 잘 反映하고 있는 A.F.L.은 各 加入勞組들의 完全自治를 인정하는 反面 相互間의 관계는 道德的인 義務에 지나지 않게 함으로써 수많은 勞動組合을 하나의 聯盟體안에 모을 수 있었으며 A.F.L, 以前의 全國勞動組織體들과는 달리 美國社會에 정착할 수 있었던 것이다. 또한 勞動運動을 展開酪하는 過程에 있어서 A.F.L.은 순수하고 소박한 勞動組合主義에 立脚하여 經濟的 勞動組合主義(business unionism)를 原則으로 하였으며 이러한 勞動組合運動의 순수성을 유지하기 위해 政黨이나 政府의 介入을 반대하고 勞動組合만을 통한 勞動者들의 自發的인 努力으로 勞動條件의 改善을 이루려고 하였다. 또한 從來의 勞動組織들이 追求하던 幻想的인 目標를 버리고 當面한 目標를 위하여 實際的인 勞動運動을 展開하였다. 결국 設立된 以後 10年間에 이르는 時期의 A.F.L.은 團體交涉을 통한 勞動者의 生活向上에만 主力하였으며 急進的인 社會主義나 政治的인 勞動組合運動을 배격하였다. 그러나 平和的인 團體交涉을 통해 雇用主와의 協約을 이루려는 A.F.L. 勞動者들의 노력은 雇用主들의 非妥協的인 태도로 인해 번번히 좌절되었다. 特히 當代의 美國政府는 資本家와 結托하여 이들의 利益을 위한 金權政治를 해왔으므로 聯邦政府의 支持를 받고 있던 雇用主들은 對動組合을 인정하려고 하지 않았으며 이들과의 交涉에 응하지 않았다. 그러므로 勞動者들은 자기들의 勞動條件의 改善을 위해 雇用主에 대항하는 方法으로 實力行使인 罷業을 사용하였다. 특히 1982年의 Homestead罷업과 1894年의 Pullman 罷業은 全國的인 總罷業으로 확대될 可能性까지 內包한 罷業이었으나 組織의 弱化를 우려한 A.F.L.의 政策으로 인해 總罷業의 계획은 實現을 보지 못하였다. 극도로 치열하였던 90年代의 勞使間의 爭議에 있어서 聯邦政府는 雇用主들의 편이 되어 勞動者들의 合法的인 團體行動權을 저지하기 위해 法院을 통한 禁止命令을 내림으로써 勞動組合의 活動을 크게 위협하였다. 이에 A.F.L.은 禁止命令과 같은 强力한 反勞動措置로부터 勞動者를 保護하기 위해서 勞動者에게 有利한 立法을 支持하는 政治活動을 벌여야 했다. 그리하여 A.F.L.은 어떠한 特定政黨을 支持하지 않는 超黨派的 政治活動을 政策으로 세우고 1896年부터는 有力란 壓力團體로서 政治活動을 展開하였다. 以上과 같이 A.F.L.이 순수한 勞動組合主義에 立脚한 勞動組合活動을 追求할 결과 美國의 勞動運動은 政治的運動으로 展開되지 못하였으며 過激한 改革을 배격한 安定된 기반위에서 꾸준한 발전을 계속해 나갈 수 있었다. 앞에서 지적한 바와 같이 勞動組合運動은 그 性格이 너무나 복잡하고 多樣하기 때문에 이에 대한 硏究도 개괄적으로 종합하기가 어려우며 이에 他學間과의 協同硏究가 필요한 것이다. 그러나 本人은 歷史學徒로서 이러한 特性을 지닌 勞動組合을 歷史的인 側面에서 관찰하여 보았다. 그리하여 19世紀末 以來로 美國勞動運動의 主流를 이루어 온 A.F.L.의 Trade Unionism을 中心으로 하여 그 基本思想과 勞動政策 또 이러한 勞動組合主義가 A.F.L.의 初創期 10年동안 실제 勞動組合들의 活動에 어떻게 反映되고 있는지를 살펴보았다. 또한 이같은 美國勞動運動에 관한 硏究는 우리 社會의 特殊性만 감안한다면 우리나라의 勞動組合活動에도 참고로 할 수 있을 것이다. 끝으로 本人의 硏究는 앞에서 지적한 대로 勞動組合에 대한 결코 完全한 考察이 될 수 없으며 이것은 勞動者들 자체가 社會의 모든 부분에 관여하고 있는한 勞動組合運動의 硏究는 역시 政治·經濟·社會等의 모든 면에서 考察되어야 한다는 것을 强調하고 싶다. 따라서 이러한 점에서 볼때 本論文의 限界를 느끼는 것이며 이를 補完할 專門的인 硏究가 앞으로 기대되는 바이다.;The history of labor union movement in America was begun at even before the Independence days and was continued to the end of l9th century with the ups and downs in various periods. With the end of the Civil War, American society was faced with the age of industrial development which enhanced labors' consciousness and in consequence the labor union movement gradually began to solidify it's footing. Then in 1886 the American Federation of Labor based on pure trade unionism put in an appearance as did the National Labor Union and the Knights of Labor in the 1860s. The principles of labor union movement in America differ from that of European trade union movement in nature since individualism and democratism, foundations of American society, are fully reflected. in the labor union movement. In this thesis, several points are examined, such as, the background behind the formation of the early A.F.L., the structure and theory of the A.F.L. organization, the fierce struggle of labor unions under the control of the A.F.L. against capitalists, the attitude of A.F.L. toward this violent labor disputes, and the basic policies of A.F.L. in pursuance of its.trade unionism. Thtie are many books written on the history of labor union movement in America, and a number of books were written from the point of economics, sociology, political science, and others. The study of labor movement can be approached from various angles and a fulle examination of this subject can be made by synthesizing from several related fields. In the end of 19th century, the rapid development of industry was to raise America to the level of world most industrialized countries and at the same time the economic power of America was concentrated in monopolistic undertakings, operated by several plutocracies. Accordingly, excessive competition among fellow traders and the law of jungle i.e. the larger capital eats up the smaller, were conspicuous. phenomena. These situations were justified by the Social Darwinism of Herbert Spencer, whose doctrines were grounded on the Doctrine of Evolution of Charles Darwin in which the survival of the fittest, natural selection, and the struggle for existence were asserted. And the economic policy of laissez-faire, that is, individual activity of enterprising is absolutely free from the govern mental interference, was assumed by the federal government, intensively supporting free competition. Owing to this laissez-faire policy, pursuits of undue profits and labor sweatings in large enterprises were free from all the restrictions and naturally the legislative enactment for the better treatment of labor was not made by the politicians. In these conditions, the A.F.L. was formed as a national federation which could guarantee the rights and interests of labor and speak for them. Since the A.F.L. was a federation among skilled craft unions such as cigar-makers and iron-molders, it couldn't represent the interests of the whole American laboring class, but it showed the way in which the most appropriate labor movement in America should make progress. Therefore the A.F,L., which well reflected characteristics of American society, could hold together numerous unions to one federation and took root in American society without repeating failures experienced by other national labor organizations prior to the A.F.L. The reason for this success can be attributed to the fact that the perfe.ct autonomy of its members was strictly recognized and at the same time their mutual relations Were nothing but moral obligations. In the course of labor movement, the A.F.L., grounded on pure and simple trade unionism, made business unionism its principle and tried to improve working conditions by the labors' voluntary efforts, not by the commitment of government or party but by the labor union only in order to preserve the pure objectives of the labor union movement. It also developed a practical labor movement aiming at immediate ends instead of illusive ends at which former labor organizations tried to reach. The A.F.L. rejected both socialism and the political labor union movement and made collective bargaining as its main objective for its first ten years. But the A.F.L.'s effort to make an agreement between employers and employees by peaceful collective bargaining always ended in a failure due to the employers' uncompromising attitudes. Especially, in cooperating with capitalists, the Ametican government established plutocracy for their interests. In result, employers under the support of the federal government did not approve of labor unions and turned deaf ear on the labors' demand for negotiations. In consequence, for the better working conditions, the labors went on a strike as a way of objection to their employers, ThereUpon, labor unions under the A.F.L. in the 1890s were engulfed in labor disputes, standing against the arrogance of employers. The Homestead strike in 1892 and the Pullman strike in 1894, exceptionally, seemed to develop into a general strike throughout the country, but the A.F.L. worried about the weakening of its organization, and welcomed the policy of giving up the general strike plan. In the middle of the extremely fierce dispute between employees and employers in the 1890s, the federal government took the side of employers and issued court injunction in order to hold back the labors's legal right to act collectively. Thus the activity of unions was seriously threatened. From here on, in order to protect the labor from this drastic anti-labor measure like injunction, the A.F.L. must engage in a political activity for, legislation favorable to the labor. The A.F.L., as a powerful pressure group, engaged in political activity from 1896, associating itself with no major parties but supporting individual congressman for specific legislation favorable to the labor. As we have seen, the labor movement in America couldn't have developed into a political movement as a result of the labor union activity of the A.F.L. based on pure trade unionism. But, on the other hand, for that reason, the labor movement in America could have constantly developed on'a secure basis without radical innovations. Since it is difficult to synthesize because of the complexity and diversity of the labor union movement, the inter-disciplinary study of related sciences is required, as I have already mentioned. But as a student of history, I have examined the labor unions in those various characters from.he historical point of view. That is, I have examined the basic ideas and the labor policy of the A.F.L. centering around its trade unionism which became the main stream of American labor movement since the end of 19th century, and how this trade unionism had been reflected on the actual activity of labor unions during the first ten years of the A.F.L. In addition, the study of American labor may be illuminating to our labor union activity in Korea if we take account of our peculiarities. In short, this historical approach can never be a complete study of the American labor unions, as long as the labors have concern in all the aspects of society. I would like to emphasize that the study of labor unions must be done from political, economical, and social point of views. In this respect, this thesis has its own limit and special studies in this field are expected.