How did violent strikes hurt workers?

Answer 1

In the United States, strikes were an extremely useful tool for unions until about 1980. Strikes gained benefits for the workers and made the unions a strong political force. In 1976 Jimmy Carter was elected president. A sunset provision was established for a number of governmental boards and agencies that served no purpose. When Ronald Reagin was elected president in 1980, those boards and agencies expired. Small, non unionized steel mills using the oxygen process could produce steel for far less money than the large corporations using the bessemer convertors. Without the governmental regulations, strikes no longer worked in private enterprise. They still worked in government. Today, most union members are government employees. They make far more money than their counterparts in the same jobs in private enterprise. Strikes work where the government has a monopoly. They stopped working where deregulation and competition came in.

Answer 2

the riot and unions affected the labor unions because they had hundreds of workers were detained;some were beaten during interrogation and number of forced confession was obtained in the end ,eight anarchists were put on trial and seven were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder were hanged in November 1887,one committed suicide and three were later pardoned by Illinois governern peter altgeld.

Answer 3

A workers' strike is often the result of a failure in collective bargaining. Adding the word "violent" to the question almost is an answer itself. From a neutral point of view, a violent strike can mean personal injury to workers, management, police and the general population. A strike usually means a shrinkage of the workers' income & the loss of income and/or profits by the company involved. Often times in a lengthy strike, the lost wages and loss of income to the company under a workers strike cannot be made up for in whatever the new labor agreement that is reached between the two opposing parties. Another factor to consider is that the Government may become involved in settling a violent strike. This may or may not be beneficial to the other two parties as new Government regulations to settle violent strikes can lead to less freedom in collective bargaining.

Answer 4

Aroused fierce opposition from business people and gaurdians of law