Long Cycles in Strike Activity: an

Empirical Investigation
Ernesto Screpanti*

INTRODUCTION

The long period of economic and social disease that began in the early 70s
stands in striking contrast to the golden age of the 50s and the 60s. Many
economists are now struck with the observation that the same long run
succession of good and bad times has occurred more or less regularly four
times in the last two centuries: the Industrial Revolution (1790-1820), the
Restoration (1820-1850), the Age of Capital (1850-1870), the first Great
Depression (1870-1895), the Belle Epoque (1895-1915), the second Great
Depression (1920-1936), the Golden Age (1950-1970), the Leaden Years
(197C^?). Such an impressive alternation of splendid and gloomy epochs
tallies quite well with the results of much economic research on the ex-
istence of Kondratieff cycles. These are waves in the growth rates of in-
dustrial output, consisting of a long phase of rapid growth, lasting 20-30
years, followed by an equally long phase of stagnation.' A periodisation of
long cycles which would be accepted by the majority of students (see Bies-
haar and Kleinknecht, 1983) is the following:

TABLE 1

Phases of Kondratieff Cycles

Cycle upturns downturns
1st Kondratieff 1789/92 1810/17
ca.1790-1848
2nd Kondratieff 1844/51 1866/75
ca. 184&-1894
3rd Kondratieff 1892/96 1913/20
ca. 18SM-1945
4th Kondratieff 1939/48 1967/74
ca. 1945-?

A problem that has attracted the interest of sodal researchers is whether

long cycles involve other aspects of life besides the economic one. In par-
* University of Trento.
100 British Journal of Iruiustrial Relations
ticular, some attention has been paid to the evolution of class relationship>s:
is there a tendency of class conflict to move in phase with Kondratieff cycles?
Kondratieff (1979) himself observed that major social upheavals tended to
occur in the upswings of iong cycles in the nineteenth century. After the
second Worid War, the same theme was taken up by Duniop (1948),
Hobsbawm (1964) and Imbert (1959), who, in an effort to support their
theses with historical data, posed the problem correctly and elucidated the
empirical and theoretical difficulties implied in its study. More recently,
various authors have revived interest in the phenomenon (Bouvier, 1964,
Phelps Brown, 1975, Gattei, 1981, Cronin, 1979, 1979b, 1980, Gordon,
Edwards and Reich, 1982, Mandel, 1980, Screpanti, 1984), No one,
however, has succeeded in producing evidence capable of satisfying the
agnostic student. Nor has there been any clarification of the nature of the
relationship between Kondratieff cycles and the evolution of class conflict.
One reason for this is that the notion of 'class struggle', as well as of
related concepts like 'intensification of ciass stmggie', 'social explosion', and
'fundamental unrest', are difficult to handle in empirical research; for they
are qualitive concepts, such that any index meant to measure their
manifestations wili aiways be somewhat arbitrary. Does, for exampie,
Dunlop's use of union membership adequately measure 'fundamental
unrest'? On the other hand, the unwillingness to use any quantitative index
at all expKjses the analysis to theriskof producing unfalsifiable or ambiguous
results. No doubt a great part of the discordant results mentioned above,
stems from problems of this kind. To these must be added the problem of
choosing the countries and the historical periods to be investigated; for, in
principle, it is possible that different theses hold tme in different countries
and in different periods.
In the present paper, the intensity of class struggle wili be measured by
three dimensions of strike activity: frequency of strikes, F; thousands of
strikers involved in strikes, S; and thousands of working-days lost in strike
activity, L,'^ Put simply, it is claimed here that any changes occurring in the
'qualitative' nature of ciass struggle shouid also manifest themselves in the
intensity of strike waves. As far as I know, the only systematic studies of the
relationship between strike activity and Kondratieff cycies are those of
Cronin (1979, 1979b), The main reason for this scarcity of research is
undoubtediy that 'reiiabie' data on strike activity in major capitaiist
countries have been gathered oniy since the 1 8 ^ ; a time series which is not
ionger than a hundred years is too short for investigating cycies that are not
shorter than haif a century. To overcome this difficuity it has been necessary
here to lengthen the time series by making use of unofficial data. Hius, with
some series of frequency starting in the 186O's it has been p>ossibie to
embrace an historicai period containing three peaks of the long cycle. Of
course, none of the ionger series are intemally as homogeneous as those
based on only official data; nor are unofficial data likely to be as reliable as
official ones. This could distort the analysis that follows, especially when
secular trend curves arefittedthrough the data, or when subperiods of a time
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 101
profile are compared. However, the methods that have been applied have
been chosen and handled with a view to minimising such difficulties;
furthermore, whenever possible, data have been supplemented and correc-
ted by historical knowledge.
Long cycles are an international phenomenon. They manifest themselves
in a wave-like, broadly synchronous movement of such aggregates as real
output, price levels, interest rates, and by such world-wide aggregates as
world trade and industrial output. Therefore, the analysis must be extended
to a consistent group of nations. Fortunately it is recognised that the world
engine of long cycles is constituted by the most advanced capitalist
countries. Thus, the analysis may be limited to a significant but not too
ample set of countries. Here five have been chosen; the USA, France,
Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. It is supposed that any macro-
scopic event affecting simultaneously the economic and social evolution of
these countries will most probably be a common phenomenon of alt the core
capitalist countries and will be capable of reverberating at a world-wide
level.

SECTION 1

The initial examination ofthe long period evolution of strike activity is based
on a simple perusal of the broad data. At afirstglance it looks as if four kinds
of movements are present in one or other of the various series. Thefirstis a
cyclical motion with a mean period of ten years. The second is a secularly
increasing trend. These are of no interest to the present study. The third
movement is one that exhibits a central-peak pattern; it reduces to the
exceptionally high levels reached by the series in the years around the firet
World War and may be explained by the high intensity class war reached in
that period throughout the world, but especially in Europe, where it created
revolutionary situations.
Of most interest to this study is the fourth movement: a pattern consisting
of a long cycle with a half century period, whose peaks, (1869-75,1910-20,
1968-74) coincide with those of Kondratieff cycles. The three Kondratieff
peaks are present in all the series long enough to contain them (frequency in
France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the number of strikers in
France), while the last two are present in all the shorter series. In some
countries, however, there are other exceptionally high peaks, so that, at first
sight, it seems difficult to distinguish a regular cyclical movement.
In order to bring any long cycle pattem to light it is necessary to find a
theoretical criterion and a statistical procedure capable of isolating the
peaks that are related to Kondratieff cyclesfromthe others. The theoretical
criterion is easily found. Many of the major peaks in strike activity are
caused by economic, sodal and political factors that are specific to particular
countries. So it is, for example, with the peaks occuring in 1880—^1,1893
and 1936 in FrMice; in 1954-55 in Germany; in 1885,1901—02 and 1%3 in
102 British Journal of Industrial Relations
Italy; in 1889-90 and 1926 in the United Kingdom; and in 1937 and 1946 in
the United States. That they are country-specific is reflected in the fact that
they are not synchronised throughout the five countries. On the contrary,
the peaks that exhibit a long cycle pattern, if they are related to the Kondratieff
cycle, must be synchronised; for the long economic cycle is an intemational
phenomenon whose tuming pioints historically coincide in all the five
countries considered. A statistical procedure suitable for ascertaining the
existence of this characteristic of strike activity is 'principal components
analysis'. This reduces a set of variates that are supposed to be correlated
into a smaller number of new variates, called 'principal components' that
account for the correlations. Principal components are calculated as the best
linear combinations of the original variates; best in the sense that the chosen
combinations would account for more of the variance in the data as a whole
than any other linear combination. Thus, thefirstprindpal component is the
single best summary of any relationships exhibited in the data; the second
component accounts for the most residual variance after the effect of the first
component is removed, and so on. Therefore, if a long cycle pattern is at
work in the various series, it must show itself in one or other of their
principal components. The peaks in strike activity that are ascribable to the
long cycle movement should be brought to light, while those ascribable to
country-specificity should be smoothed away.
Principal components analysis has been separately applied to the three
sets of variates: F=(Fi), S=(Si), L=(Li); where i=l,...,5 are the five
countries. As the different variates contained in any single set are all
measured on the same scale and have variances of similar magnitude,
principal component analysis may be used quite appropriately.
The most outstanding results of the analysis are as follows. In all three
sets, most of the variance is accounted for by only two components: 86 per
cent of the variance of F, 70 per cent of that of S, and 54 per cent of that of L.
Further, thefirstcomponent accounts for about two thirds of the F variance,
a half of that of S, and more than a quarter of that of L. If a long cycle exists
as a common feature of the five countries it should show itself in the first
component. Moreover, if it is common to the three sets of variates, it should
manifest in a common pattern of the first conqwnents of the different sets.
And this is predsely what happens. To illustrate this, the scores^ of the three
first components have been plotted in figure 1, together with their five-year

Before evaluating figure 1, two facts must be taken into account. Firet,
the German, Italian and British data up to 1880, and those of France up
to 1889, are less reliable than the later data and are very likely to under-
estimate the tme extent of strike activity. Cronin (1984), for example,
multiplies Bevan's data by two in an attempt to make them comparable
with the offidal data. Therefore, the reader should realise that the peak in
strike activity occurring in the late 186O's-early 187O's is in reality higher
than that shown infigtireI. Secondly, there are no data for Italy in 1924-
48 and Germany in 1933-48. Strike activity of course was very low in
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 103

FIGURE )

2, Kondr 3, Kondr 4, Kondr

downturn downturn downturn

I LJJ 1 I I I I ; I I 1 11 i
1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

these countries at those times. But principal components anaiysis cannot

take into account this fact; worse, it implicitly estimates missing data in a
country as averages of those available for the same period in other count-
ries. This explains the high peaks reached by the first components in
1936-37 and in the late 4O's. The reader should keep in mind that such
peaks are not a general phenomenon, but reflect only French and Amer-
ican events.
With these provisos in mind figure 1 can be correctly interpreted. As
expected, the three firet components aii exhibit a trend pius a iong cycle
pattem. The peaks of the cycles occur in the late i860's-early 187O's, in the
early 191O's-early 192O's, and in the late 196O's-eariy 197O's; this yields a
peak-to-peak period of half a century. Of the three components the most
significant ose is that relating to strike frequency, because it is for strike
frequency that we have the longest time series.
In fact 55 pet cent of the French frequency variance, 53 per cent of the
104 British Joumal of Industrial Relations
German, 98 pier cent of the Italian, 69 per cent of the British, and 66 per cent
of the American are explained by the trend-plus-long-cycle pattern. A
confirmation that such a pattern is a general phenomenon can be obtained
by observing that the component coefficients are approximately the same for
all thefivecountries (0.22,0.21,0.29,0.24,0.24).
Thefirstcomponents ofthe other two indicators also reveal a trend-plus-
long-cycle pattern, but they are less significant than that for frequency, the S
and L series being shorter. In fact, the first long cycle peak emerging in the
number of strikers and days lost embodies only French data. Yet the
percentage of overall variance explained by the first components remains
high for both the series of strikers and days lost. The long cycle pattem
shown by the two first components still reveals a general characteristic.
The second components embody a central peak pattem (with a residual of
the long cycle's). TTiey would exhibit, if drawn, three trendless profiles with
a very high p>eak in thefirsthalf ofthe 192O's. To interpret this component, it
must be observed that, though accounting also for French and Italian post
World War I events as well as for the British general strike of 1926, it loads
heavily on Germany in all the three sets (0.51 in frequency, 0.87 in strikers,
0.77 in days lost). Now it is well known that class struggle reached its highest
levels in Germany precisely in that period, during which 'the closest
approximation to a proletarian revolution that has yet occurred in an
advanced industrial country' (Moore, 1978, 120) took place. This fact is
strongly reflected in the second component for the strikers series.
Returning to the first component, in order to appredate the relevance of
the long cycle pattem it may be convenient to separate it from the trend.
This could not be done directly by principal components analysis due to the
shortness of the series. But now it can be done very simply by taking the
differences of the moving averages of the first component (of frequency)
from its trend. The result is shown in graph A infigure2, where also a good
long cycle indicator"* is drawn (as graph B). The coinddence of the major
pezks ofthe two graphs is evident.
In conclusion prindpal component analysis seems to support the idea that
a long mn cyclical motion in strike activity has been at work in all the
countries considered with the same p>eriodicity and phasing as the Kon-
dratieff cycle.

SECTION II

In an important comparative study of strike activity in capitalist countries

Forcheimer (1948) spieaks, in passing, of a 'big international strike wave' with
reference to the one that occurred around the first World War. TTiis is an
interesting concept which requires some elaboration for a study like the
present one. It defines strike waves that make themselves conspicuous in
terms of acuteness, extension and duration. Acuteness, for they reveal sodal
explosions in which strike activity reaches very high pieaks; extension for
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 105

FIGURE 2

-1.50 I I I j 1 1 I \ I I I
1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970

they take place simultaneously in a very large international field; duration,

for they can last several years, certainly more than the one or two years
duration of a normal strike wave.^ Forcheimer wrote his article in 1948 and
did not make use of the data for the years preceding the 189O's. Thus, he
could not have noticed that the big wave of 1910-20 was not as serendipitous
a leap as it seemed. Indeed, the three major peaks in strike activity brought
to light by principal components analysis possess all the characteristics of a
big intemational strike wave. Moreover, it appears that the oniy strike
waves sharing such characteristics are these three.
To ascertain the vaiidity of this observation, it is necessary to be able to
measure and compare acuteness, extension and duration of strike waves.
Some synthetic indices have been devised with this end in mind. They are
briefly presented in this paragraph. The details of their constmction,
together with some comments on theirflawsand virtues, can be found in the
Appendix. Two sets of indices of acuteness have been obtained by
aggregating in two different ways the deviations of the series with respiect to
their trends or their moving averages. The former criterion follows a
commonly used measure of workers militancy (see Purdy and Zis, 1974,55),
whereas the latter is derived from a measure of the acuteness of strike waves
proposed by Shorter and Tilly (1974,106-107). To capture the intemational
asp)ect of strike activity, the indices have been aggregated over the five
countries. Then two indices of geographical extension have been obtained
106 British Jourrud of Industrial Relations
by simply averaging, overfive,the number of countries with a positive index
of acuteness.
But a further step toward aggregation is necessary. A good index of the
intensity of class conflict should combine both the measure of acuteness and
that of extension. When workers are getting very angry, claims wil! tend to
overcome their immediate and local interests, while targets will tend to
assume a general anticapitalistic content. As a consequence, not only will the
stmggle become very acute in any country, but will also tend to spill over the
national boundaries. This tendency may also be due to a sort of epidemic
effect activated by the disease acuteness. Finally, it also happens that, when
the production of stmggle leaderships tends to switch in favour of radical (and
therefore, usually, internationalist) vanguards the efforts toward intema-
tional liaisons increase. Be that as it may, two aggregate indices of intensity,
II, I2, have been devised; they are the products of those measuring acuteness
and extension. Figures 3 and 4 present the graphs of Ii and I2: the 'clou du
spectacle'.

FIGURE 3

h 0

-1
1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980
-2

FIGURE 4

_2L 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Table 2 shows the average intensities calculated over different phases of the
Kondratieff cycles.^ A perusal of table 2 suggests the following inference: the
intensity of class confiict tends to vary procycUcally with Kondratieff cycles,
increasing during upswings and decreasing diaing downswings.
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 107

TABLE 2

Average Intensities in Kondratieff Cycle Phases

Years 1869-75 1876-95 1896-909 *I910-20 1921-38 1945-67 1968-74 1974-8.
Phases D i T D i t D ]_
I, 0,23 -0.01 -0.11 0.75 -0,36 -0.12 0.68 -0*26
h 0,39 0.07 0.18 0.80 -0,21 -0.03 0.32 -0.27
D = Downturns, J, = Downswings, \ = Upswings
* Excluded war years

In fact table 2 shows that the intensity of class struggle is, on average, lower
in any Kondratieff downswings than in the preceding and the subsequent
upswings. Notice that, with the exception of Ii in the period 1876-1895, the
averages of both Ij and I2 show variations in the direction of the arrows
(illustrating the ups and downs of the long cycle). Furthermore table 2 and
figures 3 and 4 show that the average intensities are higher in any downtum
than in the preceding upswings and the subsequent downswings. This
suggests another important proposition: three big international strike waves
occurred in correspondence to the three downturns ofthe Kondratieff cycles,
1869-75, 1910-20, 1968-74. These strike waves reach, in terms of both Ii
and I2, higher values than any other; they are also the most acute, while,
geographically, they are among the most extensive.
As for duration, it can be assessed by observing the succession of dots^ in
figure 4, It is apparent that, with the exception of what happened in 1885-
91,^ the only intemational strike waves showing a duration longer than two
years are those occurring in the three downturns ofthe long cycle.
The three intemational strike waves which occurred in 1869-75,1910-20,
1968-74 outstrip all the others in acuteness, extension and duration, and
they are the only ones to possess in a high degree all the three characteristics.
Therefore, also considering that the probability of having be dazzled by a
random phenomenon is extremely low,' it may be concluded that a long
cycle explanation of the observed facts tums up as very plausible.

SECTION III

What happened in the capitalist world during the years 1910-20 and 1968-74
is well known. The big intemational strike wave of 1869-75 is less known,
however, either because the lapse of time may have removed gloomy
memories, or because the events of the Paris Commune may have obscured
the other 'minor' ones. Therefore, it might be useful to dwell upon such
events to convince the reader that they are part of a major proletarian
insurgency which is truly comparable in acuteness, extension and duration
with the other two explosions.
The first foreshadowings of the coming evente seem to have appeared
108 British Journal of Indtistrial Relations
already in 1865, when an 'infection of strikes' (Marx, 1865) spread all over
Europe. In 1866 some bloody explosions of social strife occurred in the
United Kingdom, where a wave of riots and workers demonstrations in
London got out of hand (Tilly, 1%9, 24); in Italy, where a republican
insurrection of some 30-40 thousand workers and peasants in Palermo
caused the death of thousands of men among the workers and 200 among the
soldiers (Del Carria, 1979,1, 105-39); in Germany, where riotings against
conscription and military presence broke out in Pmssia and other parts of
the country (Tilly, Tilly and Tilly, 1975,311).
Subsequently 'the great exdtement' (Cole, 1948) burst forth in the United
Kingdom throughout the years 1867-75, when a great strike movement,
mainly aiming at union recognition and the nine hour working-day, involved
workers of all trades in mass meetings and demonstrations and produced a
series of great strikes. Most important were those of buiiding workers,
initially on the North-east coast (1867), then over the whole country (1869-
70), andfinallyin London (1872-73); engineers in South Wales, North-east
coast (1869-71), and other parts of the country (1872-73), textile workers in
Oidham (1870); seamen in all the major ports (1871-72); miners in South
Wales (1871), Lancashire and Durham (1874); and agricultural workers in
many parts of the country (1871). In 1868 the TUC was born, and
throughout the period the union movement grew very rapidly under the
pressure of the rank andfile,extending its influence to all the components of
the working class, including unskilled and agricultural workers (Cole, 1948,
183-223).
In Italy the uprising took more disruptive and chaotic forms. In 1868 the
first great national strike, mainly led by left wing republicans, hit the major
industrial dties, esp)ecially Bologna, Turin, Leghom, Milan, Pistoia.
Between December 1868 and Febmary 1869 the 'Macinato Revolt' broke
out in the countryside, involving agricultural workers, peasants, artisans and
millers, and provoked many bloody episodes, hke assaults on munidpal
buildings, armed occupations of some towns, clashes with the piolice, the
army and the National Guard, that caused (according to official sources) 275
deaths, 1,099 injured, 3,788 arrests. Other violent agricultural strikes took
place in Lombardy in 1871; and harsh agricultural and industrial strikes
occurred in Emilia-Romagna, Lombardy and Turin during 1872, when some
workers were killed and others injured during clashes with the police. In
1874 vehement strikes andriotingswere led by left wing republicans in more
than thirty cities; while armed insurrections were attempted by anarchists in
various regions, espedally in Central Italy. Scattered armed clashes with the
police and the army continued to take place throughout 1876-77 (Del
Carria, 1979,1,141-79).
In Germany outbursts of labour violence occurred in many parts of the
country during 1869-70, when 'die machtige Streikwelle' (Machtan, 1983)
began with some strikes of bricklayers in Berlin, textile workers in Berlin
and Forst, miners in Waldenburg and Zwickau, carpenters in Hamburg. In
1871-72 important strikes involved metal workers in Chemnitz; miners in
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 109
the Ruhr, Oberechlesien, and Oberkirchen; engineers in Numberg and
Berlin; textile workers in Brandenburg; bricklayers, carpenters and shoe-
makers in Berlin. In 1873-74 the strike movement became more extensive
and mobilised workers of all trades in the major cities. In 1872 violent
clashes with the police broke out in Berlin; in 1873 massive bloody riots
occurred in many places, particularly in Frankfurt-am-Main; in 1874 serious
disturbances, fighting with the police, assaults and destructions of prisons
were provoked by agricultural workers in East Prussia (Enzensberger, 1973,
II, 66-76; Steglich, 1960,269-79).
In France it all began in 1867-68 with some strikes of coppersmiths and
tailors in Paris; textile workers in Vienne, Bourgoin, Bourg-les-Valence,
Bas-Dauphine; metalworkers in Macon, Vienne, Grenoble; miners in
Montceau-les-Mines and La Mure. In 1869 miners struck in Loire, Carmaux
and Aubin; textile workers in Rouen and Champagne d'Elbeuf. In Saint-
Etienne and Aubin clashes between strikers and the army caused twenty
seven deaths and twenty nine injured. In 1870 the strike movement involved
a great number of trades and spread all over the country. Then in 1870-71
the well known events took place that led to the Paris Commune. Less well
known are the strong responses in Lyon and Marseille and the similar but
minor rebellions that broke out in Toulouse, Limoges, Les Creusot and
Saint-Etienne. After the defeat of the Commune the strike movement
underwent a short ebb, but it revived intensely in 1872 with harsh strikes and
riots, like those of the miners in the North and Pas-de-Calais. Only after
Dufaure's antisocialist law and the piolitical trials of 1873 did the movement
die out (Bron, 1973,1,180-90,236-38).
In the USA a strike wave with violent demonstrations and mass meetings
occurred in 1872-75. In 1872 great strikes of bricklayers, engineers and cigar
makers mobilised in New York about 100,000 workers and lasted three
months. Again in New York serious disturbances and clashes with the police
were provoked by unemployed people. In 1873 the hard and bitterly fought
strikes in the textile industry of Fall River began. The activity of the Molly
Maguires in Pennsylvania culminated in the years 187S-75. Of this at least
the riots and clashes with Militia occurring during the harsh and long strikes
of December 1874-June 1875 must be remembered. But the most bloody
explosion took place in 1877 with the railway strikes. TTiese strikes, led by
radical and socialist leaders, spread all over the country gaining the active
support of many other trades and unemployed people. Hundreds of men
were killed during armed clashes with the police, vigilantes. Militia and the
army, invasions of stores and arms depots, bombarding of railway depots
and wagons. The most bloody episodes occurred in Martinsburg, Baltimore,
Pittsburg, New York, Chicago and the Pennsylvania state (Adamic, 1934,
19-34; Commons, 1935, II, 181-85).
In conclusion, it should be apparent now that the scarce and scarcely
reliable strike data available for that period do not do justice to the high
intensity of class struggle during the big international strike wave of 1867-
110 British Journal of Industrial Relations
Returning to the main argument, there is another phenomenon that
deserves to be brought to light. It may be observed, fromfigures3 and 4, that
any one of the three outstanding international strike waves is followed by a
profound trough. These troughs possess the opposite characteristic to those
of the big strike waves, namely, a very low level of acuteness. And they are
very extensive and long lasting. They reveal a sort of big reflux in workers'
struggles which may have been a result of the sharp and severe defeats with
which big international strike waves have usually been closed. A workers
defeat, no matter how it is reached, may be consolidated by a severe
economic crisis, with the consequences this has on the levels of employment,
wage rate and other elements of workers welfare and self-confidence. In fact
the big refluxes coincide in any country with the periods of economic
hardship that open the depression phases of Kondratieff cycles.
Furthermore, it may also be observed that around five to ten years after
the end of the big intemational strike waves, there are strong revivals of
strike activity in almost all the countries (the exceptions are represented by
the fascist denouements). The revivals, however, do not last very long, nor
do they occur simultaneously in ail countries, being usually triggered off by
specific economic and political conditions. The revival phenomena could be
explained as forms of eruption ofthe repressed rage brought about by eariier
defeats and by the subsequent accumulation of economic and political
grievances. Examples of these revivals are: 1880 in France, 1885 in Italy,
1886 in the USA; and again 1926 in the UK, 1930 in France, 1933 in the
USA. Afterwards class conflict resumes its normal course of ups and downs.
So long as the depression phases of the Kondratieff cycle continue, however,
the downs show prevalence over the ups in terms of duration; whiie the ups
score very high in terms of acuteness.

CONCLUSIONS

It may be useful to conclude this essay by confronting its results with some
views put forward by other authors. A first hypothesis was suggested by
Kondratieff himself: class stmggle tends to intensify during long upswings
because of increasing social tension provoked by rapid economic growth. A
similar thesis has been put forward by Perrot (1974) with regard to strike
activity. A second thesis is a variant of the first and suggests that dass
struggle tends to intensify at the peaks of long cycles. The idea is that the
tension provoked by growth will be suppressed but accumulated for a long
time; it will then break out pseriodically either as a direct consequence of
strong compression, as in a Diesel engine, or in response to an external
spark, as in a normal combustion engine (Hobsbawm, 1964). Both Cronin
(1979b) and Screpanti (1984) suggest that relative deprivation accoimts for
the latent tension accumulated during upswings, and make use of cata-
strophe theory and/or a theory of generational change to explain the
explosions. A third view was put forward by Duniop, who, observing that
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 111
three periods of 'fiindamental unrest' occurred in the USA immediately
after three major depressions, suggested that 'after prolonged periods of
high unemployment [. . .] and after years of downward pressure on wages
exerted by price declines, labor organizations emerge which are apt to be
particularly critical of the fundamental tenets of the society and the
economy' (Dunlop, 1948,192). A variant of this hyopthesis was proposed by
Imbert (1959), namely that major upheavals occurred during depression
phases as a response to governments' reactionary policies that prevail in
these periods.
Now confront the results of the present analysis. Kondratieff s and
Perrot's view, that class struggle tends to intensify during long upswings
seems to be confirmed, as both of the indices of intensity reach, in any
upswing, higher values than those prevailing in the preceding and the
subsequent downswings. However, it cannot properly be said that prosper-
ity is conducive to major upheavals or revolutions, as Kondratieff suggested.
In fact, no such disruptive events have occurred during upswings. The
intensification of class conflict in prosperity phases never reaches extremely
high levels; rather, it seems to follow a regular course, as if the script of the
industrial relations comedy would have required workers, in order to gain
the welfare improvements to which they feel prosperity entitles them, to
play a moderate periodic intensification of strike activity through the
altemative vicissitudes of the shorter cycles. It is possible that the sisyphian
fmstration remains latent and cumulates for a long time, until eventually it
bursts out. This could happen at the end of the upswings; and it seems
sensible to believe that precisely these explosions put an end to the
prosperity phases.
Indeed, a more striking confirmation is obtained by the second
hypothesis, the one according to which major upheavals tend to explode
around the upper tuming points of the long cycles. This is the main result of
the present study; here it is only necessary to observe that this is precisely the
case in which data on strike activity do not do justice to the richness of
historical events occurring during the big international strike waves. Our
two indices of intensity do not reveal much of the quaUtative aspects of the
jumps in class stmggle that occurred in those three periods; the revolution-
ary moods that spread among the labouring masses; the ease with which
economic targets tended to transmute into political ones; the emergence of
the rank and file as a political protagonist and its ability to assume a more
active role in the process of deciding forms and contents of the struggles; the
crowding out of old party and union leadership by new vanguard groups; and
still other things. A more profound investigation might show that the three
big intemational strike waves occurring in 186^75,1910-20,1968-74, are
only a feeble shadow of historical events that constitute three milestones in
the evolution ofthe modem working class.
As to the third hypothesis, the one holding that Kondratieff downswings
are periods of 'fundamental unrest', it tums out that it does not receive a
clear-cut quantitative validation. Long depression periods in fact show, on
112 British Journal of Indtistrial Relations
average, the lowest levels of strike intensity. The solefindingsin favour of
Dunlop's conjecture are those concerning the fact that some of the most
intense strike waves, besides the three big intemational strike waves,
occurred during downswings: 1880-83, 1930, 1936 in France; 1928 in
Germany; 1885, 1891-93 in Italy; 1889-SK), 1926 in the UK; 1891-92,1933,
1937 in the USA. Most of these waves appear to be related to political or
economic triggering factors that are specific to the single countries.
However, a further inspection would reveal that many of them share the
common nature of being 'revival' upheavals, bursting forth after the periods
of struggle refluxes following the big international strike waves. At any rate
it comes to light that downswings are periods in which class struggle evolves
in a very irregular form, with high, short and scattered peaks of intensity
emerging over a floor of depressed moods: a characteristic that may be
accounted for by the defensive nature of strike activity in these periods and
by its tendency to erupt at times in short-lived, wrathful blowbacks.
Strikingly enough, all three, seemingly contrasting, hypotheses appear to
receive some sort of confirmation from empirical evidence. In reality,
however, only one of them, the second, is fully vahdated; an important
finding that facilitates the aim of putting the others in perspective and of
integrating them in a more general view capable of accd'unting for the overall
relationship existing between long economic cycles and the evolution of
class struggle. It remains, of course, to find a full-fledged theoretical
explanation of such a relationship; but this aim is out of the scope of the
present study.^^
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 113

2l
„ so i (^ a^ *
.-t f*^ (Tl (N
•s

1 J

3I

I
Si

I' si
114 British Journal of Industrial Relations

aCo OCK aoo ttn 4

cyrnc05

S
eoc cOc lOi ton «K oO? ao« «O9 b
l/1^ooooopfsoQOPVo^n^^^^^T^Vf*^^^^

^ 00

iI
I

S Y 00'-*tSV^»/^OOQO'*0'r^*OV^OO*or^*iO'^'^**'^<0<^0»~<C^OO^*
2 NJ ( ^ F'*- ^ • ^ •t-^ C>1 O> V^ O »O "-H t ^ ^ ^ ^ 00 C^ 00 ^ '•^ t ^ f*^ 00 l ^ rTj
2 r*^ro(S'-H^w^00'—•CT'f^^^r^'-^O'-^cJ t-HT—<u-ir~-^QO^O

o
^ fl 00 trt ^ ^ P4 T**

J2
'B
55

ro
w 1^^ QQ g ^ QQ gQ QQ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^pt ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ :^^ ^ ^ Qh ( ^ ^ ^ %^y O^ ^ ^ ^ ^ C^ w^ ^ ^ ^ ^
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 115

) 1—' r') S w^ (

I ^ - fvi O <
> fn r ^ «S <

^^-liCKxpmmMr^

r3 2 m f^ S MS

! (*> r*% Qi ON trj I

I *-H CO --H 00
5 « »n 00 m
N ^ 00 <n 00

ioor^SS<n(^*«^f^^{
116 British Journal of Industrial Relations

0 ^& ^^ ^ fs ^p r ^ ^ ^ H ^ IO ^p ^t ro

^ 00 IO O ^

I <3

I
i§ll^il<

I
r r o r o fO CM CM

s
s
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 117

APPENDIX

The Construction of Indices

The (national) indices of acuteness are calculated as follows:

'i + ASi 4- ALi _ dFj 4- dSj 4-

where
= Xj ~ Xi ,Y_ logXi-Xi

X,. = I f ^ logXi,

X =F,S,L,
X = a trend value,
t = years,
i = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 = France, Gennany, Italy, UK, USA,
Oxi = standard deviation of (Xi - Xi).
Omxi = standard deviation of (logXi — Xi).

In the case of missing d a t a , only the average of the available ones is used to
calculate t h e indices. This is the oniy feasible procedure in the present case.
O n the o t h e r h a n d , it could b e thought of as a m e t h o d of implicity estimating
missing d a t a as averages of the available o n e s , which seems the most neutral
procedure.
The formulae of the aggregate indices are:

In this case the way of dealing with missing data deserves a little caution;
for, provided it makes sense to suppose, e.g., a high (or low) Lj in one
country when Fj and Sj are high (or low) in that same country, in general, it
does not seem likewise sensible to suppose high (or low) An and A2i in one
country when they are high (or low) in others. At any rate the procedure of
ignoring missing data (i.e. the 'neutral' method of implicity estimating them)
has been preserved in the cases where it did not appear to distort the facts
substantially, or where no clearcut and uncontroversial conjecture on the
acuteness of class conflict could be obtained from historical knowledge.
However, this could not be the case in the period 1924-48. Data are lacking
in 1924-48 for Italy, in 1933-48 for Gennany and in 1935M5 for France.
Manifest class conflict was not very acute in any of these countries during
those years. And it would be a serious deformation of reality to suppose, e.g.
high Aii's and A2i's in Italy and Gennany during 1936-37, when they were
high in France and the USA. The same problem arose in prindpal
components analysis, where it could not be tackled but by appealing to the
reader's sensiblenss. Here, to cope with it, the procedure has been followed
118 British Journal of Industrial Relations
of entering a zero (in place of a missing Ay or A2i) into the averages over
which A] and A2 are calculated throughout the pyeriod 1924-48.
The formulae for the indices of extension are:
Et = nV5, E^ = n^/5. E l = 1 - Et, E2 = 1 - E^;
where
nt = number of countries with a positive A^,
n 2 = number of countries with a positive A2i.
The indices of intensity are calculated as follows:
II = A, E t
when Al, A2>0,

when Al, A2<0.

Notice that, as negative A] 's and A2's are measures of struggle 'mildness',
they must be multiplied by E7 and E^ to give Ij's and 12's that are
comparable with the positive ones.
By observingfigures3 and 4, it may be noticed that the graph of I2 shows a
flatter profiie than that of Ii. This is a consequence of calculating the A2i's in
relation to only a few years preceding the strike waves. Any strike wave is
measured only with reference to its sp>ecific and short mn historical context;
and this makes it impossible to use I2 in long mn inter-temporal compar-
isons. A more genuine profile is exhibited by the graph of Ii, which, in
measuring strike waves by means of differences with resprect to a secular
trend, makes inter-temporal comparisons more reliable. However, the
graph of II tends to flatten the pjeaks occurring at the beginning of the
p)eriod. Such a distorting effect may be accoimted for on the grounds of the
low coverage and reliability of the pre-1890 series.

SOURCES

France
1864-1889: Perrot (1974,1,51).
1890-1982: ASF.
Ll is lacking in the years 1864-1870 and 1936-1945; Fi and Sj in
1945; Fi also in 1982. The figure for Ej in 1968 is an estimate." Political
strikes, as well as those lasting less than one day, are included. Lockouts and
strikes in agriculture and public administration are excluded.

Germany
ia54-1880: Steglich (1960) and Kuczynski (1972, II, 98; III, 40).
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 119
1890-1898: CGGD.
1899-1932: SJdR,
1948-1982: SJBD,
F2 is lacking in the years 1881-1889 and 1933 onward; Sj in 1864-1889 and
1933-1948; Lj in 1864-1898 and 1933-1948,
Data for 1890 and 1891 are yearly averages. Since 1900 disputes lasting
less than one day are included only if more than 100 working-days are lost.

Italy
1864-1880: RP and SSAIA,
1881-1923: CLI,
1949-1982: ASL and ASI,
S3 and L3 are lacking in the years 1864-1878; all the three variates in
1924-1948,
Data for the years 1864-69 are yeariy averages: the total number of strikes
in the period 1860-69 is 132, Agricultural strikes are included since 1881 on.
Figures for the working-days lost in agriculture in the years 1904-05 are
estimates by Bordogna and Provasi (1979), Political strikes are excluded.
Strikes lasting less than one day are excluded up to 1954.

United Kingdom
1870-1879: Bevan (1880,37),
1888-1913 (only F4 and S4): RSL.
1914-1982 (aiso L4 in 1891-1913): ALS, BLSHA, BLSY, and AAS,
Bevan's data refer only to F4.
Included Ireland up to 1913, Northem Ireland since 1924, Political strikes
are excluded, but the general strike of 1926 is not. Lockouts are included.
Stoppages involving less than ten workers or lasting less than one day are
excluded, except when more than 100 working-days are lost.

United Slates
1880-1899: TCUS and HSUS,
1900-1981: HLS, SA, and MLR.
L5 begins in 1927.
Thefiguresfor F5 in the period 1906-15 and S5 in 1906-13 are estimates'^
by Griffin (1939). Lockouts are included. Disputes involving less than six
workers are excluded from S5. Those leasting less than a full day or shift are
excludedfromF5. The series are intermpted in 1981 because, 'due to budget
stringencies, collection of data on strikes involving fewer than 1,000 workers
was disconnected with December 1981' (MLR, April 1984,95).
120 British Joumal of Iruiustrial Relations

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

*) The author wishes to thank S. Casini, S. Leveghi and H. Schadee for their
assistance in elaborating data and for their many and valuable suggestions.
Also G. Gattei, M. Pugno, R. Richardson and G. Romagnoli deserve to be
thanked for their comments on an earlier draft. Of course the usual
disclaimers apply. On request the author will supply details on data and
calculations that, for brevity, could not be published here.

NOTES

1. The literature eoneeming the empirical evidence on long economic cycles is now
vast, though not conclusive. Here suffice it to refer to Van Dujin (1983), an
encyclopedic book on long cycles, containing among other things also abundant
and convincing evidence.
2. Often, in analyses of strike activity, the variates S and L are transformed into the
variates M=SIF and D=LIS, called respectively 'strikes magnitude' and
'duration'. Here this procedure has not been followed because it is thought that,
as the variates have anyway to undergo some artificial make-up due to statistical
elaboration, it is better to take them as bare as possible. However, for caution,
the overall analysis applied to F, S and L has also been applied to F, M and D. It
has been found that the two new variates did not bring any substantial
modification in the results obtained with the former.
3. In order to obtain a clearer graphical representation a logarithmic transforma-
tion, P'i(X), of the original factor scores, Pi(X), has been plotted:
P'i(X), = log (3 + P,(X) ) -1- h (X = F, S, L)
(h = 0,1,2).
4. This is given by the differences of the logarithms of UK consumer prices indices
(1870-1974) with respect to their trend.
5. Notice that here the terms 'acuteness', 'extension' and 'duration' are used in a
different sense than is usual in research in strike activity. In particular, the notion
of 'strike wave duration' (measured in terms of years in which a strike wave lasts)
must not be confiised with that of 'strike duration' (measured in terms of days lost
per striker, D=LIS).
6. In table 2 the years around the upper turning points have been isolated from the
upswings phases. To locate the precise years in which an upswing turns into a
downswing is an impossible task. On the other hand, the downtum years hold a
spedal position in the present analysis, as they contain the big intemational
strike waves. The spedal role played by the periods in which an economy passes
from rapid growth to depression has been recognised by some students
(Research Working Group, 1979; van Roon, 1983; Screpanti, 1984), who tend to
assign a spedfic theoretical function to such periods; so much as to periodise a
long cycle into three phases (instead of two or four): an upswing period, a
transition period, a downswing period.
7. A dot has been drawn along the absdssa of figure 4 in correspondence to any
year in which the number of countries with a positive index of acuteness, A^, is
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 121
at least 4 (3, if only 4 of the Aa's are available; 2 if only 3 are available). For the
reasons given in the Appendix, the unavailable A^'s of Italy and Germany in the
years 1935-38 are treated as negative.
8. There are doubts as to whether the strike waves of this period may be counted as
a big intemational strike wave. Most probably they are a statistical effect of the
increase in coverage and of the lacunae in the series available for that period. A
tentative inference from historical material would suggest that an international
strike wave may have occurred in that period only in the years 1885-86.
9. A runs test with a one-t{iil z-test has been applied to check the degree to which a
long cycle explanation of the time distribution of Ii and I2 may be accepted
against the null hypothesis that the distribution is random. The zcalculated for Ii
and I2 are respiectively -5.04 and -4.36; much lower than the Zo.05 = -1.64,
corresponding to a level of significance of 0.05. As a matter of fact the
probability of occurrence under the null hypothesis is much less than 0.00(X)3
(corresponding to a Z(caic.) = ~4) for both I, and I2.
10. It has been attempted by this author in another essay; see Screpanti (1984).
11. It has been estimated by applying to the figure of the preceding year a rate of
increase obtained as a geometric mean of the rates of increase of S| and Lj in the
same years (the correlation coefficient between Fi and Si is 0.56, that between Fj
and Ll 0.69). The figure obtained must be taken as a broad approximation of
only the order of magnitude of the real datum.
12. For the method of estimation see GrifHn (1939, 117-32). Official figures are
missing for F5 and S5 in 1906-13 and very incomplete for F5 in 1914-15.

REFERENCES
Adamic, L. (1934), Dynamite: The Story of Class Violence in America, Viking, New
York.
Bevan, G. P., (1880), 'The Strikes of the Past Ten Years', in Jourrml ofthe Royal
Statistical Society, March, 35-54.
Bieshaar, H. and Kleinknecht, A. (1983), 'Kondratieff Long Waves in Aggregate
Output? An Econometric Test', in Bianchi G., Bruckman, G. and Vasko, T.
(eds.) Background Material of the Conference on Long Waves, Depression and
Innovation: Implications for National and Regional Economic Policy, IRPET,
Florence, 239-278.
Bordogna, L. and Provasi, G. (1979), 'It movimento degli sdoperiin Italia', in Cella,
G. P., (ed.), IImovimento degliscioperinelXXsecolo, II Mulino, Bologna, 169-
304.
Bouvier, J. (1964), 'Mouvement ouvrier et conjonctures dconomiques', in Le
mouvement social, N. 48, July-Sept., 3-31.
Bron, J. (1973), Histoire du mouvement ouvrier frangais, 3 vols., Les Editions
ouvriSres, Paris.
Cole, G. D. H., (1948), A Short History ofthe British Working Class Movement,
Allen and Unwin, London.
Commons, J. R. et d. (1935), History of Labor in the United States, 4 vols.,
Macmillan, New York 1918-1935. Reprint: Kelly, New York 1966.
Cronin, J. E., (1979), 'The peculiar Pattem of British Strikes Since 1888', in The
Joumal of British Stiidies, Spring, 116-141.
122 British Journal of Industrial Relations
(1979b), Industrial Conflict in Modem Britain, Croom Helm, London.
(1980), 'Stages, Cycles and Insurgencies: The Economics of Unrest', in Hopkins,
T. K. and Wallerstein I., (eds), The Political Economy ofthe World-System, vol.
Ill, Sage, Beverly Hills, 101-118.
(1984), 'Streiks und gewerkschaftliche Organisationsfortschdtte: Gro^hritannien
un Kontinentateuropa 1870-1914', in Mommsen J. and HusungH.-G. (eds.), Auf
dem Wege zur Massengewerkschaft, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart.
De!Carria, R. (1979), Proletarisenzarivoluzione,5 vols., Savelli, Rome 1966-1979.
Dunlop, J. T. (1948), 'The Development of Labor Organization: A Theoretical
Framework', in Lester, R. A. and Shister, J., (eds.). Insights into Labor Issues,
Mactnillan, New York, 163-193.
Enzensberger, H. M. (1973), (ed.) Klassenbuch. Ein Lesebuch zu den Klassenkamp-
fen in Deutschland, 3 vois., Luchterhand Verlag, Darmstadt-Neuwied.
Forcheimer, K., (1948), 'Some Intemational Aspects of the Strike Movement', in
Bulletin ofthe Oxford University Institute of Statistics, N. 1, Jan., 9-31.
Gattei, G. (1981), 'Introduzione' to Kondratieff N. D., Icicli economid maggiori,
Capelh, Bologna, 7-29.
Gordon, D. M. Edwards, R. and Reich, M. (1982), Segmented Work, Divided
Workers, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Griffin, J. 1. (1939), Strikes: A Study in Quantitative Economics, Columbia Univ.
Press, New York. Reprint: AMS Press, New YcH-k 1968.
Hobshawm, E. J., (1964), Labouring Men, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London.
Imhert, G. (1959), Des mouvements de long durie Kondratieff, La Pens6e
Universitaire, Aix-en-Provence.
Kondratieff, N. D., (1979), 'The Long Wave in Economic Life', Review, II, 4,
Spring, 519-562. Original Russian edition in Voprosy kon'junktury, N. 1, 1925,
28-79.
Kuczynski, J. (1972), Die Geschichte der Lage derArbeiter unter dem Kapitalismus,
38 vois., Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1961-1972.
Machtan, L. (1983), Streiks infriihen deutsche Keiserreich, Campus, Frankfurt a.M.
Mandel, E. (1980), Long waves of Capitalist Development, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Marx, K. (1865), 'Letter to Engels, 20 May 1865', in Marx — Engels Werke, vol.
XXXI, Dietz Verlag, Berlin.
Moore, B. Jr. (1978), Injustice. The Social Bases of Obedience and Revolt, Sharpe,
New York.
Perrot, M. (1974), Les ouvriers en grives, 2 vols., Mouton, Paris.
Phelps Brown, H. (1975), 'A Non-Monetarist View of the Pay Explosion', in Three
Banks Review, N. 105, March, 3-24.
Purdy, D. L., and Zis, G., (1974), 'On the Concept and Measurement of Union
Militancy', in Laidler, D. and Purdy D. L., (eds.), Ir^ation and Labour Market,
Manchester, Utiiversity Press, Manchester.
Research Working Group on Cyclical Rhythms and Secular Trends (1979), 'Cyclical
Rhythms and Secular Trends of the Capitalist World-Economy:Some Ihremises,
Hyptotheses, and Questions', in Review, II, 4, S{Hing, 483-500.
Salvati, M. (1981), 'Cicio politico e onde lunghe: Note su Kalecki e Phelps Brown', in
Stato e Mercato, N. 1, Apr., 9-45.
Screpanti, E. (1984), 'Long Economic Cycles and Recurring Proletarian Insurgen-
cies', in/Jei-ww, VII, 3, Winter, 509-548.
Shalev, M. (1978), 'Lies, Damned Lies and Strike Statistics: The Measurement of
 Long Cycles in Strike Activity 123
Trend in Industrial Conflict', in Crouch, C. and Pizzomo, A. (eds.). The
Resurgence of Class Confiict in Western Europe since 1968, Macmiilan, London,
1-19.
Shorter, E. and Tilly, C. (1974), Strikes in France 1830-1968, Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge.
Steglich, W. (1960), 'Eine Streiktabeile fur Deutschiand, 1864 bis 1880', in
Jahrbuchfur Wirschaftgeschichte, Teii il, 235-283.
Tilly, C. (1969). 'Collective Violence in European Perspective', in Graham, H. D.
and Gurr, T. R. (eds.). Violence in America, Signet, New York, 4—42.
Tilly, C , Tilly, L. and Tiily, R. (1975), The Rebellious Century: 1830-1930,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Van Duijn, J. J. (1983), The Long Wave in Economic Life, Alien and Unwin,
London.
Van Roon, G. (1983) 'Cycles, Tuming Phases and Societal Structures: Historical
Perspective and Current Problems', Paper delivered at the Conference on Long
Waves, Maison des Sdences de l'homme, Paris, March.

OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS
France
ASF, Annuaire Statistique de la France, Paris, various years.

Genruiny
CGGD, Correspondenzblatt der Generalkommission der Gewerkschaften
Deutschiand, Berlin 1901-1902.
SJBD, Statistisches Jahrbuch fur die Bundesrepublik Deutschiand, Stutt-
gard, various years.
SJdR, Statistiches Jahrbuch fiir das deutsches Reich, Berlin, various years.

Italy
ASI, Anntmrio statistico italiano, Rome, various years.
ASL, Annuario di statistiche del lavoro, Rome, various years.
CLI, / cor^itti del lavoro in Italia nel decennio 1914-1923, Supplement N.
38 to the Bollettino del lavoro e della previdenza sociale, Rome 1924.
RP, Relazione presentata a S.E. il Ministro dell'lntemo nel mese di marzo
1879 dalla Comnussione d'Inchiesta sugli scioperi nominata col R.
Decreto 3 febbraio 1878, Rome 1885.
SSAIA, Statistica degli scioperi avventiti nelVIndustria e neWAgricoltura,
Rome 1892.

United Kingdom
AAS, Annual Abstract of Statistics, London, various years.
ALS, Abstract of Labotir Statistics, London 1893-1936.
BLSHA, British Labour Statistics: Historical Abstract, 1886-1968, London
1971.
BL5Y, British Labour Statistics Yearbook, 1969-1972, London 1974.
124 British Joumai of Industrial Relations
RSL, Reports on Strikes and Lockouts, in Parliamentary Papers, London
1888-1913.

United States
HLS, Handbook of Labor Statistics, Washington DC, various years.
HSUS, Historical Statistics of the United States; Colonial Times to 1970,
Washington DC, 1975.
MLR, Monthly Labor Review, Washington DC, various years.
SA, Statistical Abstract of the United States, Washington DC, various years.
TCUS, TerUh Census ofthe United States; Report on Strikes arul Lockouts, 2
vols,, Washington DC, 1880.