Hi guys! Sorry this is very late! Here are some discussion questions.
1. Masson and Guimary discuss Pio de Cano's influence in the Pilipino community in Pacific Northwest and Alaska. Although he became a leader in the Pilipino Pacific Northwest Labourer Community, he was criticised for opposing unions and exploiting workers. What were some of the benefits and the damages he brought to the community?
2. Discuss the social, ethnic, cultural and 'mechanization' factors that inhibited the cannery workers from forming effective worker solidarity. Give suggestions on how to alleviate these.
3. Many Pilipino groups had difficult interrace relations until Virgil Duyungan and Aurelio Simon were assassinated. Would Pilipinos unite against other racial groups if they had not been asassinated?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletejessica :] said...
ReplyDelete2. First of all, the conditions of the canneries alone were bad enough to make the workers wish for a change. However, the conditions were so terrible that workers often were just struggling to not even earn a dollar, but just to stay out of debt, to stay clean and warm. When the little things in life such as purchasing toiletries or shoes to wear, or getting enough sleep are not available, often, the first things that come to ones mind is not to organize and to fight, but just to fight as an individual to survive.
Second, we see another major example of pitting these different ethnic groups of workers against each other. When the number of Japanese and Chinese workers declined, and new Pilipinos and Mexicans were brought in, the remaining Japanese and Chinese foremen resented the newcomers, who were thus pushed to the lowest pay level. This split between ethnic groups prevented an initial coalition to form. Not only was there interethnic conflicts, but there were even intraethnic conflicts, as even groups within the Pilipinos who were split depending on which region of the Philippines they came from stuck to themselves, and favoring promotions to foremen of workers within their own group.
Third party labor contractors such as de Cano also prevented unionization, as he frowned upon organization among his workers. The need to please the contractors/employers prevented the workers from being able to organize in this case. Those that wanted to organize, could not convince all others to do so as well.
The ethnic conflicts, and conflicts of the employers, and the lack of leaders to organize the unions were eventually somewhat solved by first, the decision of a few more Pilipinos each year to permanently settle in Alaska. Because workers often left Alaska at the end of each canning season, it was often difficult to organize, as everyone had two common goals during canning season--basic surival, and to earn money. The establishment of Pilipinos permanently in Alaska allowed for the establishment of union leaders. Basically, one major thing that the cannery workers needed, was some solid foundation or establishment upon which to organize on.
De Cano is a sly and shrewd contractor, who quickly learned the trick in managing the cannery business. He was aware that he would not always be guaranteed the manager position if he did not choose his men wisely, and therefore designated his own brother as his forement and hired only Pilipinos from his former hometown. This creates a bias and discrimination against other Pilipino communities, which probably provoked or increased the tension between interracial Pilipino communities. He furthermore attempted to undermine the Alaska salmon cannery union, again proving his strong discrimination against those who were not from his former hometown in Pilipino. Although a very successful contractor/businessman, he probably owed much of it to the exploitation of his workers.
ReplyDeleteI do, however, appreciate his sympathy to college students and his active role in fighting Pilipino immigrant rights. He believed that Pilipinos were worthy to receive an American education and deserve citizenship rights like an American. Despite his wrongdoings, he did shed light and hope to the future of Pilipino immigrant workers.
Although the shock of both Virgil Duyungan and Aurelio Simon being assassinated was enough to unite the factions within the union initially, it did splinter again only shortly afterwards (I think it said two months). Crisis is often something that groups can unite over, however, relying solely on the effect of crisis to unite people is not very effective. There were plenty of other factors that lead to the creation of factions within the union and those factors should have been overcome first. There were different cultural groups: the Visayans, Ilocanos, and Tagalogs. Language may have been an issue. Education was also an issue, especially with a large influx of well-educated Pilipino college students into the executive board of the union. As Jessica mentions, many of the workers were just fighting to survive. However, this shared experience of having to fight to survive, I think, is enough of a basis to organize people as a group. If we look at the example of slaves in the United States, the creation of the black radical tradition came out of a people's shared experience of oppression and slavery, the fight to survive. The specifics of how to unite the Pilipinos using this experience is something I'll leave for discussion, though, since it is still something to think about.
ReplyDelete2. One major and obvious "mechanization" that made unionization seem virtually impossible was type of work force the canneries required. The canneries can get anyone they want, the job being for "unskilled to semiskilled." And there were a ton of people trying to get work.
ReplyDeleteTo me, De Cano is capitalism personified. He went into it trying to make as much money for himself as possible and to keep making that money. That's what led him to hire foremen he could trust. Just how capitalism attempts to use our selfish nature to better everyone else, De Cano's selfishness, or "shrewdness" as we have decided to call it, led to some pretty great things for the Pilipino.
1. De Cano's position of power meant he could deal out many monetary benefits to struggling Pilipinos, such as college students and new immigrants with no means of starting up. He fought for issues such as land ownership for his people, and was a strong leader in the community. However, the fact remains that he obtained his riches through exploitation of the very people he protected. Paradoxical? Yes. But as others have probably said, I'm inclined to be in his favor simply because he was able to help so many people. He may not have started out on his lucrative career with altruistic intentions, but the fact that he did use his money and power to aid those in need earns him my respect.
ReplyDelete