Master of Philosophy / Australian government policy today aims to ‘deregulate’ industrial relations. A fractured system has ensued where uncontrolled market forces disrupt both business and unions. The building industry is particularly affected by uncertainty and industrial barbarism. Precisely one hundred years ago government policy was to create order, becoming directly involved in industrial regulation. This thesis aims to understand how building unions maintained their rates and conditions in the pre-arbitration era when there were no legislative minimums, and it seeks to place their labour relations within a political and ideological context. The thesis criticises historical scholarship surrounding artisan unionism in Britain and Australia, in particular the role of building tradesmen. Positive relations between employers and employed in the industry are often described in pejorative terms with tradesmen labelled ‘aristocrats of labour’ – apolitical, middle class and lacking class-awareness. The thesis argues this view does not adequately describe the qualities of building operatives, or place their motives within a ‘deregulated’ industrial context. To demonstrate nineteenth century building industry unionism in NSW had a broader nature, the thesis looks at British trade union radicalism. It examines both changes in structure and ideology caused by growing industrialisation and competitive organisation affecting building tradesmen known as general contracting, as well as continuity and differences in ideas of social change and progress. The thesis connects the ideology of British and colonial building unions in this regard. It then turns to the lives, work and society of nineteenth century building workers in Sydney and the make-up of their organisations. The thesis seeks to understand the political and ideological aspects of Australian building unionism and the effects of general contracting and competition. Central to the discussion is the influence of the Co-operative movement, and the significance of the struggle for the eight-hour day to the labour movement. Both were progressive responses to unfettered market forces on the trade. It argues that the challenges faced by operatives in maintaining conditions led them to develop politically, creating ‘modern’ class representation and ideology. The thesis ends with a chapter that examines the evidence before the 1891 NSW Royal Commission into Strikes showing the building industry to be characterised by conflict, co-operation, and radicalism. Unionists expressed progressive ideology and industrial militancy but maintained positive relationships with certain employers for whom they provided market security. The trade-off for efforts in this respect was recognition that union rules would be the primary form of industrial regulation. Their system, however, was ultimately unsustainable because of competitive pressures, and industrial militancy against builders outside the system flourished. In conclusion, the thesis suggests that nineteenth century building workers improved and maintained industrial standards by militant unionism, and yet, at the same time, by forming co-operative relations with employers. In dealing with the corrosive effect of market deregulation that undermined control over their trade, operatives also built progressive organisations which forged working class unity and developed politically advanced ideologies of social change. Their ideas and practices were at times unsuccessful or contradictory, but building unionists were not inward-looking ‘labour aristocrats’.

Master of Philosophy / Australian government policy today aims to ‘deregulate’ industrial relations. A fractured system has ensued where uncontrolled market forces disrupt both business and unions. The building industry is particularly affected by uncertainty and industrial barbarism. Precisely one hundred years ago government policy was to create order, becoming directly involved in industrial regulation. This thesis aims to understand how building unions maintained their rates and conditions in the pre-arbitration era when there were no legislative minimums, and it seeks to place their labour relations within a political and ideological context. The thesis criticises historical scholarship surrounding artisan unionism in Britain and Australia, in particular the role of building tradesmen. Positive relations between employers and employed in the industry are often described in pejorative terms with tradesmen labelled ‘aristocrats of labour’ – apolitical, middle class and lacking class-awareness. The thesis argues this view does not adequately describe the qualities of building operatives, or place their motives within a ‘deregulated’ industrial context. To demonstrate nineteenth century building industry unionism in NSW had a broader nature, the thesis looks at British trade union radicalism. It examines both changes in structure and ideology caused by growing industrialisation and competitive organisation affecting building tradesmen known as general contracting, as well as continuity and differences in ideas of social change and progress. The thesis connects the ideology of British and colonial building unions in this regard. It then turns to the lives, work and society of nineteenth century building workers in Sydney and the make-up of their organisations. The thesis seeks to understand the political and ideological aspects of Australian building unionism and the effects of general contracting and competition. Central to the discussion is the influence of the Co-operative movement, and the significance of the struggle for the eight-hour day to the labour movement. Both were progressive responses to unfettered market forces on the trade. It argues that the challenges faced by operatives in maintaining conditions led them to develop politically, creating ‘modern’ class representation and ideology. The thesis ends with a chapter that examines the evidence before the 1891 NSW Royal Commission into Strikes showing the building industry to be characterised by conflict, co-operation, and radicalism. Unionists expressed progressive ideology and industrial militancy but maintained positive relationships with certain employers for whom they provided market security. The trade-off for efforts in this respect was recognition that union rules would be the primary form of industrial regulation. Their system, however, was ultimately unsustainable because of competitive pressures, and industrial militancy against builders outside the system flourished. In conclusion, the thesis suggests that nineteenth century building workers improved and maintained industrial standards by militant unionism, and yet, at the same time, by forming co-operative relations with employers. In dealing with the corrosive effect of market deregulation that undermined control over their trade, operatives also built progressive organisations which forged working class unity and developed politically advanced ideologies of social change. Their ideas and practices were at times unsuccessful or contradictory, but building unionists were not inward-looking ‘labour aristocrats’.