Show tHE VOICE OF BUSINESS Af Aftermath of a o boycott By Oy Richard L. L Lesher Ires Chamber of or Commerce of or the United States In May 1972 the Amalgamated Clothing Workers' Workers Union launched a consumer boycott of ot the principally clothing mens men's slacks produced by the Farah Manufacturing Company of El EI ElPaso ElPaso Paso Texas The boycott was promptly joined by church groups and other kind-hearted kind citizens who wanted to help the downtrodden workers the was trying to unionize The boycott achieved its immediate objective Farah capitulated In February 1974 and accepted a union But did anybody really benefit in the thelong thelong thelong long run And did any of the kind hearted citizens who made the boycott so effective bother to follow up the results of their crusade I doubt it I doubt it because the same crowd is now trying the same kind of boycott against another Southern manufacturer J. J P. P Stevens This fact alone makes it worthwhile to review the aftermath of orthe the Farah boycott First what happened to the company Farah at Its pre pre- boycott peak produced dozen mens men's and boys boy's garments garments garments gar gar- ments per day Currently they are producing dozen per day which is a decline of 71 percent In other words they have never recovered from the boycott oven even though they now have a union What happened to 10 the workers Before the boycott Farah larah employed people at nine plants in the El EI Paso and San Antonio areas Today they employ in three plants So three thousand jobs disappeared disappeared thanks to the boycott What happened to the union Estimates vary but bul the union spent approximately 45 million on the boycott As a result It obtained new members At the mid 1974 dues level of 3 per member per month the now known as the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union following a 1976 merger of the and the TWo would need 25 years to recoup the cost of acquiring these members The union expected to be able to organize other employees in inEl inEl El EI Paso after a victory at Farah thus justifying the cost They foresaw a potential of 50 new members It didn't happen So far over three years after the settlement only tenth one-tenth of El EI Paso is unionized And when a settlement was finally reached between Willie WilIie Farah and the union the union netted only twenty cents an hour more spread over a three- three year period than would have been required anyway by the 1974 minimum wage increase That Is the union won a three three- year Increase of eighty cents an hour sixty cents an hour of ot which was mandated by the higher minimum wage law To those who struck for 22 months the twenty cents gained by the union must seem like small compensation To the 2000 who lost their jobs during the boycott and the additional 1000 w who ho have lost jobs because of the lingering aftereffects the boycott cant can't seem like any help at al all And what can the union do donow donow donow now Farah is obviously not as aswell aswell aswell well off as it once was The company probably could not afford either another strike or a major increase in wage costs Meanwhile Farah's competition competition competition com com- petition has gained the business Farah lost not because of anything they did or did not do but simply because of the boycott Thus competition is reduced in the Industry industry industry in In- and the consumer has less choice of style quality and price I hope the good people who are thinking of joining the Stevens or boycott-or any other will boycott read this and think long and hard about the possible consequences of their acts Our conscience can drive us to do wonderful things but only when that conscience is properly informed |