Amagasaki Steel Works Dispute

…Although it produced some pioneering examples of workplace struggles, such as the Hokuriku Railway Union, which developed the “Meishoku (creating a bright and pleasant workplace) movement” in the struggle for agreements, and the Mitsui Miike Union, which promoted the “memoization” struggle (putting agreements into memoranda) in the wake of the struggle against corporate consolidation, the unified struggle by industry repeatedly collapsed due to the lack of unity on the part of the unions, as seen in the Electric Power and Coal Miners’ strike in 1952 and the defeat of the Nissan dispute in 1953. In this situation, SOHYO proposed a “whole-work struggle” approach, based on workplace struggles and fighting in local struggles involving families and towns, but this approach also ended without bearing fruit, with the defeat of the Amagasaki Steel Works strike and the Nippon Steel Muroran strike in 1954. Moreover, in 1954, three unions, including the Zensen Doumei, which was dominated by the right wing of the Democratic Party, which had split off after the second SOHYO convention, withdrew from SOHYO and went on to form the Zenro Kaigi as a separate national center together with SOHYO. …

*Some of the terminology used in reference to the "Amagasaki Steel Dispute" is listed below.

Source | Heibonsha World Encyclopedia 2nd Edition | Information

…協約闘争のなかで〈明職(明るく働きやすい職場をつくる)運動〉を展開した北陸鉄道労組や企業整備反対闘争を契機として(合意事項を覚書にする)メモ化闘争を推進した三井三池労組など，いくつかの職場闘争の先進的なケースを生み出していったとはいえ，52年の電産･炭労スト，53年の日産争議の敗北などにみられるごとく，産業別統一闘争は組合側の足並みの乱れによって瓦解を重ねた。このようななかで，総評は職場闘争をベースにすえて家族ぐるみ，町ぐるみの地域闘争で闘うという〈ぐるみ闘争〉路線を提起していったが，この方式も54年の尼崎製鋼争議，日鋼室蘭争議の敗北によって実を結ぶことなく終わった。しかも，54年には，総評第2回大会を契機として分裂した民同の右派勢力がヘゲモニーをもつ全繊同盟など3組合が総評から脱退し，総同盟とともに別個のナショナル･センターとして全労会議を結成するにいたった。…

※「尼崎製鋼争議」について言及している用語解説の一部を掲載しています。

出典｜株式会社平凡社世界大百科事典 第２版について | 情報