Michael Nuwer wrote:
I'm not sure why you think this is an embarrassment. Carnegie Steel
had three
basic steel-making plants before 1905, and Carnegie picked the people
who ran
those mills. Managers like Charles Schwab and William Jones were
technical people
and they did pay careful attention to the production process. Carnegie
looked to
shave the cost of a rail and people like Schwab and Jones found ways
to do it.
After the formation of US Steel, shaving cost was not the focus of
Judge Gary.
Because I had assumed that he played a more direct role, not just
telegraphing Jones, Schwab & Frick.
The most important cost for Carnegie was labor. He plowed back about
75% of the
company's earnings into reinvestment, often in labor saving
technologies.
A key factor in the history of Homestead is that Carnegie Steel
refused to sell
specialized products (which was common in 1890). Instead, Carnegie
offered a few
standard beams and told building engineers that they should pick from
these
choices (or buy elsewhere). This way the mill did not need to make
customized
rolls and change them for each order. Instead they ran the same rolls
all day long.
Nasaw says that he gave the order in 1890 to integrate forward into
finished products.
Your article looks very good. I apologize for not knowing about it before.
I have discussed mass-production steel-making in:
"From Batch to Flow: Production Technology and Work-Force Skills in
the Steel
Industry, 1880-1920," _Technology_and_Culture_, Vol. 29, No. 4,
Special Issue:
Labor History and the History of Technology. (Oct., 1988), pp. 808-838.
The book is a magnificent production. Nasaw had access to material
that nobody else
did.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Chico, CA 95929
530-898-5321
fax 530-898-5901
www.michaelperelman.wordpress.com
