As we explored different definitions and examples of disaster in HIST2203, The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire popped back into my head for the first time since when I first learned about the disaster in the sixth grade. I chose to research the 1911 disaster at Triangle because I was able to draw thematic connections from our class including, but not limited to, the strife between spectacle and slow disasters, the role of marginalization and bias in disaster, technological determinism, as well as the role that collective memory plays in a disaster such as this. Researching the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory provided me not only with a more intricate understanding of the fire and its legacy, but also with a more complex understanding of disaster theory and concepts overall.
The disaster at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory adversely affected a marginalized community consisting largely of young, working-class, immigrant women who were consistent victims of unsafe and unjust working conditions throughout the industrializing twentieth century. While news of the disaster, as well as outrage, may have spread across the city of New York, the country, and the world, the majority of the harm was felt by poor, working-class communities based out of Brooklyn.
The two additional sections of this website point to the complexities and tension within describing the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire as either a spectacle disaster or an example of slow, meticulous violence, as well as the faults of industrialization in protecting workers before, during and after the disaster itself. These snapshots of slow versus spectacular disasters and the role of technological determinism within 19th century New York provide useful context to not only the causes of the disaster, but the ways that it was perceived following the fire itself.
The disaster at Triangle is a seemingly cut and dry disaster, at least according to many textbooks on American history: Dozens of vulnerable, young immigrant women were subjected to inhumane working conditions, falling victim to the extremes of industrialization and the corporate greed that early nineteenth century urban spheres had no ability of controlling (Cornell University – ILR School). In a time when a community’s unequal social order was vastly apparent and the law was not expected to ‘take care’ of anyone–even communities being overtly taken advantage of and demeaned within sweatshops–the “major revolution in legal culture as well as social order” that came from the fire at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory did not happen right away (McEvoy, 626). While the disaster is seen as a calling card for labor reform, it’s important to remember that that change did not happen magically, or even within the immediate aftermath. It didn’t happen with the proceeding criminal trial, which ended with the acquittal of the “shirtwaist kings,” Harris and Blanck, who consistently locked the doors of their factories during working hours to stop their employees from stealing goods; it didn’t come about with the short term charity provided to victims and families by organizations like the Red Cross. Instead, unions full of workers themselves were the ones pushing for reform that was lasting and meaningful. They knew that they needed to be the ones working to stop the slow violence that had afflicted working-class families of this industrialized era for far too long.
The Triangle Factory fire is remembered as a victory for labor reform; it was the push needed to enact new factory safety guidelines, as well as laws on child labor and compensation. Before Triangle, issues of labor inequality were often hidden from public view on the floors of factories or within tenement housing. With the events of March 25, 1911, these labor issues were violently made visible to the upper and middle class public who did not have to experience them before. The fire, as well as the criminal trial following it, showcased the brutality that workers faced and the laws indifference to such cruelty (McEvoy, 627). However, due to the activism and unionization that took place after, the disaster is ultimately remembered as causing a positive shift within the Progressive Era reforms that would take hold in New York City and the United States.
It is estimated that around one hundred American workers were killed every day on the job in 1911 (AFL-CIO). Today, such stories are not as common; no longer do Americans hear of the atrocities taking place in sweatshops in the middle of Manhattan. Within our collective consciousness, this triumph over workplace inequalities following the disaster at Triangle has been credited, largely, to the introduction of labor reform. New labor laws did have a part in this cleanup of working conditions, but, ultimately, these issues are still present. In fact, sweatshops may no longer be housed in the middle of Manhattan, but they haven’t disappeared from American industries–they have just moved to less visible spaces.
The United States Department of Labor claims that 67% of garment factories in Los Angeles today do not follow overtime or compensation laws, while also stating that 98% of the same factories foster serious workplace health and safety issues that could cause injury or death (UFCW). Similarly, a quick Google search reveals countless recent examples of industrial tragedies of the same stature of the Triangle Fire. A 2012 letter directed to the United States Secretary of Labor references the deaths of 112 workers in a Bangladesh garment factory fire: “Much like the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire more than a century ago, the largely female workforce found the exit doors blocked and staircases filled with smoke when they tried to escape and many workers were killed as they jumped from the upper floors of the building” (International Labor Rights Forum).
This specific factory was a major supplier to United States clothing brands–including Walmart, Sears and Kmart–proving that these issues have not disappeared from the American industrialized landscape, they have simply moved from immediate view.