• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

On 3rd May 1926, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) called three million workers out on strike to support the coal miners locked out by their employers.

Extracts from this document...


On 3rd May 1926, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) called three million workers out on strike to support the coal miners locked out by their employers. The strike lasted nine days. There were three main causes to this General Strike: Britain's economic crisis, problems in the coal industry, and Government policy towards industrial relations. The root cause of the General Strike, however, was the conflict within the coal industry. In the spring of 1920, Britain had experienced its worst economic slump, caused by poor performance in foreign markets; lack of investment and modernization in British industry, and increased competition abroad. Britain's coal industry was trading less in 1925 than before the 1914-18 war. The Government attempted to stabilise the economy by reintroducing the Gold Standard in 1925. Unfortunately, they overestimated the value of sterling by 10%, increasing the problems of British industry. The economic situation, however, had not deteriorated to the extent that a general strike was unavoidable. ...read more.


This is why it can be argued that the coal industry was the catalyst to the General Strike. It took extreme exploitation of mineworkers for the TUC to decide to act. The TUC's involvement signalled a turning point. Initially, the government also kept out of the coal dispute. When, in 1925, the TUC threatened to support the mineworkers, though, the government provided a �23million in coal industry subsidies. A strike was temporarily avoided. The subsidy, though, was only for nine months. During this time, the government appointed Samuel Commission investigated the problems of British mining and its low productivity. Samuel reported in 1926. The report rejected nationalisation, but recognised a need for modernisation. It recommended the withdrawal of subsidies and cuts to miners' wages. The government would accept the recommendations if both sides agreed. This was unrealistic: the report suggested things that neither party would agree. The conflict returned to the same position as before. ...read more.


It has been argued that if he had enforced its findings, the General Strike would have been averted. Another view is that implementation of the Samuel report would have worsened the dispute between miners and mine owners. Baldwin could not win. The government's response did not cause the General Strike - but it did nothing to prevent it. The general strike of 1926 was caused by a combination of economic crisis, a crippled coal industry, and a poor government response. British industry was moribund and the government could have reacted more responsibly to the needs of the workers. But these were additional to the underlying conflicts in the coal industry. The miners were extremely unhappy with their dire working conditions and failure to nationalise the industry. They refused to accept lower wages and longer hours. The treatment of the miners made the TUC act. I think that the mine owners' proposals for lower wages and longer hours were the catalyst for the General Strike. If it weren't for that, it would've taken longer or never happened. Frankie Hine-Hughes History coursework 858 Why did the General strike of 1926 take place? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays


    It is likely to be possible to bring a greater chance of having a negotiation while the wall is being built. This was so they can make thorough decisions without thinking about terrorism reaching Israel as many efforts was put in to guard and secure the Jewish people.

  2. What Where Causes And Consequences Of The General Strike In 1926?

    Most members agreed that mines being nationalised would be the best idea but however this did not happen.

  1. Why did the General Strike of 1926 take place?

    in the mines to make the job easier, but after the war, Britain owed much money to the US and could not afford to buy any luxuries for their own mines. The mines in Britain were old, and mining was a long and tiring job, as most of the coal

  2. WWI, The Twenty-One Demands and The May Fourth Movement

    people, and the majority of the people have no personal feeling of direct material interest.7 Rather than traditional writing based around 'style rather than substance', Hu proposed a writing style based around common vernacular language, as part of his goal to "oppose blind obedience and to oppose compromise...to reorganise our

  1. Did Paul Lahti, the director of the Minahasa Raya mine, make the correct decision ...

    (Times Picuyane 5) These are just a few reasons as to which I feel he made the correct decision by not reopening the mine in Minahasa. More evidence as to why the closing of the Minahasa Raya mine was good fro Newmont is the illegal mining that was going on taking away from their business.

  2. The conflict may be classified as a strike for power between Taliban government and ...

    Parties and Time Period The primary parties involved in this conflict are the Taliban government and the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan (UIFSA). The Taliban government was proclaimed in September 1996 by Islamic extremist students under the leadership of Mullah Mohammed Omar.

  1. Lord Grey, writing the British Gazzette in May 1926, said of the General Strike, ...

    The strike was simply an industrial dispute and the General Council was keen to make it appear as respectable as possible. They even declined a donation from Russian trade unions of 2 million roubles, the equivalent of �26,000.

  2. How far do the sources support the view that the General Strike was "an ...

    the basis of an 'industrial dispute' and that they were simply 'defending the mine workers against the mine owners.' Yet, this attempt of removing revolutionary blame from them only worsened the situation with careless phrased sentences and perhaps slightly too much use of 'emotive language' for example, instead of saying

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work