Short Answer
In February 1958, the sugar plantations of the Territory of Hawaiʻi fell silent. Thousands of workers, members of the International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union (ILWU), had walked off the job, demanding a 25-cent hourly wage increase. The industry, which had offered only 4 to 24 cents, called the demand unrealistic. Yet the strike was not a complete shutdown: strikers continued to water the sugar cane, ensuring the crop would survive the walkout. This act of care amid conflict became the defining image of what would be called the “Aloha Strike.” For months, the islands’ economy and politics revolved around the picket lines, the negotiations, and the question of whether labor or capital would prevail.
What Happened?
The strike had its roots in December 1957, when the sugar industry entered negotiations with the ILWU. The union presented a “25 CENTS OR STRIKE!” demand—a 25-cent across-the-board increase for a one-year contract, along with other costly items. The industry, pointing to its earnings of $15 million before taxes in 1956, calculated that the union’s demand would cost $12.5 million per year—a sum it said it could not afford, especially since sugar prices were fixed and could not be raised to cover the increase.
As the strike deadline approached, the industry made a counteroffer: 4 to 24 cents for a one-year contract, with more for a longer term. The union rejected it. On February 1, 1958, the strike began. It quickly spread across the islands, affecting sugar and pineapple plantations alike. The ILWU’s Local 142 printed 50,000 copies of a brochure titled “The Strike in Sugar: It Must Be Won,” which it mailed to unions and friends of organized labor across the nation, aiming to “turn the spotlight on our cause before the nation.”
The strike was notable for its discipline and its unusual tactic: workers continued to water the sugar cane. As the Hawaiʻi Public Radio retrospective later noted, “Workers demanded higher wages while still watering the sugar cane during 1958 ‘Aloha Strike.'” This ensured that the crop would not be destroyed, preserving the industry’s future while the workers pressed their claims. The strike dragged on for months, with negotiations continuing intermittently. By May 1958, the strike was more than three months old, and the ILWU’s newsletter, the Dispatcher, was still rallying support.
How It Was Seen at the Time
Contemporaries understood the strike as a fundamental clash between labor’s need for a living wage and capital’s insistence on fiscal prudence. The union framed its demand as a matter of survival. In the Dispatcher of May 23, 1958, the ILWU declared that sugar workers needed a “substantial” wage increase because of the rising cost of living in the territory. The brochure distributed by Local 142 told the story of “the sugar workers’ struggle,” emphasizing the “mammoth corporations which own or control industry and commerce in the Hawaiian Islands” and the “bloody struggles of the past when workers tried, often at the cost of their lives, to gain decent living standards and conditions.”
The industry, for its part, saw the strike as an unreasonable demand that threatened the viability of the sugar business. In a document dated May 16, 1958, the industry argued that the union’s demand would cost $12.5 million per year against total industry earnings of $15 million before taxes in 1956. It reminded the union that “the sugar industry cannot raise the price of its product to help meet the extra cost of a wage increase.” The industry’s tone was one of frustration, accusing the union of choosing to strike rather than negotiate realistically.
“The Union chose to strike!” — from the industry’s May 16, 1958 statement, reflecting the prevailing view that the union had rejected a reasonable offer.
Historical Snapshot
| Aspect | Detail |
|---|---|
| Date | February 1958 – 1959 (strike began February 1, 1958) |
| Place | Territory of Hawaiʻi, primarily sugar and pineapple plantations |
| People | ILWU Local 142, sugar industry employers, workers, Harry Bridges (ILWU leader) |
| What Happened | Workers struck for a 25-cent hourly raise; industry offered 4–24 cents; strike lasted months, with workers continuing to water cane |
| Why It Mattered | It was a major test of labor power in Hawaii, affecting the islands’ economy and leading to a settlement that shaped future labor relations |
What People Knew at the Time
| What People Knew Then | What We Know Now |
|---|---|
| That the strike was about wages and the cost of living; that the industry claimed it could not afford the demand. | That the strike was part of a broader ILWU strategy to organize agricultural workers and secure long-term gains; that the industry’s financial claims were contested. |
| That the union was determined to win a substantial increase, as stated in its brochures and newsletters. | That the strike ultimately led to a compromise settlement, though the exact terms are not detailed in the primary sources we have. |
| That the strike was a local affair, though the union sought national attention. | That the strike had national implications for labor relations in agriculture and for the ILWU’s reputation. |
Contemporary Newspaper Coverage
The strike received extensive coverage in Hawaiian newspapers, including the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser. The Associated Press and local photographers captured images of union leader Harry Bridges leading protests. One notable photograph, taken on January 31, 1957, shows Bridges leading ILWU members in protest against a Senate Internal Security subcommittee hearing—a precursor to the strike’s tensions. During the strike itself, newspapers reported on the negotiations, the picket lines, and the unusual sight of strikers watering the cane. The Star-Bulletin and other papers used headlines like “Sugar Strike Continues” and “Union Demands 25 Cents.” The tone was generally factual, though editorials often reflected the industry’s perspective, emphasizing the economic costs of the strike.
“Workers demanded higher wages while still watering the sugar cane during 1958 ‘Aloha Strike'” — a headline from a later retrospective, but capturing the contemporary image.
Different Perspectives
The Union’s Perspective
The ILWU saw the strike as a necessary fight for dignity and economic justice. In its newsletter, the union argued that sugar workers were underpaid relative to the cost of living and that the industry’s profits were sufficient to meet their demands. The union also emphasized the historical struggles of workers in Hawaii, framing the strike as a continuation of a long battle against corporate domination. The brochure distributed by Local 142 was designed to “let the public know the facts in the current sugar strike,” and it highlighted the power of the “mammoth corporations” that controlled the islands.
The Industry’s Perspective
The sugar industry portrayed the strike as an unreasonable disruption. In its May 16, 1958 statement, the industry detailed the financial burden of the union’s demand, noting that it would cost $12.5 million per year against earnings of $15 million. The industry argued that it had made a fair offer and that the union had chosen to strike rather than negotiate. The industry also pointed out that it could not raise sugar prices to cover the increase, making the demand particularly onerous.
Numbers at the Time
| Statistic | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Union wage demand | 25 cents per hour across the board | Industry statement, May 16, 1958 |
| Industry offer | 4 to 24 cents per hour | Industry statement, May 16, 1958 |
| Total industry earnings (1956, before taxes) | $15 million | Industry statement, May 16, 1958 |
| Estimated cost of union demand | $12.5 million per year | Industry statement, May 16, 1958 |
| Copies of union brochure printed | 50,000 | ILWU Dispatcher, May 23, 1958 |
Timeline
- December 1957: Sugar industry enters negotiations with ILWU; union presents “25 cents or strike” demand.
- January 1958: Industry offers 4–24 cents; union rejects; strike deadline approaches.
- February 1, 1958: Strike begins across sugar and pineapple plantations.
- May 16, 1958: Industry issues statement detailing the strike’s status and its financial arguments.
- May 23, 1958: ILWU Dispatcher publishes article about the strike and the brochure distribution.
- 1959: Strike continues into the new year, eventually resolved through negotiations (exact end date not in primary sources).
Aftermath
The strike eventually ended, though the primary sources we have do not record the exact settlement. It is known that the ILWU and the sugar industry reached a compromise, likely in 1959, that provided some wage increase but not the full 25 cents. The strike had lasting effects: it solidified the ILWU’s position as the dominant labor union in Hawaii’s agricultural sector, and it demonstrated the power of disciplined, strategic action. The image of strikers watering the cane became a symbol of the union’s commitment to both its members and the industry’s future. The strike also contributed to the broader labor movement in Hawaii, which was gaining momentum in the late 1950s.
How Historians See It Today
Modern historians view the 1958–59 Hawaiian sugar strike as a pivotal moment in the labor history of the Pacific. It is seen as part of the ILWU’s successful campaign to organize agricultural workers in Hawaii, which had been a long and often violent struggle. Historians emphasize the strategic sophistication of the union, which used the “watering the cane” tactic to maintain goodwill and preserve the industry’s viability. The strike is also understood within the context of the Cold War, as the ILWU was often accused of communist sympathies, though the strike itself was primarily about wages and working conditions. Contemporary accounts focused on the immediate economic conflict, while modern scholarship places the strike within a longer narrative of labor rights and decolonization in Hawaii.
Common Misconceptions
The strike was a violent, destructive affair.
Primary sources indicate that the strike was disciplined, with workers continuing to water the cane to protect the crop.
The union demanded an unreasonable amount.
The union argued that the cost of living in Hawaii justified the 25-cent increase, and the industry’s own earnings figures showed it could potentially afford it.
The strike ended quickly.
The strike lasted for months, from February 1958 into 1959, as evidenced by the May 1958 industry statement and the ongoing coverage.
Related Primary Sources
- ILWU Dispatcher, May 23, 1958 issue (available at archive.ilwu.org)
- “The Strike in Sugar: It Must Be Won” brochure, ILWU Local 142 (available at evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu)
- Industry statement on sugar negotiations, May 16, 1958 (available at dspace.lib.hawaii.edu)
- Hawaiʻi Public Radio retrospective article (2022) with historical photographs
FAQ
Why did the strikers continue to water the sugar cane?
The strikers watered the cane to preserve the crop and the industry's future, demonstrating that they were not seeking to destroy the industry but to win a fair wage. This tactic also helped maintain public sympathy and ensured that the plantations could resume production quickly after the strike.
What was the outcome of the 1958–59 sugar strike?
The strike eventually ended with a compromise settlement, though the exact terms are not recorded in the primary sources we have. It is known that the ILWU secured some wage increase, and the strike solidified the union's position in Hawaii's agricultural sector.
Leave a Reply