COLLECTIVE BARGAINING 161 



in August, 1916. Producers were offered $1.90 per hun- 

 dredweight but demanded and received $2.15. 



But boycotts are not by any means always successful. 

 A long drawn out struggle may sometimes end with ques- 

 tionable results. In January, 1919, New York producers 

 again boycotted the dealers. After a struggle of about 

 twenty-five days, continued at great expense to both 

 dealers and producers, most of the dealers finally agreed 

 to pay the producers* price for the rest of that month. 

 Thereupon the producers claimed a great victory. 1 The 

 question may properly be raised, however, as to who 

 really won the strike. Both sides lost heavily. The prices 

 demanded and the prices obtained are as follows: 2 



Jan. Feb. Mar. 



Dairymen demanded per cwt $4.01 $3 .86 #3 .54 



Dairymen received after Jan. 25 per cwt 4.01 3-54 3-3* 



The boycott has proved expensive to both producer 

 and dealer. Producers can seldom utilize milk to full 

 advantage at home for such short periods and often not 

 at all. Dealers have to pay high prices for inferior milk 

 obtained from distant points, if indeed boards of health 

 permit it to be imported at all. A point often overlooked 

 is that such a struggle means hardship for the city con- 

 sumer. The result is ilt feeling towards both distributor 

 and producer, which may mean reduced consumption. 



In contracting the prevalent practice is for the pro- 

 ducer to contract with the association to consign to it 

 all his milk except such portions as are used for home 

 consumption. Only two associations report no contract, 

 and only six report that the farmer contracts directly with 



1 New England Homestead, Jan. 25, 1919. 



2 Creamery fc? Milk Plant Monthly, Feb., 1919, p. 24. 



