I read the second chapter which was mostly the "folklore" of the steel workers themselves about their work. This part was cool. The rest of the book I browsed through but it didn't have the same degree of interest. Perhaps if you were particularly interested in the academic study of folklore the other segments of stories and arguments would be more interesting.
Much of the material Dorson collects does seem to walk a line between what I imagine folklore as being as opposed to random banter. Again, I wasn't terribly interested in the arguments Dorson makes to justify the label, or to point out the function of the stories.
I also wonder somehow about the nature of the interview responses. I found myself wondering how much it mattered if the stories were embellished for the sake of the interviewers. On the one hand it doesn't seem to matter because the they are still the stories of these people and still reflect their concerns and the way they conceive of their environment. On the other hand, who cares what a bunch of mill workers thought it would be funny to tell some academic interviewing them about their lives?