Trade Unions and Labour Rights

Question 1

Issues facing TU

Answer 1

right for union to exist

recognition of unions

involvement of unions in negotiation over pay and working conditions

establishment of systems for mediation

freedom of workers to withdraw their labour w/o fear of punishment

Question 2

How was progress for TU?

Answer 2

not continuous

periods where improvements were limited therefore employers and often the gov were reluctant to support unionisation

Question 3

Factors influencing progress

Answer 3

eco-change

growth of capitalism

amount of immigration

Question 4

Position of TU at start of period

Answer 4

rights = dependent on what workers could negotiate with employers

no requirment for employers to recognise let alone negotiate therefore workers had no representation or protection from their employers
-> could be exploited

Question 5

Position of TU at end of period

Answer 5

won right to join unions (but some emps had been able to create workplaces where unions were forbidden - forced to accept fall in wages and fear of job loss)

right to collective bargaining but limited in practice (as w/ join a union)

w/o union rep workers = weak position to improve rights but did not want to risk confrontation

right to withdraw labour and strike but limited some emps

Question 6

Extent of rights by WW1 (pos)

Answer 6

position improved leading to outbreak -> reflected by growth in UN membership

Question 7

Extent of rights but WW1 (neg)

Answer 7

initial gains = limited to white, male workers and by 1914 no guarantee of perm gains

unions in 1865 = only skilled workers in craft industries but the USA = undergoing a period of rapid industrialisation meaning many of the new unskilled workers = excluded from unions (therefore no rep/protection)

employers hired unskilled workes under contracts rather than perm employment so could be laid off when less demand for work

limited safety precautions in factories -> large no of incidents and emp not introduce measures because it would reduce profits through greater supervision - injury = risk employee had to take (courts)

Question 8

Unions in the late 19th century (pos)

Answer 8

increasing industrialisation -> increase in no of unions (Knights of Labor - KOL and American Fed of Labor - AFL)

KOL: 1881 - 20,000 -> 1886 - 700,000 (suggests successful strike action = crucial to growth)

un m.ship across USA had growth to over 2 million

uns had begun to put pressure on candidates in elections to support workers rights

Question 9

Unions in the late 19th century (neg)

Answer 9

membership decline of KOL to 100,000 by 1890 and rep collapsed as a result of violence of Haymarket Affair

1905: Industrial Workers of the World less effective due to violence/militancy ; 100,000 by 1923 but declined thereafter

divisions in workforce affected un m.ship -> arrival of AA workers after abolition of slavery ; most accepted lower pay - employers exploited this by laying off whites and replacing with AA ; exacerbated by arrival of European/Asian immigrants
-> existing unions saw this as a sig challenge and refused to allow them to join which further limited size of unions and their ability to exert pressure on emps -> divided workforce = easier to exploit

progress further weakened by 2 other strikes
- Homestead Strike 1892 - virtually bankrupted Amalagamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers and resulted in a decline in union mship (1891 24,000 - 1909 6300)
- Pullman Strike - developed from emps refusal to recognise rights of workers to use collectibe bargaining and showed difficulties in gaining un recognition

-appears that by outbreak, little achieved in terms of UN rights

Question 10

Factors suggesting position of labour = no stronger than in 1865

Answer 10

uns represented only 20% of non-agricultural workforce

many industrys did not have uns (e.g steel/car manufacturing)

many uns = not legally recognised therefore lacked real power over decisions

wks divided by ethnicity, gender, skill level - divisions often exploited

gains limited to white skilled workers

Question 11

Rights during WW1 and inter years

Answer 11

WW1, New Deal, WW2 = some progress due to necessity than willingness

WW1
- pos of workers improved

• factory owners saw an increased demand for their products therefore more opp to increase profits ; more willing to be conciliatory towards their wks e.g textiles for uniforms, steel for weapons
• to ensure that protection = maintained, gov recognise and negotiated with uns through National War Labor Board (NWLB)
• -> resulted in working hours limited to 8 in return for agreeing to a no-strike policy

Question 12

The boom of the 1920s - positive

Answer 12

eco boom - unemp decline

employees offered benefits e.g reduction in working hours, pensions, insurance

porters appointed Randolph to lead their counter-campaign, set up the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters (BSCP) Union

by 1934, change in law under Roosevelt w/ passing of Railway Labor Act, meant that the BSCP could claim right to represent porters

Randolph demanded that the National Mediation Board offically declared the BSCP as the Porter’s rep

BSCP defeated company un in elections to decide who should rep workers
-> in 1935 finally gained recog and Pullman began to negotiating within a year the un had enrolled 51% of all porters

Question 13

The boom of the 1920s - negative

Answer 13

development of welfare capitalism (offered benefits in return for est of unions under direction of employer) = usually in return for no strike agreements and abandoning right to negotiate wages as emp feared that wks would take advantage of the low rates of unemployment to demand more money

some indiv company unions set up - wks lost independence and sometimes forced to sign yellow-dog contracts (agree not to join un)

many emp refused to recog uns
-> e.g Henry Ford - tight control over wk force ; only in 1941 did he recog un for collective bargaining

struggle for recog evident in Pullman Company. Employed many AA porters in poor conditions who relied on tips for income and were denied promotion
-> PC established own un and banned BSCP meetings (who had not gained recog by 1928)

Question 14

The Great Depression and its impact on rights

Answer 14

living standard improvements ened

emp could exploit weak pos of wks who feared losing their jobs during period of high unemp

tough action against strikers during period - police or own strike breakers

un mship fell as being unable to strike undermined their pos and un strength

Question 15

Norris - La Guardia Act

Answer 15

1932

banned yellow-dog contracts

barred fed courts from issuing injunctions against non-violent labour disputes

Question 16

New Deal Positives for rights

Answer 16

high point in rights - wide range of legislation

National Industry Recovery Act (NIRA) 1932
-> encouraged firms to agree to codes of practice to imp hours, wages, un rights (major step forward)

National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) 1935
-> step forward
-> established National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)

increase in no of unionised workers - increase power

sit-in strike in 1936 led to recog of United Automobile Worker’s Union and then Steel Workers Organizing Committe - recog in 1937

Fair Labor Standards Act 1939
-> minimum wage

pos = stronger than before WW1

Question 17

National Labor Relations Board

Answer 17

could negotiate on behalf of workers and prevent companies from using own uns

looked into accusations of unfair labour practices and reached judgement on issues brought before it

-> right to elect own rep
-> declared constitutional
-> right to join own un
-> using spies against un = banned
-> reorganised role of un unlike any other leg (rapid expansion of un mship from 3.7 mil 1933 to 9 mil 1938)

Question 18

New Deal negatives

Answer 18

NIRA limited as not all emps signed code (e.g Ford) - declared unconstitutional by SC - gains reversed

improvements only benfitted some workers

unskilled wks - no rights

lower end of pay scale, most in need of protection, did not benefit

ethnic minorities v vulnerable

women paid less

NLRA did not give agricultural workers right to join union
-> attempts to improve conditions wait until 1960s

Question 19

WW2 impact on rights

Answer 19

imp in pos of labour continued bc wrks = essential to war prod

wages increased by 70% -> strong pos

unemp fell - labour shortage

mship from 9 mil (1938) to 15 mil (1945)

power & pos of un increased when compared to 1918 (high point?)

uns gained recog

laws recog.d labour rights

mship soared giving wks more influential voice in politics

balance of power btween wks and emp moved in favour of wks

(but many emp unwilling to accept change)

Question 20

post-WW2 period positives

Answer 20

individual victories

General Motors 1948
- negotiated pay agreement linked to living cost

Question 21

post-WW2 negatives

Answer 21

large no of strikes - decline in pos of uns

politcians believed uns = too powerful

Taft-Harley Act 1947

eco changes following WW2 threatened to undermine pos of wks - growth in no of white collar wks (prof, tech, clerical) and sub dec in no of blue-collar wks (manual) meant fewer wks -> uns

mship fell 1945-50 (many new jobs in gov with no-stike agreement)

many wks = better off (less interested in un activity)

Question 22

Taft Harley Act 1947

Answer 22

limited power of uns (prevented from running closed shop)
-> backwards move

prohibbited un from engaging in sev “unfair labour practices”
-> jurisdictional strikes, wildcat strikes, closed shop, secondary boycotts

allowed states to pass right-to-work laws banning union shops

congress overode Truman’s veto to pass act

Question 23

The 1960s - positive

Answer 23

Kennedy : 1963 Equal Pay Act - men & women ‘equal pay for equal work’

Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ policy benefitted those in poverty

1964 Economic Opp Act: inc training opp

Age Discrimination Act 1968: protected those over 40 y/o

Merger of AFL with CIO -> AFL-CIO in 1955 - wks benefitted, brought together 85% of un members & gave movement power/influ. 16 million member - bargain over conditions and wages, negotiate over contract cond, paid holidays and unemp insurance, gain med/dental insurance and pension

right to join a un not been poss century earlier, now established

uns collaborated with emps - confrontations that had characterised earlier period not been pos century earlier appeared to be in decline

wks given many benefits

Question 24

The 1960s - negative

Answer 24

pos for many AA = little imp, worsened due to changes in industry

demand for skilled/tech adv workers disadvantaged many AA -> lack education as most lived in poverty w/ poor school (diff to WA)

eco change threatened pos of wks

wks had to agree to no-strike agreement

Question 25

Cesar Chavez - pos

Answer 25

attempts made to imp pos of farmworkers gained from merger of Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC) w/ National Farm Workers Association (NFWA) founded by CC -> became United Farm Workers (UFW) Union in 1972 Chavez = non-violent; turned struggle of farmers into moral cause which won national sympathy tactics forced growers to recog UFW as bargaining org for field wks in Cali early 70s UFW org strikes/boycott inc Salad Bowl Strike - largest farmworker strike in US history -> won increased wages for lettuce/grape wks series of fasts to promote non-violence and in response to leg passed in Arizona prohibitting boycotts/strikes 1975 California Agricultural Labor Relations Act est the Cali Agr Rel Board to oversee coll barg for farm labourers

Question 26

Cesar Chavez - negative

Answer 26

farmworkers had not gained from the benfits of org labour in industry involved in struggle to limit immigration - believed it undermined pos of wks born in USA while exploiting immigrants late 1960 s saw a decline in un mship not as result of failure of uns to protect wks but due to tech changes resulting in a more skilled wkforce that did not look to uns to protect their pos

Question 27

End of period - pos

Answer 27

org labour = stronger pos than start of 1865 un power reduced but wks = better pos than 1865 - join un (non-unionised firms) - collective bargaining (threat unemp) - strike (no-strike clauses) - pos of female wks improve

Question 28

End of period - negatives

Answer 28

power/imp of un = reduced compared w/ 1960s & 30s falling un mship until 1992 decline in un mship = reflection of continued change in structure of wkforce/eco but also due to events such as PATCO strike and changing attitudes no of strikes reduced from 381 (1970) to 44 (1990) - no. involved red from 6477 to 4204 lack of public support for air traffic controllers actions in PATCO strike, discouraged other strikes and show decline in un influence/power early 1980s and 1990s, uns = under attack from all sides gov and emps had issues w/ uns divisions w/in un movement w/ others unwilling to support PATCO air traffic controls due to perception as well paid -> weakened pos decline in size of factories/business -> diff to org wks; impacted on un recruitment decline in un mship (1970 = 19.3 mil; 1990 = 16.7 mil) further exacerbate by continued divisions by emps of generous welfare packages therefore wks saw little to be gained froms uns growth in non-un firms emps allowed to ignore law/deny rights - increase trend when emps discovered they could effectvely get away w/ it NLRB less willing to defend un rights resulting in emp interests taking presendence over wks (emp now in stronger pos than WW2) un power reduced

Question 29

What happened to the economy during the period?

Answer 29

fluctuated widely eco downturns such as Great Depression as well as growth e.g Gilded Age -> great impact on pos of uns/labour rights

Question 30

Gilded Age 1870-90

Answer 30

periods of rapid eco growth, esp booming N+W states industries such as railways, mining, iron, steel and financial sector grew wks gained from high wages -> attracted large no of imms from Europe -> many lived in poverty and did not benefit from gains

Question 31

Labour rights during periods of industrial growth and economic change - positive

Answer 31

employees were often in a stronger pos than in times of eco downturn growing eco may have allowed labour org to increase pressure on emps at first for un recog then for better pay/conditions industry growth imp wks conditions

Question 32

Labour rights during periods of industrial growth and economic change - negative

Answer 32

growth in eco usually resulted in an increased demand for wks but this did not always result in actual deviation of un rights Great Dep and 1930s fear of being unemp did not always result in gain not always case in later part, the improvements in living cond meant they were less interested in un activity

Question 33

Skilled and unskilled wks in 19th century

Answer 33

wks org = able to use growth in no of indus workers from 885,000 to 3.2 million from 1860-1900 to win some concessions from emps eco growth resulted in increased demand for uns resulting in formation of KOL in 1869, AFL in 1886 and IWotW in 1905 creation of large no of unskilled wks due to development of mass prod and growth in heavy industry -> resulted in new wave of wks who wanted rep and protection progress in obtaining rights = slow but un mship grew from 500,000 @ end of 19th century to 2.5 mil in 1915 and 5 mil by 1920 -> sheer no of wks inc press on emps to recog uns but much still depended on fluctuations in eco

Question 34

The 1920s - industrial growth and eco change

Answer 34

eco boom allowed some of this progress to continue to meet a growing demand for new goods, e.g cars, not only were more wks taken on but real wages increased inc demand for wks and low level of unemp forced some emps to take conciliatory action, either in form of un recog or through welfare capitalism some gains made w/ emps like Henry Ford (cut wking day to 8hrs, doubled daily wages to $5 and introduce profit sharing BUT welfare capitalism limtied rights of wks

Question 35

The 1950s - growth and eco change (positive)

Answer 35

development of 50s = sim to 20s period of prosperity resulted in rapid improvement in eco pos wks, avg income by end of 50s = 35% increaseed than end of WW2 SoL rose increased prosperity sig wage increase

Question 36

The 1950s (negative)

Answer 36

increase in SoL not always reflected in improvement rights many wks less likely to support uns and risk their gains through industrial action trend continued into 70s w/ those involved in less concern for wks orgs

Question 37

Did industrial growth and eco change hinder labour and un rights?

Answer 37

start of period inc in mass prod was main factor in limiting un rights whereas after WW2 it was growth in white-collar emo w/ dev of high tech/service industry that had largest composit/ nature of wkforce had limiting impact @ start

Question 38

Growth or depression?

Answer 38

periods of depression usually saw an increase in un pos as well as a period of boom -> particaully true of Great Dep and 1930s although high levels of unemp made wks vulnerable (1929 = 3% ; 1933 = 25%) and grateful to have a job New Deal leg. to get ppl back to wk had a profound impact on un rights -> usually result of gov action as it attempted to deal w/ high unemp levels and increase conflict bet emps and employees

Question 39

The 19th century - eco change

Answer 39

exceptional growth in eco, esp during Gilded Age, created unprecedential demand for skilled labour in indus like construction craft uns saw add of these wks to job market as a threat to their pos and therefore unwilling to allow them to join their uns -> division weakened the un movement as even when unskilled wks attempted to est their own uns, employers could often resist due to lack of unity among wks change in industry structure and freq failure to gain un recog for unskilled wks resulted in large no of wks being exposed to dangerous conditions and long hours with no org to protect them

Question 40

The booms of the 1880s and 1920s

Answer 40

end of GA neg impacted pos of wkrs fall in demand meant that fewer wks needed so able to use lower wages due to readily avalible wkfroce wks = unable to combat this as uns lacked power to take on emps when they did, ensuing violence weakened un movement period after WW1 = sim to GA - boom of 1920s did little to advance labour rights - gained from rise in real wages and welfare capitalism (but it limited independence)

Question 41

Economic change post WW2

Answer 41

boom and changing nature of eco had neg impact on uns new tech inc automation during 50s so no of blue-collar wks decreased -> un mship in these industries fell by 50%, weakening bargaining power growth in white-collar wks due to eco changes, esp in service indus and gov sector -> some forced to sign non-un agreements - limit influ growing no of women emp - often did not join male-dominated uns (decline in % of wkforce who were members of uns during 50s/60s) 1970s: eco change added diff for org labour and eco growth slowed - decline in productivity. Caused: - rise in unemp - fall in real wages esp among unsk - inc reliance on high-tech indus (more skilled and white-collar wks more reluctat to join un) - relocation : high tech indus often relocated to areas outside maj cities and smaller enterpirses than large factories of earlier periods (harder to unionise) - reluctance to join by higher paid skilled wks (incentives not to)

Question 42

Federal government attitudes and actions

Answer 42

American gov generally only intervene in eco times of emergency for most of period, they adpoted a laissez-faire - favoured emp and allowed them to form large business coop (some like Rockerfeller or Carnegie built up large industrial enterprises) - emps able to exploit employees and deny them a voice - most consistent way gov hindered development gov allowed capitalism to thrive and businesses to wk toegther to make large profit

Question 43

The Pullman Strike 1894

Answer 43

gov action to support wks = unusual in early years of period -> the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890= an exception (restricted monopolies) Laissez-faire attittude ensured any intervention would be on emps side, which was case during Pullamn Strike - attorney general issued on injunction stopping anyone interfering w/ movement of mail - > legal order preventing/forcing un action to be carried out Pres Cleveland sent 2000 fed troops to break the strike troops fired at protests killed 4 people -> gov = willing to kill its own people SC legalised use of injunctions and issued Omnibus Indictment Act which prohinited strikers and wks representatives from trying to persuade others to strike -> indication that fed authorities = willing to prevent uns from exerting rights -> Act remained in force until Wagner Act in 1935 -> when wks did not disperse they were declared ... and the strike illegal

Question 44

How was the 19th century characterised?

Answer 44

by gov upholding pos of emps against uns

Question 45

Attitudes of fed gov during WW1 (pos)

Answer 45

gov intervened in 1914 - passed Clayton Anti-Trust Act limited use of injunctions against striking wks - allowed peaceful picketing, provided protestors did not damage property recog of uns + est the NWLB to negotiate w/ uns done to prevent strikes - successful (Samuel Gompers, leader AFL, ordered his large no of wks not to strike) gov action improved pos of uns -> resulted in inc un mship during war years

Question 46

Gov attitudes during WW1 (neg)

Answer 46

unwillingness of gov to intervene ensured wks had no means of seeking redress of grievances gov's first move towards supporting org labour = need for prod of war goods during WW1 not done out of sympathy for uns but need to sustain production and prevent strikes (potential to be reversed after war)

Question 47

Attitudes of gov during WW2 (pos)

Answer 47

similar process during WW2 when gov re-established NWLB improvement of pos of uns encouraged wks to join -> mship rose considerably

Question 48

Attitudes of gov (neg)

Answer 48

gov action imp position of wks but as w/ WW1 efforts due to essential to war, not due to sympathy contrast ; support for emps seen after WW2 many in gov esp Republicans (won 1946 election) believed power of uns too strong )pot for after war reversal) -> Taft-Harley Act 1947 - limited power of uns believed communists dominated labour movement and wanted to reduce their influence (Communsit0led groups were expelled, reducing mship no)

Question 49

The role of the Supreme Court in limiting wks rights

Answer 49

SC = crucial role im limiting - injunctions Lockner v NY case 1905 SC intervention reached climax in 1935 - declared NIRA to be unconstitutional Schechter brothers prosecuted by NIRA but SC ruled it was not a matter for the federal gov and declared that they had no right to intervene in matters that were concern of indiv. states (federal gov had acted unconstitutionally by taking power of states) -> NIRA which had brought in progress and protection for wks was destroyed

Question 50

Lockner v NY case 1905

Answer 50

SC rejected law that limited the no of hours a baker could work did not accept arguement that the law = an attempt to regulate the temrs of employment and described it as "unreasonable, uncessary and arbitary interference with the right and liberty of the individual to contract" judgement began a series which invalidated laws to regulate wking conditions up to WW2 - allowed yellow-dog contracts in Coppage v kansas case of 1913 - stated that minimum wage laws violated the due process clause in the Adkins v Children's Hospital case of 1923

Question 51

The impact of Pres Roosevelt (pos)

Answer 51

most sig gov intervention = during his presidency collapse in world trade necessitated introduction of a programme to get large no of the unemployed back to work and stop industrial unrest caused by the collapse New Deal leg transformed pos of wks/un more gov leg helped production and gave right to org uns and take part in collective bargaining and allowed closed shops and prevented companies from using blacklists est minimum wage - NIRA 1933 - Wagner Act 1935 - Creation of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) - Fair Labor Standard Act 1938 -> reduced power of emp and prevented them from limiting the rights of wks growth in un membership that followed these reforms suggests that gov action played a crucial role in growth of unionism during R's pres.

Question 52

Roosevelt (neg)

Answer 52

reluctant to improve power of wks -> may have seen potential in crease support for Democrats but main concern = bringing stability by ending conflict bewt emps and employees

Question 53

Attitudes of Presidents during the 60s/70s

Answer 53

perhaps only time that gov advanced cause of wks outside of war and national emergencies

Question 54

1960s

Answer 54

leg introduced as part of wider cr movement and the desire to reduce no of ppl living below poverty line -> as part of Kennedy's 'New Frontier' and Johnson's 'Great Society' a no of reforms introduced that improved pos of wks - Equal Pay Act 1963: wage discrimination on basis of gender = illegal - Civil Rights Act 1964: helped AAs and Hispanics who had faced discr at work - Economic Opportunity Act 1964: provided funds to train ppl and inc emp opportunity - Age Discrimination in Emp Act 1968: prevented discr against ppl aged 40-65

Question 55

1970s

Answer 55

Nixon - 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act: aimed to provide a wking environment which was free from hazards/unsanitart conditions -> reversed the pos whereby the health and safety of wks had been largely ignored - Department of Labour set the standards as employers had little influence Carter - est min wage - attempts by uns to persuade him to reform the National Labr Relations Act failed - > showed there still limits to gov willingness to support wks (more evident under R)

Question 56

Impact of President Reagan

Answer 56

towards end of period, presidential action played its most sig role in reducing labour movement influence Reagan = determined to reudce un power aim = remove restrictive regulations that had hindered US industry but protected wks wanted to privatise publically owned businesses -> not in wks interest clear that he believed the pendulum had swung too far in favour of wks/employees -> evident in gov response to 1981 PATCO Strike -> gov unwilling to allow air traffic controllers to be paid more for wking fewer hours -> gov concerned that such a strike would serious impact on eco (as well as disrupting holidays) -> Reagan: if wks did not return w/in 48hrs, contracts would be ended - redefinsed industrial relations gov gave clear message as to how they thought uns should proceed and continued woth Labor Relations Board (appointments to the board= made by pres and ensured they supported his views - any disputs likely to favour emp)

Question 57

impact of WW1 and WW2

Answer 57

inc demand in production offered emps opp to increase profits -> meant they had a more concilatory approach as a result of demands for labour wars encouraged gov intervention in the eco -> benefitted wks -> reflected in inc un mship 14-18 and 39-45 -> during WW1: 2.7 - 5 million (16-20) ; WW2: 8.9-14.8 million (40-45) rise in real wagees -> WW1 = 20%; WW2 = 70% (owing to overtime) -> raised standard of living

Question 58

Impact of WW1

Answer 58

benefits aided by NWLB -> recog un rep wks and gaurenteed their rights to join a un in return for no-strike policies and coop -emps responded pos to NWLB and intro of 8hr days

Question 59

Impact of WW2

Answer 59

NWLB largely took control of industry away from emps -> benefitted wks as in WW1 = supportive of uns pres = given power to take control of factories where strike action threatened war effort Labour shortages due to growth in armed forces and enduring of immigration during war helped strengthen pos of wks and provided opps for many who had been excluded from wkforce, inc AA and women However, despite gains, clear that emps sought to regain their control and limit/reserve gains that org labour had made during post-war periods -> indus unrest = common feature of 1919-20 and 1946-7 w/ 1919 seeing 4 mil wks involved in indus action and 1946 = 5 mil -> wks gains during war periods = often temp

Question 60

Relationship between skilled and unskilled workers (pos)

Answer 60

1930s - worker solidarity more evident 1935, some uns broke away from AFL (interested in amalgamating craft uns than helping unskilled wks) - solidarity breakaway group formed Committee on Industrial Organization which became Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) in 1937 - more rep for unskilled wks 1955 merger pf AFL with CIO -> AFLO-CIO - 85% of un members (16 mil) - able to exert more pressure over wages and conditions (best way to preserve interests was through greater solidarity) AFL-CIO secured benefits despite change - wages of un membership rose 20% and growth in mem from public sector

Question 61

Rel bet unskilled and skilled wks (neg)

Answer 61

1860s - uns = protect those in skilled and craft indus -> idea of strength in no = ignored (still a problem by outbreak of WW1) opp to unskilled wks limited size of un mship to limit press that wks could exert on gov and emps -> evident in New Deal years - large no of unskilled wks denied rights (e.g AFL) initial split into CIO from AFL weakened labour movement divisions post WW2 continued to limit un influence - change in eco = inc in white collar jobs -> less likely to join a un and were more willing to sign no-strike agreement - prop of wkforce in un = 31% -> limited power - division evident in PATCO strike - influence reduced - 70s and 80s continued to decline of blue-collar and inc in w-c (inscentives to not join un)

Question 62

Ethnic divisions

Answer 62

white wks = concerned AAs and European/Asian imms taking their jobs and working for lower pay - therefore, many uns did not allow them to join or offered little support many AAs = non-un and emps could exploit divisions

Question 63

Ethnic divisions during abolition and immigration

Answer 63

abolition of slavery meant that whites and imms = unwilling to work w/ them -> meant that emps could lay off whites and replace with AAs at times of unrest - limited striking ability due to fear of being replaced emps able to sack any wks who attempted to org action -> removal of the men who might have been able to effecitvely lead uns as at time when wks orgs needed to be united to gain rights, emps = able to ignore demands and exploit divisions exacerbated by arrival of imms - wk for lower pay -> unskilled not allowed to join

Question 64

Continuing ethnic divisions in the 20th century

Answer 64

1894 - Pullman Strike -> many affiliates of AFL excluded AAs so harder for porters to org -> struggle lasted until 1937 -> coll barg agreement w/ Pullman Company racial divisions and eco separation (Washington) = many AA not want to join uns led by white ppl -> weakened unity of wkforce until post-WW2 divisions remained during CR movement period -> uns did not promote equal opps 1971-90 = 2.5 million Asian imm (esp after Vietnam War) weakened uns -> lower wages and less intent on joining and willing to work for firms that ran non-un enterprises

Question 65

Gender divisions

Answer 65

no of women in the wkforce increased but faced divisions (esp AA and NA) campaign for the vote took priority over joining uns

Question 66

Women and TU in ther period to 1945

Answer 66

main concern = limit exploitation uns dominated by men so in 1903 the Women's Trade Union League (WTUL) -> aimed to enc women to org into uns -> saw gaining vote as best way to imp -> wanted 8hr day and min wage -> conflict w/ male uns who believed it was their right to campaign for it (not all male uns supported this and those that did did do to stop firms employing women as they were cheaper) WW1 and WW2 = drastic increase in women emp in wkforce -> some joined male uns

Question 67

Women and TU in the post-war period

Answer 67

much wk = part time and were not int in joining uns fulltime were concerned with childcare and paid maternity leave -> saw uns as best way to achieve this so were more attracted to uns than feminist movement and no of uns increased in 70s changing eco situation and delcine in un mship in later 70s many women in high tech induss = had welfare schemes so women less interested in joining uns (pos weakened)

Question 68

Union violence

Answer 68

discouraged wks from joining uns and did not want to be ass w/ such acts -> particular problem in 1st 1/2 of period evidence of mship decline after violence presented a reason for gov and emps to resist un demands first clear indication of impact of violence = Molly Magins 1873 - Irish imms wanted better wking conditions - derailed camages and set fire to coal tips - murdered superintendent - > wks = reluctant to join uns (disapprove or feared intimidation) - limited power

Question 69

The Haymarket Affair 1886

Answer 69

strike at McCormick Harvester Plant = violence bet police and strikers (Chicago) 4 strikers killed - bombs thrown in protest march that followed 7 policemen killed - police returned fire, killed 4 more trouble blamed on German iims no evi dound but 5 = executed strikers actions encouraged dislike of uns -> blamed for events weakened and divided labour movement NA = even more suspicious of imms destoryed rep of KOL and led some uns to breakawayt (join AFL or IDotW)

Question 70

The Homestead Strike 1892

Answer 70

prob most famous violent strike between Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers and Carnegie Steel Company lasted 143 days there had been trouble at the wks in 1882 and 1889 but these resulted in growth in un mship 1892 violence due to comapny's decision to advertise for replacement wks after locking the un out of the plant following failure to reach coll bargaining agreement culminated w/ shooting and stabbing of Henry Frick, ruthless millionaire who had been brought in to break un -> led to collapse of strike the violence broke the un and resulted in dramatic decline in mship (1891 = 24,000 ; 1894 = 10,000 ; 1909= 6300) Carnegie Steel Company = non-unionised for another 40yrs not a single steel plant in Pennsylvania was unionised in 1900 harmed progress of wks gaining rights -> emps in other indus = more suspicious of granting recog to uns violence continued in to 20th century provided emps with justification to resist calls for more peaceful/less common -> perhaps recog its limitations achieveing aims

Question 71

The attitudes of management to organised labour and strikes

Answer 71

used powers of appeal to gov for support start resisted introduction of health/safety measures would impact rights 1892 Homestead Strike - locked wks out called in state militia agents 1894 Pullman Strike appealed to gov -> troops Henry Ford: used secutrity men to attack/intimidate potential un organisers Pullman dispute 1920s-30s: sacked un leaders and used spies 1920s/30s -> many companies set up uns -> offered benefits to negate need for uns emps made to sign no-strike and non-un agreements scab labour brought in to break strikes some emps ignored law over wage agreements emps gen resisted claims of wks orgs first half - break strike, intimidate wks -> discourage othera frm joining second half - able to erode some of the legislation gains made by wks

Question 72

Union membership

Answer 72

grew until 1980s but was not able to attract all wks start - deliberate by uns e.g refusing AA to join/not protecting unskilled wks -> exacerbated by violence -> dissuaded many from joins after WW2 - failure to attract due to chanfes in industrial structure and native of resultant wkforce therefore emps did not have to deal w/ large no of trade unionists which would have given strength and press emps able to bring non-un wks to resist un demands end - 1980 = 20 mil, 1995 = 16.5 mil no of days lost to strikes over halved from 1980 unionisation also affected by decision to est factories in developing countrues to est -> decreased no of un recruits -> reinforced by growth in service sector which trad attracted fewer un members