How did US Labour Movement change in the period 1945-60?
How did US Labour Movement change in the period 1945-60?
This essay examines the changes that took place in the period 1945 to 1960.
Many of these changes were brought about not by the unions themselves but by
external factors. American culture espouses the cult of individuality and the US
labour movement without the socialist or social Democratic background of
europe was more prone to the influence of economics, politics and social opinion.
Economically this essay will show that as industry changed the unions changed
likewise and union membership reflected the changing job market. Politically
the unions with no strong political party affiliations [unlike British trade unions and
Labour party] were at the mercy of public opinion and bandwagon politics as will
be seen with the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Finally this essay will examine the
increasing role of women and ethnic minorities in trade union membership and
argues that their increased influence was in spite of and not because of trade
union practices.
The American Federation of Labour founded by skilled craftsmen in1886 emerged as the
only permanent national focus for the political struggle of the American worker. The AFL
scorned wider goals and concentrated exclusively on wages, hours and conditions.
Ethnic diversity, race, the large agricultural sector, the western frontier, better
Opportunities, greater equality, a higher standard of living all inhibited the growth of
class consciousness and the rise of labour unions. American unions consisted mainly
of wage-earning, manual workers, skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled, usually hourly
paid and lacking much in job security. Such unions were based in industries such as mining,
iron and steel, lumber trade, manufacturing, transport and construction. Part of the
working class was white-collared, part uniformed like railwaymen. [Renshaw, 1991,
pp1-2]
The AFL had been in existence for fifty years to protect craftsmen. It regarded semi-
Skilled and unskilled workers in mass production as inferior, unorganised and a
danger because they could undercut wages and break strikes. Lewis and Hillman,
industrial union activists, proposed to cut clean across AFL jurisdiction by launching
the Committee of Industrial Organisations [CIO] and organising all workers in each
industry into one union. At a time of falling craft union membership the CIO proposed
industrial unions were a further threat to AFL strength. Industrial unions aimed at
everyone, regardless of ethnic origin or gender, blacks and women. [Renshaw, 1991, p23]
Wartime strikes, undemocratic union practices, mounting anti-Communist hysteria,
racial discrimination and jurisdictional strikes all caused mounting criticism of unions.
In 1947 perceived union indifference to public reaction helped to create a climate of
opinion which made ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
the Committee of Industrial Organisations [CIO] and organising all workers in each
industry into one union. At a time of falling craft union membership the CIO proposed
industrial unions were a further threat to AFL strength. Industrial unions aimed at
everyone, regardless of ethnic origin or gender, blacks and women. [Renshaw, 1991, p23]
Wartime strikes, undemocratic union practices, mounting anti-Communist hysteria,
racial discrimination and jurisdictional strikes all caused mounting criticism of unions.
In 1947 perceived union indifference to public reaction helped to create a climate of
opinion which made the severely restrictive Taft-Hartley Act possible. The problem was
compounded by the unions themselves, had they shown any willingness to reform
restrictive law might have been avoided or softened. This was heavily punished with
the Taft-Hartley Act. [Renshaw, 1991, p89]
During the war and again in 1946, Democratic Congresses had passed legislation that
restricted union power, only to encounter presidential vetoes. Voters in 1946 elected
Republican majorities to both houses for the first time since 1930. Supporting these
Republicans were many Conservative Democrats, especially from the South and other
areas of the country where labour unions were politically unpopular. The coalition seeking
to curb labour benefited from intense lobbying by employer groups and was led in the
House by Fred Hartley, a strong anti-union Republican from New Jersey. In the Senate
the key leader was Robert Taft of Ohio, son of the former President. Acting quickly they
drafted the so-called Taft-Hartley bill in early 1947. Taft-Hartley was a bold effort to
weaken the pro-labour Wagner Act of 1935. A highly publicised clause authorised the
President to call for an eighty-day ''cooling off'' period before strikes could be called that
might affect the national interest. The bill prohibited secondary boycotts which enabled
workers to boycott the goods of allegedly anti-labour companies. States could pass what
became known as ''right to work'' laws that were expected to impose major obstacles to
union organising. Taft-Hartley aroused storms of outrage from labour leaders who
damned it as ''fascistic'' and as a ''slave labour act.'' The ban on closed shops lessened
the control that a few strong unions had had over hiring, but most unions managed to
live with the law. The major industrial unions bargained with employers and aggressive
unions flourished even in right-to-work states. By the 1950s what mattered the most in
labour relations was not government law such as Taft-Hartey but the relative power of
unions and management in the economic marketplace. Where unions were traditionally
strong their influence was maintained. Weaker unions suffered because of the new
legislation and were unable to grow. The Act reaffirmed labour's basic right to bargain
collectively. [Patterson, 1996, pp50-52]
American unions were losing the support of a whole generation including support among
blacks and women. Unions had offered an attractive career to the young in the years
between 1935 and 1960 but this was no longer true. A great majority of unions were
unorganised. Demographic, economic, social and technological change from the mid
960s rapidly transformed the nature of the labour force. Automation reduced the
need for workers in basic industries, for example, car companies. Walter Reuther saw
the need for action by the AFL-CIO and he argued that labour must help the poor by
creating community unions and launching aggressive organising campaigns. He
wanted the United Autoworkers [UAW] to fight for more democracy in the labour
movement. The UAW, the most democratic, cleanest union which had always
backed the Democratic Party emerged as the most autocratic, corrupt and successful
exponent of business unionism which had always supported the Republicans. The
Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959 had been designed to put an end to this corrupt unionism,
but had done little effectively. [Renshaw, 1991, pp170-171]
In the 1950s the United States, like other advanced industrial nations was depending
less on heavy manual labour in factories and mines and more on service work and
office based employment. Larger percentages of people escaped hard physical labour,
earned higher wages and enjoyed more comfortable lives. Unions began to lose their
potential to promote socio-economic mobility. It did not necessarily help the prospects
of low paid workers that many of the most powerful labour leaders of the early and mid
950s became increasingly cautious and conservative. Chief among these leaders was
George Meany, a strongly anti-Communist labour bureaucrat who became head of the
newly emerged AFL-CIO in December 1955. The merger symbolised the weakening
state of the CIO which became a sort of junior partner. Walter Reuther, who presided
over the Industrial Union Department became increasingly disenchanted with Meany,
who showed little interest in mobilising the masses of unskilled and semi-skilled
workers. Although a few unions of retail clerks, service employees and communication
workers managed to expand most grew slowly if at all in the 1950s. [Patterson, 1996, 325-
326]
In terms of bringing about racial equality in either the work place or society as a whole
the unions were at best ineffective and at worst were protectors of a racist status quo.
Crime was endemic in the ghetto and law-abiding citizens lived in perpetual fear. Blacks
committed the great majority of criminal acts against members of their own race.
Between 1946 and 1960 the nation enjoyed an enormous expansion in the consumption
of goods and services. The normal forty-hour work week became the actual schedule in
most workplaces by 1960 usually accompanied by an eight-hour day. By 1957 ninety-
one per cent of the workers covered by major collective bargaining agreements got
paid vacations and office workers fared even better. [Bernstein, 1991, pp19-21]
The most significant increase of the Communist party in racial and gender politics
shaped labour and community struggles in the early 1950s. The hostility of rank-and-
filers and the cold reception given to left-wing union initiatives by management halted
real progress. Recruitment of blacks into either union was especially difficult. Local
blacks were consistently denied jobs and were steered into low-skilled, menial positions.
Myers' recollection, a retired Italian American shop steward recalled
''In the turbine division.....we had about 60 of them [blacks], and they were all porters; they swept up around and cleaned the toilets.''1
White shop- floor resistance and union stewards' incomplete dedication to racial equality
continually reinforced management's racist hiring and job placement policies. For the
above reasons of apathy and a failure to recognise the large number of potential
union members in the black working population, union recruitment of ethnic minorities
was very poor. [Zahari, G, 1996, The Journal ofAmerican History Sept 1996 522-523]
American unionism was predominantly white, working class, blue-collar and male
In both composition and outlook. Its failure to grow came not only from the
external political climate but also its own failure to recognise possible growth
areas. This was the case not only in its failure to bring the black working class
Into union membership but also it lack of vision in ignoring the increasingly
important place of women in the workforce. The increasing role of women in
the workforce was due not to women inspiration but due to external political
and economic conditions, for example, a shortage of manpower brought about in the
Second world war.
World war two complicated women's workplace culture. Hundred of thousands of
women entered into auto work for the first time during the war often performing jobs
considered ''men's work''. This increased the frequency and hightened the tensions of
male and female interaction. Higher wages and increased numbers strengthened
women's shop floor power. They often used that power to assert control of working
conditions. As they took up new positions women auto workers became more willing
to challenge gender discrimination.
' Working through both formal and informal union networks, women demanded equal
pay for equal work and equal access to defence work.'2
It is important therefore to recognise the importance of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947,
how it successfully placed major obstacles in the way of union organisation resulting
in the weaker unions suffering in growth.
Myers, D interview by Zahavi, Nov 11, 1992, audiotape, side 1, tape 1
2 Gabin, Feminism In the Labour Movement, 47-100
32