The strategic approaches committee and the Organizing Institute were institutional devices that the AFL-CIO created to promote targeting and a more scientific approach to organization. A committee on the needs of the working family was another response to the growing importance of the female factor.
Female Membership and Leadership in Selected Large Unions, 1990
Convention resolutions have called for federal support for day care. But the AFL-CIO has tended to steer clear of such controversial issues as abortion and the achievment of pay equity through job evaluation. As far as union leadership is concerned, there is still a large female deficit, as the data in the table above indicated. The American labor movement remains male-dominated.
The flawed record of unions vis women and racial minorities is reflected not only in failures of organizing, but by an internal reluctance or inability to address issues raised by the feminist and civil rights movements. Women's presence as union members, for example, falls short of their presence in the labor force as a whole, while gains in leadership have been "quite modest" in relation to gains in membership. More fundamentally, Milkman argues, women have been organized not as women, but "as members of occupational groups which happened to be largely female in composition," with the result that women were "now squarely in, but generally still not of the labor movement". To the extent that men and women differ in preferred cultural styles and forms of leadership, unions have tended to reflect and to value male (often macho) approaches.
While the late 1960s saw the emergence of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers as a rank-and-file protest movement, more recent responses such as the Coalition of Labor Union Women and the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists have been largely concentrated among elected officials and staff, focusing, in the case of CLUW, on placing more women in leadership positions "without challenging the basic structure or character of the labor movement" (Milkman 1985:305).
Labor became increasingly distant from other social movements, and unions were not seen -either by unions themselves or by social movement activists – as a primary means of addressing the issues raised by the civil rights, feminist, and environmental movements. Instead these concerns were primarily addressed through new legal rights, governmental regulation, new social movement organizations, and class action lawsuits. Unions participated in these processes but were not generally regarded as crucial actors.
The decline of organizing in the postwar era coincides with an increased focus on contract negotiation and the enforcement of work rules through the grievance system, both of which led to an increase in union staff. Within this framework, the union's shop-floor presence was expressed primarily through its negotiation of work rules and their enforcement through the grievance procedure. Grievances were virtually the only way for workers to address working conditions and conflicts with supervisors within a Taylorist organization of production; the grievance procedure accomplishes this through a multi-step, quasi-judicial process that strengthens the role of staff and attenuates workers' involvement. Burawoy notes the individualizing effect of the grievance process: "Each time a collective grievance or an issue of principle outside the contract, affecting the entire membership... is raised" the union representative responded "Have you got a grievance? ... If you haven't, give the floor to someone else."
The limitations of the staff-driven union were also evident in politics. Form's detailed study of Ohio demonstrates that "most union officials think they have a political education program, but most members are not aware of it". Four-fifths were not aware of their union's political action program, and very few members were involved in electoral and party activities. Croteau argues workers hold many progressive political views, but--for a variety of reasons, with the weakness of unions one of the most important--workers doubt their ability to have a political impact and hence see little point in getting involved
A number of factors influenced the slow-down in women's labor force participation rate growth. These include a decline in participation among women under age 25, and a long-term slowdown in participation growth among women in the prime working-age group. The rise in women's labor force participation rate came to a virtual halt as these factors combined with the 1990-91 recession, which had the greatest effect on women's employment of any recession over the last 30 years, and an uncharacteristically slow employment recovery that continued through the early part of 1993 before gaining momentum.
Who Benefits From Unions? Before accounting for the decline in union enrollment, it suffices to consider who is impacted by today’s unions? Literature is consistent in that members of strong unions tend to make more money and receive better benefits than non-union workers in the same jobs. While unions generally protect all of its members, certain socioeconomic groups reap even greater benefits than others. In Ohio for example, workers in lower-paying jobs, minorities, and women that are enrolled in unions receive pay that more significantly closes the gaps in compensation between: the non-educated and educated; women and men; and African Americans and Caucasians than do their nonunion equivalents. Median earnings of non-union Ohioans without and with high school diplomas in 1997 were $6.50 per hour and $8.75 per hour, respectively. A union member without a diploma, however, received $11.20 per hour. Again, these data are similar for non-union and union women as compared to men, and non-union. Where union males made $2.50 per hour (median) more than non-union males in same jobs, union women made $3.50 per hour more than non-union females, and so on for African Americans versus Caucasians. Furthermore, union membership compliments higher wages for these affected classes with increased job security and with more equal and fair treatment than those not in unions.
However, in an effort to improve women’s relative earnings and labor market status, US government has adopted policies that promote equal treatment in the workplace. The two most common types of such policies are equal-pay and equal-opportunity measures. These measures do not target women for protection or special treatment, but they do have the explicit goal of improving women’s labor market outcomes by eliminating wage and employment discrimination against women. The “equal pay for equal work” clause requires employers to The equal-pay clause can change the impact that other protective measures for female workers have on the labor market. In particular, if the equal-pay clause is binding, it will limit firms’ ability to lower female wages relative to male wages in response to a labor market shock, such as the imposition of firm-financed maternity benefits. If employers cannot work around the restrictions, the equal-pay clause acts as a price floor on women’s relative wages. In such a scenario, the labor demand and supply curves may shift following a maternity leave mandate, but women’s wages are no longer free to fully adjust downward. In the face of such wage rigidity, the change in relative labor costs from providing maternity leave will induce firms to substitute male workers for female workers, or to substitute capital for labor. The end result is a female labor surplus at the wage floor.
In practice, equal-pay legislation has mixed success in improving women’s relative wages. Equal pay tends to have more success in countries such as Australia, Britain, and Canada, where collective bargaining is common and differential pay rates by gender are legislated but relatively easy to change. Equal pay has less impact in countries such as the United States, where the wage setting mechanism is more decentralized. Furthermore, enforcement has proven to be a major obstacle, particularly in developing countries that do not have sufficient resources to create viable enforcement methods. Also, legislation that requires equal pay for equal work within an occupation and enterprise will have little impact on women’s relative wages if women are segregated by occupation and industry. Numerous governments have tackled the occupational segregation problem head on by promoting employment redistribution with legislation that improves women’s access to occupations in which they formerly had few opportunities. These provisions prohibit sex-based discrimination in many aspects of employment, including hiring, training, promotion, and firing. Closely-related measures that prevent discrimination on the basis of marital status or family responsibilities have similar objectives in equalizing job opportunities for men and women. While technically gender-neutral, such laws disproportionately affect women since job prohibitions for married workers or workers with families do not generally apply to men or predominantly-male occupations.
In theory, if equal-opportunity measures are effective in reducing discrimination against women in male-dominated occupations, the demand for female labor will shift rightward as firms hire more women at any given wage. On the supply side, the creation of new job opportunities will encourage some women to shift occupations and other women to join the labor force. However, there could be a negative short-run effect on female labor supply if women choose to temporarily exit the labor force in order to acquire sufficient skills and education for the new positions. Hence the short-run effect of equal-opportunity measures on equilibrium employment, and
the corresponding wage, is ambiguous. In the longer run, the employment effect should be positive as women complete the desired amount of education and training and reenter the labor market. Women’s relative wages should rise if the legislation succeeds in reducing women’s concentration in relatively low-paying occupations. As occupational segregation declines, an equal-pay clause may in turn become more important in boosting women’s relative earnings. Because men might also face discrimination in such female-dominated jobs as nursing, childcare provision, and secretarial work, equal opportunity measures could in principle be used to assist men in obtaining traditionally female occupations. This approach would help to further reduce occupational segregation, provide a broader support base for the policy, and help to combat
gender stereotypes in the work force.
US government has responded to the equal-pay issue with comparable worth policies that contain broader definitions for work of equal value across occupational categories. Governments have also responded with affirmative action laws that require greater efforts on the part of employers to recruit and hire women for occupations in which they are under-represented. Proponents of comparable worth and affirmative action argue that such policies reduce sex-based discrimination, a major cause of persistent male-female pay differentials, and they have a bigger impact on the gender pay gap than the equal-pay clause. Comparable worth may also reduce the gender earnings gap more quickly than equal opportunity measures if the legislation calls for an immediate rise in relative wages in female-dominated jobs. Critics counter that these policies are difficult to implement and enforce. Such policies prevent employers from responding to market signals, thus creating labor shortages and surpluses, and they may even lead to reverse discrimination against men.
Although women have, as is generally true in most American labor organizations, and elsewhere, occupied more than half of the nonprofessional positions, only a few have achieved policymaking status. There has been little or no differentiation on the basis of sex with respect to initial salaries for people hired in the same grade but men tend to be hired into higher grades and to be promoted more quickly than women. Many of the problems faced by women centre around the relatively rigid division of the staff into clerical and professional categories – with some privileges going only to the senior international professional levels and full diplomatic perks only to the directorial staff. Staff in the lower professional grades, which encompass the major portion of the women professionals, do not have privileges, such as tax-free gas for example, enjoyed by the senior staff (D1 and above). On the clerical level there were initially problems arising from the fact that international staff were paid more than local staff, even when their duties were clerical (rather than "housekeeping" ) and often required multilingual skills. This problem no longer exists at headquarters since local scales have been eliminated but many continue for staff recruited in the field. In the early days, in contrast to today, a far larger proportion of the clerical and other staff in the general service category was male.
An early problem of discrimination was whether or not wives could be employed and whether a woman would have to resign if she married a member of the staff. Here the decisions were for a long time clearly in favor of men but the situation is now much improved.
With respect to men, how have concepts about women in society changed over the years and how has the participation of women within the Organization evolved? For roughly the first thirty years the major emphases were on protecting women against exploitation – both for their own sake and because their cheap labor posed a threat to male workers – and on women as procreators of the next generation. To protect them against labor injurious to their health and to foster their childbearing under the most favorable conditions were the prime objectives. Such protective measures, initially restricted to industrial workers, were extended to women in agriculture and on plantations, then later to part-time workers, teachers, nurses, and to certain aspects of domestic employment. Gradually the emphasis shifted from protection to such questions as equal remuneration and the abolition of discrimination in the range of jobs open to women. There was also a growing recognition that women, too, had human rights. The next and latest step concerned equality in the broadest sense -- the integration of women as equal partners in the whole fabric of society and in economic development. One aspect of this has been the recognition of the mutual responsibility of both parents for child rearing and other family obligations, coupled with provisions such as child-care centers and flexible hours of work, to facilitate this integration.
How, over the years, and under the leadership of eight different directors, have women prospered as members of the staff? What has been the role of the staff union with respect to women? What role have women played within the staff union? Has any true collective bargaining been possible within the framework of an international civil service? Is the status of women any greater -- or less – than in other international organizations? Is there any correlation between the role of women in the Office and prior careers in their own countries? Does the status of women nationally – and in national or regional policymaking bodies – affect their role? Have women participants in American labor organizations and conferences influenced the staff role of women? Unfortunately, there are too many variables and intangibles for definitive answers to most of these questions, but some general lines for future action may emerge from the exercise.
The impact of the women labor movement is not easy to ascertain. There is the record of ratifications of conventions, very spotty on the whole. However, this does not tell the whole story as it does not take into account the numerous recommendations and resolutions that buttress and amplify the conventions. Moreover, ratification and government compliance is only the first step. While, as we have seen, the Committee of Experts appointed by the Governing Body and the Conference Committee on Standard s examine in detail national compliance with the provisions of the conventions, analysis of the changes that have been wrought in the status of women is much more elusive. If one looks only at the record of ratifications, whether they apply to men or women, one is struck first with how slow the process is in most cases. Thus, for example, in the ten-year span between 1976 and 1986, only one convention adopted during that period achieved thirty ratifications and the balance substantially less. Another finding is that only 9 of 168 conventions adopted by 1989 had been ratified by more than 100 countries. Protective legislation for either sex has received short shrift, except with regard to Underground Work for Women ( 1935) which 88 countries ratified and somewhat smaller numbers for the Night Work for Women and its revisions -- 59 for the 1919 version and 37 and 62, respectively, for the 1934 and 1938 revisions. The most encouraging aspect of this somewhat bleak picture regarding ratification of conventions is the fact that so many of those that commanded major support dealt with equal rights for women. For example, the Equal Remuneration Convention (100) as of 1989 had been ratified by 109 countries, and the Convention on Discrimination in Employment and Occupation by the same number.
The increases in the number of women represented in part the growing number of countries, but even more the social changes that had been taking place all over the world. Many states, even some European ones, did not send women until long after they joined any labor union. As might be expected since the trade union movement is so new in the developing countries, government representatives outnumbered workers by a substantial margin. There was even a larger discrepancy between women workers' and employers' representatives, the latter amounting to about one-third of the former. This reflects the fact that only recently have women been admitted to the upper ranks of business. In some of the early years there were no women from employer organizations. However, the number of such women has grown steadily, while there has been a relative decrease in the influence of women from trade unions. An increasing number of women have achieved leadership roles in management of industries and in employer organizations. The growing preoccupation of women labor union members, however, with their role in their own national unions, coupled with the continued reluctance of male unionists to share the stage with their female counterparts, has lessened their influence in the labor unions. Another reason for the relative decrease in female trade union participation is because so many women workers in developing countries have not yet been unionized. In recognition of this fact ILO has launched a vigorous campaign, including educational seminars in a number of developing countries, to stimulate union membership. This, as noted previously, has become a dominant trend -- technical assistance linked to legal instruments.
So, does the women labor movement have historical value?
It is open to question whether even the memory of the American labor movement will survive the present generation, and one can ask whether the explanation is to be found in the biases of those who, up to now, have done historical research on America. After all, we are talking about a substantially larger and more influential organizational body than many others that have found their way into the history books.
For those who refuse to accept anything less than a complete historical perspective on America, the basic premise must be that such a perspective also include the story of women who sought to advance the cause of the political arm of the labor movement. They were the women who actually propagated the same ideas that have played such an important role in transforming twentieth-century American society-ideas of demonstrably progressive potential for social development.
Whatever one's personal opinion of the radical movements and their activities among women in the United States, it is wrong to cover up their presence and their history. The contributions of labor organizations to the history of women in American society claim equal interest with the contributions of other organizations, and there can be no doubt that their membership rosters included just as many hard-working, law-abiding citizens as the rosters of any other comparable body. The women labor movement was inspired by a pure strain of altruism: it worked for the welfare of all, not simply the individual. It stands to reason that this objective carries far more weight in comparison with the outlook of people whose sole objective in life is the pursuit of material gain.
Finally, I believe that the American women’s labor movement toward liberation is becoming more spontaneous and individual and less organized and collective: the various women’s organizations, women’s groups and political parties, that we had believed to be the main pillars of the movement, tend to diffuse the movement. The main battle must be carried out to the individual woman: in the kitchen, the bedroom, the classroom, the workplace, the voting booth and whenever the two sexes meet. The road is long but the dream is gradually becomes a reality.
Bibliography:
- AFL-CIO. 1996. Elected Leadership Task Force on Organizing. Organizing for Change, Changing to Organize!
- Blum LM. 1991. Between Feminism and Labar: The Significance of the Comparable Worth Movement. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
- Bronfenbrenner KL. 1994. Employer behavior in certification elections and first-contract campaigns: implications for labor law reform. See Friedman et al 1994, pp. 75-89
- Cornfield D. 1991. The US labor movement: its development and impact on social inequality and politics. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 17: 27-49
- Cornfield D. 1993. Integrating U.S. labor leadership: union democracy and the ascent of ethnic and racial minorities and women into national union offices. Res. Sociol. Organ. 2:51-74
- Foerster A. 1996. "Don't whine. organize!" The AFL-CIO Organizing Institute: a rejuvenation of U.S. labor? Presented at Annu. Meet. Am. Soc. Assoc., New York
- Goldfield M. 1987. The Decline of Organized Labor in the United States. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
- International Labour Office. 1987. Women Workers: Protection or Equality? Vol. 6, no. 2, Conditions of Work, Digest. Geneva: International Labour Office
- Melcher D, Eichstedt JL, Eriksen S, Clawson D. 1992. Women's participation in local union leadership: the Massachusetts experience. Indust. Labor Relat. Rev. 45:267-80
- Ruth Millman, "The New Gender Politics in Organized Labor," Industrial Relations Re-
search Association, Fortieth Annual Proceedings, p. 351
- Shostak AB. 1991. Robust Unionism: Innovations in the Labor Movement. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press