What do you think?
Rate this book
Reviving the Strike: How Working People Can Regain Power and Transform America
If the American labor movement is to rise again, it will not be as a result of electing different politicians, the passage of legislation, or improved methods of union organizing. Rather, workers will need to rediscover the power of the strike. Not the ineffectual strike of today, where employees meekly sit on picket lines waiting for scabs to take their jobs, but the type of strike capable of grinding industries to a halt—the kind employed up until the 1960s. In Reviving the Strike , labor lawyer Joe Burns draws on economics, history and current analysis in arguing that the labor movement must redevelop an effective strike based on the now outlawed traditional labor tactics of stopping production and workplace-based solidarity. The book challenges the prevailing view that tactics such as organizing workers or amending labor law can save trade unionism in this country. Instead, Reviving the Strike offers a fundamentally different solution to the current labor crisis, showing how collective bargaining backed by a strike capable of inflicting economic harm upon an employer is the only way for workers to break free of the repressive system of labor control that has been imposed upon them by corporations and the government for the past seventy-five years.
224 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2011
12 people are currently reading
281 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
July 5, 2011
This book is a great manifesto for renewing working class power. I'm not sure if Joe Burns would agree with the classification. He never calls it a manifesto and he foregoes the flourishes associated with the form.
It's not a history of the strike, though it gives a sketch of the history to draw lessons about the strike's importance then and relevance today. It's not a book on labor law either. But Burns adeptly steers the reader through the legislation and cases that shaped what he calls "the system of labor control."
Burns uses the story of how working class power has been lost in order to point toward how it can be regained. Rather than give another academic diagnosis of the patient, he questions the crutches with which it limps along--new organizing, corporate campaigns, social unionism. Sometimes the book's arguments are too slapdash but I don't ever expect to be fully convinced by a manifesto.
What I really appreciate is that Burns seeks to instigate the readers, to get them to take responsibility for a future where the labor movement no longer lets labor be treated--either by trade unionists or by capitalists--as just another commodity used in production. He does this effectively, with a clear command of labor history and labor law, and with a style meant not to distance either topic from those who can determine what comes next.
It's not a history of the strike, though it gives a sketch of the history to draw lessons about the strike's importance then and relevance today. It's not a book on labor law either. But Burns adeptly steers the reader through the legislation and cases that shaped what he calls "the system of labor control."
Burns uses the story of how working class power has been lost in order to point toward how it can be regained. Rather than give another academic diagnosis of the patient, he questions the crutches with which it limps along--new organizing, corporate campaigns, social unionism. Sometimes the book's arguments are too slapdash but I don't ever expect to be fully convinced by a manifesto.
What I really appreciate is that Burns seeks to instigate the readers, to get them to take responsibility for a future where the labor movement no longer lets labor be treated--either by trade unionists or by capitalists--as just another commodity used in production. He does this effectively, with a clear command of labor history and labor law, and with a style meant not to distance either topic from those who can determine what comes next.
May 1, 2013
Essential reading. Very clear & straight-forward. Makes a compelling case for the need for workers to figure out how to conduct effective, production halting strikes if the labor movement is to be revived. If you look at the history of the American labor movement, it has grown and declined in cycles. The "normal" condition has actually been a situation of decline. The decade of the '20s was similar to the present period...decline in union membership, few strikes, rising income inequality, growing power of the plutocratic elite. The labor movement has only grown during periods of mass strike waves & widespread insurgency... 1915 to 1923, 1933 to 1937, 1942 to 1946, and the public sector strikes of the late '60s and early '70s. What Burns doesn't consider so much is that in these periods of insurgency in the past, new kinds of organizations have been created...due to the entrenched opposition of the bureaucrats to disruptive mass action.
May 25, 2012
Joe Burns gets right down to business. Without the strike, unions might as well pack up and go home now. Today unions are entangled in a web of bad legislation and worse legal decisions that eviscerated the Wagner Act and resulted in atrocities like Taft-Hartley. Time to get back to basics with mass picketlines and industry-wide strikes in the context of global workers solidarity. Easier said then done, but the longer we put it off, the harder it's going to be,
February 28, 2016
"... [L]abor is not a commodity but a part of ... life, and that, therefore, the courts must treat it as if it were a part of ... life. I am sorry that there were any judges in the United States who had to be told that." - Woodrow Wilson signing the Clayton Act into law, 1914
June 27, 2013
This is an amazing book. Though it is rife with typos, if you can overlook minor errors of spelling, the message comes through loud and clear. This should be a must read for anyone doing 'social change' work or activism, but especially for labor activists and leftists. In a few short pages, Burns gives an illuminating overview of labor history but all to support his main points: that in order to regain strength, the labor movement needs to reclaim the use of production-halting strikes and workplace-based solidarity. Burns argues that these twin tools were sacrificed by the labor movement almost as much as they have been legislated away and outlawed by the ruling class over the last 80 years. I'm probably biased as a wobbly but I this book also challenged me as a former community organizer, a wobbly organizer and a longtime political activist. Even if you disagree with Burns, if you think that some of his fundamental insistence on strikes and solidarity could be better defended, I think that if it is reflected upon seriously, the main points of this book will force most organizers to rethink their outlook.
Read it.
Read it.
September 25, 2013
This is a very good book because it brought an argument to me that I do not see very often. I have obviously heard that Taft-Hartley is, to put it mildly, not good for organized labor. I have not heard the same complaints raised about the Wagner Act.
This book argues that everything about the modern labor system harms organized labor because physical massive strikes with secondary strikes are the only way to get benefits for labor. Only by actively harming a business, which means physical control of the capital such that replacement workers cannot be used, Burns argues, can workers force favorable negotiations. This is an interesting thought.
What was perhaps even more interesting is that the book is littered with references to books that similarly describe how labor will be resurgent, although they all seem to argue different points. I guess this is a burgeoning genre, although I'm not sure who reads them.
Short, to the point, somewhat counterintuitive and somewhat transgressive. Interesting.
The book is hurt by some minor typoes and sloppiness. They're more noticeable because they're simple errors and the book is short.
This book argues that everything about the modern labor system harms organized labor because physical massive strikes with secondary strikes are the only way to get benefits for labor. Only by actively harming a business, which means physical control of the capital such that replacement workers cannot be used, Burns argues, can workers force favorable negotiations. This is an interesting thought.
What was perhaps even more interesting is that the book is littered with references to books that similarly describe how labor will be resurgent, although they all seem to argue different points. I guess this is a burgeoning genre, although I'm not sure who reads them.
Short, to the point, somewhat counterintuitive and somewhat transgressive. Interesting.
The book is hurt by some minor typoes and sloppiness. They're more noticeable because they're simple errors and the book is short.
January 23, 2012
excellent. grim but I think he is right. Read it in two days....
January 13, 2021
Reading Burns' analysis can sometimes be disheartening, but as someone working in an organization premised on the idea that the U.S. labor movement needs a radical rethinking of strategy and tactics - the book is vital. It is almost an immediate reread.
December 24, 2021
This book starts off a bit slow and legalistic, but Burns' strategy makes this book very worthwhile. If you are among the young people standing up to Fight for $15, organize Amazon, Starbucks and Big Tech/New Media, you'll learn.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews