Rust Belt Union Blues: Why Working-Class Voters Are Turning Away from the Democratic Party

by Lainey Newman, Theda Skocpol

In the heyday of American labor, the influence of local unions extended far beyond the workplace. Unions were embedded in tight-knit communities, touching nearly every aspect of the lives of members―mostly men―and their families and neighbors. They conveyed fundamental worldviews, making blue-collar unionists into loyal Democrats who saw the party as on the side of the working man. Today, unions play a much less significant role in American life. In industrial and formerly industrial Rust Belt towns, Republican-leaning groups and outlooks have burgeoned among the kinds of voters who once would have been part of union communities.

Lainey Newman and Theda Skocpol provide timely insight into the relationship between the decline of unions and the shift of working-class voters away from Democrats. Drawing on interviews, union newsletters, and ethnographic analysis, they pinpoint the significance of eroding local community ties and identities. Using western Pennsylvania as a case study, Newman and Skocpol argue that union members’ loyalty to Democratic candidates was as much a product of the group identity that unions fostered as it was a response to the Democratic Party’s economic policies. As the social world around organized labor dissipated, conservative institutions like gun clubs, megachurches, and other Republican-leaning groups took its place.

Rust Belt Union Blues sheds new light on why so many union members have dramatically changed their party politics. It makes a compelling case that Democrats are unlikely to rebuild credibility in places like western Pennsylvania unless they find new ways to weave themselves into the daily lives of workers and their families.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Sociology, Labor, American History, History

328 pages, Hardcover

Published September 19, 2023

Reviews

[Jason Furman · Rating 5 out of 5]

This comparative study at the intersection of history, sociology and politics seeks to understand why unions workers, specifically Steelworkers in Western Pennsylvania, have shifted from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party over the last seventy years, with most of the shift concentrated in the last two decades. Lainey Newman and Theda Skocpol tell a rich and nuanced story while bringing lots of new data to the fore, including systematic cataloging of changes in union newsletters/newspapers over time, tallies of bumper stickers in a Steelworkers parking lot, extensive interviews, as well as synthesizing other scholarship.

Their argument in part rests on the familiar story of deindustrialization and the effects it had on employment and communities. The novel twist, which they develop and emphasize, is that this ended up shifting unions from being at the center of a rich social network that fostered social events and ties to unions being simply about collective bargaining. For example, when everyone lived in one town the local could organize bbqs, sporting events and the like--but with sparser employment people started commuting much longer distances to their jobs and were less likely to have social ties to co-workers or through the union. This vacuum ended up being filled by other associations, like the National Rifle Association, that often connected people to the Republican Party, particularly the ascendant populist strain under Trump.

Some of their argument is bolstered by an interesting contrast between the United Steelworkers (USW) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). People in the building trades move from job to job so the union plays an important role in allocating the jobs but also is more active in fostering ties because of what would otherwise be a very lonely way to operate.

A lot of social scientists are content with just documenting and explain but Newman and Skocpol seek to provide advice to labor leaders (who still support Democrats) about how to bring their rank and file along, most notably through trying to resuscitate some of the richer social ties. They also have a plea to Democrats not to give up on this group and instead more actively court and engage it.

Overall, this was a really enjoyable and enlightening read that brought a lot of new data into the world. Ultimately, however, it documents a series of associations and sequences of events so cannot settle questions of causation. The atomization of workers is a consequence of deindustrialization but is it itself a cause of shifting party affiliations? Or is the deindustrialization also the cause of that? And the advice to union leaders is worth a try but there are, as they document, very good reasons unions no longer serve the social functions they used to and so it may be fruitless to try to bring that back.

[William Drayer · Rating 5 out of 5]

I want to give it 4 stars for some minor details, but I also don't want to pull down the average. This deserves the highest praise and I think this is mandatory reading for every organizer or concerned individual. This is a clear eyed collection of observations about one of the most important trends in American voting patterns. They get it entirely right, I think, in how the writing was on the wall, and that the mess we're in right now shouldn't be so surprising.

[Tanzil Chowdhury · Rating 5 out of 5]

we used to be a proper country

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

After the 2016 election, pundits often declared that the "unexpected" support for Trump among working-class voters came down primarily to economic issues. In this thoughtfully researched book by grad student Newman and professor Skocpol, the long-term evolution of workers' unions and their impact on workers' social identities provides answers that economic factors alone don't address. Based on interviews with current and retired union members, research in union newsletters, and more, the authors show that in midcentury America, the union played a central social role in workers' lives, bringing them together in common purpose with a strong historical memory. The current role of unions seems to be less entwined with workers' everyday lives, and gun clubs, churches, and other institutions (often of a more conservative bent) fill that gap. The study provides more detail and nuance than this summary, of course, and for readers interested both in labor history and in political history, the information found in this book will add to their understanding of the changes in political views over the past 50-75 years. Well worth the read. 4 stars.

Thank you, Columbia University Press and NetGalley, for providing an eARC of this book. Opinions expressed here are solely my own.

[Curtis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rust Belt Union Blues

- By 2010, union density was greater in the public sector than among blue-collar industrial workers and tradespeople.
- As industry collapsed and a new generation of workers emerged, workers began to place a higher value on individual job security rather than communal union loyalty. (105-106)
- I see the Trump administration’s attacks on unions as part of an effort to narrow their focus — away from building on progress in the labor movement and more on just trying to survive.
- As corporations shut down plants and mills in the 70s and 80s, communities tried to use eminent domain to acquire facilities and organize community-owned factories. This was largely unsuccessful, as corporations and interests did all they could to quell the efforts and dominate whatever domestic industry remained.
- As industries declined, unions began to diversify (“now a librarian can be a Steelworker”). (117-118)
- This diversification of workers represented by industrial unions has likely contributed to detachment from and disaffection with unions (older workers felt betrayed and younger recruits joined a union that was very different from that of Big Labor’s heyday). (117-118)
- On loyalty and ties to building trades:
- “The local union is your hiring hall… Work is determined by the contracts awarded to the local union, and workers therefore look to the local union rather than a company as their source of work and income.” (151)
- “…building trades unions anchor workers to the union and a trade, while local industrial unions tend to link workers to places and particular company sites.” (153)
- Unlike industrial unions, the building trades aren’t expanding outside of their original occupational sectors. This has had the effect of reinforcing union identity and solidarity. (153-154)
- “One interviewee who had worked with union and nonunion miners in Pennsylvania and West Virginia for more than fitty years told us a story that he prefaced as "kind of funny but dark":
- A while back, now this was a while ago, I was talking to a guy, and he said that he had recently asked a miner he had a lot of respect for about the KKK [Ku Klux Klan]. The miner gave a very right-on talk about how in the [United] Mine Workers, we don't care about color, we believe in equality and all that. And then when he was done, he said, "but if it wasn't for all that, i'd probably join the KKK."
- “Of course, the miner in this anecdote clearly had prejudicial views. But there is something to be said for the fact that his social and political needs were satiated by his membership in the progressive organization of the UMWA. Because of the union, he did not join an abhorrent extremist organization, and even though he was not convinced by the UMWA's positions on equality, his devotion to his union prevailed over his potential desire to deviate from the union stance.” (198)
- Local USW union leaders prevented rank and file members from putting Trump signs in front of Union hall in 2016 because USW International endorsed Clinton. This continued to rank and file dissatisfaction with USW leadership. (214)
- As Union members began to see that their union couldn’t protect them from plant closures and unemployment, their loyalties shifted over time from the Union to the company, which many came to see as the sole source of any remaining job security. (230)

[Daniel Gerlach · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rust belt union blues filled the gap in my knowledge into why the rust belt went red and why the working class disaligned with the democrats. Also, it gave me great insight into the rise of trumpism. Related to my academic studies, an idea i grapple with a lot was extended into a new realm: that people vote not based on ideology, but to protect and be in alignment with their communities. And to protect their economic interests that support those communities… at least in capitalist-democracy

[Laila · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75

[elm · Rating 4 out of 5]

Informative and well-written. I listened to the audiobook and appreciate the narrative history and analysis blending into an easy but thought provoking text.

[Samuel Golden · Rating 3 out of 5]

ehh too libbed up for me but still decent material

[Sedona MaCloud · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gave me a lot of understanding of the political shift