Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement

by Rick Fantasia, Kim Voss

This concise overview of the labor movement in the United States focuses on why American workers have failed to develop the powerful unions that exist in other industrialized countries. Packed with valuable analysis and information, Hard Work explores historical perspectives, examines social and political policies, and brings us inside today's unions, providing an excellent introduction to labor in America.

Hard Work begins with a comparison of the very different conditions that prevail for labor in the United States and in Europe. What emerges is a picture of an American labor movement forced to operate on terrain shaped by powerful corporations, a weak state, and an inhospitable judicial system. What also emerges is a picture of an American worker that has virtually disappeared from the American social imagination. Recently, however, the authors find that a new kind of unionism—one that more closely resembles a social movement—has begun to develop from the shell of the old labor movement. Looking at the cities of Los Angeles and Las Vegas they point to new practices that are being developed by innovative unions to fight corporate domination, practices that may well signal a revival of unionism and the emergence of a new social imagination in the United States.

Genres: Sociology, Labor, Nonfiction

259 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[Eavan Wong · Rating 3 out of 5]

Staggenborg's book on professionalization in the pro-choice movement: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5...

A specter is haunting social movement organizations (SMOs), the specter of oligarchy. The conventional wisdom is that formalization not only leads to conservatism but also perpetuates itself due to inertia. This determinism of bureaucratic corruption, according to Voss and Sherman, is nevertheless malleable for at least three reasons. Firstly, the linearity in the “iron law of oligarchy” could be disrupted by political environments. Secondly, bureaucratic structure could be compatible with political innovation. And thirdly, innovations within formalized SMOs are contingent on their shifts in visions at the leadership level. The following passages will assess the influence of the influx of new outside leaders on labor union from these three perspectives.

To begin with, external and internal political environments affect the legitimacy of the status quo in leadership. A disastrous strike that reflects organizational weaknesses vis-à-vis hostile capitalist environment, or exposed problems of mismanagement that reflect internal power imbalance, would most likely pave the way for leadership from outside the labor movement. The introduction of new leadership is not necessarily welcome in locals unless the existing leadership is put into questions. Note that there is a distinction between political crisis and political difficulty for SMOs, the former leads to illegitimacy of leadership, while the latter, as Staggenborg points out, comes with demobilization and the need to preserve and further formalize existing SMOs and their leadership. Therefore, an environment causing legitimacy crisis to the current leadership is the necessary condition for newcomers’ success.

The second aspect is the compatibility between bureaucracy and innovation. Voss and Sherman’s research shows that the revitalization of locals was not an informal process. Instead, the key was the active facilitating force of the centralized pressure from the federated International Unions. Resources and organizational incentives matter for the diffusion of new ideology through introducing new directors. This top-down operation echoes Staggenborg’s point on how the maintenance of formalized structure helps avoid the “classic leadership problem” in coordination (p. 598). However, Voss and Sherman’s observation contradicts Staggenborg’s view that professional managers are less likely than movement entrepreneurs to initiate social movements due to their different motivational incentives. In the labor movement case, IU professional managers are not only likely to more efficiently implement revitalization plans, but also have the intention to initiate them, without both of which the trusteeship and resources crucial for new organizers would not be available. As such, while organizations are better at implementing plans, a directional shift toward revitalization requires reformist intention that triumphs the mere concern for career development at the top leadership level.

Finally, with the conditions of political crisis and reformist top leadership, the entrenched culture of inertia within business unionism could be overcome by the influx of outside leaders with a deep commitment to organizing. However, “outsider-reformer” could be counterintuitive. Based on Staggenborg’s depiction of entrepreneurial initiators, outside leaders may have few “personal experiences and ideological commitment that make them interested in the particular issues” (593-4) of labor unions. In contrast, in Voss and Sherman’s piece, outside leaders’ commitment, skills, and visions related to a specific organizational style is more important than their passion for sectarian left unionism per se. This could be explained by the distinctively bureaucratic culture of unions that set the labor movement apart from other movements, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the universality of working class issues that helps attract organizers from different fields, which may not be replicated by movements with more specific issue framings.

[Adam · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great book that I highly recommend, not just for labor types, but also those who have no direct experience with labor unions nor count themselves as part of the labor movement. I especially recommend this book for smart members of the public who are ambivalent or against labor unions.

While the book is intended to explain American organized labor to a European audience, it serves as a great introduction to an American audience (I realize that his point actually is a sad statement about how foreign American labor is to much of the American public!).

In Europe, the state is responsible for providing for workers’ needs and regulating one’s relationship with one’s employer. In contrast, in the U.S., the provision of key needs such as healthcare is left to the whim of one’s employer. Those without employment, are often left without a sufficient safety net. In such a desperate situation as is ours, the need for the labor movement is paramount. Unlike the European context, In the U.S., we don’t even have the protection from being fired for any (or no) reason, unless we are protected by a union contract.

Hard Work is smart without being inaccessibly academic, popular in its appeal to core American values and traditions, and forceful in its argument. Not only does it provide an admiringly concise history of the movement; it also compellingly argues the necessary role of unions in our society, while at the same time patiently and unblinkingly describes both the external and internal forces that weaken the movement. The latter includes anti-democratic forces of capital against the American worker, as well as the strategic mistakes the movement has made.

The book is ultimately cautiously optimistic, reviewing promising trends in social justice unionism and innovations in strategic organizing. Read this and restore the faith; join the struggle.

[Charlie Cray · Rating 5 out of 5]

Concise introduction by a sociologist and labor activist (good combination) to what ails the U.S. labor movement, both in terms of institutional and historical and legal impediments (including unions' decades-long failure to invest in organizing, rather focusing on "servicing" its membership, purging of radicals (forced by Taft-Hartley), etc. We (those of us who aren't as familiar with either the conditions of labor or the situation in Europe) are reminded that because healthcare is considered a universal public service (and right) in most of Europe, they don't have to bargain for it with employers as we do in the U.S., thereby essentially making it a market transaction. The book also describes some of the more hopeful new developments in labor since the 90s -- including new forms of social movement unionism, urban extra-institutional organizing outside of the ossified and legally-constrained boundaries of unions themselves, the use of strategic corporate campaigns as leverage, and an investment in key cities like Los Angeles (Justice for Janitors) and Las Vegas.

Anyway, although this is now well over a decade old, I think it's still one of the best books I was able to find that is a solid primer on labor. In part this is because the book was originally written for a European, specifically French, audience, it turned out to be a great introduction to labor for an American audience, too. (Interestingly, it was one of a series of sociological publications created by Pierre Bourdieu, who passed away before the book was published.)

People (activists, sociologists, historians) who already know a good deal about labor probably won't get as much out of it as I did. For the perspective of someone in the labor movement, see Jim McNeill's review in Dissent. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/artic... (if you can get beyond the paywall).

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book in preparation for a job screening that I am attending on Tuesday. SEIU (Service Employees International Union) is currently hiring/training new organizers...and I think I'd very much like to be involved.

Until very recently I didn't think very much about the labor movement or unions. It seemed to me that the peak for unions occurred even before my parents were born and that the current trends in the corporate realm create immense obstacles for unions to overcome. When I thought of labor, I thought of the Wobblies, Eugene Debs, railway strikes, teamsters, etc. Then I saw the job posting and SEIU's website and was confronted with claims such as "the largest anti-poverty organization" in the United States.

"Hard Work" is a very short, easy to read book outlining a brief history of the labor movement many of us would have studied in college courses (the one that brings to mind the imagery listed in the previous paragraph) and shows what has happened to labor in the decades since. After a huge decline in union membership in the 1980s, the 1990s saw the emergence of a new kind of labor movement, one that can be called social movement unionism. Social movement unionism fosters increased solidarity among workers as well as community members by addressing issues like living wages, health care, and lessening the inequality gap. The emphasis on social justice and activism has provided the boost needed to revitalize labor.

I also like that the book is not overly optimistic. It acknowledges that union membership is still only around 10% of labor nationally and current government policies aren't making things any easier. If union membership falls below 5%, labor will lack the necessary political power needed to make changes...however, since the Justice for Janitors movement in the early 1990s and the WTO demonstrations is Seattle, people at least have some victories to point at to inspire more organizing.

[Brynn · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this up because one of my former professors just started using this text in a social movements class (replacing Poor People's Movements/American Dream book-and-film combo from when I took the course), which I was going to visit. So I thought I'd be a good student and read the book. Three stars for me-- the material was nothing new to me, but I think it would be a good choice for those who aren't in the muck on labor stuff. And really, aside from this, there aren't many books out there that really delve into some of the interesting recent campaigns employing new strategies, etc. (On that note... Though I haven't read it, I hear Poor Workers Unions is good.)

Very good explanation of how politics, cultural myths, economy, and so forth got us in this mess, and strategies some unions are using to grow and build power. Published in 2004-- before, ahem, the Illinois child care victory, Change to Win and a number of other breakthrough campaigns in the South-- which the authors could probably get another chapter out of for a future edition.

[Kyle Warner · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think this book was a pretty good brief history of the American labor movement. A good introduction but that is not why I purchased it. Based on the title I was expecting something more along the lines of a prescription for REMAKING THE AMERICAN LABOR MOVEMENT.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lucid, succinct, and insightful analysis of what ails the United States labor movement. Begins to offer a blueprint for future organizing avenues. Fantastic broad diagnosis of labor movement in the Neoliberal era.