Class Struggle Unionism

by Joe Burns

For those who want to build a fighting labor movement, there are many questions to answer. How to relate to the union establishment which often does not want to fight? Whether to work in the rank and file of unions or staff jobs? How much to prioritize broader class demands versus shop floor struggle? How to relate to foundation-funded worker centers and alternative union efforts? And most critically, how can we revive militancy and union power in the face of corporate power and a legal system set up against us?

Class struggle unionism is the belief that our union struggle exists within a larger struggle between an exploiting billionaire class and the working class which actually produces the goods and services in society. Class struggle unionism looks at the employment transaction as inherently exploitative. While workers create all wealth in society, the outcome of the wage employment transaction is to separate workers from that wealth and create the billionaire class. From that simple proposition flows a powerful and radical form of unionism. Historically, class struggle unionists placed their workplace fights squarely within this larger fight between workers and the owning class. Viewing unionism in this way produces a particular type of unionism which both fights for broader class issues but is also rooted in workplace-based militancy.

Drawing on years of labor activism and study of labor tradition Joe Burns outlines the key set of ideas common to class struggle unionism and shows how these ideas can create a more militant, democratic and fighting labor movement.

Genres: Labor, Nonfiction, Politics, Economics, History, Activism, Sociology

180 pages, Paperback

Published March 1, 2022

Reviews

[Jollene · Rating 1 out of 5]

The de-emphasis on organizing skills and emphasis on “militant minorities” versus organizing the majority of the workplace is frankly, antithetical to supermajority strikes. I am not sure if this author has organized strikes before, especially recently, but this is espousing that theory is more important than the actual practice of organizing workers. Would not recommend for unionists. - A unionist of 18+ years who has organized on several strikes in the last few years

[Nathan Fisher · Rating 1 out of 5]

Explanation proffered to justify the one-star dismissal — it's not a political objection per se, since I obviously share a very broad swathe of Burns' politics. It's rather that a) the book never rises above the level of banalities — there are sections that honestly called to mind the viral Hillary Clinton tweet about her plan to defeat ISIS wherein 'step one' was 'defeat ISIS' (e.g. “The core of a class struggle approach is to build a labor movement based on class struggle principles," and there are *a lot* more potential examples) and b) I have grown weary of the replacement of explicit socialism and Marxism with sandpapered alternatives such as "class struggle." Burns is obviously a Marxist and obviously wants the labor movement to reintegrate itself with the ideological vision of historical socialism — he should say so more unapologetically. There's always the argument that the wink-wink replacement of scary words like 'Marxism' with more 'palatable' language makes the ideology go down easier — I disagree and think it acts to degrade it politically rather than help it enter through the back door. Anyway, it's a bummer, because I actually *agree* with his critiques of McAlevey, but there's a reason her book is dogeared and passed around and this one has already hit the bargain bin.

[Kai · Rating 4 out of 5]

really basic, sometimes too basic. but also we're so far behind the 8 ball that basic is pretty necessary. helped me understand the tendencies and dynamics in my fake union, particularly the issue of staff

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic short look at the state of the labor movement, an examination of it's core problems, and proposals for the tasks necessary to be taken up to change things. This books probably comes closer than any single other one to the philosophy we have tried to advance on the Work Stoppage podcast. With a biting critique of the abandonment of class struggle by the labor movement and a call to action built in a broad range of tactic focused around the core principle that the workers movement is irreconcilable with capitalist, this book cuts through so much of the dead air around questions of union strategy.

[Rocky · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Ultimately the question must always be, where are the workers in motion or where can they be in motion?”

[Angela Yang · Rating 5 out of 5]

I wish this book was longer and more detailed on the specific ways we could start implanting class struggle unionism strategy, but I get that wasn’t the scope of the book. I thought this was really powerful for how short and simple it was, and definitely helped me reflect on my union experience and clarify my approach. A must read for anyone in a union or interested in learning more about how unions can be a powerful tool in taking down billionaires!

[Jonathan Kissam · Rating 5 out of 5]

In less than 200 pages, and in clear, accessible language, Burns lays out a strong case that the reason the labor movement in the U.S. has been on the defensive for the past half-century is its abandonment of “class struggle unionism.”

Burns defines class struggle unionism as “a form of unionism that challenges the control over our society by the superrich—the handful of billionaires who own the vast majority of resources in the United States and the world.”

One of the great strengths of Class Struggle Unionism is that, unlike many other books about “reviving the labor movement,” Burns is not simply interested in improving the practice of individual unions — he encourages class struggle unionists to put demands on the leadership of the labor movement as a whole. He points out with brutal honesty that “[t]oday the labor movement is at its weakest in over one hundred years,” with only six percent union density in the private sector. He argues that without the whole of the labor movement taking up a “class struggle strategy capable of confronting capital” there is little hope of reversing the downward trend we’ve seen in the past half-century.

(Taken from my longer review for the UE NEWS: https://www.ueunion.org/ue-news/2022/...)

[Nadav David · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought the assessment of the current state of the labor movement, and the history that led it to this moment, was comprehensive and useful. The author describes a powerful way forward, class struggle unionism, but I found the details of what that looks like in practice to be thinner than I’d hoped for. Super curious how folks organizing more actively in the labor movement are reacting to this text, hit me up!

[Shaun Richman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Burns has written a polemic, trying to inspire a new tendency of labor militant. He's very generous with his citations of other scholars and activists. Readers should follow his bibliography. I would argue that there's more nuance to–and diversity of–"business unionism" and liberal "unionism," but then that's not the point of his book. And also probably why he sells more books than I do.

[TheGroundBaby · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really solid, lays down the foundational arguments for what needs to be done across unions very well. At some points, it gets a little repetitive, and there was a lot where I already knew, but still a very useful delineation of trends in the labor movement like staffers, workers centers, and labor liberalism. Lots of good history rooted in the traditions of the leftist unionists and a good critical engagement of many organizations from the CPUSA to the IWW to the SWP. Also always love a good discussion of William Z Foster and the militant minority, which some people say doesn't focus enough on majorities, but Burns clearly illustrates this is how you change unions to get to a militant majority.

[B · Rating 5 out of 5]

In a book with less than 200 pages, Joe Burns lays out a detailed and accessible approach to unions and class struggle. If you're already aware of this topic/issues, it might seem surface level, but I thought it was still a nice refresher on how we got to this position and where the labor movement (in the States) need to go. This was pleasantly powerful for how short it was! I would definitely recommend it to anyone waking up to class struggle and unions.

[Josephine Clarke · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 I think that this brings up some important ideas, but it approaches them with the idea that you are already steeped in Union history and knowledge. As such, to me, it would lightly touch on a topic before rocketing to another. I don’t want to get too upset at the author because I might just be the wrong audience and he clearly has done his research. But this felt vague and made me want to get other union books to supplement it.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

A revelation to me, a beginner socialist/labor reader. This is an essential companion/contrasting partner to No Shortcuts.

Burns does an amazing job demystifying the labor movements’ history and current state on class struggle terms. The writing is very clear, concise but also nuanced in its analysis of previous attempts and potential strategies.

[Robyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book provides an accessible, engaging, BS-free argument for why and how the labour movement must be revitalized along the lines of class struggle — and, for those of us who are already socialists, a helpful primer on how we got here. I found the critiques union staffers and workers centres interesting; hadn’t considered this before. A great resource for starting conversations with coworkers and comrades.

[Bex · Rating 5 out of 5]

I knew about unionism, but this book really gave me the details I needed. While I am someone new to unionism, it does seem to give many details and arguments that someone who's been a unionist for a while can read and form their own arguments as well. Really well written and easy to understand.

[Nate Krinsky · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't love this. It does a decent job of spelling out the two main trends in the US labor movement, business unionism and so-called labor liberalism, and describes the shortcomings of both. But when it comes to defining the core concept of the book, the class struggle unionism in question, I found it lacking.

Burns' conception of class struggle unionism boils down to these points:
1. Emphasis on the class conflict inherent in the workplace, between workers and bosses, who fundamentally have different interests
2. The willingness to use workers' complete leverage, including embracing strikes and breaking labor law when necessary
3. Leadership coming from the rank and file rather than from union staffers

Frankly, despite agreeing with the necessity of these points, I don't feel like this is enough to justify an entire book, at least with the relatively low level of detail that's given to the specifics. Too often in this book, when it comes time to elaborate on a point or describe how it can be used in practice, he just repeats the term "class struggle unionism" ad nauseam as if it were a sufficient explanation of the concept and its application. It alternately left me wanting more and wanting the book to be slimmed down to the size of a pamphlet or zine.

Other concepts are covered so superficially that they felt shoehorned in. Yes antiracism and antisexism should be primary aims of unions. How do we incorporate those struggles? How have existing unions done so in the past? Burns does not elaborate beyond acknowledging that these things are important.

It's a short book and can be read quickly, so if it's a topic that interests you it's worth picking up, especially as it's a popular book on the left-wing of the current labor upswing. I will say though that the intended audience is definitely one that is familiar with labor history and some ongoing debates in the movement, and preferably have been involved in labor struggles in one way or another in the past.

[Matthew · Rating 3 out of 5]

The broader politics of this book are correct - we need to organise in the workplace, we need to view these struggles as inherently antagonistic, and they need to be led by self-organised by workers. Burns’ framework of “class struggles vs liberal unionism” is also helpful, as well as the importance he puts on struggles over control on the shopfloor.

However, other parts of the book are less helpful. His insistence on using the term “billionaire class” obfuscates the reality of capitalist class relations. The idea of “left-led” unions and of rank-and-file seem somewhat at odds and confused, as does his relationship to the strategy of socialist working as staffers (on the surface extremely critical - which is good in my opinion - but then dials back in the final chapters).

Broader questions too - on how to build independent working-class organisation capable of breaking labour law - seem to lack answers other than “we must do it”. The question of how to relate strategies of revolution to class struggle unionism is purposefully dismissed and underdeveloped.

Overall parts would definitely serve as very useful for more green labour movement militants to read, but overall seems to be politically limited in vision and at times confused.

[Eugene Kernes · Rating 2 out of 5]

Is This An Overview?
The superrich own the majority of resources. Class struggle unionism seeks to challenge that position. Class struggle unionism, is about the class system of workers and owners. Owners who are few, but control most of the resources. The working class need to sell their labor to survive. Workers have little income-producing property. It is through worker efforts that resources become more valuable, for which they are compensated by a wage or a salary. But owners keep most of the worker’s effort when they sell the products to consumers. Owner’s income comes from other people’s efforts.

What class struggle unions want are large scale efforts, militancy, union democracy, fighting the status quo, and being inclusive to all. To change the structure of the economy. Workers need to emancipate themselves. Worker movements need political influence to defend their interests against the superrich class. An effective method for workers gaining power is to strike. Strikes stop the profit-making ability of the business, therefore the workers’ demands get attention. But there are limits to what unions can do, for many union activities have become illegal. Breaking the laws comes with high costs, making unions hesitant about their actions. What this book favors, is for unions to use militancy and violate labor laws.

A Class Struggle?
Owner class would not have to work another day, simply because they own the properties that produce income. Owners generally utilize already existing physical, social, and knowledge infrastructure rather than develop the infrastructure themselves. They just have control over the emerging and existing industries. Part of the reason they keep a large share of the worker outcomes, is because of propaganda. That they have more of a stake in the outcomes than workers because it was the owners who took the risk in developing the business. To the superrich class, the works are just inputs in the production process. They are raw material rather than human.

Wealth is social relationships, the ability to command others. Wealth enables the purchase of politicians, and to control the political system.

Caveats?
The goals of class struggle unions can bring value to people, as the ideas about reducing inequality and being properly rewarded for the value of one’s efforts are virtuous. The methods being used to achieve the goals, are not virtuous. The methods are totalitarian. The type of union that is promoted in the book, is one that controls all production activities, even through violent means. To stop businesses from relocating or closing when they disagree with the union. To stop workers who disagree with union decisions. To stop non-union competitors from out pricing the unions. The only acceptable decisions, are those given by the union, as they are perceived that they are for the benefit of the worker. These policies have been used in various states throughout history, and have led to the devastation of their economies.

The claims of the book are about unions taking control of production capacities, of how other people produce wealth, rather than unions starting their own businesses and facing their own consequences. The author claims that the superrich own the income producing property, but rejects programs that give workers the opportunity to develop their income producing property.

The goals in the book are abstract, without referencing how the situation would be should the goals come about. The practical reference comes from depowering management, for management to have less power than the workers. It is possible that income would be distributed different.

It is possible that part of the reason that militancy is being promoted, is because other methods that unions used have become illegal. But, rather than use militancy, the unions could fight to change the laws. Or develop methods that are legal and effective.

Strikes themselves are aimed at reducing production capacity, even at the cost of the very business. As the businesses leave. Rather, unions can create programs to enhance productivity that also enables the workers to gain the benefits.

The author acknowledges that union workers are inefficient, for they cannot compete with the alternatives. For this author, this means that unions need to have enough power to stop the competitors. There is an alternative for this, which is to make the union workers more efficient. Unions are supposed to enable workers to get benefits, which can make them union workers more productive rather than inefficient.

The author does not want a bureaucratic union. There are many different types of bureaucracies, and some do hurt their own members. But bureaucracies tend to have the function of limiting arbitrary decision making. The author wants the unions, to have the capacity for arbitrary decision making. This can create problems, for the author references some unions which harmed their members, as they stole from their unions. What this means, is that the unions who possess arbitrary power, would not have ways to restrict their leaderships decision making when the same power is turned against the members.

The author supports large scale efforts, but large scale efforts have consequences that are difficult to reverse. Small-scale efforts might not be enough to change the system, but they enable experimentation and error correction.

A claim is made that the superrich can live without working, but they do work. They might produce the inequality, but they still work.

[Mrtfalls · Rating 4 out of 5]

I generally find this book good in how it highlights how the US union movement has retreated from a class-struggle approach. Very readable and short - 140 pages.

While his differentiation between class-struggle unionism, liberal unionism, and business unionism is helpful to some extent even his own conceptio of class-struggle unionism could easily be argued to be liberal in that the main class his claims to be in struggle with is the "billionaire class". I am sure he opposes millionaire capitalist rulers too - but if he does he should say that and spell it out.

I liked that he talked about the issue of union bureaucracies - Jane McAlevey in her early book Raising Expectations and Raising Hell was much more brazen in her criticism of the union bureaucracy and to some extent in No Shortcuts but then this was dialled back and a (in my opinion) historically revisionist history of the US labour movement and the CIO of the 30s and 40s was given.

Joe Burns is better in his history. However, while his criticisms of union bureaucracies is good, it is underdeveloped. He presents union bureaucracies as coming about because bad middle-class people with bad middle-class ideas came along and made the originally good class-struggle unions into bad liberal or business unions. There is definitely an element of truth to this, but it tells half a story and taking it as the whole story obscures more fundamental issues - i.e. that unions exist under capitalism firstly to mediate the relationship between workers and bosses (and the ruling class as a whole), it has to create a bureaucracy to do that and this bureaucratic layer of leaders, officials and staffers comes under pressure from two sides - the bosses it is mediating and negotiating with and the workers it represents and organises.

This is never spelled out in his book.

However, these more analytical issues aside, the book has some useful pointers - he is better for example than McAlevey on supporting reform caucuses. Although he remains largely ambivalent between the choices of "making a new union" and the "boring from within" approach of transforming unions - he seems to come down more in favour of the latter.

Other bits I thought he was right on and better than other popular writers of the US labour movement:
- the important role Labor Notes and other groups play in opposing things like contract concessions and Team Concept (a management approach of getting workers to participate in making themselves work more productively and quickly). In this he highlights how at the time most union officialdoms, and particularly those of the more progressive unions, were focussed on "organizing techniques". The work of Labor Notes and others as Burns says "established an ideological pole within the labor movement, challenging key assumptions of business unionism.
- he clarifies that the gig economy is not actually getting bigger in the US and if anything shrunk between 2005 and 2017.
- he highlights the importance of people getting jobs with the intention of being union militants - this is good and not argued enough. He is also good at pointing at people need to be clear in how they are doing this and to not then get too narrowly focussed on just bread and butter day-to-day issues and miss out on the broader political issues that need to be tackled. He emphasises the importance of a militant-minority approach in this.

I think he is spot on when he says that the "key problems in the labor movement are class collaboratianism, the decrepit state of the labor movement, and the failure to confront the repressive labor laws in the country. No amount of organizing training can change that."

I see this a lot even in the more "progressive" parts of UK trade union movement. Those that are big fans of McAlevely (and don't get me wrong, I am big fan of her too) is that the lesson they take is that first you need to build enough power locally and nationally to do anything - for union leaders (and this can be seen in UCU and NEU in the UK) this becomes a great way to give a progressive cover for doing nothing and not putting resources in to getting people ready and gearing up for a fight.

Organising training is still important though and I see many national and local unions have a poor organising approach - but this is symptomatic of the lack of militancy of most unions and changes dramatically once local branches or national unions decide to gear themselves up for a fight.

Finally, I liked his point that the previous union militants thought of their role differently than other union militants of today. As he says "Previous generations of militants played more of an ideological role within the workplace and the union. It's not that they were not organizers, but they saw their role as taking on management and union bureaucrats unwilling to fight the bosses". It's a question of an attitude adjustment and not just about being good at organising your workplace.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reverently read this in a study group with other labor/union people. While the book seeks to orient the labor movement on the path of the class struggle, it’s by no means a recipe book. It in fact lacks some ingredients.

The critiques of business unionism and labor unionism are good. The general idea of class struggle unionism is important. Getting the workers to adopt and adapt the idea to their everyday life seems spontaneous at best. It’s a combo of just tell them the idea and then let them sort it out by throwing them at the billionaire class and they’ll get it through struggle.

The author cites many examples of things that work and then suggests a kind of composition strategy of making all those things happen together. Sure, TDU reformed unions and CTU held great strikes, but what were the sustained consequences of these actions such that any repetition will succeed better? The examples are glossed over in detail backed by a lot of veteran expertise.

This is criticism because criticism is necessary. My reading group summarizes a lot of these points in our discussion.

I would still recommend this book to anybody who isn’t with the program and needs the introduction.

[Phantom1058 · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great introduction to class politics, even for someone already familiar with them. This acts as a theory/praxis hybrid, introducing different principles that can help revitalize the labor movement. I like how plain the language is allowing for any read to easily pick up concepts that may be difficult to decipher in translated Marx or Lenin. The book is also fairly short adding to its accessibility.

However, I didn’t like how repetitive the book got at some points. Burns reiterates the same points in multiple chapters using the same language which kinda led to some boredom. Also some may view Joe burns thesis as economism as he doesn’t focus much on the political aspects of the labor movement. Which is fine for this book but workers should understand the political aspect of their condition. Great book overall I would definitely see this as something to give to union members or unorganized workers or really anyone trying to enter socialist/communist politics

[Zak Katich · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was introduced to me by several current union organizers and was presented to me as the ‘modern handbook on labor organizing,’ and if that’s the case the future of the unionization movement and the working class is bright. While things are dimmer than ever for the American labor movement currently, this book masterfully diagnoses the problems within the system as well as within existing union structures, and presents a better path forward. A new path built around raising class consciousness and unity above all else. Not since college have I been so compelled to annotate and highlight a book to such a great extent. Every single page is marked up! This book is teaming with knowledge and now that I have read it, it feels like a MUST READ for anyone who wants to improve the American labor movement and the lives of working class Americans.

[Jody Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

An essential text that I’ve seen really impact union organizing. I think the above reviewer misunderstands militant minority, it doesn’t mean we don’t build majority support of class struggle, it just is the only way to do that due to uneven development. This is the same reason for the necessity of a vanguard more broadly. One of the really excellent points in this text is that attacks should be aimed squarely at capital, forcing reactionary union leadership to make the decision to get out of the way or stand in between and reveal their allegiance. Burns outlines a number of paths to bring exciting and new unions into a class struggle orientation, if you’re at all involved in union work this is a must-read!

[Maya · Rating 4 out of 5]

As someone doing a lot of work in union spaces, this book is an excellent tool to help put words and ideas into full form for me. Most of us know what's not working for us, but its hard to remember why things aren't working, and what needs to be prioritized to fix it. I'm no stranger to the ideas of class struggle unionism generally, but this book really helped to apply those ideas to the work I'm doing in my own union, and will hopefully help me beyond that as well.

The most exciting part is that, despite this book only being a year or two old, it already feels out of date compared to what's been happening in the labor movement recently. Which is not a criticism, but is in fact a very promising thing. Hopefully that means people out there are listening.

[Brenmlaws · Rating 4 out of 5]

Decent overview of some labor history with an emphasis on the need to view unionism as an aspect of class struggle. A bit messy in how it discusses racism and sexism as well as somewhat diminishing the need to fight explicitly for socialism. It seems like it was written by a socialist, but one who is a bit cagey and defensive about revolutionary politics. Overall clear, sharp, and has a good critique of the "labor liberalism" of unions like the SEIU doing piecemeal stunts and strikes while fueling all their resources into policy reform as well as foundation-funded workers centers, which, like all social justice NGOs are dead ends for people who want to fight for radical change in society.

[Mason Wyss · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lots of good ideas about how to revive the labor movement and infuse it with an anti-capitalist objective. I especially appreciate the parts about class struggle unionists fighting for shop floor issues and class struggle tactics. Burns is absolutely right that we need to contest the managerial authority at the point of production and the liberal political order that values property rights over human life. I think, however, that Burns gives short shrift to revolutionary syndicalism. I feel like this is a book I could give to a union co-worker, regardless of whether they’re already a socialist or not, and they would find it valuable and accessible.

[Carl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hardly fun reading or inspiring but he does make his case that current approaches to unionization are going nowhere except for the destruction of the union movement. He lists & describes 2: business unionism which views management & labor as partners in an enterprise & the purpose of the union is just to tweak the system with occasional pay raises or adjustments to benefits packages, and liberal unionism which is basically taken out of the hands of the rank & file & is dictated by NGO & professionals. He says to succeed, unions must recognize the fact of class conflict & behave accordingly. Chances are pretty good that he is correct.

[Alex Guerrero · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great introduction to class informed unionism. Perfect for those starting to explore the ideas of unionism or those questioning their big corporatized liberal so called unions. I appreciate the call to militancy and the breakdown of tactics instead of solely reinforcement of ideology. Could get a little repetitive but that is a method of information retention that works best for me. Would recommend!

[Josh Komarovsky · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice introduce to the concepts of class-struggle unionism. He talks about transforming the labor movement. While he believes that unions won't liberate us by themselves, he teases its essential role in transforming society. His conceptualization and contrast of class struggle unionism with business unionism and liberal unionism is useful. A lot of interesting historical anecdotes as well. It does not get full 5 stars as the book can be vague and repetitive at times.

[josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a welcome analysis of where the labor movement is now and where is needs to go. To reverse the decades long decline in union membership and coverage, the left has to take up tactics that harken back to the past and update them for today. No discussion of demands and agnostic on relationship to Democratic party