Compare and contrast the 1959 steel Strike and the strike of catfish workers in Mississippi delta 1IN 990. What characteristics did both strikes contain that might make them instructive for organized labor as it tries to revive itself in 2010?
Both strikes were properly organized by trade unions which championed for better wages and working conditions for their members. Both the steel workers and their catfish counterparts were oppressed by their employers since they got poor salaries even though they were being overworked (Dine 11). There were no allowances for overtime and unionization was either prohibited or restricted. The catfish workers’ strike was accompanied by a well organized boycott from the entire society to all products from Delta Pride Company under the trade dispute. Since the products were perishable commodities, the company lost millions of dollars through the boycott that was well received by all the businesses in support of the workers’ grievances1.
The media was equally instrumental in propagating workers’ plight from the townships to the countryside. Even though farmers and other shareholders of the company felt that the strike was not genuine in view of the massive losses, they were later enlightened of the need to share profits equitably (Dine 17). As such, the entire community boycotted Delta Pride products in all the supermarket chains and retail outlets forcing the management of the company to give in. The management later presented offers that were too good to believe for the workers including better salaries, contract employment, skilled worker benefits, disability allowances in addition to gender and human rights privileges. Workers were therefore entitled to compensation and health insurance for work-related injuries as well as guaranteed privacy with no supervision when visiting washrooms.
The strike was therefore a labor dispute and a civil right battle that involved political leaders, businessmen, workers and union leaders in a concerted effort to improve standards of living in Mississippi2. The success of both the strike and the boycott was characterized by a prevailing labor-sensitive society in the region with an informed media that combined with democratic political and social institutions to end impunity in factories. Workers were therefore at the forefront of the entire society in advocating for better remuneration and working conditions (Dine 23).
Union leaders organized for the whole exercise but did not spearhead the actual strike due to established democratic institutions in the labor movement at that time. Politicians were equally enlightened by the media about the underlying workers’ grievances in addition to the presence of radical civil activists and labor heroes in government. The stage had therefore been set for a robust workers’ strike in Mississippi with success guaranteed. The union leaders had equally done their homework well by investigating consumption patterns in the community before launching the boycott.
On the other hand, the striking steel workers were motivated to fight for their cause due to oppressive labor laws that did not recognize their plight (Metzga 15). The media was not actively involved in the workers’ strike due to social inequalities occasioned by class differentials and labor rights indifference in the society at that time. However, workers were in solidarity in championing their cause since they had suffered for more twelve years under deplorable working conditions and meager salaries. As such, the strike was essentially organized by a solid workers union that was determined to go hungry in pursuit of better living standards3.
Since reform in the labor movement was in tandem with the civil rights agenda, workers received support from their political leaders as well as local government in demanding for better wages. Steel companies had suppressed workers by paying them poorly despite of the huge profits they got from their hard labor (Metzga 22). The strike was therefore successful due to the unity of purpose among disgruntled workers who championed their cause relentlessly. Other workers in railroads and mines also benefited from the robust trade movement.
As a result, the wages doubled, pensions were entrenched into retirement benefits, holidays and vacations received allowances in addition to a better working environment under verification by the workers’ union. Both strikes were therefore a desperate move by frustrated workers in the lower middle class to better their living standards. Class differentials define American society with the rich and the poor at the extreme ends. The rich few undermined the poor majority and the middle class whose lives were characterized by poverty, disease and despair (Hinshaw 30).
When the workers went on strike, most of the suffered financially and starved their families. Their wages were therefore so little to allow for any substantial savings and investments to be made. There was also the racial nightmare that pitied poor blacks against the rich white. The trade disputes were therefore a struggle by the black workers engaged in manual jobs to free themselves from slavery. The social underpinnings that condemned the blacks to a poor life working as factory staff was informed by the civil injustices embedded in corrupt undemocratic regimes4.
The modern labor organizations can therefore revive themselves with a background from the experiences of these two landmark strikes. Workers need to be encouraged to actively participate in labor unions in order to establish a formidable and vibrant movement necessary in championing workers rights and privileges. The society needs to be equally integrated into the labor movement through government and non-governmental organizations as well as the media (Piven 25). Journalists were very instrumental in the Catfish strike in sending the relevant message to the rest of the consumers thereby making the boycott reality. Democratic unions should be able to delegate active roles in labor disputes to their members.
In the State of the Union, author suggests that the recent split in the U.S labor movement was over a dispute between those who advocate organize labor spend most of its energies organizing new workers and those who believe that more labor ‘s energies need to be focused on seeking political change. Explain the positions of both groups and give your reasons for choosing one over the other.
The labor movement in the United States requires reform as far as organizing new workers is concerned. Labor unions are made up of workers and the current deficit in their numbers is a major setback in fighting for better terms of service for workers (Metzga 28). It is not just important that workers should be recruited into trade unions in large numbers without having them committed to the workers’ cause. There is need for solidarity and active participation of workers in all matters that concerns their welfare in order to ensure that the society becomes enlightened about their situation5.
When labor organizations are reinforced by large numbers of active members, they are better positioned to express their ideas, grievances and suggestions with remarkable results than a paltry few. Workers do not need sympathy since they are paid to deliver services. They need a proper compensation for their work in order to motivate them. On the other hand, the government and political institutions should be aware about workers’ issues as people’s representatives in order to make informed decisions on their policies.
The labor movement is therefore as successful as is their membership, ideology and principles as well as their political partnership (Dine 41). With a strong and dynamic labor movement, workers are capable of democratically transforming their political regimes due to their unity of purpose and substantial numbers. The political elite are likely to create barriers to a vibrant labor movement in order to maintain the status quo. It is the workers themselves who are properly positioned to advance their cause in the direction of their choice. Workers cannot therefore depend on the ruling elite for them to achieve gainful employment, better wages and terms of service until they are part of the political process that defines their destiny.
American political structures are democratic in nature courtesy of a strong labor movement that laid the foundation of the governance institutions6. However, a capitalist economy characterized by global competitiveness for accumulation of wealth has led to social inequalities with the poor living in deplorable conditions (Hinshaw 37). Employers keen to make huge profits exploit workers with impunity with no hope for justice in the future. The workers are forced to perform their duties under poor working conditions for extended hours with poor remuneration. The political elite on the other hand appear lukewarm in their efforts to resolve labor disputes.
Employers are currently engaged in a cat and mouse game either complying temporarily with workers’ unions or discouraging their employees from unionization (Piven 33). Workers who are allowed by their employers to join a trade union are equally few in numbers with little commitment. Some of these crafty employers only allow their employees to participate in union activities sparingly. The jobs are tagged to a strict code of conduct which does not allow for active participation in unions.
An organized labor movement is therefore necessary in reforming political institutions through the recruitment of all workers in trade unions. When workers issues are addressed through their unions, they are better placed to achieve better wages and salaries. A vibrant labor organization is influential in advocating for the best in their industrial relations with their employers as well as pushing their political representatives towards legally recognizing their contributions in the society. The combined efforts of active workers union is therefore the basis for better living standards for workers (Dine 52).
Both Metzger in the Striking Steel and Philip Dine in the State of the Union argue that a strong labor movement was and is vital to the development of just, political and economic order in the United States. In a detailed essay explain the positions of both authors and discuss if you agree with their position or whether or not, you think organized labor will succeed in expanding its power and influence in American society.
A strong labor movement is dependent on the social, political and economic institutions in the American society7. The social barriers in the society are characterized by racial prejudice, financial status and political orientation. Status differentials defined by social classes which characterize individuals according to their skin complexion and income have led to the rich being in power and total control of the society(Metzga 44). The poor and the middle class are left at the mercy of the rich who then dictate their roles in the society since they command political and social influence.
Metzger explains that bridging the gap between the poor and the rich is important in reconciling the social classes into a harmonious political outfit that empowers everyone with equal opportunities. According to Philip Dine, globalization has continued to strain standards of living in the United States to the extent the rule of law and strong labor movement is necessary in remedying the situation. Employees motivated to work with their enlightened employers within the framework of an elaborate labor union can achieve better living standards despite of the prevailing economic situations8.
As such, employers and employees shall be able to work as partners for the mutual benefit of everyone. Profits resulting from the business are then shared between them for the purpose of improving the economic situation in the country as well as sustaining the culture of democracy in distribution of resources equitably. A strong labor movement then empowers workers in putting pressure on their indifferent employers and political leaders towards reforming their socio-economic status. The middle class characterized by the professional and ordinary workers dependent on their financial status is instrumental in organizing the labor movement as well as the political and economic institutions in America democratically (Piven 48).
Workers are equal stakeholders with their employers in harmonizing financial and economic benefits in a coherent society. A strong middle class provides the platform for a strong labor movement and reforming the power equation in the American society9. All the institutions in the society are important in facilitating a democratic society with a balanced capitalist economy which allows for wealth distribution amicably. The family being the basic unit of the society is directly affected when economic and political circumstances become fluctuating.
Social institutions such as family, schools and religious organizations are dependent on the political and economic situations. As such, when workers go on strike in demand for better wages and working conditions, their dependents are bound to suffer financially (Hinshaw 50). On the other hand, the benefits that emerge from such an industrial action equally improve the standards of living of the society as a whole. It is therefore important that solidarity among workers is reinforced through active unionization and advocacy towards a vibrant society with democratic representation in political platforms10.
A strong labor movement is also influential in reforming political institutions through sustained activism. When workers are united in their cause for better living standards and working environment, they are equally capable of electing political leaders with a track record of improving workers’ welfare. This demands that workers are enlightened about the underlying processes that reinforce their wellbeing in the society in order to associate with like-minded leaders as an independent entity. Unionization is therefore an appropriate vehicle for championing civil rights and labor issues in America (Dine 60).
The process of evaluating the democratic credentials in the American society should therefore follow a criterion that recognizes the role of the middle class in shaping the standards of living of the citizenry. Reform in the middle should include eradicating the stereotypes that accompany social classes among different wage patterns. The dividing lines that exist between different income earners and their influence in the society should be subjected to scrutiny by through informed public debate facilitated by the media (Metzga 55).
Workers on the other hand need to be at the forefront in ensuring that there is a just and democratic environment at work and in the rest of the country. Workers should be paid in terms of their experience and level of education with emphasis on the job environment. Allowances and proper compensation should be legally attached to work-place injuries in addition to other benefits that accompany their terms of engagement. The underlying attitudes and stereotypes that divide the professional and managerial middle class should be discouraged for the common good of everyone in the society (Piven 70). Workers should develop a culture of partnership in order to strengthen their efforts in pursuit of a better life.
The political and economic situation in the country is a product of the contributions of its society. Whatever the society reinforces becomes a reality and that which it suppresses becomes eradicated. People get the legitimacy and the justifications to work towards some defined goals and objectives as a result of the degree of reinforcement of the underlying social principles (Hinshaw 65). A democratic and labor-sensitive society in America shall therefore emerge from the qualities, values and attitudes that are reinforced by the workers11. In a democratic society, it is the majority that carries the day in all matters. A strong labor movement made up of proactive members is capable of achieving a just society in America.
Works cited
Dine, Philip M. State of the unions: how labor can strengthen the middle class, improve our economy, and regain political influence. London:McGraw-Hill Professional, 2008.
Hinshaw, John H. Steel and steelworkers: race and class struggle in twentieth-century Pittsburgh. New York: SUNY Press, 2002.
Metzga, Jack. Striking steel: solidarity remembered. Washington: Temple University Press, 2000.
Piven, Fox F. Challenging authority: how ordinary people change America. Pennsylvania: Rowman & Little field, 2006.