Introduction
The process of development and formation of trade unions was closely connected with the emergence of the working class and industrialization. Workers embody human capital, in the form of skill and knowledge, which makes their labor more valuable. Workers became more skillful and prepared for their work. To a large extent, the skills of manual workers were developed by on-the-job training, so the existence in mid-eighteenth-century Britain of a reasonable industrial base in industries such as shipbuilding, mining, and iron-smelting was a valuable asset. In these industries, skills were built up through long experience and were very difficult to transmit on paper. In mining, recruitment was usually from within existing families or communities, although at times of rapid expansion green labor was hired. It was difficult for employers to break this familial recruitment even if they had wished to because they were reliant on the skills of the workers. In practice, employers accepted it because it provided a cheap mechanism for the transmission of skills to new workers. These circumstances and changes gave rise to the consciousness and self-determination of the working class as a social force able to resist oppression and exploitation. Trade unions were aimed to protect workers from unfair labor practices and exploitation (Gurney, 1994; Kessler-Harris, 1987).
The social cosmopolitanism
On the other hand, the emergence of trade unions was caused by revolutionary ideas held by many workers. An idea of a common bond between the laboring people of different countries emerged in Western Europe and America between 1830 and 1840. It was part of the “teeming mass of ideas” which, starting half a century before with the political revolutions in France and America and with the Industrial Revolution in England, were now shaping themselves into currents of thought which were to become characteristic of the nineteenth century (Gurney, 1994). Concurrently with these ideas, there came to the fore the social cosmopolitanism which was christened by the name of socialism and which was connected with the work of Robert Owen, Thomas Hodgskin, John Gray, and William Thompson in England, and of St-Simon, Fourier, Buchez, and Pierre Leroux in France.
Opposition to the new industrial system
Trade unions can be seen as an opposition to the new industrial system that had been growing up in Western Europe and America since the middle of the eighteenth century. They condemned its alleged planlessness and ruthlessness, its pecuniary outlook and competitive individualism, and in one form or another, called for a social reorganization based on associative effort and of economic cooperation. In thought as well as inaction, these men ignored political boundaries and national differences, appealing to “humanity” for the reform of “society.” (Gurney, 1994; Rosenberg & Rosenberg, 2006). In the minds of the skilled artisans and workers who began forming the first, large labor organizations of modern times, these ideas became combined with a feeling of class status. To a marked degree in England and a considerable measure in the United States and France, groups of workers began to think of themselves, not as weavers, or carpenters, or tailors, or miners, but as members of a great class which in all countries was pushed deeper and deeper (Rosenberg & Rosenberg, 2006). The trade union movement committed itself to a collective struggle on behalf of all workers. If its immediate gains were to accrue only to those it represented, the existence of market unionism–the very possibility of organizing–was rooted in a rejection of rugged individualism and a concomitant defense of the egalitarian ethic” (Kessler-Harris 1987, p. 32).
A social transformation
It was commonly held that the development of “capitalism” was condemning the workers to increase misery, that the concentration of industry was eliminating the middle classes and bringing capitalists and proletarians into sharper conflicts, and that the capitalist economy was subject to periodic crises and would finally end in a social cataclysm which would be the beginning of a social transformation. These different trends were the manifestations of a single process of the struggle of classes whose driving power lay in changes of technique and whose ultimate social results, the forcible abolition of private property and the establishment of a communist society, could be brought about only by the workers themselves organized into a separate political party to win political power and of using such power to carry out measures of social reform (Rosenberg & Rosenberg, 2006). Following Kessler-Harris (1987): “Trade unions serve a crucial function for the society as a whole. The movement provides moral leadership and “voice’ even where it negates the special interests of many of its constituents” (p. 32). Trade unions voiced the new sense of a growing community of interests between the countries of the world which was stimulated by the coming of the railway, by increasing facilities of communication, by the extension of machine industry into new countries, by the rapid expansion of foreign trade, and by the opening up of international financial relations.
In all Western countries, men’s minds were perturbed by the widespread distress which began with the panic of 1837 and which continued with short intervals throughout the “hungry forties.” To many thoughtful men women, it seemed impossible that an industrial system marked by great contrasts of wealth and poverty and subject. One of the first results of this philanthropic impulse was the resurgence of the idea that the condition of the industrial workers in any one country could be permanently improved only by the international cooperation of governments (Rosenberg & Rosenberg, 2006; Gurney, 1994).
In this environment of ideas and movements, the advocates of an international organization tended to draw nearer together. With the increased facilities for travel, they came more frequently into personal contact. Paris and London were the centers where socialists, Owenites, Chartists, co-operators, “democrats,” communists, revolutionists, and nationalists met and planned and schemed. In Paris especially one could have found at one time or another that group of men who exercised a profound influence on the social thought of the century. It was a cosmopolitan and revolutionary atmosphere, surcharged with the hopes and dreams of the political refugees from Eastern, Southern, and Central Europe. From the middle of the 19th century, there is a steady advance in the thought of these “intellectuals” and workers and in their efforts to bring about a practical organization (Sugeno, 1994; Kessler-Harris, 1987).
In contact with this pacifist internationalism, there also developed during these years the doctrine of commercial internationalism, based upon the idea, of Free Trade. It is important to note that children’s wages were notoriously low while women’s wages were usually between one-third and two-thirds of men’s. The industrial revolution increased the participation of women and children. The employment of women and children allowed the capitalist sector to bypass wage rises elsewhere in the economy. In other words, the industrial revolution opened new opportunities for these classes to be employed, and earn for their families. In contrast to the childrens wages, adult textile workers’ earnings were much higher than those of unskilled workers. The rise in male wages is also explained as a result of urban growth. Trade unions aimed to regulate relations between employees and employers and established strict rules of working (Kessler-Harris, 1987; Metcalf et al 2001).
Reorganization of the entire social life
The struggle of the workers was international. National differences were being wiped out by the development of free trade, by the growth of a world market, and by the increasing uniformity of industrial and social conditions. The workers, in particular, were being “denationalized” by modern industry and had no fatherland. The workers’ movement was national in the form in the sense that the workers of each country had to “square accounts” with their bourgeoisie. Also, since the working class in each country had to gain political power, it had to act as “a national class,” which meant that it had to elevate itself to the position of “being the nation.” The Labor movement of these years was centered in the political, educational, cooperative, and revolutionary organizations in which an elite of skilled workers and small groups of middle-class “intellectuals” combined to reorganize the entire social life of the world (Rosenberg & Rosenberg 2006).
Trade unions in the 20th century
In the 20th century, trade unions play a protective role in helping employees to resolve conflict and avoid discrimination. Similar to the first trade unions, the prime responsibility of modern trade unions is rulemaking. Their functions are half administrative, through their authority to make investigations, and half judicial, through their power to adjudicate disputes. The unions’ rules and decisions are taken together have established a line of precedents through which there has come into being a common law of industrial; relations (Noon & Hoque 2001). According to Sugeno (1994) “Unions have expanded their roles in the contemporary industrial relations of developed economies, contributing to the equality and stability of society as well as to economic development” (p.511). This arrangement, which is typical of federal regulatory commissions, tries to combine elements of responsiveness to public opinion with elements of stability and independence of political controls. The trade unions usually include individuals of different political views, and the expectation is that they will consult reasonably on cases coming before them (Noon & Hoque 2001).
Modern trade unions
Modern trade unions are aimed to protect employees from discrimination, resolve conflicts between employees and employers and provide fair treatment of all social classes. Trade unions aim to ensure workers’ leadership and protection from discrimination. State and federal statutes have established a pattern of self-organization and majority rule, closely resembling the political process, as the basis for economic relationships in American industrial life. In theory, the two sides are free to negotiate as they see fit, about any subject either side wishes to bring up (Noon & Hoque 2001). Out of previous contests have come scores of rulings which, taken together, make up a kind of common law of industrial relations. The vast majority of negotiating sessions operate within the framework of this new common law and proceed to the writing of a contract. Trade unions aim to ensure a balance between forceful support of the National Labor Relations Board decisions on the one hand, and protection of constitutionally guaranteed individual rights on the other. Ruling by the ruling, the board’s decisions hammer out a pattern that holds industrial conflict within predictable lines of action (Metcalf et al 2001; Rosenberg & Rosenberg, 2006). To the extent that the contestants feel they cannot expect a better deal by appealing to the board, or by appealing from the board to the courts, they are encouraged to reach an agreement through private collective bargaining.
References
- Gurney, P. 1994, The Middle-Class Embrace: Language, Representation, and the Contest Over Co-Operative Forms in Britain, C. 1860-1914. Victorian Studies, vol. 37, num. 2, pp. 253-285.
- Kessler-Harris, A. 1987, Trade Unions Mirror Society in Conflict between Collectivism and Individualism. Monthly Labor Review, vol. 110, pp. 32-33.
- Metcalf, D., Hansen, K., Charlwood, A. 2001, Unions and the Sword of Justice: Unions and Pay Systems, Pay Inequality, Pay Discrimination and Low Pay. National Institute Economic Review, pp. 61-62.
- Noon, M., Hoque, K. 2001, Ethnic Minorities and Equal Treatment: The Impact of Gender, Equal Opportunities Policies and Trade Unions. National Institute Economic Review, pp. 105.
- Rosenberg, J., Rosenberg, S. 2006, Do Unions Matter? an Examination of the Historical and Contemporary Role of Labor Unions in the Social Work Profession. Social Work, vol. 51, num. 4, pp. 295-296.
- Sugeno, K. 1994, Unions as Social Institutions in Democratic Market Economies International Labor Review, vol. 133, num.4, pp. 511-512.