Origins of Right to Work

de Leon Cedric

Description

"Right to work" states weaken collective bargaining rights and limit the ability of unions to effectively advocate on behalf of workers. As more and more states consider enacting right-to-work laws, observers trace the contemporary attack on organized labor to the 1980s and the Reagan era. In The Origins of Right to Work, however, Cedric de Leon contends that this antagonism began a century earlier with the northern victory in the U.S. Civil War, when the political establishment revised the English common-law doctrine of conspiracy to equate collective bargaining with the enslavement of free white men. In doing so, de Leon connects past and present, raising critical questions that address pressing social issues. Drawing on the changing relationship between political parties and workers in nineteenth-century Chicago, de Leon concludes that if workers' collective rights are to be preserved in a global economy, workers must chart a course of political independence and overcome long-standing racial and ethnic divisions.

Sujets

• Histoire
• Local history
• Industrial relations
• History of the Americas
• Illinois

Informations

• Publié par: Cornell University Press
• Date de parution: 25 août 2015
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780801455889
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 3 Mo

Extrait

THE ORIGINS OF RIGHT TO WORK

THEORIGINS OFRIGHT TO WORK Antilabor Democracy in NineteenthCentury Chicago

Cedric de Leon

ILR PRESS AN IMPRINT OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRESSITHACA AND LONDON

All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information, address Cornell University Press, Sage House, 512 East State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850.

First published 2015 by Cornell University Press First printing, Cornell Paperbacks, 2015

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress CataloginginPublication Data Leon, Cedric de, author.  The origins of right to work : antilabor democracy in nineteenthcentury Chicago / Cedric de Leon.  pages cm  Includes bibliographical references and index.  ISBN 9780801453083 (cloth : alk. paper)  ISBN 9780801479588 (pbk. : alk. paper)  1. Open and closed shop—Illinois—Chicago—History—19th century. 2. Labor—Illinois—Chicago—History—19th century. 3. Labor movement— Illinois—Chicago—History—19th century. 4. Working class—Political activity—Illinois—Chicago—History—19th century. 5. Political parties— Illinois—Chicago—History—19th century. 6. Chicago (Ill.)—Politics and government—19th century. I. Title.  HD6488.2.U6L46 2015  331.88'92097731109034—dc23 2014043953

Cornell University Press strives to use environmentally responsible suppliers and materials to the fullest extent possible in the publishing of its books. Such materials include vegetablebased, lowVOC inks and acidfree papers that are recycled, totally chlorinefree, or partly composed of nonwood fibers. For further information, visit our website at www.cornellpress.cornell.edu.

Cloth printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Paperback printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

For my sisters and brothers in GEO and LEO, Locals 3550 and 6244, American Federation of Teachers Michigan

Contents

Preface

1.  Tracing the Origins of Right to Work 2.  The Critique of Wage Dependency, 1828–1844 3.  The Political Crisis over Slavery and the Rise of Free Labor, 1844–1860 4.  The War Years, or the Triumphs and Reversals of Free Labor Ideology, 1861–1865 5.  Antilabor Democracy and the Working Class, 1865–1887 Epilogue: Neoliberalism in the Rustbelt

Notes References Index

ix

1

24

49

78

96

130

149 153 167

Preface

As a graduate student of sociology at the University of Michigan, I spent as much time organizing on behalf of my union as I did writing my dissertation. In 1998, when I arrived in Ann Arbor, I immediately joined the graduate assistants’ steer ing committee, and by 2001, I had become local union president. Instead of tak ing a tenuretrack job in San Diego when I graduated in 2004, I took a lecturer position in my department and became lead organizer of the lecturers’ union. Throughout my time in Ann Arbor, Michigan, teachers went on strike and either fought their employer to a draw or won resounding victories. Of course, I knew that globalization had badly weakened Michigan workers, especially in the auto industry, but my own experience had been that the labor movement remained defiant and strong. I should have known better. By 2011, conservatives were blaming my fellow teachers for a financial crisis which, as far as I knew, had begun with the preda tory lending practices and credit default swaps of Wall Street. Then the unthink able happened: Michigan, the cradle of the modern U.S. labor movement, joined the ranks of mainly southern “right to work” states, where workers receive the benefits of union contracts without having to pay the dues or fees that support the daily operation of unions. By the winter of 2012, workers in other union strongholds like Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin had come under similar attack. This might not have been so surprising to me had I been on the ground, but in 2007 I left Michigan for my first tenuretrack job at Providence College, where I focused on getting sociologists to take the study of political parties seriously. The shock of this monumental setback, however, stirred in me the impulse to return to my labor roots and the central claim of my dissertation, which was that the United States emerged from the crucible of the Civil War as an antilabor democracy, one that undermined the right of workers to bargain collectively with their employers. The parallels between that time and ours were inescapable. My sense of secu rity in leaving behind a strong labor movement reminded me of the promise of the northern victory in the Civil War which, for nineteenthcentury American workers, was the prospect of land out West and an escape from wage dependency in the nation’s cities. The splash of cold water to my face recalled the rude awak ening that these same workers must have felt as they realized that they would not become independent farmers and instead remain in industrial servitude. Finally,

ix