Experiment with Change

In this time of drastic economic restructuring of the employment relationship, it is more important than ever that labor vigorously debate and experiment with new models of employee representation. Both the economic and political landscapes in which Americans work have been dramatically altered in the last twenty years. The movement must be ready to adapt to these sea changes.

Lance Compa critiques a wide variety of different approaches that labor advocates have been advancing in recent years, and he is certainly correct that not all these tactics have equal merit. However, he does not offer a coherent alternative and instead seems to be arguing that the labor movement should just soldier on without making any significant changes. There is, quite simply, no way to rebuild exactly the models of unionism that won such brilliant gains in the mid-twentieth century. America’s economy has been too dramatically transformed since then.

There is, quite simply, no way to rebuild exactly the models of unionism that won such brilliant gains in the mid-twentieth century.

Of the different tactics Compa critiques, Alt-labor is certainly one that deserves defense. In the 1930s, the experimentation and innovation of the industrial labor organizers were also denounced as a waste of time and resources. The auto and steel workers of the New Deal era were not building their labor organizations in the way that such things had traditionally been orchestrated. However, when the massive worker unrest of that decade surged, those CIO unions and the organizational models they championed were there waiting to be picked up and expanded upon.

Today, efforts such as OUR Walmart and Fast Food Forward are experimenting with new forms of organizing to adapt to the decentralized economy. The funding for these efforts comes from existing unions, but so, too, did the money for the Steel Workers’ Organizing Committee come from other CIO unions. Moreover, like the Justice for Janitors model that won such powerful victories in the 1990s and 2000s, these campaigns focus not on the contractors and other middle men being squeezed by corporate giants, but on the client companies themselves. Already, real gains have been won both legislatively, as the $15 minimum wage spreads, and in individual stores where fired workers have been rehired.

Moreover, Alt-labor organizations such as the National Domestic Workers Alliance and the National Taxi Workers Alliance offer protections to workers who, voluntarily or not, work outside the umbrella of one long-term employment relationship. These groups represent workers who are more contingent, not tied down to a particular employer, and are perhaps misclassified as independent contractors: they cannot organize workers only through a specific employer, but along occupational lines. In these cases, the locus of organizing must shift from a single employer to an entire industry. The AFL-CIO has acknowledged the legitimacy and importance of these organizations, allowing them to affiliate with the federation—a radical move that would have been unthinkable ten years ago.

Compa’s essay does not adequately acknowledge that the “conventional unions” he champions are existentially beset by overwhelmingly powerful political and economic forces. New forms of organizing, such as Fast Food Forward or the National Taxi Workers Alliance, must be an integral part of labor’s strategy moving forward. We can, and we must, experiment with new forms of organizing while also defending the remaining “conventional unions” that Compa holds up as our only option.