Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement

Hard Work by Fantasia and Voss book gave us an insight of the work place and the different Labor Unions who have attempted to help their workers fight off bureacratic tactics practices by Business Owners. In the beginning of the chapter The United States Work Benefits was compared with the Europeans Work Benefits and the Europeans offer were more appealing. The book went on to say the the United States is a capitalistic country, because they are more interesting in making profits than taking care of their workers. Businesses uses tactics such as globalization and hiring Immigrants to work for them so that they can avoid the Labor Unions. Labor Unions who are suppose to protect their workers are sometimes bought out at the bargaining table. If Business Owners continue to get their ways then there are going to be more uprising of social movements, more standardized jobs and a cripple in the political forces. No one is really sure what the future entails for the Labor Unions. Labor Unions need to be more stronger and do what is right to protect their workes from Buisness Owners Practices.

In this book, Fantasia and Voss--two long-time, respected labor scholars--provide a great overview of and introduction to the American labor movement. The book was actually originally written for a French audience, so they assume you know very little about the American labor movement, explaining things like the National Labor Relations Board and the Taft-Hartley Act, instead of assuming you know about them. They also at times contrast the American labor movement with those in Eruope, which is also frequently illuminating. Building upon Voss' previous work, they address the question of the supposed exceptionalism of the American working class--the fact that, unlike European working classes, they never developed a militant labor movement that fought for the interests of all workers and embraced socialist or social-democratic politics; instead, the labor movement has fought primarily for benefits for its members and embraced mainstream politics. But, Fantasia and Viss argue, the American labor movement was not always like this--in the mid- to late nineteenth century, the American labor movement was as militant, broad-minded and radical as its European counterparts, if not more so. What was exceptional was not the American working class, but the American capitalist class, which was far more hostile to labor than their European counterparts. This hostile social environment, in which any major labor organziation that showed signs of a broad vision of social justice was brutally crushed, lead to the thoroughly domesticated politics of the AFL-CIO, in which they agreed to act as business' junior partner, gaining increased wages and benefits for their members, in return for abandonning any broader vision and supporting the Cold War agenda. Even at its height, this bargain excluded most workers outside the core manufacturing industries. When the US and global economy began to undergo major changes in the 1970s (changes Fantasia and Voss don't explain well--this is one of the few weaknesses of the book), US business decided this bargain no longer suited its needs, rolling back the gains workers had made, a process that accelerated once the Reagan administration came to power. Traditional labor leaders were totally unprepared for this assult and it looked like organized American labor might go down the tubes. Fortunately, the decentralized structure of some unions, while allowing for local corruption, had also allowed for progressives to survive in some localities. They have responded to the crisis of American labor with innovative new tactics and a new vision that embraces the interests of all workers, not just union members. They have begun working with other community groups and organizing groups unions had traditionally ignored--people of color, women and immigrants. (This is the other big weakness of the book--Fantasia and Voss don't pay enough attention to how deeply entrenched racism, sexism and nativism were entrenched in mainstream unions. They