Ruth Milkman
I think you absolutely need both. So for example, take the Flint strike of 1936, ’37. Even with the law on their side, I’m not sure the UAW could have possibly gained a foothold without both the militancy of ordinary workers and the strategic capacity of the leaders. They didn’t just spontaneously rise up — they had a whole plan of action that was extremely successful in how to outwit General Motors. They pulled it off amazingly.
It also really helps to have the law either neutral or on your side. There’s no question about that because labor law has been used as a battering ram against unions throughout American history. So, in the 1930s, when it seems to be tilting in a way that doesn’t favor workers, but at least equalizes the playing field between management and labor, that’s key. That’s not either top-down or bottom-up, but it’s a precondition for successful organizing.
That’s part of why it’s so difficult to organize big corporations today. The employers have all the cards in terms of the legal stuff. The places where unionism is winning a foothold, just like in the days of the old AFL, is where workers have skill. So medical interns and residents, they’re winning. Graduate student workers and adjuncts, who are not easily replaced. Maybe more easily replaced than residents and interns because there are a lot of us academic workers out there, but still, it’s a very highly skilled job. You can’t just fire everybody and start over tomorrow. Journalists are another example. They have a lot of skill and they’re winning.
So in a way we are back to those days where skill really matters. The law is less relevant because you have power outside the law. It doesn’t matter so much if you have other leverage, based on the fact that you’re hard to replace. There is a great article by Howard Kimeldorf, about the…
La suite est à lire sur: jacobin.com
Auteur: Ruth Milkman
