Side by Side We Battle Onward? Representing Workers in Contemporary America
| Author | Rebecca Kolins Givan |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00663.x |
| Published date | 01 December 2007 |
| Date | 01 December 2007 |
ANNUAL REVIEW ARTICLE 2006
Side by Side We Battle Onward?
Representing Workers in
Contemporary America
Rebecca Kolins Givan
Abstract
As collective bargaining in the United States declines, diverse forms of worker
representation are proliferating. Strategic dilemmas of representation are
central to the diverse organizations and coalitions representing disparate
aspects of workers’ interests. Unions continue to bargain collectively, while
forming alliances with other groups and providing an array of services to
members. Other organizations and loose associations represent specific aspects
of workers’ interests and advocate on their behalf while stopping short of
collective bargaining. This article compares the scope, objectives and methods
of worker representation by unions and non-bargaining actors. It argues that
the key dilemmas of which workers to represent, over what issues and through
which organizational forms, apply both to unions and to non-bargaining actors,
such as community organizations, and advocacy groups, which represent select
interests of particular workers. These non-bargaining actors are key strategic
allies for unions. While these organizations do not take on collective bargaining,
they are sometimes better positioned to represent other key needs and interests
of workers. The legal-political and mutual insurance needs of workers are
sometimes well met by these emergent groups. However, these organizations do
not, and cannot, provide the advantages of traditional collective bargaining.
1. Introduction
Unions in the United States face declining membership, an increasingly
hostile environment and an internal split over strategy. The separation
between the American Federation of Labor–Congress of Industrial
Rebecca Kolins Givan is at the ILR School, Cornell University.
British Journal of Industrial Relations doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2007.00663.x
45:4 December 2007 0007–1080 pp. 829–855
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2007. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
Organizations (AFL–CIO) and Change to Win in 2005 illustrates only one of
the strategic dilemmas faced in worker representation in the United States
today. In order to represent the interests of workers, unions must now work
with other organizations where they have common objectives. Worker rep-
resentation, broadly constructed, rather than straightforward collective bar-
gaining is a growth area brimming with new actors, even as traditional unions
are fighting for their lives. Strategic dilemmas of representation are central to
the diverse organizations and coalitions representing disparate aspects of
workers’ interests. As collective bargaining declines, new forms of worker
representation are proliferating.
This article proceeds from three initial observations. First, collective bar-
gaining in the United States is declining. Second, unions are struggling
(although sometimes succeeding) to represent their members beyond collec-
tive bargaining. Finally, other organizations and actors are fulfilling some of
the traditional, non-collective bargaining functions of unions. This article
analyses a number of different trends at work, in the legal and political
environment, in union strategy and in the role of grassroots coalitions and
professional advocacy groups, which represent the interests of workers. At a
time when overall union density is only 12 per cent and workers’ interests
seem fully subordinated to the interests of employers, this article looks at
diverse strategies for representing these interests. It asks how diverse organi-
zations are responding to dilemmas of representation and bridging the rep-
resentation gap. Unions continue to bargain collectively, while forming
alliances with other groups and providing an array of services to members.
Other organizations and loose associations, here referred to as non-
bargaining actors, represent specific aspects of workers’ interests and advo-
cate on their behalf while stopping short of collective bargaining. This article
compares the scope, objectives and methods of worker representation by
unions and non-bargaining actors.
The core of this article is its discussion of dilemmas of worker representa-
tion. I argue that the key dilemmas of which workers to represent, over what
issues and through which organizational forms (as set forth by Hyman
1997b) apply both to unions and to non-bargaining actors, such as commu-
nity organizations, and advocacy groups, which represent select interests of
particular workers. These non-bargaining actors are key strategic allies for
unions. While these organizations do not (and are not equipped) to take on
collective bargaining, they are sometimes better positioned to represent other
key needs and interests of workers. The interests of workers can be well
represented by an alliance between these emergent groups and more tradi-
tional trade unions. However, these alliances do not, and cannot, provide the
advantages of traditional collective bargaining.
2. Representing workers: collective bargaining and beyond
The Webbs famously argued that trade unions carry out three key functions:
collective bargaining, self-insurance and legal enactment. Crucially, and by
830 British Journal of Industrial Relations
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2007.
To continue reading
Request your trial