You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
The struggle for civil rights in the United States is usually told as a story about race, but Unit Y319 defines it more broadly, and one of its central strands is the long contest over the rights of working people to organise, bargain and withdraw their labour. This was, in its way, a civil-rights struggle every bit as much as the campaigns of African Americans or women: it turned on freedoms of association, assembly and speech; it pitted organised citizens against the concentrated power of employers and the coercive power of the state; and it moved, across the century and a quarter from 1865 to 1992, from a condition in which unions were treated in law as criminal conspiracies to one in which collective bargaining was federally guaranteed — and then back toward retreat. A thematic study must resist narrating this as a sequence of strikes. Instead it must ask an analytical question about change and continuity across the whole period: how far, and by what means, did the legal and practical position of organised labour change between 1865 and 1992, and what forces — employer power, state action, the courts, internal divisions, and the shifting structure of the economy — determined whether workers' rights advanced or receded?
The organising question for this lesson is therefore: why did the American labour movement, uniquely among the industrial democracies, find it so hard to secure durable rights, achieving a decisive but temporary breakthrough in the 1930s before entering long decline — and what does its trajectory reveal about the balance between private economic power and the protections of citizenship? Keep this question in view. The material below is organised not decade by decade but around the recurring tension between the collective rights of labour and the power arrayed against them — a tension visible in the Gilded Age defeats, the constitutional breakthrough of the New Deal, the post-war reaction, and the erosion of union power by 1992.
By the end of this lesson you will be able to:
This lesson belongs to OCR H505 Unit Y319 (Thematic study and interpretations): Civil Rights in the USA 1865–1992, a UG3 thematic-study unit. Unit Y319 is assessed in two distinct ways. First, it is examined by thematic essays that range across the entire period 1865–1992 (AO1) — synoptic questions requiring analysis of change and continuity, similarity and difference, across more than a century, organised by theme rather than by decade. Second, it is examined by historical interpretations (AO3) focused on three named depth topics: the Gilded Age 1875–1895, the New Deal and civil rights 1933–1941, and Malcolm X and Black Power 1941–1970 (these interpretation topics are treated in later lessons). The present lesson develops the AO1 thematic-synthesis skill applied to trade union and labour rights across the whole period.
Within our own teaching sequence we treat labour rights as a distinct theme, second in the course, because it demonstrates that the unit's conception of "civil rights" extends beyond race to the rights of citizens as workers, and because the labour story intersects repeatedly with the others — Black workers excluded by craft unions, women in the wartime workforce, the New Deal's simultaneous impact on labour and on African Americans. This is our pedagogical decision, not a transcription of the specification's ordering. The change-and-continuity threads foregrounded here — the gap between formal right and practical strength, the decisive role of the state and the courts, and the vulnerability of labour to economic and political shifts — run across the whole unit. (Refer to the official OCR specification for exact wording.)
Because Y319 is a thematic study, the examiner rewards command of change over time across the whole period and judgements that compare different phases rather than narrating a sequence of disputes. Throughout, keep asking how each development altered — or preserved — the balance between organised labour and the power ranged against it.
The starting condition of the theme is stark. In the decades after the Civil War, as the United States industrialised faster than any nation in history, the men and women who built its wealth had almost no legally protected rights as workers. Employers were free to hire and fire at will, to set hours of twelve to sixteen a day, to employ children, and to pay wages that often fell below subsistence. Against this, the law offered workers little and the state offered them still less: strikes were frequently treated by the courts as illegal "conspiracies" or restraints of trade, and when disputes turned to confrontation the coercive power of the state — militia, federal troops, court injunctions — was deployed overwhelmingly on the side of capital.
The first great labour organisations struggled against these conditions with contrasting strategies:
| Organisation | Years | Approach | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knights of Labor | 1869–1890s | Inclusive "one big union" open to all workers — skilled and unskilled, women, and Black workers; aimed at a cooperative commonwealth | Grew rapidly in the mid-1880s; discredited and declined after the Haymarket affair (1886); criticised as utopian and loosely organised |
| American Federation of Labor (AFL) | 1886– | Craft unionism of skilled workers only; excluded most Black workers, women and unskilled immigrants; "bread-and-butter" focus on wages and hours | Grew steadily under Samuel Gompers; became the dominant labour body by pursuing narrow, achievable gains |
The defeats of the era were severe and revealing. The Great Railroad Strike of 1877, the first national strike, was crushed by federal troops with over a hundred killed. The Haymarket affair (1886) — a bomb at a Chicago labour rally, followed by the conviction and execution of anarchists on scant evidence — was used to discredit the whole movement. The Homestead Strike (1892) at Carnegie's steel works was broken when Henry Clay Frick deployed 300 Pinkerton detectives and the state militia, destroying the steelworkers' union for a generation. The Pullman Strike (1894), a national railway boycott led by Eugene V. Debs's American Railway Union, was smashed by federal troops and a sweeping court injunction; the Supreme Court's decision in In re Debs (1895) confirmed that injunctions could be used to break strikes.
The structural reasons for these defeats form the analytical core of the Gilded Age labour story, and they recur throughout the theme:
The historian Melvyn Dubofsky has emphasised that American labour operated in an exceptionally hostile legal and political environment — the American state, unlike its European counterparts, threw its coercive weight against unions while withholding the legal protections that elsewhere allowed labour movements to consolidate. This "American exceptionalism" in labour history — the puzzle of why the world's leading industrial power produced no mass socialist labour party and so weak a union movement — is a central interpretive thread, and its explanation begins in the defeats of the Gilded Age.
The cautious craft unionism of the AFL, which organised only skilled workers and largely accepted the capitalist order, left the great mass of unskilled, immigrant and non-white workers unrepresented — and provoked a radical alternative. In 1905 the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), the "Wobblies", was founded on a revolutionary, syndicalist programme: it aimed to organise all workers into "one big union" regardless of skill, race or sex, and to overthrow the wage system through direct action and the general strike. Led by figures such as "Big Bill" Haywood, the IWW led dramatic strikes — the Lawrence textile strike (1912) in Massachusetts being the most famous — and gave a voice to precisely those workers the AFL ignored.
But the IWW's radicalism made it a target, and its fate illustrates a continuity of the theme: the state's readiness to use repression against organised labour. During and after the First World War, the wartime Espionage and Sedition Acts and the post-war Red Scare of 1919–20 (the Palmer Raids) were turned against the IWW and the wider left, deporting immigrant radicals and effectively destroying the organisation. The steel strike of 1919 and a wider strike wave were defeated, and the 1920s became a decade of union retreat, as employers promoted "welfare capitalism" and the "open shop" (the so-called "American Plan") to keep unions out.
| Strand of the labour movement | Membership base | Political stance | Fate by the 1920s |
|---|---|---|---|
| Craft unionism (AFL) | Skilled workers | Accepted capitalism; "pure and simple" unionism | Survived but stagnated in the 1920s |
| Revolutionary syndicalism (IWW) | Unskilled, migrant, excluded workers | Sought to abolish the wage system | Crushed by wartime and Red Scare repression |
| Socialist politics (Debs) | Cross-section; strongest among some workers and radicals | Electoral socialism | Never achieved a mass party; marginalised after 1919 |
The failure of both the radical (IWW) and the political-socialist (Debs) alternatives to take root is central to the "exceptionalism" debate. By 1920, despite half a century of struggle, American workers still had no general legal right to organise or bargain collectively, and union membership remained a small fraction of the workforce. The gap between the formal freedoms of citizenship and the practical powerlessness of labour remained as wide as ever.
The decisive change in the whole theme came in the 1930s, and it is the labour equivalent of the constitutional revolution that Reconstruction had been for African Americans. The Great Depression discredited the laissez-faire order and the "welfare capitalism" of the 1920s, and Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, responding both to economic collapse and to a wave of labour militancy, for the first time placed the power of the federal government behind the right to organise.
The breakthrough came in two stages:
| Measure | Provision | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Section 7(a), National Industrial Recovery Act (1933) | Declared workers' right to organise and bargain collectively | First federal endorsement of the principle, but weakly enforced and struck down with the NIRA in 1935 |
| National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act (1935) | Guaranteed the right to join unions and bargain collectively; banned "unfair labor practices"; created the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to supervise elections and enforce the law | The charter of American labour rights; the single most important change in the theme |
| Fair Labor Standards Act (1938) | Established a federal minimum wage, a maximum working week and limits on child labour | Extended federal protection to conditions of work |
The Wagner Act was transformative because it did what no previous measure had done: it committed the coercive machinery of the state — hitherto the ally of employers — to protecting rather than suppressing organisation. Crucially, it survived judicial challenge: in NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel (1937), a Supreme Court chastened by Roosevelt's confrontation with it upheld the Act's constitutionality, marking the end of the Lochner-era jurisprudence that had treated collective action as a violation of freedom of contract. This was a genuine constitutional turning point.
Behind the legislation lay a surge of organisation. The old craft-based AFL could not organise the great mass-production industries, so in 1935 a group of unions broke away to form the Committee (later Congress) of Industrial Organizations (CIO) under John L. Lewis, committed to industrial unionism — organising all workers in an industry regardless of skill. Using the new legal protections and militant tactics such as the Flint sit-down strike (1936–37) against General Motors, the CIO organised steel, automobiles, rubber and electrical goods, and by 1941 had brought union membership to levels unimaginable a decade earlier. Importantly for the wider theme, the CIO — unlike the old AFL — organised across racial lines, bringing large numbers of Black workers into the labour movement and forging a link between labour rights and the emerging struggle for racial equality.
If the New Deal was the high-water mark, the second half of the period is a story of reaction and slow erosion — and a strong thematic essay must weigh this against the breakthrough. The immediate post-war years saw a wave of strikes as workers pressed for wage rises after wartime restraint, and a political backlash followed. In 1947 a Republican Congress passed the Taft–Hartley Act over President Truman's veto, significantly rolling back the Wagner settlement:
| Provision of Taft–Hartley (1947) | Effect on labour |
|---|---|
| Banned the "closed shop" and permitted states to pass "right-to-work" laws banning union-security agreements | Weakened union membership, especially in the South and West |
| Outlawed secondary boycotts and certain sympathy strikes | Restricted labour's most powerful solidarity tactics |
| Allowed "national emergency" injunctions (an 80-day cooling-off period) | Restored a version of the injunction weapon against strikes |
| Required anti-communist affidavits from union officers | Weakened the left-led unions and deepened Cold War purges within labour |
The Cold War intensified the retreat: the CIO expelled its communist-led unions in 1949–50, and in 1955 the two federations merged as the AFL–CIO under George Meany, marking the triumph of a cautious, anti-communist "business unionism" that accepted the post-war order and largely abandoned wider social ambitions. For a generation, unionised workers in mass-production industries enjoyed real prosperity, but the movement's political horizons had narrowed.
From the 1970s, deeper structural forces drove union power into long decline:
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.