| Reviews / Comptes Rendus | Labour/Le Travail, 59

Reviews / Comptes Rendus

Josiah Bartlett Lambert, "If the Workers Took a Notion": The Right to Strike and American Political Development (Ithaca, NY: ILR Press 2005)

STRIKE ACTIVITY has declined in the United States since the immediate post-World War II years. However, the right to strike is one of the fundamental means used by workers to communicate their grievances to employers. Josiah Bartlett Lambert, a member of the political science department at St. Bonaventure University, goes a long way to explaining the emergence and transformation of the right to strike in this informative volume. Lambert utilizes an impressive review of the legal and ideological framework in which the right to strike has been shaped in order to support the view that this right has been transformed from a right of citizenship to a commercial right.

Lambert covers a lot of ground in a relatively short book, and he manages to include many references to various theories about the development of strike activity. He suggests that the right to strike was initially rooted in 19th-century republican ideology. Artisans of that period saw the right to withhold labour as an intrinsic part of their rights as American citizens. While not delving too broadly into republicanism, Lambert appears to believe that the right to strike was part of the ideology of Free Soil, Free Labour, Free Men that Eric Foner has examined. Artisans held allegiances to different institutions and some — like the Catholic Church — also supported the right to withhold labour.

The interplay between the American state and organized labour is prominent in this book. John R. Commons's view that American society lacked the kind of class antagonisms found in Europe is noted, but so too is the repeated use of coercive force to break strike activity. The use of martial law was common in the late 19th century, and so too was the use of public and private armies to confront strikers. Capital and the state were, however, confronted with a dilemma as the 20th century dawned. America's entry into World War I required the quelling of labour dissent, while also necessitating working-class support for the conflict in Europe. The state became more willing to placate labour by granting greater legal legitimacy in return for union leadership limiting rank-and-file militancy. This was not particularly problematic as the recognized leader of the American labour movement, Samuel Gompers, had already been a proponent of "pure and simple" unionism that itself limited dissent.

State interest in granting legal rights to American workers, such as the right to strike, ebbed and flowed in conjunction with America's entry into the 20th-century's two global wars. The extensive use of coercive measures against labour by capital and the state increased in the post-World War I years. Interest in developing a comprehensive legal framework for labour waned, and the primacy of the courts in circumscribing union activity continued. The creation of the National Labour Relations Act [NLRA] provided a comprehensive framework for union organizing and collective bargaining. However, Lambert correctly shows that the NLRA era was relatively brief. Worker militancy was not completely limited during World War II. Strike activity peaked in the United States in 1946 against the backdrop of dramatic strike activity in the country's coalfields. A conservative post-war reaction to labour militancy manifested itself in the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act. Taft-Hartley does not usually receive the same attention as the Wagner Act, but Lambert properly shows that it was just as important as its 1935 predecessor. He does not think that Taft-Hartley was a repudiation of collective bargaining or the right to strike, but it clearly placed severe limitations on both. Taft-Hartley would eventually be part of three major legislative defeats from which American unions suffered in the post-World War II decades, with the 1955 Landrum-Griffin Act and the failure of the 1978 Labour Law Reform Act being the other two. The 1980 election of the Reagan Administration accelerated the process of decline that had been in progress since 1947. Lambert concludes his analysis by strongly advocating a renewal of the right to strike as a citizenship, rather than commercial, right.

Lambert's narrative is strongest when he recounts the various events, individuals, and legislation that shaped the right to strike. He is on somewhat less firm ground when considering the ideology that has shaped the right to strike. He refers to diverse thinkers such as Friedrich von Hayek to illustrate how liberal economic arguments have been employed against organized labour, with von Hayek strongly opposing strikes. Leading management theorists like W. Edwards Deming have promoted worker autonomy, but not the right to strike. These various theories are presented as part of the wider view that the right to strike is a commercial right. However, the countervailing views of other theorists are not sufficiently considered.

Lambert is correct to note the importance of the right to strike, but he could have also contextualized it in relation to other aspects of unionism. For example, union membership is essentially viewed in commodity terms in the United States. Many workers feel that they are purchasing various services in return for their membership dues. Indeed, some may reside in right-to-work states and not pay any dues, yet still expect union represent a t i o n from the unions in t h e i r workplaces. American unions have not substantially veered away from an emphasis on economic issues. Should it then be a surprise that striking is viewed as an economic right?

American workers live with many different identities, and being a union member may only be one aspect of their lives. However, being a consumer and participating in a consumer culture is also part of the reality of post-World War II America. Liz Cohen, in particular, has examined this phenomenon. Participating in consumer culture has increasingly become a part of citizenship for American workers. It should therefore not be a surprise that striking is viewed as an economic activity as so many other important aspects of workers' lives are also viewed in a similar manner.

Lambert advocates a return to republican values, and suggests that the right to strike should be part of a broader civil movement for workers' rights. This is an admirable suggestion, but there are problems with this idea that he identifies but does not fully pursue. He correctly notes that republican ideology did not have broad appeal among the working class, and a modern return to it could have the same limitation. However, republicanism was also inextricably linked to specific social, economic, and political conditions of the antebellum period. For example, David Roediger has notably discussed the impact of whiteness on republicanism. The artisan class also supported the Republican Party, and this party made a swift post-bellum transformation into the party of big business. The American Federation of Labor could be viewed as a product of republican thought as it did not essentially challenge Gilded Age capitalism, and instead operated within it. Lambert could have perhaps suggested that unions attempt to forge a new ideology that does not confine them within the bounds of capitalism.

Legislation, such as laws regulating strikes, is the product of political activity. Lambert touches upon the relationship between American unions and the Democratic Party, and it is evident from his narrative that this relationship has not always yielded many returns for labour. However, he does not present a comprehensive political program for labour. Simply suggesting that unions create a modern movement for workers' rights will not lead to better labour laws.

This is a useful book despite its shortcomings. It will provide readers with a detailed overview of the most effective means of opposing capital and the state that workers possess. However, readers may wish to refer to some other more comprehensive works on American labour history — such as Melvyn Dubofsky's The State and Labour in Modern America or David Montgomery's The Rise and Fall of the House of Labour — in order to place Lambert's analysis within a broader perspective.


Jason Russell York University

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.