In this paper an argument is put for a reconceptualization of the theory of US industrial unionism. It reflects lessons learnt about the patterns and determinants of the electoral performance of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union and the United Auto Workers union over the period 1970–82. Empirically, the spatial and temporal diversity of unions' electoral performance is emphasized. Theoretically, it is suggested that unions' performances in representation elections are the product of a complex array of processes and their interrelationships. Diversity of patterns and complexity of processes makes forecasting the future of industrial unionism a risky project. Also considered are competing theories of unionism and the methodologies for analyzing union electoral performance. Based on these observations, a case is made for the necessity of a ‘new’ framework for understanding the geography of US unionism.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anti-Racketeering Law (Hobbs Act), 1954, 18 USC 1951, 1982
2.
AshenfelterOPencavelJ, 1969, “American trade union growth: 1900–1960”Quarterly Journal of Economics83434–448
3.
BeckerG, 1964Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis (Columbia University Press, New York)
4.
BellD, 1953, “The next American labor movement”Fortune April issue, pp 120–123, 201–206
5.
BernsteinI, 1961, “The growth of American unions, 1945–1960”Labor History2131–157
6.
CavesR, 1980, “The structure of industry” in The American Economy in Transition Ed. FeldsteinM (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL) pp 501–545
7.
ChubbJEPetersonP (Eds), 1985The New Directions in American Politics (The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC)
8.
ClarkGL, 1981, “The employment relation and spatial division of labor”Annals of the Association of American Geographers71412–424
9.
ClarkGLGertlerMWhitemanJ, 1986Regional Dynamics: Studies in Adjustment Theory (George Allen and Unwin, Hemel Hempstead, Herts)
10.
ClarkGLJohnstonK, 1987a, “The geography of US union elections 1: The crisis of US unions and a critical review of the literature”Environment and Planning A1933–57
11.
ClarkGLJohnstonK, 1987b, “The geography of US union elections 2: Performance of the United Auto Workers union and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union, 1970–82”Environment and Planning A19153–172
12.
ClarkGLJohnstonK, 1987c, “The geography of US union elections 3: The context and structure of union electoral performance (the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union and the United Auto Workers union, 1970–82)”Environment and Planning A19289–311
13.
ClarkGLJohnstonK, 1987d, “The geography of US union elections 4: Patterns of close elections and determinants of the margins of victory and loss (the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union and the United Auto Workers union, 1970–82)”Environment and Planning A19447–469
14.
DickensWLeonardJ, 1985, “Accounting for the decline in union membership, 1950–1980”Industrial and Labor Relations Review38323–334
15.
DickensWWholeyDRobinsonJ, 1985, “Bargaining unit, industry, and locational correlates of union support in certification and decertification elections” mimeo, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA
16.
DunlopJ, 1944Wage Determination under Trade Unions (Kelley, New York)
17.
DunlopJ, 1948, “The development of labor organization: A theoretical framework” in Insights into Labor Issues Eds LesterRAShisterJ (Macmillan, New York) pp 163–193
18.
EllwoodDFineG, 1983, “Effects of right-to-work laws on union organizing” mimeo, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA
19.
FaithRLReidJ, 1983, “The labor union as its members' agent” in Research in Labor Economics (supplement) Ed. ReidJ (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) pp 3–26
20.
FarberH, 1984, “Right-to-work laws and the extent of unionization”Journal of Labor Economics2319–352
21.
FioritoJGreerC, 1982, “Determinants of US unionism: Past research and future needs”Industrial Relations211–32
22.
FreemanRMedoffJ, 1984What Do Unions Do? (Basic Books, New York)
23.
HirschBAddisonJ, 1986The Economic Analysis of Unions: New Approaches and Evidence (George Allen and Unwin, Hemel Hempstead, Herts)
24.
HirschmanA, 1985, “Against parsimony: Three easy ways of complicatng some categories of economic discourse”Economics and Philosophy17–21
25.
Hobbs Act—see Anti-Racketeering Law
26.
HoxieR, 1917Trade Unionism in the United States (Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York)
27.
Johnson (President), 1966Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report 28 January, page 304
Labor Management Reporting and Disclosures (Landrum–Griffin) Act, 1959, 29 USC 401 et seq
30.
Landrum-Griffin Act—see Labor Management Reporting and Disclosures Act
31.
LazearE, 1983, “A microeconomic theory of labor unions” in Research in Labor Economics (supplement) Ed. ReidJ (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) pp 53–96
32.
LeabDJ (Ed.), 1985The Labor History Reader (University of Illinois Press, Champaign, IL)
33.
LesterR, 1958As Unions Mature: Analysis of the Evolution of American Unionism (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
34.
LucasR, 1981Studies in Business-cycle Theory (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
35.
MillsHABrownEC, 1950From the Wagner Act to Taft–Hartley: A Study of National Labor Policy and Labor Relations (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
36.
MooreWJNewmanRJ, 1975, “On the prospects for American trade union growth: A cross-section analysis”The Review of Economics and Statistics57435–445
37.
MorrisC (Ed.), 1983The Developing Labor Law (Bureau of National Affairs, Washington, DC)
38.
National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act, 1935, 49 Stat. 449, as amended, 29 USC section 151–166
39.
National Labor Relations Board, 1986Forty-seventh Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended September 1982 (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
40.
NeumannGRissmanE, 1984, “Where have all the union members gone?”Journal of Labor Economics2175–192
41.
PrattJWZeckhauserR (Eds), 1985Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business (Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA)
