Abstract
This article examines the scholarly literature giving advice to U.S. unions on the strategic direction they should pursue. It divides much of the literature into two main schools of thought: "value added" or "mutual gains" unionism (VAU), and "social movement" unionism (SMU). Both schools of thought are explained and evalu ated. The two are then compared, using contemporary national and local examples to illustrate each. After comparing their pros pects and advantages/disadvantages, the article concludes that SMU has a better likelihood of reviving the U.S. labor movement, al though its adoption as dominant practice is far from assured.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
