The article written by Richard Hurd on the U.S. unions contemplates on the past commentary done by Christopher Tomlins in his famous book, the state and the unions. Hurd’s essay makes clear references to the work done by Jean Christian Vinel, in which he places Tomlins’ contribution as a pattern which draws its knowledge from many fields and which encompasses the legal scholars and the social scientists (Hurd, 2013).
Tomlins’ work attempts to make clear predictions on the fall of the labor unions and discredits what he calls the ‘counterfeit rights’ given to the working class in the United States under the new dispensation. Hurd tends to agree with Tomlin on some points but again examines the durability and the validity of the predictions made by Tomlin based on the occurrence of changes in economics and policy attitudes since the publication of Tomlins’ book was made (Hurd, 2013).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In his article, Hurd recognizes that indeed the assertions made by Tomlin on the decline of the labor unions were accurately foretold. Hurd adds to the idea of Tomlin which predicted that the counterfeit liberties and the ineffective labor laws would be the main reason for the fall of the labor unions. According to Hurd, the demise of unions would not only be intrigued by the weak labor laws but would also suffer from their internal weaknesses ranging from mismanagement to institutional inflexibility. Hurd asserts that the main source of fraud is founded mainly in the economic policies which are neoliberal, and, therefore, if workers are convinced that representation or the labor laws only provide counterfeit liberty then they may become resentful and this would negate their morale.
Tomlin observes that in the late 30’s a rift became evident between the organizers of the union because there was no source of authority which was able to resolve conflicts that existed between such unions, and as a result, these disputes lay an early foundation for the decline of future efforts by labor organizations. Vinel seems to agree with this as he also observes that the organized labor receded slowly as the unions continued to decline and the labor historians started to gain back their faith in Democratic Party and liberalism. This idea is also shared by Michael Brown, a professor of politics at the University of California. The professor reveals that the labor historians were dissatisfied by the unions’ failure to control their fate and to resist the violation of workers’ rights by the employers, thus, confirming the perception of the decline of movement by the labor unions.
Hurd too reiterates this thought as he indicates that in the 90’s the trust and the optimism that he had built on the labor unions was brought down by yet again the disintegration of the organization. He also observes that the organizers of the labor union continued to struggle to sustain their energies and to keep the unions relevant. He gives several reasons for the fall out; lack of cohesion amongst the authorities of the labor unions, general difficulty in keeping high the unions’ momentum, fragmentation observed in the unions and perhaps significantly, that there was a major problem of preference amongst the union members (Hurd, 2013).
Collective bargaining can be defined as negotiation process which leads to an agreement between a labor union or group of workers and the employer on the employment terms. Items brought to the table for discussions usually include the working conditions, wages, overtime rates, work rules, sick days, vacation leave, retirement benefits, holidays and healthcare insurance amongst many others. Usually, there are two strategies applied in the negotiation process during the collective bargaining. They include; integrative, which is sometimes referred to as interest-based bargaining and distributive bargaining (Katz, 1993). The method of approach to the bargaining process depends on the objectives of the negotiations and the particular context.
Normally, if the issues to be discussed are just a few or only one, then the distributive strategy is preferred. If there are many issues simultaneously tabled and the parties involved are enjoying a good relationship, then the integrative strategy may be better-suited technique. It is believed that the integrative bargaining technique would be successful when the parties involved have shared interests (Katz, 1993). When there is a conflict of interests, however, the parties would prefer more traditional ways to resolve. The approach chosen greatly influences the attitudes of the parties involved in the bargaining process and predetermines whether they would cooperate or not under different circumstances (Katz, 1993).
The bargaining process has for a long time proven to be a problematic affair. However, there is clear evidence that efforts made so far have yielded some progress. The policies and the existing laws have finally permitted employers and the workers to reach an agreement of sorts even if it is sometimes difficult. Even as some labor unions are still soldiering on, the unions have not yet won.
The tone used in Hurd’s article does not have any optimism for the industry or labor cooperation, labelling the policy as a mere political wasteland. I do not share Hurd’s opinion. In any case, the past harsh labor conflicts in the United States have ended, and the workers seem to be treated reasonably well. The tranquility enjoyed by the industry is an indication of reconciliation between the falsely perceived enemies who are now acknowledging and coming to terms with their mutual interdependence. The two opposites have naturally established a more collaborative approach to dealing with conflicts and incorporated better ways of conflict resolutions.
References
Hurd, R. W. (2013). Moving beyond the critical synthesis: does the law preclude a future for US unions?. Labor History , 54 (2), 193-200.
Katz, H. C. (1993). The decentralization of collective bargaining: a literature review and comparative analysis. ILR Review , 47 (1), 3-22.
