Moving Beyond the Critical Synthesis: Does the Law Preclude a Future For US Unions?

The Author’s Main Points

  The article, “ Moving beyond the critical synthesis: does the law preclude a future for US unions?” by Richard W. Hurd (2013) is written to address various main points. First, Hurd outlines the decline of labor unions in which he draws his illustration from Tomlin’s thesis that the New Deal offered only a counterfeit liberty to labor (Hurd, 2013). Secondly, the author discusses how the efforts in trying to revive the unions failed; where he blames the failure of the unions on both the organizational rigidity and the internal weaknesses within the organizations (Hurd, 2013). In addition, Hurd writes addressing the liberty at the US working class. In this regard, Hurd views the liberty at the US working class as counterfeit arising from neoliberal economic policies as opposed to constraints emanating from the nature of the labor itself (Hurd, 2013). In short terms, the author (Hurd) tries to assert that the rules and regulations used in governing the labor unions are unfit in helping the unions to meet their goals based on their wrong structuring. 

How the Argumentative Ideas Put Forward By the Author in This Article Support His Main Points and the Supportive Evidence to His Main Points 

The argumentative ideas put forward by the author (Hurd) in this article strongly support his main mains. To start with, his first main point about the decline of labor unions is well supported by the fact that the National Labor relation Act (NLARA) which was first formed in 1985 collapsed because it was received negatively by the concerned parties. This is because the NLARA was introduced at a time when the public had full consent that its main purpose was to weaken the labor unions (Hurd, 2013). Again, Hurd’s argument that the attempt to revive the union still failed is supported by the fact that the regime erected by the Progressive and New Deal reformers failed to last long, as most of leaders attached to the trade unions openly criticized Tomlin’s stating that the union’s rules and regulations were outdated meant devastation to the unions. Besides, it is evidence that Tomlin’s thesis about the New Deal was to blame for the massive decline of the labor unions, as argued by scholars such as Vinel and Melvyn Dubofsky. No doubt that the thesis resulted into a counterfeit liberty to the labor; consequently killing the employees’ morale (Hurd, 2013). In summary, the arguments presented by the author (Hurd) have been able to offer solid support to his main points. 

The Two Collective Bargaining Strategies Companies Use When Dealing With Unions 

The two collective bargaining strategies companies use when dealing with unions are the distributive bargaining strategy and the integrative bargaining strategy (Grimsley, 2018). In the distributive bargaining strategy, the involved parties approach the negotiations from the zero-sum game point of view with an implication that one party gains while the other losses (Grimsley, 2018). At such, a gain by an employer means a loss by the employee; and the reverse is true. The main target in the distributive bargaining strategy is to gain as much of the limited resources to oneself as possible (Grimsley, 2018). The effect of the distributive bargaining strategy on the morale of the employee depends on the probable outcome. If chances are that the employee gains while the employer losses, then the strategy raises the morale of the employee. On the other hand, if the employee losses while the employer gains, then definitely the employee losses the morale in the bargaining strategy. 

The integrative bargaining strategy on the other side entails a game play in which both parties can win (Grimsley, 2018). Unlike in the distributive bargaining strategy, the integrative bargaining strategy results in both sides winning, but none wins at the cost of the other party; an implication that by totaling up the wins and losses on both side results into a positive outcome on either side (Grimsley, 2018). For instance, an integrative bargaining strategy within an organization results into both the management and the employees gain a net positive sum; neither the institution nor the employees losses. The integrative bargaining strategy improves the morale of the employee since either way he or she gains. 

My Opinion of the Article and the Evidence to Support My Opinion 

In my own opinion, “ Moving beyond the critical synthesis: does the law preclude a future 

For US unions?” by Richard W. Hurd is an excellent retrospective essay that accurately criticizes Tomlin’s The State and Unions. Hurd convincingly assesses the durability of his observations in light of development for nearly a quarter century ago (Hurd, 2013). Hurd further asserts accurately that Tomlin’s thesis that the New Deal offered only a counterfeit liberty to labor, a situation that led to the decline of the labor unions. On page 193, Hurd notes that the state and the unions was not met with universal praise, but like all good scholarship served as a catalyst for healthy debate (Hurd, 2013). 

To improve the credibility on his argument that the decline of the labor union fits Tomlin’s thesis, Hurd draws illustrations from other critics emanating from different scholars such as Jean-Christian Vinel and Melvyn Dubofsky who constantly questions the truth of the Tomlin’s portrayal of the original National Labor Relation Act (NLRA) (Hurd, 2013). In summary, Hurd’s article tries to point out that the labor’s waning fortunes are triggered by the rigidity of the institution as well as the internal weakness resulting from external constraints and that any present semblance of liberty offered to the US working class is a true counterfeit (Hurd, 2013). Hurd maintains his credibility from the beginning of the article to the end. 

References 

Grimsley, S. (2018). Bargaining Strategies in Labor Relations: Integrative & Distributive (Online). Retrieved from https://study.com/academy/lesson/bargaining-strategies-in-labor-relations-integrative-distributive.html 

Hurd, R. W. (2013). Moving beyond the critical synthesis: Does the law preclude a future for US unions? Labor History, 54(2), 193-200.