'So Closely Intertwined': Labor and Racial Solidarity

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Charlotte Garden, Nancy Leong
{"title":"'So Closely Intertwined': Labor and Racial Solidarity","authors":"Charlotte Garden, Nancy Leong","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2128136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conventional wisdom tells us that labor unions and people of color are adversaries. Commentators, academics, politicians, and employers across a broad range of ideologies view the two groups’ interests as fundamentally opposed and their relationship as rightfully fraught with tension. For example, commentators assert that unions capture a wage premium that mostly benefits white workers while making it harder for workers of color to find work; that unions deprive workers of color of an effective voice in the workplace; and that unions are interested in workers of color only to the extent that they can showcase them to manufacture the appearance of racial diversity. Like much conventional wisdom, the narrative that unions and people of color are rivals is flawed. In reality, labor unions and civil rights groups work together to advance a wide array of mutual interests; this work ranges from lobbying all levels of government to protesting working conditions across the country. Moreover, unions improve the lives of both members and non-members of color, from bargaining for better wages and working conditions to providing services like job training and continuing education to under-resourced communities. Accordingly, we aim to replace the conventional wisdom with a narrative that more accurately describes the occasionally complicated but ultimately hopeful relationship between labor and race. In developing this narrative, we anchor our conclusions in an interdisciplinary literature that includes insights from legal, economic, psychological and sociological scholarly research. This extensive body of scholarship indicates that union membership has significant benefits for workers of color in the form of higher wages and improved benefits, more racially congenial workplaces, and deeper cross-racial understanding. We complement this robust scholarly literature with real-world examples of union success at improving the well-being of workers and communities of color. In contrast to many other commentators, then, our account is largely optimistic, though we emphasize that there is still work for the labor movement to do.","PeriodicalId":47068,"journal":{"name":"George Washington Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"George Washington Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2128136","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Conventional wisdom tells us that labor unions and people of color are adversaries. Commentators, academics, politicians, and employers across a broad range of ideologies view the two groups’ interests as fundamentally opposed and their relationship as rightfully fraught with tension. For example, commentators assert that unions capture a wage premium that mostly benefits white workers while making it harder for workers of color to find work; that unions deprive workers of color of an effective voice in the workplace; and that unions are interested in workers of color only to the extent that they can showcase them to manufacture the appearance of racial diversity. Like much conventional wisdom, the narrative that unions and people of color are rivals is flawed. In reality, labor unions and civil rights groups work together to advance a wide array of mutual interests; this work ranges from lobbying all levels of government to protesting working conditions across the country. Moreover, unions improve the lives of both members and non-members of color, from bargaining for better wages and working conditions to providing services like job training and continuing education to under-resourced communities. Accordingly, we aim to replace the conventional wisdom with a narrative that more accurately describes the occasionally complicated but ultimately hopeful relationship between labor and race. In developing this narrative, we anchor our conclusions in an interdisciplinary literature that includes insights from legal, economic, psychological and sociological scholarly research. This extensive body of scholarship indicates that union membership has significant benefits for workers of color in the form of higher wages and improved benefits, more racially congenial workplaces, and deeper cross-racial understanding. We complement this robust scholarly literature with real-world examples of union success at improving the well-being of workers and communities of color. In contrast to many other commentators, then, our account is largely optimistic, though we emphasize that there is still work for the labor movement to do.
“如此紧密地交织在一起”:劳工和种族团结
传统观念告诉我们,工会和有色人种是对立的。各种意识形态的评论员、学者、政治家和雇主都认为,这两个群体的利益从根本上是对立的,他们的关系充满了紧张,这是理所当然的。例如,评论人士断言,工会获得的工资溢价主要使白人工人受益,同时使有色人种工人更难找到工作;工会剥夺了有色人种工人在工作场所的有效发言权;工会对有色人种的工人感兴趣,只是因为他们可以展示他们,以制造种族多样性的表象。像许多传统观点一样,工会和有色人种是竞争对手的说法是有缺陷的。在现实中,工会和民权组织共同努力推进一系列广泛的共同利益;这项工作的范围从游说各级政府到抗议全国各地的工作条件。此外,工会改善了有色人种成员和非有色人种成员的生活,从争取更好的工资和工作条件,到为资源不足的社区提供职业培训和继续教育等服务。因此,我们的目标是用一种更准确地描述劳工与种族之间偶尔复杂但最终充满希望的关系的叙述来取代传统智慧。在发展这种叙事的过程中,我们将我们的结论锚定在跨学科的文献中,其中包括来自法律、经济、心理学和社会学学术研究的见解。这一广泛的学术研究表明,工会成员资格对有色人种工人有显著的好处,包括更高的工资和更好的福利,更适合种族的工作场所,以及更深层次的跨种族理解。我们用工会在改善工人和有色人种社区福祉方面取得成功的现实例子来补充这一强大的学术文献。因此,与许多其他评论员相比,我们的描述在很大程度上是乐观的,尽管我们强调劳工运动仍有工作要做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信