United Automobile Workers Research Articles

Books reviewed

The Noblest Cry: A History of the American Civil Liberties Union, by Charles Lam Markmann, New York: St. Martin's Press, 1965. 464 pp. $7.95. Cornbelt Rebellion: The Farmers’ Holiday Association, by John L. Shover. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press. 1965. 239 pp. $5.95. Third Party Footprint: An Anthology From Writings And Speeches Of Midwest Radicals. Edited by James M. Youngdale. Minneapolis: Ross & Haines, Inc., 1966. 357 pp. $6.75. Harlem: The Making of a Ghetto: Negro New York, 1890–1930. By Gilbert Osofsky. New York: Harper & Row. 1965. 259 pp. $6.95. The Case of Joe Hill by Philip S. Foner, New York: International Publishers. 1965. 127 pp. $3.50. The Letters of Joe Hill. Edited by Philip S. Foner, New York; Oak Publications. 1965. 96 pp. $1.95. Labor and the Progressive Movement in New York State, 1897–1916. By Irwin Yellowitz. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1965. 288 pp. $6.50. Southern Wealth and Northern Profits By Thomas Prentice Kettel, with an Introduction by Fletcher M. Green. University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press. 1965. 181 pp. $5.95. The Negro in the South Since 1865: Selected Essays in American Negro History. Edited by Charles E. Wynes. University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 1965. $6.95. The Political Economy of Slavery: Studies in the Economy and Society of the Slave South. By Eugene D. Genovese, New York: Pantheon Books. 1956. 304 pp. $6.95. An Historical Examination of the Purposes and Practices of the Education Program of the United Automobile Workers of America — 1936–1959. By Thomas E. Linton. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan School of Education. 1965. 334 pp. $2.50. Education & The Labour Movement: 1870–1920, by Brian Simon. London: Lawrence & Wisht. 1965. 387 pp. 50s. Organization and Revolution: Working Class Associations in the German Revolutions of 1848–1849. By P. H. Noyes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. 1966. 444 pp. $10.00.

Book Reviews : An Historical Examination of the Purposes and Practices of the Education Program of the United Automobile Workers of America—1936-1959

Book Reviews : An Historical Examination of the Purposes and Practices of the Education Program of the United Automobile Workers of America—1936-1959

The General Motors Sit-Down Strike: A Re-examination

ALTHOUGH General Motors sit-down strike of I937 has been correctly described as the most critical labor conflict of nineteen thirties and as of crucial significance to subsequent growth of automobile unionism in particular and industrial unionism in general,1 a great many questions regarding strlke and role of its principal participants remain unanswered. It is still not possible to resolve all doubts concerning this greatest of all automotive strikes, but relevant manuscript collections now available, and especially recently opened Frank Murphy Papers, do permit one to speak about at least some aspects of strike with a greater degree of certainty than was heretofore possible.2 The general outlines of GM sit-down strike are familiar enough. Following outbreak of sit-down strikes at Atlanta Fisher Body plant on November i8, 1936, and Kansas City Fisher Body plant on December i6, i936, Homer Martin, president of United Automobile Workers, sought an immediate general conference with top management of GM. The corporation, however, insisted that union should discuss its grievances at local plant level, in accordance with GM's established procedure for collective bargaining. The union responded that principal issues that it wished to discuss with company-recognition for collective bargaining, seniority rights, minimum wages, and speed of production line-were national in scope and must consequently be dealt with by union and management representatives for GM as a whole. Affairs were thus deadlocked when on December 28 Cleveland Fisher Body plant

Early Carriage and Auto Unions: The Impact of Industrialization and Rival Unionism

This historical study focuses on unionism in the carriage and early automobile industries and describes the labor organizations active there between 1890 and 1930. These are the Carriage Workers Union, the Carriage, Wagon and Automobile Union, and the United Automobile, Aircraft and Vehicle Workers. There was continuity among these three organizations, and, indeed, the author traces threads from them to the present-day UAW. All three of these early unions faced problems from employer opposition, the business cycle, technological change, and rivalry from various craft unions. These factors ultimately combined to defeat industrial unionism in the carriage and auto industries during the period discussed. The strength, at various times, of these early unions was nevertheless surprising, and their life cycles provide an interesting view of the historical antecedents of contemporary labor relations in the automobile industry. (Author's abstract courtesy EBSCO.)

An Introduction

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsJohn SilardJohn Silard serves as special editor of this section. Mr. Silard is engaged in the practice of law in the District of Columbia with the General Counsel of the United Automobile Workers, is counsel to the Council for a Livable World, and was special consultant for the Senate Labor Committee hearings on defense industry conversion potentials held in November 1963.

The United Automobile Workers: Past, Present, and Future

The United Automobile Workers: Past, Present, and Future

Avoiding Written Grievances: A Successful Program

T HE publicity given to contract negotiations, and the attention focused on strikes, make it easy to overlook the importance of contract administration. Negotiating a contract is a significant part of collective bargaining. But it is the day-to-day administration of a contract that determines how well the objectives of the contract are realized. And it is the day-to-day administration that most influences the development of a constructive relationship between the contracting parties. A key activity in contract administration is grievance handling. By examining the development of grievance machinery in a large, multiplant manufacturing company, we hope to provide insights applicable elsewhere. The company is the International Harvester Company (I-H); the union is the United Automobile Workers (UAW). The operation of their grievance machinery is described; steps taken to alleviate its malfunctioning are discussed, and the impact of a program to avoid written grievances is analyzed. During most of the postwar period the grievance machinery at I-H did not function effectively. Contract administration was characterized by a multitude of written grievances and many heated discussions. The causes lay deep in the history of labor relations at I-H. Union rivalry and contentious issues early created an atmosphere that fostered many grievances. Yet even after union rivalry was eliminated, and many contract issues were solved, the problem continued. Various measures were tried-control was centralized, special agreements were signed, grievance handling procedures were altered-but the machinery continued to function improperly. Hostility generated by twenty years of conflict perpetuated the trouble. But gradually, through informal talks and experimentation, top officials from the company and the union managed to set the stage for a significant departure in the method of handling workers' complaints. In December, 1959, a program of avoiding written grievances by emphasizing oral handling of complaints was inaugurated. This new look' has made possible a quick and informal solution of employee problems. Generally, its impact has been salutary-contentious discussions have ceased; problems are being settled out on the floor; relationships have improved within, and between, union and management; and the tenor of contract negotiations has become more harmonious. However, there is one troublesome possibility, namely, that localized grievance settlements may not conform to central policy. A study of the grievance experience at I-H has wider relevance for two reasons: This company and union faced a problem which is common in labor-management * Assistant professor of industrial relations, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago.

Some Aspects of Life and Politics in the United States of America in 1932

To the present generation of young Americans the so-called two party system appears to be an almost unshakeable and permanent feature of the nation's polity. Several well-known American liberals (as, for instance, Senator Paul Douglas of Illinois and Walter Reuther, head of the powerful United Automobile Workers), who, in earlier years had reposed little faith in the Republican and Democratic parties, have gradually veered round to the view that the quest for reform must be pursued within the framework of the two major political parties. “Third parties” on the American scene have become virtually skeletonized for various reasons and their plans and platforms receive scant notice at the hands of the media of mass communication. With the advent of good times during the war and post-war years, organizations advocating a radical reconstruction of the social and economic order have found a progressively shrinking audience. Radicalism among the intelligentsia has become a factor of minor significance. Will there be any important changes in such a state of affairs if the current business “recession” continues much longer or intensifies? Do “bad times” favor the growth of militant parties of protest and dissent? Few students of the American scene expect that in the foreseeable future there will be any widespread move away from the two traditional parties. It is interesting in this connection to examine the developments in the United States a quarter of a century ago when the nation was plunged into one of the most serious economic crises in its annals. This paper will examine some aspects of life and politics in the United States in 1932 with special reference to the campaign of the Socialist Party of America to emerge as a significant political force.

The Origins of the United Automobile Workers, 1933-1935

On August 26, 1935, delegates from sixty-five American Federationof Labor locals in the automobile industry gathered in Detroit to launch the International Union, United Automobile Workers of America. Although many of the delegates thought that the A.F. of L. had unnecessarily delayed the convocation of this convention, they were no doubt mindful of the fact that an international was being formed in an industry where only a little more than two years previously unionism had been conspicuous primarily because of its absence.

Collective Bargaining Over Profit-Sharing: The Automobile Union's Effort to Extend its Frontier of Control

THE recent demand of the United Automobile Workers that its 1958 contract with the Big Three and other motorcar manufacturers include provision for participation by the union and its members in the net profits of the corporations' raises complex issues of almost self-evident importance. They are issues of concern to businessmen, to economists, to trade-union leaders, and to the consuming public. Among them are managerial prerogatives and management's conception of appropriate subjects for collective bargaining versus expansion of area of control by an imDortant segment of labor; the impact of the profit-sharing proposal upon the pattern of employer-worker arrangements in other industries;2 the feasibility and economic implications of hitching part of total employee remuneration to profits and the question of what level of wages and supplementary benefits is most conducive to maximum output and the health of the economy as a whole; the effect upon business incentives and investment of a predetermined allocation of part of the profits that traditionally have been regarded as a reward for suc-

The Barometer Is Rising

The break-away of labor from a routine and hurtful conformity in domestic politics and foreign relations-a move long advocated by some labor leaders who saw labor's status diminish under Truman -may have been given decisive impetus at the CIO United Automobile Workers convention in Atlantic City in March.This article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Automatic Annual Improvement Provisions

ONE of the outstanding developments in collective bargaining in I948 was the General Motors contract with the United Automobile Workers.' Two phases of this contract led to considerable discussion: (a) the cost of living adjustment clause and (b) the annual improvement factor for each of the two years for which the contract was drawn. Cost of living clauses are not unique in labor contracts.2 The inclusion of an annual improvement factor in the collective bargaining contract, however, did represent a significant departure from past practice. Under the General Motors' formula, provision was made for an annual improvement factor of 3 cents an hour in I948 and an increase of the same amount in May I949, in addition to adjustments required to meet changes in living costs. Since at the time the contract was signed, the average hourly rate for General Motors was about $1.50, the rate of improvement provided was about 2 per cent a year. The General Motors' rate of increase apparently was based on the long-term national average increases in output per man-hour.

Barriers to Negro War Employment

O N JUNE 18, 1942 several thousand white Detroit workers, members of the United Automobile Workers, CIO, went on a wildcat strike shutting down 60 per cent of the Hudson Naval Ordnance Arsenal. The strike occurred because eight Negro employees, in accordance with their union seniority rights, had been assigned to machines formerly operated by white men. Prompt action by R. J. Thomas, president of the union, ended the strike after seven hours. The strikers were told to return to work or be expelled from the union. The walkout was described by the UAW head as sabotage of our war effort that played into the hands of the enemies of our Nation. Our constitution, declared Mr. Thomas, provides for safeguarding the rights of all our members irrespective of their race or creed.