labor history research topics

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• 20th Century: Post-1945
• 20th Century: Pre-1945
• African American History
• Antebellum History
• Asian American History
• Civil War and Reconstruction
• Colonial History
• Cultural History
• Early National History
• Economic History
• Environmental History
• Foreign Relations and Foreign Policy
• History of Science and Technology
• Labor and Working Class History
• Late 19th-Century History
• Latino History
• Legal History
• Native American History
• Political History
• Pre-Contact History
• Religious History
• Revolutionary History
• Slavery and Abolition
• Southern History
• Urban History
• Western History
• Women's History
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

American labor and working-class history, 1900–1945.

• Jeffrey Helgeson Jeffrey Helgeson Department of History, Texas State University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.013.330
• Published online: 31 August 2016

Early 20th century American labor and working-class history is a subfield of American social history that focuses attention on the complex lives of working people in a rapidly changing global political and economic system. Once focused closely on institutional dynamics in the workplace and electoral politics, labor history has expanded and refined its approach to include questions about the families, communities, identities, and cultures workers have developed over time. With a critical eye on the limits of liberal capitalism and democracy for workers’ welfare, labor historians explore individual and collective struggles against exclusion from opportunity, as well as accommodation to political and economic contexts defined by rapid and volatile growth and deep inequality.

Particularly important are the ways that workers both defined and were defined by differences of race, gender, ethnicity, class, and place. Individual workers and organized groups of working Americans both transformed and were transformed by the main struggles of the industrial era, including conflicts over the place of former slaves and their descendants in the United States, mass immigration and migrations, technological change, new management and business models, the development of a consumer economy, the rise of a more active federal government, and the evolution of popular culture.

The period between 1896 and 1945 saw a crucial transition in the labor and working-class history of the United States. At its outset, Americans were working many more hours a day than the eight for which they had fought hard in the late 19th century. On average, Americans labored fifty-four to sixty-three hours per week in dangerous working conditions (approximately 35,000 workers died in accidents annually at the turn of the century). By 1920, half of all Americans lived in growing urban neighborhoods, and for many of them chronic unemployment, poverty, and deep social divides had become a regular part of life. Workers had little power in either the Democratic or Republican party. They faced a legal system that gave them no rights at work but the right to quit, judges who took the side of employers in the labor market by issuing thousands of injunctions against even nonviolent workers’ organizing, and vigilantes and police forces that did not hesitate to repress dissent violently. The ranks of organized labor were shrinking in the years before the economy began to recover in 1897. Dreams of a more democratic alternative to wage labor and corporate-dominated capitalism had been all but destroyed. Workers struggled to find their place in an emerging consumer-oriented culture that assumed everyone ought to strive for the often unattainable, and not necessarily desirable, marks of middle-class respectability.

Yet American labor emerged from World War II with the main sectors of the industrial economy organized, with greater earning potential than any previous generation of American workers, and with unprecedented power as an organized interest group that could appeal to the federal government to promote its welfare. Though American workers as a whole had made no grand challenge to the nation’s basic corporate-centered political economy in the preceding four and one-half decades, they entered the postwar world with a greater level of power, and a bigger share in the proceeds of a booming economy, than anyone could have imagined in 1896. The labor and working-class history of the United States between 1900 and 1945, then, is the story of how working-class individuals, families, and communities—members of an extremely diverse American working class—managed to carve out positions of political, economic, and cultural influence, even as they remained divided among themselves, dependent upon corporate power, and increasingly invested in a individualistic, competitive, acquisitive culture.

• labor and working-class history
• labor movement
• trade unions
• Progressive Era
• World War I
• World War II
• race and ethnic relations
• legal history
• political history

Workers and the Rise of Corporate America

American trade unionists entered the 20th century battered by a series of savage defeats which, by 1896 , brought the end of an era when millions of Americans had joined mass movements seeking alternatives to corporate-dominated, wage-labor capitalism. Labor reformers’ post-Civil War dream of emancipating American laborers from the wage system and their hopes for the creation of a producers’ republic based on principles of cooperation and commonwealth had been shattered in Chicago’s Haymarket Square on May 4, 1886 . The wind had been stolen from the spirit of unionism in the all-important steel industry at Andrew Carnegie’s Homestead mill in 1892 , and from industrial unionism on the nation’s rail lines in the defeat of the 1894 Pullman strike and boycott. Finally, the Republican Party’s defeat of the Populist-Democrat fusion in the presidential campaign in 1896 ensured that the vast majority of wage workers and farmers would not have the support of their own national political party.

Ascendant corporate leaders had been emboldened and empowered by much of the public’s revulsion against the labor-related violence of the late 19th century. The forces of “law and order” at the local, state, and federal levels came to the aid of business in strikes and lockouts during the “Age of Industrial Conflict.” Business also won the crucial legal conflict over the definition of “freedom” in the workplace and in employment markets. Court injunctions against labor activity were ubiquitous in the wake of the 1894 Pullman boycott, and case law privileged employers’ prerogatives at all turns. In the eyes of the law, Americans generally—with the exception of married white women—had a responsibility to work, but their sole right at work was the right to quit. Furthermore, legislators paid less attention to workers’ welfare than they did to subsidizing the growth of American industry or sustaining their own political power, all too often lining their pockets with the graft that ran rampant in that period of fantastic growth. Lawmakers had taken the first steps toward regulating trusts and moderating the worst forms of corruption, but those efforts were generally weak, and the nation’s courts ensured that employers’ power in the workplace would be virtually unchecked.

Great changes were taking place, yet Americans generally believed that even more change was needed if the republic were to survive and thrive in the industrial era. In the workplace as much as in surrounding communities, Americans feared the implications of this new era of global economic expansion. Political and ideological violence may have been rare, but when violence broke out, it both stigmatized and divided labor groups, even as it brought swift reactions from local police, private detective firms, and state and federal officials. 1 More broadly, a general fear of the revolutionary changes taking shape in everyday life inspired both a broad-based progressive reform impulse, shared by many American workers, and a renewed American radicalism, as well as the forces of reactionary repression and business conservatism that sought to stamp out what many saw as the real possibility of mob action and socialist insurgency.

The labor violence and economic upheavals of the late 19th century had been horrific enough to convince many powerful Americans that reform was necessary. In 1898 , Republican president William McKinley, who would be assassinated in 1901 by the anarchist Leon Czolgosz, appointed the United States Industrial Commission to study the causes of labor violence. At the same time, a broad group of largely middle-class and elite Americans, soon to be known as Progressives, set out to document and then ameliorate the worst forms of corruption in the economy and politics, and to soften the edges of the new industrial system by making workplaces, consumer products, and neighborhoods safer and healthier. There was no single Progressive Era social movement; rather, reformers sought everything from antitrust legislation, shorter working hours, and safer workplaces to bans on child labor, protective legislation for female workers, and reforms that would clean up manufacturing and the political process.

These top-down reform efforts—efforts that emphasized the need for greater efficiency and order in the economy and at the workplace—would be deeply ambiguous for workers. But they reflected an important move away from the commitments to Social Darwinism and laissez-faire principles that had defined the Gilded Age. Progressive reform itself could become a form of social control. Workers were subjected to intense moral campaigns, the Americanization efforts of both well-intentioned settlement house workers and less salutary anti-immigrant vigilantes, and the institution of “scientific management” regimes fostered by Frederick Winslow Taylor, Elton Mayo, and Frank and Lillian Gilbreth. One reformer’s vision of order and efficiency often became a reality of social control for workers.

For most workers, the greatest fears derived from the accelerating changes at the workplace that were well underway by the turn of the century. The mechanization of industry and employers’ drive for efficiency had long been forcing workers to do more specialized task work and robbing them of the control over their work many had enjoyed in systems of craft production. There were benefits as production skyrocketed across the economy. Whereas the pick miner in a coal shaft produced 2.5 tons per day on average, the fully mechanized open pit mines of the 1930s produced 16.2 tons per worker per day. In 1919 , Henry Ford’s assembly line produced four times the output per worker per hour than the industry had produced in 1910 . Simultaneously, the kinds of occupations Americans held and their experiences at work changed dramatically, not always for the worse. Gangs of day laborers were transformed into legions of semiskilled workers running transportation and equipment handling machines. Skilled, independent workers in iron and steel production became semiskilled machinists and repair technicians. These mechanized factories also required the development of a whole new set of tool-and-die makers. Overall, there was an upward leveling effect of mechanization. Between 1910 and 1930 , the proportion of unskilled workers in industrial work fell from 36 to 30.5 percent, the semiskilled rose from 36 to 39 percent, and the skilled increased from 28 to 30.5 percent. 2 Not everyone benefited, of course. Black men, when they were not stuck in sharecropping or tenant farming, were generally relegated to the hot, heavy, hard jobs, and most black women were forced to accept the long hours and lack of independence in domestic service.

The 20th century also saw what one historian has described as the “degradation of work.” 3 The dream of the United States as an independent producers republic, which had inspired Americans from Thomas Jefferson to the Knights of Labor in the 1870s and 1880s, had long been dead. As early as 1877 , two-thirds of American workers were wage laborers, with little hope of opening their own shops or owning their own farms. By 1940 , no more than one-fifth of the population of the United States were self-employed. 4 Wage labor—underpaid, demanding long hours, and subjecting workers to dangerous conditions (approximately 35,000 workers died in accidents annually at the turn of the century)—had become a permanent condition. 5 Not only were the benefits of the wage economy unequally distributed, but the very nature of work became both more demanding and less satisfying. A profound contradiction emerged that arguably continues to shape workers’ lives in the 21st century: “The scientific-technical revolution and ‘automation’ requires ever higher levels of education, training, the greater exercise of intelligence and mental effort in general,” which is accompanied by “a mounting dissatisfaction with the conditions of industrial and office labor.” 6

Despite their shared circumstances and some success in building a diverse labor movement in the early part of the century, American workers entered World War I perhaps more divided among themselves than at any other point in the nation’s history. Nativism was on the rise, and workers were divided by skill, craft, race, gender, and region. Industrial employers took advantage of workers’ fears and their internal divisions. On one hand, some corporate leaders developed systems of “welfare capitalism,” voluntarily providing marginal benefits to workers in order to stifle their dissatisfaction at work. On the other hand, business leaders and their allies in politics and the press played workers of different backgrounds against one another in order to undercut the possibility of shared militancy. It would be difficult, even for the most privileged workers, to fight for a place in the system.

Fighting for a Place in the System

With a significant economic recovery underway in 1897 , American labor leaders began a new organizing push, primarily through the American Federation of Labor (AFL), railroad brotherhoods, and various unaffiliated unions. These organizations largely excluded racial minorities and women, and this model of organizing sought to come to terms with, rather than to transform, corporate dominance of the industrial economy. Nonetheless, the leaders of these unions and their largely white, male rank and file won critical victories and increased the AFL’s membership from 264,000 in 1897 to 1.6 million by 1904 . Moreover, as the historian Julie Greene has shown, it is easy to overstate the apolitical character of the AFL’s “pure and simple unionism.” In addition to “bread-and-butter” contractual issues, the Federation actively pursued political influence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It is true, however, that the AFL assumed that trade unionists would speak for all American workers in the political sphere. 7

The AFL sustained the power of craft workers in the construction and transportation trades, while also beginning to win benefits for some more skilled industrial workers. The railroad brotherhoods exerted significant, if informal, political influence through allies like Theodore Roosevelt in the Republican Party. 8 Even mineworkers—who had a reputation as the most violent and militant of unionists, and who had, indeed, fought many labor wars—had gained enough leverage to cause President Theodore Roosevelt to mediate between the workers and the mine owners in a bitter 1902 anthracite coal strike.

Many, though hardly all, employers had initially accepted the rise of the AFL, even going as far as voluntarily recognizing unions and forming the National Civic Federation, a coalition of labor and business leaders seeking cooperation in the economy. By 1904 , however, employers had grown frustrated with the demands of union contracts and workers’ increased militancy, and they began to hit back. They increased the use of “yellow dog contracts” to force workers to sign agreements that promised they would not join a union. Employers divided workers by national origin and regularly employed strikebreaking replacement workers. The National Association of Manufacturers embarked on a concerted “open shop” drive; the forerunner of today’s “right-to-work” laws, these were campaigns by employers and their political allies to ensure that workers in a unionized shop did not have to belong to the union. This protection of workers’ right to contract as individuals amounted to a thinly veiled attempt to undermine all organized labor, as unions could not afford to represent workers who were “free riders” on the backs of their union member coworkers. In 1913 , the open-shop drive climaxed in an actual labor war in the Colorado coal fields, as the Rockefeller-owned Colorado Fuel and Iron Company pushed for ever greater production and at one point destroyed a workers’ camp in Ludlow, Colorado, killing eleven children and two women in the attack (see Figure 1 ). 9

Figure 1. “Slain Miner and One of His Fighting Comrades.”

As a result of such attacks on organized labor, membership in unions actually dropped in 1905 and remained stagnant for the next five years. Yet the booming economy before and during World War I increased labor’s power: the AFL’s membership increased by approximately 800,000 between 1910 and 1917 , and organized labor as a whole grew to 4 million by 1920 . 10 The membership also became increasingly diverse in terms of skill level and occupations. These were important gains for workers, but they remained limited in no small part by the failure of the AFL to imagine an alliance with the vast majority of unorganized workers.

Radical Alternatives in the Progressive Era

Workers frustrated with the exclusionary practices and political moderation of the AFL could turn to an embattled world of labor radicalism which was going through something of a renaissance after the defeats of the 1880s and 1890s. American radicals—led by the socialist Eugene V. Debs and an eclectic band of militants that included Mother Jones (Figure 2 ), Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, “Big Bill” Haywood, and Lucy Parsons, among others—pushed for more radical and immediate change through the Socialist Party, insurgent industrial unions in mining and textiles, and through the Industrial Workers of the World.

Figure 2. “‘Mother’ Jones and Her Army of Striking Textile Workers.” Peirce & Jones for the New York World-Telegram & Sun , Philadelphia, PA, 1903 .

Founded in 1901 , the Socialist Party of America (SP) quickly emerged as a powerful political force. Within a decade the SP had built more than three thousand local branches and forty-two state organizations. Dozens of candidates affiliated with the new party won municipal and county elections on town squares stretching from Texas through Illinois to Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the party’s leader, Eugene V. Debs, won 897,000 votes in his run for the presidency in 1912 and more than a million votes for president in 1920 , while he was in prison after being convicted of sedition during World War I.

In the 1910s, garment workers in New York City and Chicago organized unions in the industry for which the term “sweatshop” was coined. Although workers suffered oppressive conditions in sweatshops, they were isolated from the rest of the workforce, and they could not take action directly against the manufacturers. But as manufacturers moved production to larger factories in order to produce standardized clothing and to distance themselves from the increasingly negative reputation of sweatshops—spread by Progressive reformers—the larger shops also brought unskilled workers out of their relative isolation. Working conditions did not necessarily improve in larger shops, but opportunities to build worker solidarity presented themselves. Employers attempted to maintain divisions among workers, separating them by ethnicity and gender, and by offering “bonus pay” to the most productive workers.

After years of suffering, garment workers organizing came in quick surges: the “Uprising” of 20,000 in New York City in 1909 , another strike of 60,000 workers in New York City in 1910 , a 1910–1911 strike of 40,000 workers in Chicago, and the movement for unionization and reform after the infamous Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire in New York in March 1911 (Figure 3 ). Together these actions reinvigorated the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union and created the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America. In one of the most dramatic moments in U.S. labor history, the young immigrant garment worker Clara Lemlich took the stage from AFL leader Samuel Gompers, who had refused to call a strike. Speaking in Yiddish, she called her fellow garment workers to action. Within two days, approximately 20,000 workers from 500 factories were on strike. By the 1920s, the tens of thousands of members of the ACWA and the ILGWU had won the closed shop, higher wages, shorter working hours, and better working conditions. These events also revealed the politicization of immigrant women in the industry and showed that immigrant workers could be organized, contrary to much AFL commentary. Along with the United Mineworkers, the garment workers forged a new model of unionism, demonstrating that a pragmatic industrial unionism could succeed as well as the more hidebound craft unionism of the AFL. In this, the new unions were important exceptions to the rule of non-socialist craft organizing of the era. 11

Figure 3. “Photograph of Police Officers, Civilians and Victims on the Sidewalk during the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire.” March 25, 1911 .

The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) created another key, if short-lived, bastion of American labor radicalism. Founded in Chicago in 1904 , the IWW took inspiration from a group from the Western Federation of Miners who had been radicalized during a series of violent strikes in Idaho, Montana, and Colorado. Rallying around their shared distaste for the AFL’s conservatism and exclusionary practices, the IWW sought to create “One Big Union” of all workers regardless of skill level, race, ethnicity, or gender. Emphasizing the necessity of direct action and workers’ control of the workplace, they called for an end of the wage system and workers’ ownership of the means of production. The “Wobblies,” as the members came to be known, tapped into and inflamed the radical spirit of many of the most marginalized workers. The IWW thus backed its demands for the fulfillment of workers’ needs, the bread of daily life, with the threat of a radical sensibility at least rhetorically committed to revolution. (see Figure 4 ).

The preamble to the IWW’s 1908 constitution declared, “A struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and the machinery of production, and abolish the wage system.” 12 The IWW’s revolutionary vision inspired many miners, loggers, and migrant agricultural workers in the West, as well as unorganized industrial workers in the East. Together, they built a lively workers’ culture with hundreds of songs collected in the Little Red Songbook . IWW membership peaked at 600,000 in 1916 , riding a wave of important victories and broader socialist sentiment. Most famously, in the 1912 “Bread and Roses Strike” in Lawrence, Massachusetts, IWW leaders joined with local workers to strike against wage cuts and many years of low wages, long hours, dangerous working conditions, and terrible living conditions in the communities surrounding the factory. The IWW sustained a thread of American radicalism that otherwise might have been lost. The Wobblies’ radical critique of capitalism, their at least rhetorical support for direct action tactics such as sabotage, and their unswerving commitment to interracial organizing among all men and women carried these principles on through the relatively conservative first three decades of the century. The IWW also sustained the idea of industrial unionism, which was a minority strain the AFL’s organizing efforts, emphasizing that workers ought to be organized across all skill levels in a given industry.

Figure 4. “I.W.W. Hat Card.” Bain News Service, New York, NY, April 11, 1914 .

Obstacles to Organizing in the Progressive Era

During the Progressive Era, the American Federation of Labor claimed to speak for all American workers. Still, with few exceptions, the AFL consisted largely of skilled, white, male workers, and focused its strikes, lawsuits, and limited political activity on maintaining those workers’ craft privileges. 13 Its leaders also discouraged any organizing efforts not under the banner of the AFL, treating them as “dual unions,” or as enemies seeking to undermine the AFL. Furthermore, the federation’s leaders refused to engage in the broad political work that would have allowed them to challenge the anti-labor decisions of the courts or the narrowness of Progressive Era reforms. 14 Such a closed, jealous, and litigious world of labor was hardly a beacon for the growing ranks of new immigrant and American migrant workers entering the deskilled factories of the North.

The limits of the Socialist Party’s gains also became clear soon enough. In the electoral arena, the SP never managed to reach the status of a viable third national party. The SP may have maintained a significant base of voters—as shown in Debs’s 1 million votes in the 1920 presidential election—but their efforts ran headlong into the anti-radical repression during and after World War I and the deeply conservative Republican ascendancy of the 1920s. Moreover, to the extent that Socialist politicians, such as Victor Berger and his allies in Milwaukee, made gains toward practical reform, they also distanced themselves from the more radical class politics of much of the American left. The Socialist leader Morris Hillquit denounced Berger and his allies as “sewer socialists”—sticking them for constantly bragging about how good Milwaukee’s sewer system was, even as they had failed to push forward the larger class struggle. Similarly, when socialist trade unionists rose to the leadership ranks in AFL unions, their pragmatism emerged. “Time and time again,” concludes the historian David Brody, “once they had acceded to office, Socialists began to act—if they did not always talk—like any other trade unionists.” 15 Accommodation to established centers of power, however justifiable it may have been for Socialist activists in particular political contexts, added to the effects of internal divisions and repression of the left in limiting the SP’s radical challenge to American political and economic systems.

The IWW—in part because the Wobblies had some success, and in part because they sustained an unflagging rhetorical radicalism—also became the target of government and vigilante repression. Wobbly activists leading “free speech campaigns” faced club-wielding police officers and were whipped and even tarred and feathered by vigilantes throughout the West. During World War I, 1,200 miners suspected of being aligned with the IWW in Bisbee, Arizona, were rounded up, forced onto a freight train at gunpoint, and abandoned in the desert without food or water for a day and half before a nearby military commander arranged for their extradition to New Mexico. At the same time, the federal government raided IWW offices across the country and convicted hundreds of Wobblies for antiwar speech. In the end, the IWW became one of the driving forces behind the rise of the American Civil Liberties Union and the push for protections of free speech during and after World War I, but the Wobblies could not save themselves from this repression. By the end of the war, with many of its leaders imprisoned, deported, or having fled the country, the IWW was unable to sustain itself as an institution.

Still more obstacles stood in the way of mass labor organizing in the first decades of the 20th century. Chief among them were the racial and ethnic divisions that ran through the shop floors of American industry. Historians have examined in great detail the intraclass racism that blocked white workers from acting in ways that would have been truly class-conscious. Between the late 19th century and World War I, tens of thousands of black workers gained access to unions, some all-black but some biracial in organization. Yet unions often acted as agents of division; some included racial exclusion clauses in their constitutions, while others gave lip service to solidarity while declaring that, in practice, black workers would undercut the wages and opportunities of white workers. For their part, recent black migrants from the South, the majority of black workers in the factories, alternately feared or despised the “white man’s union.” 16

White workers and union leaders used episodes of black strikebreaking as evidence that black workers were inevitably the opponents of labor progress. Whites’ descriptions of black workers represented a powerful, if contradictory, mix of racist notions of black inferiority and fear of black physical superiority. Black workers, they feared, could outwork white workers, and black workers would do it on the cheap. In 1901 , the AFL defended itself against accusations of racism, arguing that “the antipathy … some union workers have against the colored man is not because of his color, but because of the fact that generally he is a ‘cheap man.’” 17 But by 1905 , the division between white and black workers had become so pronounced that AFL chief Samuel Gompers (Figure 5 ) declared, “If the colored man continues to lend himself to the work of tearing down what the white man has built up, a race hatred worse than any ever known before will result. Caucasian civilization will serve notice that its uplifting process is not to be interfered with in any such way.” 18 Not surprisingly, black leaders felt differently. The black political leader Ida B. Wells praised strikebreakers as “men who proved their value by risking their lives to obtain work,” and she endorsed “the constitutional right of all men to earn a living and to protect themselves in the exercise of that right.” 19

Figure 5. “Samuel Gompers—Federal Commission on Industrial Relations, New York, New York,” 1915 .

Workers and labor reformers also struggled to organize during one the most conservative eras in United States judicial history. In its 1905 decision in Lochner v. New York (198 U.S. 45), the United States Supreme Court overruled a New York law limiting hours for bakery employees. Rather than being necessary to protect the welfare of the workers, the court found that such hours legislation amounted to an unconstitutional attempt to regulate business, and “unreasonable, unnecessary and arbitrary interference with the right and liberty of the individual to contract.” With this reading of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, the Court would go on in subsequent years to constrain workers’ rights and legislative efforts to reform the industrial system. In 1908 , for instance, the Court upheld what were known as “ironclad” or “yellow dog” contracts, which forced individual workers to sign an agreement not to join a union in order to secure a job. Also in 1908 , the Court found that labor boycotts of employers had been banned by the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act. In fact, there were more antitrust actions brought against union activities than business combinations until the Clayton Act of 1914 attempted to exclude union activity from the regulation of commerce, declaring that “the labor of human beings is not a commodity.” In 1911 , the Court banned consumer boycotts, and in this period it also upheld blacklisting of union organizers, the constitutionality of company towns, and employers’ use of civil lawsuits to resist interference in their businesses. Even when the Court did support the constitutionality of reform measures, as in the 1908 Muller v. Oregon (208 U.S. 412) case allowing for limiting the number of hours women could work, the judges did so by appealing to the notion that women were the weaker sex and had special responsibilities in the home. The justices found support in the “widespread belief that woman’s physical structure, and the functions she performs in consequence thereof, justify special legislation restricting or qualifying the conditions under which she should be permitted to toil.”

The Supreme Court’s antagonism to any limits on the individual’s “liberty of contract” ran counter to legislators’ gradual rewriting of state and federal law. The U.S. Congress regulated child labor in 1919 and instituted a system of workers’ compensation in 1916 , while twenty-five states passed workers’ compensation laws between 1911 and 1921 . State and federal officials also formally began investigating workers’ safety, especially after the Triangle Shirtwaist fire in New York City in 1911 created widespread outrage against the factory owners’ willful refusal to protect their workers from dangerous conditions. The 1926 Railway Labor Act required railway industry employers to engage in collective bargaining and banned discrimination against unions in the railway industry (this was expanded to airlines in 1936 ). The 1931 Davis-Bacon Act required construction contracts with the federal government to specify a minimum or “prevailing” wage for workers under that contract. The 1932 Norris-LaGuardia Act for the first time provided protection for workers’ rights to organize, banned yellow dog contracts, and outlawed the use of court injunctions in nonviolent labor disputes. By 1932 , then, in the face of much judicial resistance, legislators had responded to growing public alarm by initiating a revolution in labor law that would come to fruition when the Supreme Court upheld the 1935 National Labor Relations Act.

World War I and the Hope for Industrial Democracy

World War I provided an unprecedented opening for unions to make gains and for workers who had traditionally been excluded from industrial work to enter the nation’s factories. The federal government spurred a national mobilization of the workforce and economic resources, while coordinating industrial planning. Although the government went so far as to take over the railroads, the federal intervention in the economy hardly represented wartime socialism. Instead, the government relied on industry leaders who acted as “dollar-a-year” men, voluntarily aiding in the planning of the wartime economy, and it ensured profits for industry with cost-plus contracts. In essence, the federal government forged a larger role in managing the economy with the primary goal of efficient war-related production. This managed economy also facilitated the private accumulation of capital for employers and benefited masses of workers.

Why was this a boon for unions and workers? In the first place, the wartime economy required labor peace. Therefore, the federal government facilitated the formation and growth of unions. At the same time, the wartime economic boom required many new workers. With the end of European immigration and the draft of white men into the military, women and African Americans found new opportunities. The long-term consequences of the war differed sharply for women and men. Women’s industrial experiences proved to be a largely temporary phenomenon. The war did help to provide the necessary impetus to pass the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, giving women the right to vote. But the war did not lead to major changes in gender roles; gender lines in the workforce reemerged after the war, and the popular image of the liberated “flapper” in the Roaring Twenties remained a decidedly minority experience.

For African Americans, the war sparked a major demographic, economic, and political transition. Between 1915 and 1918 , nearly 500,000 African Americans migrated from the South to northern cities, with another 700,000 following in their wake during the 1920s. The Great Migration, as this movement of black southerners to industrial cities has been called, began a process that not only transformed the lives of the migrants but also fundamentally changed the populations and politics of major American cities. 20 World War I-era migrants built modern black urban communities in places like New York’s Harlem, Chicago’s South Side, and Detroit’s Black Bottom. Out of these communities would grow civil rights organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, black nationalist organizations like Marcus Garvey’s Universal Negro Improvement Association, and the first major black labor radicals and trade unions. In the 1920s, Harlem was especially fertile ground for black working-class politics. As African American artists and writers created the Harlem Renaissance, black socialists and communists spoke on soapboxes on New York City’s streetcorners and helped popularize a black class politics. Building on the longstanding activism of Hubert Harrison and others, people like A. Philip Randolph who got their start in the 1910s would help build a nationally powerful, labor-based civil rights movement in the 1930s and 1940s.

The Business Decade

World War I seemed to offer an opportunity for workers to improve their position in the economy. Workers, in fact, gained a great deal in real wages and political power during the brief period of nearly full employment during the war. Yet unions’ efforts to institutionalize their place in an “industrial democracy” were roundly defeated in a series of strikes between 1919 and 1921 . In 1919 , alone, more than 4 million workers—approximately one-fifth of the workforce—went on strike. A general strike of 60,000 in Seattle, Washington, a strike by nearly the entire police force in Boston, Massachusetts, and a national steel strike of 350,000 workers in Pittsburgh and beyond (Figure 6 ) are representative of the broad scope of the strikes by workers fearful that they would lose what they had won during the war and facing the prospect of a severe postwar recession. In each case, the workers lost, and they ended up more divided than before, and more desperate for jobs at virtually any wage. Moreover, the entrenched economic conservatism of the federal government and popular culture not only marginalized labor unions but also celebrated the spirit of innovation, speculation, and acquisitive individualism of the “business decade.”

Figure 6. “Pittsburgh Strike [ 1919 Strikers Demonstrating in Car].”

The benefits of the business decade were deeply unequal. To many Americans, the 1920s seemed to promise the unending expansion of the American economy. Consumer goods proliferated. The number of telephones doubled, by 1930 about half of Americans had indoor toilets, and Henry Ford refined assembly line production, allowing many working families to own a car. Yet the expansion of the consumer economy depended on an equal expansion of the consumer credit economy; Americans bought their radios and other modern wonders on installment plans. Moreover, even with the greater availability of credit, full participation in the consumer economy remained a dream for most. As the economic historian W. Elliot Brownlee notes, “Only one family in six owned an automobile, only one family in five owned a fixed bathtub or had electricity in its home, and only one family in ten had a telephone.” 21 As importantly, while the automobile and other manufacturing industries boomed, core American economic sectors lagged far behind. Workers in these “sick industries,” including agriculture, mining, and New England textiles, were facing depression conditions well before the stock market crash in 1929 .

Unions declined sharply in the 1920s under pressure from a conservative attack. Employers promoted an “American Plan” that celebrated the democracy of the open shop and that associated organized labor with un-American economic systems. Companies also promoted “welfare capitalism,” providing workers with benefits such as home loans, group insurance policies, stock options, and regular sponsorship of sports teams all in the name of reducing costly labor turnover and improving industrial harmony. Perhaps most importantly, some four hundred firms created Employee Representation Plans, or company unions, which sought to promote worker allegiance to the company and to provide a kind of pressure release for workers thinking about organizing in their own interests. Welfare capitalists sought to prevent unions from ever rising again, and for a time they succeeded. The number of strikes receded dramatically, and union membership declined. The success of unregulated markets and welfare capitalism, however, was short-lived, and the mass unemployment, poverty, and insecurity of the 1930s would help spark the greatest surge in union members in U.S. history.

The Crash and Its Immediate Aftermath

On October 24, 1929 , “Black Tuesday,” traders on the New York Stock Exchange shed 16.4 million shares of stock, causing a drastic decline in the overall value of stocks. From a high of 381 on September 3, 1929 , the Dow Jones Industrial Average ultimately fell to a low of 41.22 on July 8, 1932 . Approximately five thousand banks failed between 1929 and 1933 . Industrial production declined by over half between the crash and the middle of 1932 . By that year, unemployment soared to between one-quarter and one-third of the total labor force. Things were not much better for those who managed to hold onto employment: wages fell 50 to 75 percent in the early years of the Great Depression. Economic sectors that had been struggling in the 1920s saw conditions only worsen; farm income declined by 60 percent, and one-third of famers lost their land in the 1930s. The industries that had driven the prosperity of the 1920s were now failing; by 1932 , the automobile industry was producing at only 20 percent of its capacity. The stock market crash laid bare the underlying weaknesses in the U.S. economy and created mass unemployment, poverty, and insecurity.

President Herbert H. Hoover responded to the crash much more energetically than previous presidents had in similar crises, but his efforts were too limited to meet the depth of this one, in part because he remained steadfastly committed to voluntaristic, optimistic, Progressive-style interventions. Hoover moved to shore up public confidence while also supporting business leaders’ efforts to protect their financial interests. As Secretary of Treasury Andrew Mellon advised his fellow capitalists to “liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate,” Hoover assured the nation that the “fundamental business of the country was sound,” and asked for voluntary cooperation from corporate managers to maintain employment and wages. As realization of the deepening crisis dawned on him, Hoover also increased federal funds for public works, moved to cut taxes, and requested private agencies, as well as state and local governments, to provide relief to the approximately 7 million unemployed by 1931 . Arguing that direct unemployment relief was a “dangerous” suggestion, Hoover instead created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which provided loans to businesses and banks in the hope that greater corporate stability would strengthen the economy.

President Hoover’s limited, top-down response to the crisis aggravated widespread anxieties and led to a new level of popular unrest. Destitute Americans living in shantytowns (Figure 7 ), popularly known as “Hoovervilles,” clearly blamed the president for their condition. Thousands of Americans joined in organizing for relief from the federal government. In unemployed organizations, spearheaded by socialist and communist organizers, Americans demanded monetary relief and reinstalled tenants in their apartments when they were evicted. The most important protests and strikes of the 1930s were still years away, but the unemployed organizing of the early 1930s played an important role in increasing popular militancy.

Figure 7. “William A. Swift, Once a Farmer, Now a Resident of Circleville’s ‘Hooverville.’ When he Returned from the War He Went West. “Made awful good money jobbin’ around.’”

In 1932 , a group of 22,000 World War I veterans marched on Washington, D.C., to demand that the U.S. Congress pay them the bonuses they had been promised for their service in the war. For weeks thousands of veterans camped on Anacostia Flats, within sight of the Capitol, while President Hoover and Congress refused to pay the bonuses. Finally, the president sent the U.S. Army to break up the “Bonus Army” camps. Generals Douglas McArthur, George Patton, and Dwight Eisenhower led the operation. Photographs and newsreels showed tanks rolling through the streets of the nation’s capital, and current U.S. soldiers setting fire to tents occupied by the heroes of World War I, and they contributed to Hoover’s loss of public support as the 1932 election neared.

Workers and the Changing State during the New Deal

By 1932 , Herbert Hoover had become by all accounts the most unpopular person in the United States. In contrast, New York’s governor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, brought his optimistic paternalism to the national public, projecting confidence and campaigning on the promise that he would bring “Happy Days Again.” As governor, Roosevelt had experimented with unemployment relief and public works programs that became popular among New Yorkers. Yet he came to the presidency with no immediate or comprehensive solution to the nation’s economic troubles. Instead, the New Deal represented a series of experiments which, though they did not pull the nation out of the depression (only economic mobilization for World War II would do that), still dramatically transformed the American economy by creating a new welfare state, strengthening unions, and affirming the economic importance of government action as a source of both spending and business regulation.

President Roosevelt immediately took steps to address the national crisis. He initiated important banking reforms, rationalizing and regulating the banking system and providing deposit insurance. Together, these reforms arguably created the conditions for relative financial stability that helped make possible the growth of a mass middle class after World War II. Roosevelt and his allies also ended the alcohol ban of Prohibition, eliminating one cause of suffering and chaos in working-class communities. He also expanded direct relief to the poor and enlarged public works projects significantly.

President Roosevelt then embarked upon a series of legislative efforts known by historians as the “first New Deal.” Congress passed the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) in June 1933 , which sought to create a new corporatist style of regulated and planned economy in which big government, big business, and labor would work together to achieve greater efficiency. The NIRA eliminated most antitrust restrictions and, in return, asked businesses to cooperate with the National Recovery Administration (NRA), a new federal agency which would oversee a wide range of economic activities, notably wages, the prices of consumer goods, and the cost of transportation. The Supreme Court, however, struck down the NIRA because the law amounted to unconstitutional federal intervention in interstate commerce.

Yet the NIRA had two longer-lasting and largely unforeseen consequences. First, it reinforced the federal commitment to public works programs as part of the solution to the national crisis. Second, the NIRA stipulated that “employees shall have the right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing,” which marked the first time the federal government legally recognized workers’ right to union representation. Although NIRA, and its Section 7a, were quickly found unconstitutional, the support of the federal government for labor organizing helped strengthen an already growing surge in rank-and-file labor organizing.

In the wake of the passage of Section 7a, millions of American workers acted on their desire for union representation—more than 1,800 strikes occurred in 1934 alone—while also demonstrating that the AFL would not be able to contain or take full advantage of the aspirations of American industrial workers. Mass strikes broke out in 1934 among West Coast dock workers, in auto parts factories in Toledo, Ohio, in the trucking industry in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and in the East Coast textile industry. In each case, the AFL had made initial efforts to act on the rights specified in Section 7a and to organize thousands of new workers. The AFL, however, either backed down completely or failed to address the grievances of rank-and-file workers. Tens of thousands of workers then acted without the support of the AFL. Workers battled with police, the National Guard, and citizens’ committees in efforts to win their unions. In those battles, the West Coast International Longshoremen’s Association, which would become the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, built its longstanding reputation for radicalism and interracial social movement unionism. In Toledo, workers at the Electro Auto Lite Company survived clashes with National Guardsmen to win union recognition, wage increases, and other gains, while creating an important piece of the foundation for what became the United Auto Workers. In Minneapolis, four workers died in citywide violence, but they also broke through in that previously hardcore anti-union city and set the stage for the national unionization of the trucking industry.

In the long term, the 1934 strikes helped organize broad sectors of the American working class, but in the short term the strikes also helped polarize domestic politics. Indeed, 1935 and 1936 were years of greatly increasing political conflict. President Roosevelt found his support from business leaders evaporating after NIRA was struck down and after the 1934 strikes demonstrated the threat, as owners saw it, of giving workers the right to unionize. At the same time, critics to the president’s left argued that he had done too little to provide direct relief to the unemployed in the form of jobs, cash relief, and a safety net of welfare programs. Radical communists and socialists joined militant organizers for the unemployed to push for greater support for the unemployed. Populists such as Louisiana senator Huey Long and the Catholic radio priest Father Charles Coughlin, among others, demanded that the president do more for “the forgotten man.”

In response, President Roosevelt broke with the business leaders and pushed in 1935 for a flurry of legislation that would come to be known as the “Second New Deal.” The Social Security Act and Aid to Families with Dependent Children both responded directly to the populist critics by providing old age insurance and relief to poor families. In the long run, both allowed for a major reduction in poverty among young people and the elderly. In addition, the Second New Deal greatly expanded public works programs. Congress also passed the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which reaffirmed workers’ rights to organize unions and bargain collectively, outlawed what the act called “unfair labor practices” that amounted to business efforts to prevent unionization or to break unions, and created the National Labor Relations Board to adjudicate workers’ complaints against their employers.

The Second New Deal had only limited immediate effects. The first Social Security check did not go out until January 31, 1940 . The public works agencies were administered by local offices and were, therefore, racially segregated in the South and everywhere tended to benefit white male workers. New Deal legislation increased the benefits that African Americans derived from the federal government, especially in northern cities, where black voters gradually shifted to the Democratic Party beginning in the late 1930s. Yet New Deal employment benefits did not apply to agricultural workers or domestic workers, which meant that most black and female workers were not covered by unemployment insurance or Social Security. At the same time, programs such as the Agricultural Adjustment Act and the Tennessee Valley Authority, among others, directly or indirectly displaced significant numbers of black farmers, tenants, and sharecroppers from the land. Conservative opposition and the Democrats’ desire to scale back federal action after the flurry of legislation in 1935 and 1936 also moderated the immediate influence of the New Deal. The NLRA had to survive legal challenges, which prevented aggressive action by the NLRB during the first years of its existence. Moreover, as some of the New Deal measures began to improve economic conditions, President Roosevelt and his advisors moved to scale back federal spending in the belief that the recovery could proceed on its own, and the economy slowed down again. The resulting “Roosevelt Recession,” combined with popular reaction against Roosevelt’s efforts to pack the Supreme Court with New Deal-friendly justices, basically brought the New Deal to a standstill in 1938 and 1939 .

The New Industrial Union Movement

For all its limitations, the Second New Deal helped energize the U.S. labor movement. With federal recognition of their right to organize, American workers in previously non-union industries created another surge in organizing activity. This new movement to organize the unorganized differed from the 1934 strikes because it was a coordinated and concerted drive for industrial unionism. Led by John L. Lewis of the United Mine Workers of America, Sidney Hillman of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, and David Dubinsky of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, the Committee for Industrial Organization (soon to be the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or the CIO) operated autonomously from the outset, although it was officially within the structure of the AFL, and it set out to organize industrial rather than craft unions.

Lewis, Hillman, and Dubinsky took advantage of workers’ newfound rights by building unions in the mass production industries. They first formed the Steelworkers Organizing Committee (SWOC), led by Phillip Murray, to unionize steelworkers excluded from the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and Tin Workers, which had long represented only skilled steelworkers. In 1936 and 1937 , the CIO broke through in the notoriously anti-union auto industry by deploying sit-in strikes at General Motors plants in Flint, Michigan (Figure 8 ). Occupying the GM factories, workers won community support and, after bitter battles in the streets (with many women on the front lines), they forced the company to recognize the CIO union. The stunning success at GM persuaded U.S. Steel, the nation’s largest steel producer, to recognize Murray’s steelworkers’ union without a strike. The CIO faced continued, often violent resistance from Ford and from the group of steel companies collectively known as “Little Steel.” Nonetheless, within months hundreds of thousands of workers joined the “house of labor,” and the momentum spread among workers in packing houses, newspapers, the electrical industry, the public sector, canneries, and even white-collar workplaces.

Figure 8. “Striker and His Fiancée (Sitdown Strike Romance) in the Women’s Auxiliary Room in Pengally Hall.”

As the CIO succeeded in organizing industrial workers, the differences between the AFL and the new unions became increasingly apparent. The CIO built unions in manufacturing centers that had been ignored by the AFL. AFL and CIO leaders also clashed over the CIO unions’ willingness to work with a broad range of organizers. Between 1935 and 1939 , the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) pursued a “popular front” strategy, allying with organizations working for broad democratic change, rather than adhering to a narrow communist ideological line. CPUSA members became perhaps the most energetic and persistent of union organizers. Dubinsky grew unhappy with the prevalence of communist organizers in CIO unions and brought the ILGWU back into the AFL fold. Finally, in November 1938 , the CIO held a national convention and created an independent confederation of industrial unions, now known as the Congress of Industrial Organizations. Though the Roosevelt Recession nearly halted the CIO’s growth, the industrial unions took advantage of industrial recovery during World War II to build on their gains in the 1930s. After the war, these CIO unions, along with the growing building trades and teamsters unions in the AFL, would become known as “Big Labor” and play central roles in the economy and politics.

African Americans’ relationship to labor changed dramatically in the 1930s. During the first years of the decade, the CPUSA emerged as an ally for black workers and for the cause of civil rights. Communist Party organizers, for example, led many of the unemployed organizations, fighting to bring government resources to black neighborhoods and to prevent the eviction of black tenants. The party’s legal arm, the International Labor Defense Fund, came to the assistance of the “Scottsboro Boys,” nine African American teenagers falsely accused of raping a white woman on a train and wrongly convicted in Scottsboro, Alabama. Black Americans pragmatically took advantage of such alliances. They were never members of the Communist Party in large numbers, but some black organizers and radicals joined the party at least for a short time, and many were generally willing to work with it to fight racial inequality through the labor movement. Party organizers energized the CIO’s efforts to organize interracial unions. CIO leaders, including the important group of left-wing organizers, understood that for practical or idealistic reasons, or both, the new industrial unions could challenge the AFL and their employers only if they built a culture of interracialism. Nonetheless, as the CIO grew, according to the historian Bruce Nelson, “it was constrained by a membership majority that had little or no commitment to a broad-gauged social-democratic agenda.” 22 Racial discrimination in unions and working-class racial tensions remained key factors in American workplaces, and, indeed, have yet to be fully resolved.

For all the interracial organizing of radical activists and the CIO, black workers forged their own paths into the labor movement. Most notably, the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters (BSCP) became the first national African American union to win a charter from the AFL in 1935 . African American men had long worked as porters for the Pullman Palace Car Company. They acted as the servants of white customers on Pullman trains, providing first-class service in return for tips. They earned meager wages, which meant that they needed to play to the racist stereotype of the subservient black man. Some historians have argued that the access to jobs as Pullman porters helped create the foundation for the black middle class, but for many workers at the time the work was degrading, required long hours, and paid far too little. In August 1925 , five Pullman porters formed the BSCP in New York City. They were inspired by a growing labor-based black protest politics led by a “new crowd” of African American activists unsatisfied with the existing interracial, middle-class civil rights and social work groups. The porters called on New York socialist A. Philip Randolph (Figure 9 ) to lead their union drive. For twelve years, Randolph and the men and women organizing for the BSCP struggled to overcome resistance from the Pullman Company and skepticism toward unions in the black community. The Pullman Company bought support from black leaders, especially in its home city of Chicago, by donating money to local black organizations. The support worked, and the BSCP found that African Americans in Chicago not only distrusted unions because of their history of racial exclusions, but also saw labor protests as disreputable and perceived the Pullman Company to be the friend of the black community. 23

Figure 9. “Civil Rights March on Washington, D.C. [A. Philip Randolph, Organizer of the Demonstration, Veteran Labor Leader who Helped to Found the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, American Federation of Labor (AFL), and a Former Vice President of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)].” U.S. Information Agency, August 28, 1963 . Record Group 306, Still Picture Branch, U. S. National Archives (#542064).

The BSCP found the 1930s a much more productive period. Growing militancy of the labor and civil rights activism among the unemployed in the early 1930s, in the CIO’s interracial unions, and among black railroad dining car employees and “red caps” (luggage porters at train stations) all fostered a black working-class alignment with the labor movement. In addition, New Deal labor laws created opportunities to break down resistance from the AFL and the Pullman Company. The BSCP aligned with longstanding civil rights leaders in Chicago, such as Ida B. Wells-Barnett, a famous anti-lynching activist and a member of black Chicago’s political elite. Wells-Barnett brought respectability and the support of the city’s thousands of black clubwomen to the Brotherhood. At the same time, Randolph grew in stature as the foremost black labor leader and became the first head of the National Negro Congress (NNC), a characteristic Popular Front organization that sought to forge alliances among communists, socialists, and liberals organizing against racial and economic inequality. While the BSCP reached out to black leaders and community members, the union also took advantage of the 1934 Railway Labor Act to hold successful union elections among black porters. With mass black support, a new legal foundation, and the potential competition from the emerging CIO in mind, the AFL granted a charter to the BSCP in 1935 . Two long years later, the Brotherhood finally signed its first contract with the Pullman Company, the first union contract for black workers with a major corporation.

The New Deal did not bring the country out of the depression, although it did improve the lives of millions of citizens and transformed the foundations of American politics so that future battles would be fought over the nature of organized labor’s place in the nation (rather than its mere right to exist) and over broad access to “security.” Union membership increased dramatically from just under 3 million in 1933 to approximately 12 million by 1945 . President Roosevelt also helped create a fundamentally new national political alignment; success for the Democratic Party (outside the South, where the Democrats remained a conservative party until the rise of the southern wing of the Republican Party in the last third of the 20th century) would depend upon winning the votes of ethnic urban voters, unionized workers, and African Americans. In addition, the success of the CIO and the broad militancy of American workers led to a working-class-based cultural movement that one historian has termed “the laboring of American culture.” 24 Workers and their worlds as subjects, and working-class artists, reshaped American music and the literary and visual arts, as well as popular culture on the radio, in movies, and in cartoons.

Workers and World War II

When Japan attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 , the rate of American manufacturing surged, and within about eighteen months the nation’s economy was in a state of “full employment.” World War II, therefore, marked a profound turning point because it brought the country out of the depression, introduced thousands of women and black workers to the industrial labor force, reinforced the idea that federal government spending was essential to a healthy economy, and established unions as central permanent players in the national economy. The war also revolutionized American workers’ expectations. Rather than seeking to survive in what seemed to be an economic crisis without end, American workers entered the postwar world still deeply divided by race, geography, and social class, but expecting to share in a new era of prosperity.

Labor, including the CIO, solidified its place in the nation’s economy during the war. Though labor conflict continued as many workers fought for higher wartime wages, often in wildcat strikes, labor leaders gained standing by signing on to a no-strike pledge with the federal government’s labor mediation agency, the National War Labor Board. Labor unions also gained thousands of new members as they convinced the NWLB to refuse employers’ demands for an “open shop” in wartime industries, and they secured “maintenance of membership clauses” stipulating that workers who became union members during the war would remain members for the length of the contract.

As white men were drafted into the military by the tens of thousands, industries began to recruit white women to fill their spots. The famous images of “Rosie the Riveter” perhaps romanticize women’s experiences in the workforce, but women at the time did speak to the excitement and freedom they found in working outside the home and earning their own wages. The war did not usher in a rapid change in gender norms, at least not in majority public opinion. After the war, women were expected to leave the workforce, to allow returning veterans to take their jobs back, and to return to their “rightful” duties in the home. Yet women’s wartime experiences created changes that would eventually help create the modern feminist movements. First, although many women were ushered out of sectors of the workforce, women actually stayed in the labor force at higher numbers than ever before; married women, especially, worked in greater numbers than in any previous era of American history. Moreover, many women never forgot their experiences in the workforce, and their expectations for opportunities that the next generation of women should have were forever changed. Women in the labor movement who joined unions during the war also became leaders for a new labor-based feminism. 25

Black men and women were also hired into industrial work by the tens or hundreds of thousands, but only after employers found they could not fill the jobs with white women. Mexican workers also found jobs during World War II, most notably through the federal government’s Bracero Program, a guest worker program that brought tens of thousands of Mexican workers into the United States to fill labor shortages in agriculture. Although opportunity came for black workers and women later than it did for white male workers, the war brought a radical improvement in economic conditions and raised expectations for all Americans. That the raised expectations of women and racial minorities were not fulfilled after the war meant that the increased opportunity of wartime actually helped sow the seeds for the civil rights movement and other social movements to follow. 26

The United States emerged from World War II in a position to become an economic superpower. From 1945 to 1973 , American workers enjoyed higher wages, greater job security, and a steadily improving standard of living. Workers in unions made even greater gains, including not only substantially higher wages but also health insurance and pensions. Even Americans on the margins of the workforce benefited from the expansion of unemployment compensation, welfare, and job training and placement programs. Unions played a major role in improving the standard of living of their members as their gains created a “ripple effect” that raised the wages and standard of living for non-union workers.

Workers made remarkable gains between 1900 and 1945 . To be sure, this was no linear narrative of inevitable upward mobility and progress. But by the end of World War II, the combined forces of top-down reform and bottom-up activism had created a federal government that legalized and protected industrial workers’ right to organize and bargain collectively, as well as their right to a safe workplace with regulations for hours and wages. They had won access to a limited but growing public welfare state and a burgeoning private welfare system. Through both the AFL’s trade-union-led political activism and a broad world of working-class political activism and workers’ alliances with middle-class reformers and reform-minded politicians, they had made cities better places to live, banned child labor, won municipal ownership of utilities, strengthened their right of free speech, gained consumer protections, and opened new sectors of work to women and racial minorities. Moreover, industrial workers had earned a status as the virtuous “blue-collar” core of a self-consciously hard-working American society no longer divided so sharply divided along lines of national origin, though still deeply divided by the racism and segregation that remained the fundamental reality for African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans. With these newly won rights, protections, and status, the once marginalized and much-maligned American worker had secured a place within the consumerist industrial society and as one interest group among many in the political system.

Discussion of the Literature

The historiography of labor and working-class life and struggles in the United States originated in the labor economics movement of Progressive Era intellectuals. This was the stuff of big institutions. John R. Commons at the University of Wisconsin built on the work of earlier labor economists, including Richard T. Ely. Together, Commons and students like Selig Perlman developed a new field of institutional labor history. Taking for granted the growth of industrial production and market relations, they rather optimistically sought to understand the role that workers’ self-organization had played in the rise of labor in a U.S. context defined by American workers who were generally narrowly “job-conscious” rather than broadly “class-conscious” in their engagement with the state and industrial corporations. Emphasizing the significance of organized labor, and of trade unionism more specifically, as the key expression of American workers’ economic consciousness, the Commons School of labor history necessarily underestimated the importance of the vast majority of workers who were unorganized, and particularly missed the significance of women and racial minorities in the workforce. 27

The Commons School of institutional labor history would eventually give way to broader conceptions of the history of work and labor struggles in the context of workers’ community and culture. In part, this was because some more radically minded historians did not share the Commons School’s commitment to trade unionism; such scholars would recover a long history of labor radicalism in the United States. Scholars focusing on immigration history, women’s history, African American history, and urban history would also revise the Commons School’s arguments, seeking to understand the ways that working-class culture and economic politics manifested themselves outside of the trade union movement. By the late 1950s and early 1960s, scholars such as Melvyn Dubofsky, David Montgomery, Herbert Gutman, and David Brody had begun to examine what would be known as the “new social history” or the “new labor history.” 28 Given shape by E. P. Thompson’s monumental The Making of the English Working Class ( 1963 ), 29 this impulse to study the ways workers create, and are created by, the world around them inspired more than a generation of work that sought out the connections between work, community, and power in the United States, where a Marxist-style class-consciousness had never been predominant. The new labor history also gave rise to scholars, perhaps inspired by the black freedom struggle and other social movements of the 1960s and 1970s, who sought to recover the history of women, slaves and free blacks, Asians, Latinos, and Native Americans. 30

Since the 1980s, there has been a persistent sense that the field of labor history has been in a crisis, even as the production of labor and working-class scholarship has hardly slowed. With the cast of characters growing and local case studies multiplying every year, some observers wondered if a synthesis of the literature was possible. Was there ever such a thing that could be defined as the American labor and working-class history? Moreover, poststructuralism and postmodern cultural criticism called into question whether “class” could serve as a unifying concept. As Joan Wallach Scott would explain, it was not enough just to add women (or black workers, or immigrant workers, etc.) to the stage of history. 31 It was not even enough to recover the experiences of previously underrepresented workers as some sort of objective evidence for what it meant to be different kinds of working-class people. Historians had to give up the notion that any social category—race, class, gender, sexuality—had any content outside of its historical context in that moment. They had to focus on the ways that people constantly create and re-create their identities; it was argued that it may be all one can do to explain that process of conscious and unconscious creation of self in a world that cannot be known as a whole.

To make matters more difficult for labor historians, as poststructuralism questioned the very categories historians had used to make sense of the past, beginning in the 1980s the political world around them was destroying the very institutions—labor unions—that had given the field coherence. Given the near decimation of organized labor, the decline of manufacturing jobs, and the diversification of the politics and social positions of working-class people, historians have had to rethink the assumptions of the field. No longer could it be taken for granted that a kind of interest-group politics and “business unionism” would be part of the American political economy.

As the implications of Reaganism and Thatcherism, as well as the triangulating centrism of the “New Democrats,” became clearer, historians began to explore labor and working-class history in a kind of blue mood. 32 Some have pushed to “bring the state back in” to the story of working-class history in order to highlight the persistent dominance of anti-labor law and government subsidization of finance and manufacturing, as well as the concomitant weakness of workers in the capitalist system. 33 Others have focused on why American workers have built a mode of labor so deeply intertwined with the ideologies and institutions of private property, empire, and racial and gender exclusion. 34 For many, the watchwords became hegemony, agency, infrapolitics, resistance, identity, and culture, as they sought to shed light on the power of the state, corporate leaders, and employers to bring about workers’ accommodation to regimes of inequity or, alternatively, how even the most subordinated workers had managed to make their own history. This latter work, which had been initiated earlier by feminist and black historians, reshaped the investigations of all workers, bringing questions of whiteness, gender identity, and sexuality to the fore. 35

The nearly complete triumph of anti-union politics, together with the global resurgence of economic inequality, has been so dramatic that historians have become skeptical of the value of recovering histories of workers’ agency. To be sure, with the ripples of mass militancy in the early 21st century there has been some effort to recover lost traditions of radicalism. 36 But, generally speaking, the current conditions have become so reminiscent of the turn of the 20th century that historians have come to look for continuities not just of radicalism, but also of the connections among American imperialism, economic growth, and workers’ positions in a persistently unequal global economy. The historian Leon Fink, for instance, has joined a growing group of scholars in arguing that the history of American workers must be understood in light of transnational economic and political dynamics, and the evolution of global capitalism. 37 In part, these histories counter notions that we live in a postracial, classless society where inequality is a sign of a healthy economy. But they are also attempts to make a clear-eyed assessment of the continuities in combined corporate and state power, whether one looks, for example, at the control of workers in the Panama Canal Zone or at the place of “unskilled” workers in a globalizing economy in the “Long Gilded Age.” 38

From this perspective, the period between 1935 and the mid-1970s—the prime years of the “New Deal Order”—when the United States enjoyed its longest period of sustained economic growth along with the greatest equality of income in the industrial era, is really “the long exception.” 39 If this is true, some argue that historians ought to look to the period between 1896 and 1945 for the most pertinent lessons on how workers have struggled to reconcile their values and traditions in an individualistic consumer society, when they have fought or accommodated with the realities of corporate dominance of the political and economic systems, and how those struggles both made great gains for American workers and left the American working class divided by race, gender, sexuality, region, skill level, and employment sector. Workers and their allies built significant, if highly problematic, reformist and radical movements that broke from the social Darwinism and laissez-faire ethos of the late 19th century, but most American workers did not directly share the more romantic experiences of such labor activism. Labor and working-class history, therefore, does not necessarily promise to offer a usable past for those seeking to build contemporary movements, but it does open the door to greater understanding and empathy with the complex lives and struggles of working people in previous eras of globalizing inequality.

Primary Sources

The main research problems for students of labor and working-class history are, first, to sift through the nearly limitless supply of relevant sources and, second, to find ways to include the voices of working people themselves. Because the state plays such a key role in shaping law and society, labor historians regularly consult municipal, county, state, and federal records, as well as court cases. 40 Many historians of labor radicalism also make use of Freedom of Information Act requests to access the files that government agencies have collected while spying on activists. 41 Records of unions, labor leaders, and the labor press are, of course, also critical. They are available in archives across the country, with major concentrations in New York City, Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Los Angeles. The papers of civil rights and black nationalist organizations, as well as groups and leaders of the women’s movement and immigrants’ rights movements, are all essential, because the labor movement typically overlapped with other forms of social activism. 42 Labor scholars also delve deeply into oral histories, often doing interviews of their own, but also by reading the transcripts of interviews with workers completed by previous scholars, as well as by social work agencies, congressional investigations, journalists, and more. Historians interested in the culture of class, and working-class culture, examine everything from songs, plays, novels, poems, and television shows to housing, clothes, and even the sounds and smells of working people’s communities in the past.

Links to Digital Materials

• Frank B. Gilbreth , “The Original Films of Frank B. Gilbreth,” 1910–1924 . Presented by James S. Perkins in Collaboration with Dr. Lillian M. Gilbreth & Dr. Ralph M. Barnes.

Further Reading

• Brody, David . Workers in Industrial America: Essays on the 20th Century Struggle . 2d ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
• Commons, John R. A History of Labor in the United States . New York: Macmillan, 1935.
• Dubofsky, Melvin . We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988 [1969].
• Forbath, William E. Law and the Shaping of the American Labor Movement . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.
• Kessler-Harris, Alice . In Pursuit of Equity: Women, Men, and the Quest for Economic Citizenship in 20th-Century America . New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
• Lichtenstein, Nelson . Labor’s War at Home: The CIO in World War II . Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2003 [1982].
• Montgomery, David . Worker’s Control in America: Studies in the History of Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
• Montgomery, David . The Fall of the House of Labor: The Workplace, the State, and American Labor Activism, 1865–1925 . New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
• Nelson, Bruce . Divided We Stand: American Workers and the Struggle for Black Equality . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001.
• Tomlins, Christopher . The State and Unions: Labor Relations, Law, and the Organized Labor Movement in America, 1880–1960. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
• Vargas, Zaragosa . Proletarians of the North: A History of Mexican Industrial Workers in Detroit and the Midwest, 1917–1933. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

1. Beverly Gage , “Why Violence Matters: Radicalism, Politics, and Class War in the Gilded Age and Progressive Era,” Journal for the Study of Radicalism 1.1 (2007): 106.

2. David Brody , Workers in Industrial America: Essays on the 20th Century Struggle (2d ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 6.

3. Harry Braverman , Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974).

4. Braverman, Labor and Monopoly Capital , 36.

5. Gage, “Why Violence Matters,” 104.

6. Braverman, Labor and Monopoly Capital , 3.

7. Julie Greene , Pure and Simple Politics: The American Federation of Labor and Political Activism, 1881–1917 (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

8. Paul Michel Taillon , Good, Reliable, White Men: Railroad Brotherhoods, 1877–1917 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009).

9. Thomas G. Andres , Killing for Coal: America’s Deadliest Labor War (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008).

10. Melvyn Dubofsky and Foster Rhea Dulles , Labor in America: A History, Seventh Edition (Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson, 2004), 191 ; and Dorothy Sue Cobble , “Pure and Simple Radicalism: Putting the Progressive Era AFL in Its Time,” Labor: Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas 10.4 (2013): 67–68.

11. Youngsoo Bae , Labor in Retreat: Class and Community among Men’s Clothing Workers of Chicago, 1871–1929 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001) ; and Annelise Orleck , Common Sense and a Little Fire: Women And Working-Class Politics in the United States, 1900–1965 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995).

12. “The Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers of the World,” as amended and appeared in the Proceedings of the 1908 IWW Convention in the Industrial Union Bulletin (November 7, 1908), in Joyce L. Kornbluh , ed., Rebel Voices: An IWW Anthology (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1964), 13.

13. Andrew Wender Cohen , The Racketeer’s Progress: Chicago and the Struggle for the Modern American Economy 1900–1940 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004).

14. Brody, Workers, 27–28.

15. Brody, Workers, 32–34.

16. Bruce Nelson , Divided We Stand: American Workers and the Struggle for Black Equality (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001), xxix.

17. Samuel Gompers , “Trade Union Attitude Toward Colored Workers,” American Federationist 8.4 (April 1901): 119.

18. Samuel Gompers , “Talks on Labor: Addresses at St. Paul and Minneapolis,” American Federationist 12 (1905): 638.

19. Paul Moreno , Black Americans and Organized Labor: A New History (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2006).

20. James R. Grossman , Land of Hope: Chicago, Black Southerners, and the Great Migration (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989).

21. W. Elliot Brownlee , Dynamics of Ascent: A History of the American Economy (New York: Knopf, 1974), 411.

22. Nelson, Divided, xxxiii.

23. Eric Arnesen , Brotherhoods of Color: Black Railroad Workers and the Struggle for Equality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001) ; and Beth Tompkins Bates , Pullman Porters and the Rise of Protest Politics in Black America, 1925–1945 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001).

24. Michael Denning , The Cultural Front: The Laboring of American Culture in the Twentieth Century (New York: Verso, 1998).

25. Dorothy Sue Cobble , The Other Women’s Movement: Workplace Justice and Social Rights in Modern America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005).

26. Glenda Elizabeth Gilmore , Defying Dixie: The Radical Roots of Civil Rights, 1919–1950 (New York: W. W. Norton, 2009) ; and Zaragosa Vargas , Labor Rights Are Civil Rights: Mexican American Workers in Twentieth-Century America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007).

27. John R. Commons , History of Labor in the United States (New York: Macmillan, 1918–1935) ; and Selig Perlman , A Theory of the Labor Movement (New York: Macmillan, 1928).

28. David Brody , “The Old Labor History and the New: In Search of an American Working Class,” Labor History 20 (1979): 111–26 ; Brody , Workers in Industrial America: Essays on the Twentieth-Century Struggle (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980) ; Melvyn Dubofsky , We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1967) ; Dubofsky , John L. Lewis: A Biography (New York: Quadrangle Press, 1977) ; Herbert Gutman , Work, Culture, and Society in Industrializing America: Essays in American Working-Class and Social History (New York: Vintage Books, 1977) ; Gutman , Power and Culture: Essays on the American Working Class , Ira Berlin , ed., (New York: Pantheon Books, 1977) ; David Montgomery , Beyond Equality: Labor and the Radical Republicans, 1862–1872 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967) ; Montgomery , Workers’ Control in America: Studies in the History of Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles (New York: Cambridge University Press), 1979 ; and Montgomery , Workers' Control in America: Studies in the History of Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

29. E. P. Thompson , The Making of the English Working Class (1963, repr.; New York: Vintage Books, 1966).

30. Eric Arnesen , Waterfront Workers of New Orleans: Race, Class and Politics, 1863–1923 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991) ; Jeanne Boydston , Home & Work: Housework, Wages, and the Ideology of Labor in the Early Republic (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990) ; Barbara Fields , “Ideology and Race in American History,” in Region, Race, and Reconstruction: Essays in Honor of C. Vann Woodward , eds. Morgan J. Koussar and James McPherson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), 143–177 ; Eugene Genovese , Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World the Slaves Made (New York: Pantheon Books, 1974) ; Grossman , Land of Hope; Howard Lamar, “From Bondage to Contract: Ethnic Labor in the American West, 1600-1890,” in Steven Hahn and Jonathan Prude , eds., The Countryside in the Age of Capitalist Transformation: Essays in the Social History of Rural America (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1985), 293–324 ; Earl Lewis , In Their Own Interests: Race, Class, and Power in Twentieth-Century Norfolk, Virginia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991) ; Annelise Orleck , Commons Sense and a Little Fire (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985) ; Gunther Peck , Reinventing Free Labor: Padrones and Immigrant Workers in the North American West, 1880–1930 (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2000) ; Peter Rachleff , Black Labor in the South: Richmond, Virginia, 1865–1890 (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1984) ; Alexander Saxton , The Indispensable Enemy: Labor and the Anti-Chinese Movement in California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971) ; and Christine Stansell , City of Women: Sex and Class in New York, 1789–1860 (New York: Knopf, 1986).

31. Joan Wallach Scott , “Gender as a Useful Category of Analysis,” The American Historical Review 91.5 (December 1986): 1053–1075 ; and Scott , “The Evidence of Experience,” Critical Inquiry 17.4 (Summer 1991): 773–797 .

32. Nick Salvatore , “American Labor History,” in Industrial Relations at the Dawn of the New Millennium , ed. M. F. Neufeld and J. T. McKelvey (Ithaca, NY: Industrial Labor Relations Press, 1998), 114–123.

33. Melvyn Dubofsky , The State and Labor in Modern America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994) ; and William E. Forbath , Law and the Shaping of the American Labor Movement (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991).

34. David Montgomery , The Fall of the House of Labor: The Workplace, the State, and American Labor Activism, 1865–1925 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987) ; and Victoria Hattam , Labor Visions and State Power: The Origins of Business Unionism in the United States (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993).

35. Eric Arnesen , et al., “Scholarly Controversy: Whiteness and the Historians’ Imagination,” Forum in International Labor and Working-Class History 60 (Fall 2001): 1–92 ; Ava Baron , Work Engendered: Toward New History of American Labor (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991) ; George Chauncey , Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World (New York: BasicBooks, 1994) ; Robin D. G. Kelley , “‘We Are Not What We Seem’: Rethinking Black Working-Class Opposition in the Jim Crow South,” Journal of American History 80.1 (June 1993): 75–112 ; and David Roediger , The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of American Labor History (New York: Verso, 1991).

36. Philip Dray , There Is Power in a Union: The Epic Story of Labor in America (New York: Anchor, 2011).

37. Leon Fink , ed., Workers across the Americas: The Transnational Turn in Labor History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011).

38. Julie Greene , The Canal Builders: Making America’s Empire at the Panama Canal (New York: Penguin, 2010) ; and Leon Fink , The Long Gilded Age: American Capitalism and the Lessons of a New World Order (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014).

39. Jefferson Cowie and Nick Salvatore , “The Long Exception: Rethinking the Place of the New Deal in American History,” International Labor and Working-Class History 74 (2008): 1–32.

40. The local, county, and state records are often found in university government records repositories. For federal records, begin with the online site of the National Archives and Records Administration .

41. See Freedom of Information/Privacy Act .

42. Especially helpful are the holdings of the Kheel Center at the Cornell University Library ; the Southern Labor Archives at Georgia State University ; the University of Wisconsin at Madison Archives ; the Newberry Library in Chicago ; UCLA Library Special Collections in the Charles E. Young Research Library ; the Walter Reuther Library at Wayne State University in Detroit ; and Taminent Library and Robert F. Wagner Archives in New York City . The papers of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are available in digitized format through the online database ProQuest . See also the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture . For a guide to researching women’s history archives, see the Gateway to Library of Congress Resources for the Study of Women’s History and Culture in the United States .

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, American History. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 27 March 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.147.128.134]
• 185.147.128.134

Character limit 500 /500

LABOR: Studies in Working-Class History

LABOR: Studies in Working-Class History  is the official journal for the  Labor and Working-Class History Association (LAWCHA) , and is housed at the Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor at Georgetown University. A subscription to LABOR is available through membership in LAWCHA. 

The labor question—who will do the work and under what economic and political terms?—beckons today with renewed global urgency. As a site for both historical research and commentary, Labor: Studies in Working-Class History hopes to provide an intellectual scaffolding for understanding the roots of continuing social dilemmas. We invite submissions that explore the situation, subjectivity, or strategy of working men and women in any era. Although the tradition from which we emerge and to which we still pay critical homage has focused primarily on social movements and institutions based on “free” industrial labor, we mean to give equal attention to other labor systems and social contexts (e.g., slavery and other coercive labor forms, agricultural work, unpaid and domestic labor, the contingent or informal sector, the professions). While we begin with the US experience, we intend to extend our literacy not only across the American hemisphere but also, by way of transnational, international, and comparative themes, toward a truly global reach. To these ends, we look not only to academic historians but also to other scholars, journalists, labor educators, poets, and writer-activists for research articles, interpretive essays, notes and documents, and reviews.

History Site

LABOR: Studies in Working-Class History is the official journal for the Labor and Working-Class History Association (LAWCHA), and is housed at the Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor at Georgetown University. A subscription to LABOR is available through membership in LAWCHA.

You May Also Like

The Chicago Teachers Union argues for proven educational reforms to dramatically improve education of more than 400,000 students in a district of 675 schools. These reforms are desperately needed and can head Chicago towards the world-class educational system its students deserve.

Domestic work is the work that makes all other work possible. Together, we can win the protections and recognition that this vital American workforce needs. Join us today!

In 2019, there were 25 major work stoppages involving 1,000 or more workers and lasting at least one shift, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Between 2010 and 2019 there were a total of 154 work stoppages, averaging 15 stoppages a year.

Women Have Always Worked: Fighting for Equality: 1950–2018. An exploration from an online edX course.

This project, directed by Peter Cole of Western Illinois University and Franklin N. Cosey-Gay of the hicago Center for Youth Violence Prevention, is working to document and commemorate the 1919 riot with an online exhibit that includes biographies of those killed. Visit site

A gallery of photos to explore.

The Center for Working-Class Studies (CWCS) at Youngstown State University (YSU) was the first academic program in the U.S. to focus on issues of work and class. CWCS members have been at the forefront of “new working-class studies,” an international movement that brings together academics,…

We are activist scholars — Jennifer Guglielmo, Michelle Joffroy, Diana Sierra Becerra — collaborating with the domestic workers movement (nannies, house cleaners, and home care workers) to give workers greater access to their own histories and cultures of resistance. These are educational tools for everyone to learn about these foundational histories.

From early in the 19th century through recent years, the Mahoning Valley has drawn new migrants and immigrants seeking economic opportunities and new homes. As those families settled in the area, they created the diverse cultural mix of our present day community. They brought new…

Our Labor History Timeline

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) | May 3, 2021

Our Labor History Timeline highlights the key events and the people who helped bring about radical changes in the US workplace and society. The timeline is divided thematically, and covers dates from the early 17th through the early 21st centuries. It is supplemented by links to related web sites. Topics include gender equity, immigrant rights, workplace safety, civil rights, labor law, retirement, and trade unions.

Tags: North America United States Timelines African American Disability Economic Empires Environmental Human Rights & Violations Jewish Labor Latinx Legal Migration & Immigration Military Native American & Indigenous Peace Movements & Protests Political Public Race & Ethnicity Religion Slavery Social State & Local (US) Urban Women, Gender, & Sexuality 1600-1800 1800-1900 1900-1945 1945-Present

The American Historical Association welcomes comments in the discussion area below, at AHA Communities , and in letters to the editor . Please read our commenting and letters policy before submitting.

Please read our commenting and letters policy before submitting.

In This Section

Course Finder

Labor history, course details, related courses, registration information.

Dates for online sessions will be posted as soon as they are available. Sign up to be notified when new dates are available.

Get notified

Schedule & Details

Labor History can be understood from the perspectives of both trade union history and the social, cultural, and political life of workers. To gain insights into labor’s past, it is useful to explore not only union organizing, collective bargaining, and labor legislation, but also what workers think, how they work and live, and the impact of workers on the larger society. This course will use both of these approaches in order to examine the major themes in American labor history from the 19th century to the present day.

• Understanding Labor History
• Race, Gender and Ethnicity: The Constantly Changing Work Force of America
• Class conflict during the industrial revolution (the progressive era as it stands)
• Rise of industrial unions
• Rise of public sector unions
• The corporate counterattack
• Unions in the era of globalization

Approach and Features This course will cover the history of American Workers and their unions from the early days European colonization to the present.  The course places special emphasis on changes in the American working class as a result of migration from overseas and within the United States and the role of women and minorities in the work force.

Customized Delivery

Schedule this program for your organization.

Get Updates

Sign up for notification of new workshop dates.

Have Questions?

Contact us.

[email protected]

866-470-1922

Stay Connected

Receive updates to follow your interests.

By submitting this request, you are providing your express written consent for Cornell University, directly or by third-parties acting on its behalf, to send marketing information regarding furthering your education, including texts, e-mail and calls made using an automated dialing system to the number that you provided above. Accepting this consent is not required to obtain any good or service.

This course is part of this certificate

• Certificate of Labor Studies

Similar & Related

Labor leadership skills certificate program - online.

Ready to make a difference in your union, organization, or company? Earn your certificate and build essential leadership, negotiation and communication skills with convenient and flexible online courses. The Labor Leadership Skills certificate program is an affordable and rapid-results educational experience that provides skills essential to success in your organization.

• Circle with checkmark Icon Apr 1 - Sep 29, 2024
• Circle with checkmark Icon Live Online
• Circle with checkmark Icon $597

Register for Labor Leadership Skills Certificate Program - Online

Preparation for Collective Bargaining

Learn a step-by-step process on preparing for bargaining including aligning organizational, labor and bargaining strategies and developing management and union goals, and preparing for the bargaining table. An in-class project includes preparing and delivering a presentation to management to obtain bargaining mandate.

• Circle with checkmark Icon Apr 15 - 16, 2024
• Circle with checkmark Icon In-Person
• Circle with checkmark Icon $1495

New York , NY

Register for Preparation for Collective Bargaining

Effective Collective Bargaining and Simulation

Take on the role of lead negotiator in collective bargaining from start to finish. This course focuses on the practical aspects of developing and managing a team, the dynamics and flow of bargaining stages, the difference between competitive and collaborative approaches, and how to come to an agreement. Culminating in a day-and-a-half mock collective bargaining simulation, this course provides valuable practice and feedback from seasoned negotiators.

• Circle with checkmark Icon Apr 17 - 19, 2024
• Circle with checkmark Icon $2195

Register for Effective Collective Bargaining and Simulation

• Directories
• Books & eBooks
• Encyclopedias
• Primary Sources
• Labor Archives of Washington This link opens in a new window
• Start Your Research
• Research Guides
• University of Washington Libraries
• Library Guides
• UW Libraries
• History : Labor

History : Labor: Primary Sources

Letter to A. Philip Randolph courtesy of the  Records of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters , Two young girls wearing "Don't Be a Scab" sashes courtesy of UW Digital Collections  & poster courtesy of the  Cannery Workers and Farm Laborers Union Local 7 Records  

Selected microfilm, manuscript and web collections. For additional manuscript collections see Labor Archives of Washington .

• Alaska Packer's Association records
• American Federation of Labor Records
• California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, Proceedings and Publications
• Canadian Farmworkers Union Collection
• Cannery Workers and Farm Laborers Union, Local 7 records, 1915-1985
• Cesar Chavez and United Farm Workers
• Farmworker Movement Documentation Project
• Green rising, 1910-1977 : a supplement to the Southern Tenant Farmers' Union papers
• IAM Archives (International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers)
• Industrial Workers of the World Photograph Collection
• International Brotherhood of Teamsters records, 1905-1952
• International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union
• International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union Photographs
• IWW History Project
• National Domestic Workers Union Records
• Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) 1968-1985 Records

• Samuel Gompers papers
• Shaun Maloney papers, 1932-2000
• Southern Tenant Farmers' Union. Papers 1934-70
• Tyree Scott papers, ca. 1970-1995
• United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) Records

Union Newspapers & Magazines

• AFL-CIO News 1956-1996
• American Federationist 1896-1976
• BC District Union News 1944-1955
• British Columbia Federationist 1911-1925
• Carpenter Magazine 1881-1988
• Cigar Makers' Official Journal 1897-1954 & 1963-1972
• CIO News 1937-1955
• Commonwealth College Fortnightly 1926-1938
• Electrical Worker 1893-
• Firefighter, journal of the Fire Brigades Union 1947-2001
• IAM Publications, District and Local Lodges
• IAM Publications, Grand Lodge
• Industrial Union Bulletin 1907-1909
• Industrial Worker 1909-1913
• International Teamster 1942-1992
• Justice 1919-1965
• Ladies’ Garment Worker 1910-1918
• Lather 1930-1971
• Minneapolis Labor Review 1907-2006
• Railway Review 1881-1892
• Steel Labor, 1936-1980
• Teamster Magazine 1940-1969
• Texas Labor Newspapers
• Voice of Industry 1845-1848

Working Conditions & Working Life

• A. & L. Tirocchi Dressmakers Project
• America at Work/America at Leisure
• Eastern Air Lines Digital Collection
• Henry J. Kaiser Pictorial Collection, 1941-1946
• Home Economics Archive
• Inside an American Factory
• Kheel Center Labor Photos
• Labadie Collection
• Lewis Hine Collection
• National Child Labor Committee Collection
• Oral History Project in Labor History
• Real Rosie the Riveter Project
• Rosie the Riveter World War II Homefront Project
• Strawbridge & Clothier's Store Chat 1906-1966
• The 'Sweated Trades': Working life in the early 20th century
• Tradeswomen Archives Project Collection
• U.S. Steel Gary Works Photograph Collection
• Women Physicians: 1850s-1970s
• Women Working 1800-1930

Strikes, Unrest & Tragedies

• 1934 International Longshoremen's Association and General Strikes of San Francisco
• Bunker Hill Labor History Collection
• Centralia Massacre and the Industrial Workers of the World Collection
• Everett Massacre Collection
• Everett Massacre Collection at the UW
• Flint Sit-Down Strike
• Hart, Schaffner and Marx Labor Agreement Records 1919-1920
• Haymarket Affair Digital Collection
• Herrin Massacre Investigation Proceedings
• I Am a Man: The Memphis Sanitation Worker's Strike
• Reporting the General Strike: Contemporary accounts of "The Nine Day Wonder"
• Seattle General Strike
• Strikes! Labor History Encyclopedia for the Pacific Northwest
• Triangle Factory Fire
• Union Makes Us Strong
• Uprising of '34 Collection
• WTO Seattle Collection

Additional Primary Sources

• California and West Coast Labor and Industrial Relations
• Civil Rights & Labor History Consortium
• Columbia Historical Corporate Reports
• Eugene V. Debs Collection
• Fred Wright Cartoons
• Hagley Digital Archives
• Labor and Workplace Studies
• Northwest Historical Annual Reports
• Pan American World Airways Records
• Pittsburgh & Western Pennsylvania Labor Legacy
• Social Movements Collection
• Southern Labor Archives
• Teamsters Films
• University of Pennsylvania Annual Reports Colleciton
• Waterfront Workers History Project
• << Previous: Encyclopedias
• Next: Labor Archives of Washington >>
• Last Updated: Mar 18, 2024 3:42 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uw.edu/research/history-labor

• Skip to global NPS navigation
• Skip to the main content
• Skip to the footer section

Exiting nps.gov

Americans at work - national historic landmark theme study on labor history.

The history of work and working people is interwoven through the stories of all America’s most significant places. Labor History in the United States , a theme study released in June 2022 by the National Historic Landmarks (NHL) Program, highlights the many stories of Americans at work through current scholarship on labor history and nationally significant places. It includes thematic chapters focusing on work in agriculture, extraction industries like mining or lumbering, manufacturing, transportation, and the service sector. While labor organizing is a theme throughout, the focus on occupational groups highlights up-to-date research on a wide variety of working people: union and non-union, native and foreign-born, male and female, White and Black, northern and southern, and those of various religious affiliations. Currently, 52 properties have been designated NHLs specifically for various aspects of labor history. In addition to those NHLs, the theme study includes a study list of 20 possible new NHLs as well as recommendations for adding labor history updates into the documentation for 32 existing ones. Already designated labor history NHLs include some unexpected sites such as renowned Mexican painter Diego Rivera’s Detroit Industry murals at the Detroit Institute of Arts, designated in 2013. Partially sponsored by the Ford Motor Company, this series of paintings showcases the artist’s approach to public art and his interpretation of the relationship between machines and male workers, both White and Black, and workers and management.

NPS Photo/NHL Program

Other sites long associated with the history of unions and labor organizing also are well represented, such as The Forty Acres NHL, designated in 2008 and associated with César Chávez and the United Farm Workers of America, or Union Square NHL in New York, designated in 1998 for its prominent role in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century pro-labor demonstrations and marches. Labor History in the United States also expands the themes of labor history beyond organizing and work to include topics like migration, community life, recreation, and education to shed significant light on the social and cultural histories of workers and the communities that developed in and around places of production. Doing so generates greater social inclusivity in the designation and interpretation of labor and working-class properties in the United States. Beyond discussion of potential new labor history National Historic Landmarks, the context here and in other NHL theme studies can inform National Register of Historic Places nominations or other historical studies. The complete accessible PDF is available for download on the National Historic Landmarks Program website – Recent Theme Studies .

You Might Also Like

• national historic landmark
• theme studies
• labor history

Last updated: July 18, 2022

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Labor Movement

By: History.com Editors

Updated: March 31, 2020 | Original: October 29, 2009

The labor movement in the United States grew out of the need to protect the common interest of workers. For those in the industrial sector, organized labor unions fought for better wages, reasonable hours and safer working conditions. The labor movement led efforts to stop child labor, give health benefits and provide aid to workers who were injured or retired.

Origins of The Labor Movement

The origins of the labor movement lay in the formative years of the American nation, when a free wage-labor market emerged in the artisan trades late in the colonial period. The earliest recorded strike occurred in 1768 when New York journeymen tailors protested a wage reduction. The formation of the Federal Society of Journeymen Cordwainers (shoemakers) in Philadelphia in 1794 marks the beginning of sustained trade union organization among American workers. 

WATCH: The Labor Movement

From that time on, local craft unions proliferated in the cities, publishing lists of “prices” for their work, defending their trades against diluted and cheap labor and, increasingly, demanding a shorter workday in the face of the Industrial Revolution . Thus a job-conscious orientation was quick to emerge, and in its wake there followed the key structural elements characterizing American trade unionism. First, with the formation in 1827 of the Mechanics’ Union of Trade Associations in Philadelphia, central labor bodies began uniting craft unions within a single city, and then, with the creation of the International Typographical Union in 1852, national unions began bringing together local unions of the same trade from across the United States and Canada (hence the frequent union designation “international”). Although the factory system was springing up during these years, industrial workers played little part in the early trade union development. In the 19th century, trade unionism was mainly a movement of skilled workers.

Did you know? In 2009, 12 percent of American workers belonged to unions.

Early Labor Unions

The early labor movement was, however, inspired by more than the immediate job interest of its craft members. It harbored a conception of the just society, deriving from the Ricardian labor theory of value and from the republican ideals of the American Revolution , which fostered social equality, celebrated honest labor, and relied on an independent, virtuous citizenship. The transforming economic changes of industrial capitalism ran counter to labor’s vision. The result, as early labor leaders saw it, was to raise up “two distinct classes, the rich and the poor.” Beginning with the workingmen’s parties of the 1830s, the advocates of equal rights mounted a series of reform efforts that spanned the nineteenth century. Most notable were the National Labor Union, launched in 1866, and the Knights of Labor , which reached its zenith in the mid-1880s. 

On their face, these reform movements might have seemed at odds with trade unionism, aiming as they did at the cooperative commonwealth rather than a higher wage, appealing broadly to all “producers” rather than strictly to wageworkers, and eschewing the trade union reliance on the strike and boycott. But contemporaries saw no contradiction: trade unionism tended to the workers’ immediate needs, labor reform to their higher hopes. The two were held to be strands of a single movement, rooted in a common working-class constituency and to some degree sharing a common leadership. But equally important, they were strands that had to be kept operationally separate and functionally distinct.

PHOTOS: These Appalling Images Exposed Child Labor in America

American Federation of Labor

During the 1880s, that division fatally eroded. Despite its labor reform rhetoric, the Knights of Labor attracted large numbers of workers hoping to improve their immediate conditions. As the Knights carried on strikes and organized along industrial lines, the threatened national trade unions demanded that the group confine itself to its professed labor reform purposes. When it refused, they joined in December 1886 to form the American Federation of Labor (AFL). The new federation marked a break with the past, for it denied to labor reform any further role in the struggles of American workers. In part, the assertion of trade union supremacy stemmed from an undeniable reality. As industrialism matured, labor reform lost its meaning–hence the confusion and ultimate failure of the Knights of Labor. Marxism taught Samuel Gompers and his fellow socialists that trade unionism was the indispensable instrument for preparing the working class for revolution. The founders of the AFL translated this notion into the principle of “pure and simple” unionism: only by self-organization along occupational lines and by a concentration on job-conscious goals would the worker be “furnished with the weapons which shall secure his industrial emancipation.”

That class formulation necessarily defined trade unionism as the movement of the entire working class. The AFL asserted as a formal policy that it represented all workers, irrespective of skill, race, religion, nationality or gender. But the national unions that had created the AFL in fact comprised only the skilled trades. Almost at once, therefore, the trade union movement encountered a dilemma: How to square ideological aspirations against contrary institutional realities?

Discrimination in The Labor Movement

As sweeping technological change began to undermine the craft system of production, some national unions did move toward an industrial structure, most notably in coal mining and the garment trades. But most craft unions either refused or, as in iron and steel and in meat-packing, failed to organize the less skilled. And since skill lines tended to conform to racial, ethnic and gender divisions, the trade union movement took on a racist and sexist coloration as well. For a short period, the AFL resisted that tendency. But in 1895, unable to launch an interracial machinists’ union of its own, the Federation reversed an earlier principled decision and chartered the whites-only International Association of Machinists. Formally or informally, the color bar thereafter spread throughout the trade union movement. In 1902, blacks made up scarcely 3 percent of total membership, most of them segregated in Jim Crow locals. In the case of women and eastern European immigrants, a similar devolution occurred–welcomed as equals in theory, excluded or segregated in practice. (Only the fate of Asian workers was unproblematic; their rights had never been asserted by the AFL in the first place.)

Samuel Gompers

Gompers justified the subordination of principle to organizational reality on the constitutional grounds of “trade autonomy,” by which each national union was assured the right to regulate its own internal affairs. But the organizational dynamism of the labor movement was in fact located in the national unions. Only as they experienced inner change might the labor movement expand beyond the narrow limits–roughly 10 percent of the labor force–at which it stabilized before World War I .

In the political realm, the founding doctrine of pure-and-simple unionism meant an arm’s-length relationship to the state and the least possible entanglement in partisan politics. A total separation had, of course, never been seriously contemplated; some objectives, such as immigration restriction, could be achieved only through state action, and the predecessor to the AFL, the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions (1881), had in fact been created to serve as labor’s lobbying arm in Washington . Partly because of the lure of progressive labor legislation, even more in response to increasingly damaging court attacks on the trade unions, political activity quickened after 1900. With the enunciation of Labor’s Bill of Grievances (1906), the AFL laid down a challenge to the major parties. Henceforth it would campaign for its friends and seek the defeat of its enemies.

This nonpartisan entry into electoral politics, paradoxically, undercut the left-wing advocates of an independent working-class politics. That question had been repeatedly debated within the AFL, first in 1890 over Socialist Labor party representation, then in 1893-1894 over an alliance with the Populist Party and after 1901 over affiliation with the Socialist party of America. Although Gompers prevailed each time, he never found it easy. Now, as labor’s leverage with the major parties began to pay off, Gompers had an effective answer to his critics on the left: the labor movement could not afford to waste its political capital on socialist parties or independent politics. When that nonpartisan strategy failed, as it did in the reaction following World War I, an independent political strategy took hold, first through the robust campaigning of the Conference for Progressive Political Action in 1922, and in 1924 through labor’s endorsement of Robert La Follette on the Progressive ticket. By then, however, the Republican administration was moderating its hard line, evident especially in Herbert Hoover’s efforts to resolve the simmering crises in mining and on the railroads. In response, the trade unions abandoned the Progressive party, retreated to nonpartisanship, and, as their power waned, lapsed into inactivity.

The Labor Movement and The Great Depression

WATCH: Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal

It took the Great Depression to knock the labor movement off dead center. The discontent of industrial workers, combined with New Deal collective bargaining legislation, at last brought the great mass production industries within striking distance. When the craft unions stymied the ALF’s organizing efforts, John L. Lewis of the United Mine Workers and his followers broke away in 1935 and formed the Committee for Industrial Organization (CIO), which crucially aided the emerging unions in auto, rubber, steel and other basic industries. In 1938 the CIO was formally established as the Congress of Industrial Organizations. By the end of World War II , more than 12 million workers belonged to unions and collective bargaining had taken hold throughout the industrial economy.

In politics, its enhanced power led the union movement not to a new departure but to a variant on the policy of nonpartisanship. As far back as the Progressive Era, organized labor had been drifting toward the Democratic party, partly because of the latter’s greater programmatic appeal, perhaps even more because of its ethno-cultural basis of support within an increasingly “new” immigrant working class. With the coming of Roosevelt’s New Deal, this incipient alliance solidified, and from 1936 onward the Democratic Party could count on–and came to rely on–the campaigning resources of the labor movement.

Collective Bargaining

That this alliance partook of the nonpartisan logic of Gompers’s authorship–too much was at stake for organized labor to waste its political capital on third parties–became clear in the unsettled period of the early cold war. Not only did the CIO oppose the Progressive party of 1948, but it expelled the left-wing unions that broke ranks and supported Henry Wallace for the presidency that year.

The formation of the AFL-CIO in 1955 visibly testified to the powerful continuities persisting through the age of industrial unionism. Above all, the central purpose remained what it had always been–to advance the economic and job interests of the union membership. Collective bargaining performed impressively after World War II, more than tripling weekly earnings in manufacturing between 1945 and 1970, gaining for union workers an unprecedented measure of security against old age, illness and unemployment, and, through contractual protections, greatly strengthening their right to fair treatment at the workplace. But if the benefits were greater and if they went to more people, the basic job-conscious thrust remained intact. Organized labor was still a sectional movement, covering at most only a third of America’s wage earners and inaccessible to those cut off in the low-wage secondary labor market.

Women and Minorities in the Labor Movement

Nothing better captures the uneasy amalgam of old and new in the postwar labor movement than the treatment of minorities and women who flocked in, initially from the mass production industries, but after 1960 from the public and service sectors as well. Labor’s historic commitment to racial and gender equality was thereby much strengthened, but not to the point of challenging the status quo within the labor movement itself. Thus the leadership structure remained largely closed to minorities–as did the skilled jobs that were historically the preserve of white male workers–notoriously so in the construction trades but in the industrial unions as well. Yet the AFL-CIO played a crucial role in the battle for civil rights legislation in 1964-1965. That this legislation might be directed against discriminatory trade union practices was anticipated (and quietly welcomed) by the more progressive labor leaders. But more significant was the meaning they found in championing this kind of reform: the chance to act on the broad ideals of the labor movement. And, so motivated, they deployed labor’s power with great effect in the achievement of John F. Kennedy ’s and Lyndon B. Johnson ’s domestic programs during the 1960s.

Decline in Unions

This was ultimately economic, not political power, however, and as organized labor’s grip on the industrial sector began to weaken, so did its political capability. From the early 1970s onward, new competitive forces swept through the heavily unionized industries, set off by deregulation in communications and transportation, by industrial restructuring and by an unprecedented onslaught of foreign goods. As oligopolistic and regulated market structures broke down, nonunion competition spurted, concession bargaining became widespread and plant closings decimated union memberships. The once-celebrated National Labor Relations Act increasingly hamstrung the labor movement; an all-out reform campaign to get the law amended failed in 1978. And with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, there came to power an anti-union administration the likes of which had not been seen since the Harding era.

Between 1975 and 1985, union membership fell by 5 million. In manufacturing, the unionized portion of the labor force dropped below 25 percent, while mining and construction, once labor’s flagship industries, were decimated. Only in the public sector did the unions hold their own. By the end of the 1980s, less than 17 percent of American workers were organized, half the proportion of the early 1950s.

The labor movement has never been swift to change. But if the new high-tech and service sectors seemed beyond its reach in 1989, so did the mass production industries in 1929. There is a silver lining: Compared to the old AFL, organized labor is today much more diverse and broadly based: In 2018, of the 14.7 million wage and salary workers who were part of a union (compared to 17.7 million in 1983), 25 percent are women and 28 percent are Black.

TED: The Economics Daily. Bureau of Labor Statistics .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Labor Law Research Paper Topics

In this comprehensive guide on labor law research paper topics , we aim to assist law students in exploring the diverse and dynamic landscape of labor law research. As the field of labor law encompasses a wide array of topics, this page offers a valuable resource for students seeking inspiration and guidance for their research papers. Students will gain insights into how to select appropriate research paper topics, tips for writing an effective labor law research paper, and the benefits of availing iResearchNet’s custom writing services. By empowering students with essential knowledge and professional support, we aim to enhance the quality and depth of labor law research in the academic community.

100 Labor Law Research Paper Topics

Welcome to the world of labor law research paper topics, where the intricate tapestry of employment relationships and workers’ rights is unraveled and explored. Labor law stands at the intersection of law, economics, and social justice, encompassing a myriad of legal principles and regulations that govern the dynamic interactions between employers and employees. As students of law embarking on a journey into this fascinating realm, you are presented with a treasure trove of research opportunities. This comprehensive list of labor law research paper topics is designed to guide you through a diverse array of subjects, providing insights into the ever-changing landscape of labor relations and shedding light on the pressing issues faced by the modern workforce. By delving into these topics, you have the chance to contribute to the advancement of labor rights, shape policy reforms, and foster a more equitable and inclusive labor environment.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

• Analyzing the Role of Labor Unions in Protecting Workers’ Rights
• The Impact of Anti-Discrimination Laws on Workplace Equality
• Addressing Gender Pay Gap through Labor Legislation
• Disability Rights in the Workplace: Challenges and Solutions
• Racial and Ethnic Discrimination in Hiring Practices: A Legal Perspective
• Promoting LGBTQ+ Inclusivity in the Workplace: Legal Frameworks and Challenges
• Age Discrimination in Employment: Legal Implications and Protections
• Examining Religious Accommodation Laws in the Workplace
• Combating Workplace Harassment: Legal Measures and Best Practices
• Legal Remedies for Unfair Dismissal and Retaliation Claims
• Labor Exploitation in Global Supply Chains: Legal Perspectives
• Cross-Border Employment Contracts: Challenges and Legal Solutions
• International Labor Standards and Corporate Social Responsibility
• Free Trade Agreements and Labor Protections: Analyzing the Impact
• The Role of International Organizations in Shaping Labor Laws
• Comparative Analysis of Labor Laws in Different Countries
• The Intersection of Labor Law and International Human Rights Law
• Global Mobility of Labor and its Legal Implications
• Protecting Migrant Workers: International Legal Frameworks
• Challenges of Enforcing Labor Standards in Globalized Economies
• The Gig Economy and the Future of Labor Law
• Labor Law in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Automation
• Data Privacy and Employee Monitoring: Balancing Rights and Interests
• Legal Considerations for Remote Work Arrangements
• Digital Labor Platforms and Worker Classification: Legal Issues
• The Right to Disconnect: Exploring Legal Protections for Work-Life Balance
• Virtual Workplaces and Cross-Border Labor Law Challenges
• Regulating Crowdsourced Labor: Legal Implications and Innovations
• Blockchain Technology and Smart Contracts in Labor Relations
• Online Labor Marketplaces: Labor Law Challenges and Opportunities
• The Legal Framework of Employment Contracts: Rights and Obligations
• Collective Bargaining and Employment Contract Negotiations
• The Role of Employment Contracts in Protecting Intellectual Property
• Non-Compete Agreements: Enforceability and Limitations
• Zero-Hour Contracts: Legal and Ethical Considerations
• Fixed-Term Employment Contracts: Benefits and Challenges
• The Gig Economy and Independent Contractor Agreements
• The Legal Implications of Employee Handbooks and Policies
• Employment Termination Clauses: Legal Safeguards and Consequences
• Legal Protections for Whistleblowers in Employment Contracts
• Occupational Health and Safety Regulations: Compliance and Enforcement
• Legal Liability for Workplace Accidents and Injuries
• Work-Related Stress and Mental Health: Legal Duties and Rights
• Ergonomics and Workplace Design: Legal Considerations
• Workplace Substance Abuse Policies and Legal Implications
• Discrimination Based on Health Conditions: Legal Perspectives
• Safety Measures for High-Risk Occupations: Legal Frameworks
• The Right to Refuse Unsafe Work: Legal Protections and Limitations
• The Role of Labor Inspectors in Enforcing Workplace Safety
• Legal Challenges in Addressing Emerging Occupational Hazards
• Labor Market Regulations and Economic Growth: A Comparative Analysis
• Labor Laws and Business Competitiveness: Balancing Interests
• Labor Unions and Wage Bargaining: Economic Implications
• Labor Law Reforms and Employment Generation: A Case Study
• The Impact of Minimum Wage Laws on the Economy and Workers
• Employment Protection Laws and Labor Market Flexibility
• Labor Market Segmentation: Legal Challenges and Policy Responses
• Labor Law and Income Inequality: Assessing the Connection
• The Role of Labor Laws in Addressing Poverty and Social Welfare
• Labor Mobility and Economic Integration: Legal Facilitation and Barriers
• Armed Conflicts and Workers’ Rights: The Role of International Law
• Protecting Civilian Workers in Conflict Zones: Legal Challenges
• Child Labor in Conflict-Affected Areas: Legal Remedies and Rehabilitation
• Labor Law and Refugee Rights: Legal Protections and Dilemmas
• Employment Rights for Victims of Human Trafficking: Legal Approaches
• The Role of International Courts and Tribunals in Enforcing Labor Rights
• Labor Law and War Crimes: Holding Perpetrators Accountable
• Gender-Based Violence and Labor Rights: Legal Responses and Redress
• The Impact of Armed Conflicts on Labor Market Dynamics
• The Role of International Humanitarian Organizations in Protecting Workers
• The Legal Framework of Employment Discrimination Laws
• Age Discrimination in Employment: Legal Protections and Challenges
• Combating Gender Discrimination in the Workplace: Legal Strategies
• The Impact of Race and Ethnicity on Hiring and Promotion: Legal Implications
• Legal Protections for LGBTQ+ Employees: Advancements and Gaps
• Addressing Religious Discrimination in Employment: Legal Rights and Accommodations
• Disability Discrimination in the Workplace: Legal Remedies and Reasonable Accommodations
• Pregnancy Discrimination in Employment: Legal Safeguards and Enforcement
• Intersectionality and Employment Discrimination: Analyzing Multiple Identities
• The Role of Affirmative Action in Promoting Workplace Diversity: Legal Debates
• Artificial Intelligence in Labor Relations: Legal Implications and Ethical Concerns
• Gig Workers and Employee Classification: Legal Challenges and Protections
• Data Privacy and Labor Law: Balancing Employee Rights and Employer Interests
• Remote Work and Digital Nomads: Adapting Labor Law to Modern Trends
• The Future of Work and Labor Law: Preparing for Technological Advancements
• Freelancers and the Gig Economy: Legal Protections and Vulnerabilities
• Labor Law in the Era of COVID-19: Responses and Policy Considerations
• Labor Rights for Platform Workers: Legal Frameworks and Enforcement
• Climate Change and Labor Law: Environmental Responsibilities and Employment
• The Role of Labor Law in Addressing Income Inequality and Social Justice
• A Comparative Analysis of Labor Law Systems in Different Countries
• Labor Law Reforms and Social Movements: Global Experiences
• International Labor Standards and Conventions: Challenges and Implementation
• The Influence of International Trade Agreements on Labor Laws
• Human Rights and Labor Rights: Synergies and Conflicts
• Employment Protection and Flexibility: Comparative Policy Approaches
• The Role of Labor Unions in Shaping Labor Laws: Global Perspectives
• Enforcement Mechanisms of Labor Laws: Lessons from Various Jurisdictions
• Labor Law and Cross-Border Employment: Legal Complexities and Solutions

Exploring the Range of Labor Law Topics

The field of labor law offers an expansive and dynamic landscape that addresses various aspects of employment relationships, worker rights, and workplace regulations. As students delve into labor law research, they encounter a plethora of thought-provoking topics that delve into the intricacies of modern labor practices. This section explores the wide-ranging research paper topics in labor law, providing insights into the complex issues that shape the modern workforce and society at large.

• Labor Unions and Collective Bargaining: Labor unions play a vital role in representing workers’ interests, negotiating collective bargaining agreements, and advocating for improved working conditions. Research topics may encompass the history of labor unions, the impact of collective bargaining on wages and benefits, the challenges faced by unions in the contemporary economy, and the evolving role of unions in shaping labor policy.
• Employment Discrimination: Issues of employment discrimination based on race, gender, age, religion, or disability continue to be significant concerns in labor law. Research topics may explore the legal framework for combating discrimination, the effectiveness of anti-discrimination measures, and the role of employers in promoting diversity and inclusion in the workplace.
• Workplace Health and Safety: Ensuring a safe and healthy work environment is a fundamental aspect of labor law. Research topics in this area may delve into occupational health and safety regulations, the impact of workplace injuries on workers and employers, and the role of employers in promoting employee well-being.
• Employee Benefits and Compensation: Employee benefits and compensation packages are critical factors in attracting and retaining a skilled workforce. Research topics may investigate the legal requirements for employee benefits, the impact of compensation structures on job satisfaction and productivity, and the role of labor law in addressing wage disparities.
• Globalization and Labor Law: The globalization of labor markets has brought about unique challenges and opportunities for labor law. Research topics in this area may explore the impact of international trade agreements on labor standards, the role of multinational corporations in shaping labor practices, and the potential for international cooperation in addressing labor rights violations.
• Employment Contracts and At-Will Employment: The legal framework governing employment contracts and the concept of at-will employment are essential considerations in labor law. Research topics may encompass the enforceability of employment contracts, the rights and obligations of both employers and employees, and the implications of at-will employment on job security.
• Whistleblower Protections: Whistleblower protections are crucial in encouraging employees to report misconduct and unethical behavior in the workplace. Research topics in this area may explore the legal safeguards for whistleblowers, the challenges they face in coming forward, and the impact of whistleblower protections on corporate accountability.
• Labor Migration and Immigration Policies: Labor migration and immigration policies intersect with labor law, as they impact the rights and treatment of migrant workers. Research topics may examine the legal framework for labor migration, the exploitation of migrant workers, and the role of labor law in protecting the rights of this vulnerable population.
• Emerging Technologies and Labor Law: Advancements in technology, such as artificial intelligence and automation, have far-reaching implications for the labor market. Research topics may investigate the legal and ethical considerations of deploying emerging technologies in the workplace, their impact on job displacement, and the need for workforce retraining and reskilling.
• Employment Regulation in the Gig Economy: The gig economy has disrupted traditional employment relationships, leading to new challenges for labor law. Research topics in this area may explore the legal classification of gig workers, their access to labor protections and benefits, and the potential for policy reforms to address gig economy challenges.

As students explore these diverse research paper topics in labor law, they gain a deeper understanding of the complex issues that underpin modern labor practices and the legal measures designed to protect workers’ rights. From promoting workplace safety to addressing employment discrimination and adapting to the changing nature of work, the study of labor law offers an opportunity to contribute to the enhancement of labor rights and the establishment of a fair and equitable labor environment.

How to Choose a Labor Law Topic

Selecting a compelling and relevant research paper topic is a crucial step in the academic journey of law students focusing on labor law. The process of choosing the right topic requires thoughtful consideration of personal interests, academic goals, and the broader societal impact of the research. This section provides valuable insights and practical tips to help students navigate the process of choosing labor law research paper topics that are engaging, meaningful, and academically rewarding.

• Identify Your Interests: Begin the topic selection process by exploring your personal interests within the field of labor law. Reflect on the topics and issues that resonate with you the most. Whether you are passionate about workers’ rights, employment discrimination, or workplace safety, aligning your research with your interests will keep you motivated throughout the writing process.
• Conduct Background Research: Before finalizing your research paper topic, conduct thorough background research on potential subjects. Familiarize yourself with the existing literature, landmark cases, and recent developments in labor law. This exploration will not only provide you with valuable context but may also inspire fresh angles and research questions.
• Stay Informed About Current Events: Keep abreast of current events and emerging trends in labor law. Issues such as the gig economy, workplace harassment, and data privacy are constantly evolving, providing excellent opportunities for timely and relevant research topics. Being aware of the latest developments in the field will help you choose topics that address contemporary challenges.
• Consider the Scope and Feasibility: Assess the scope and feasibility of potential research paper topics. Ensure that your chosen topic is neither too broad nor too narrow, as striking the right balance is essential. A topic that is too vast may lack focus, while one that is too specific may limit your ability to find sufficient research material.
• Identify Gaps in the Literature: Look for gaps in the existing literature that your research could address. Seek out topics that provide an opportunity to contribute original insights or propose innovative solutions to labor law challenges. Contributing to the advancement of knowledge in the field will make your research paper more impactful.
• Consult with Professors and Peers: Seek guidance from professors, academic advisors, and fellow students when selecting your research paper topic. They can offer valuable perspectives, suggest relevant resources, and help refine your ideas. Collaborating with others in the field fosters a deeper understanding of labor law topics.
• Brainstorm and Narrow Down Options: Engage in brainstorming sessions to generate a list of potential research paper topics. From this list, gradually narrow down your options by evaluating each topic’s merits, research potential, and alignment with your academic interests. You may also consider creating a shortlist of topics and discussing them with your professors for further feedback.
• Consider the Practical Impact: Consider the practical implications and real-world impact of your research. Labor law is intricately linked to societal well-being, economic growth, and the protection of fundamental human rights. Choosing a topic that addresses practical challenges faced by workers and employers can enhance the relevance and significance of your research.
• Be Open to Adaptation: Remain flexible and open to adapting your research paper topic as you delve deeper into the literature. As new insights and perspectives emerge, you may find it beneficial to modify your research question or approach. Embracing flexibility allows your research to evolve organically.
• Seek Personal Connection: Lastly, choose a research paper topic that resonates with your personal values and aspirations. Labor law has a profound impact on the lives of individuals and communities. Selecting a topic that aligns with your values will foster a genuine sense of purpose and dedication to producing a meaningful and impactful research paper.

By following these practical tips, law students can navigate the process of selecting labor law research paper topics that are stimulating, relevant, and contribute to the broader discourse on labor rights and societal well-being. Embrace the journey of exploring the complexities of labor law, and let your research empower positive change in the realm of employment relationships and workplace regulations.

How to Write a Labor Law Research Paper

Writing a labor law research paper can be a rewarding experience that allows law students to delve deep into the intricacies of employment relationships and the legal framework governing workplaces. To create a compelling and well-structured labor law research paper, students should follow a systematic approach that incorporates thorough research, critical analysis, and effective writing. This section offers comprehensive guidance on how to navigate the process of writing a labor law research paper, from formulating a strong thesis statement to presenting a coherent argument.

• Develop a Clear Thesis Statement: The foundation of any successful research paper lies in a clear and concise thesis statement. A thesis statement should outline the central argument or research question of your paper. In the context of labor law, your thesis may focus on a particular aspect of workers’ rights, employment discrimination, labor unions, or workplace regulations.
• Conduct In-Depth Research: Effective research is the backbone of a well-informed labor law research paper. Utilize various reputable sources, including legal databases, academic journals, government publications, and scholarly books. Analyze landmark cases, statutory provisions, and relevant international treaties to support your arguments with authoritative evidence.
• Organize Your Paper: A well-organized structure is essential for conveying your ideas coherently. Divide your labor law research paper into sections, including an introduction, literature review, methodology (if applicable), main body, and conclusion. Ensure that each section flows logically and contributes to the overall argument.
• Address the Legal Framework: Incorporate a comprehensive analysis of the relevant legal framework into your research paper. Provide an overview of labor laws, regulations, and court decisions that pertain to your chosen topic. Analyze how these legal provisions impact workers’ rights, employer responsibilities, and labor practices.
• Engage with Case Studies: Case studies can add depth and context to your labor law research paper. Select relevant case studies that exemplify the application of labor laws in real-world scenarios. Analyze the outcomes of these cases and draw connections to broader labor law principles.
• Analyze the Historical Context: Consider the historical context of labor law to understand its evolution over time. Analyze key historical events, labor movements, and legislative changes that have shaped the current labor law landscape. Understanding the historical development of labor law will provide valuable context for your research.
• Discuss International Perspectives: Explore labor law from an international perspective. Compare labor laws and practices in different countries and examine how international treaties and conventions influence domestic labor regulations. This global outlook will enrich your research and offer a broader perspective on labor rights.
• Address Ethical Considerations: Labor law often intersects with ethical considerations. Address ethical dilemmas related to labor practices, workplace discrimination, and employer responsibilities. Reflect on the ethical implications of various labor law approaches and consider the impact on stakeholders.
• Use Clear and Concise Language: Effective communication is vital for conveying complex legal concepts. Use clear and concise language throughout your labor law research paper. Avoid jargon whenever possible and define legal terms to ensure clarity for readers.
• Edit and Revise Thoroughly: Once you have completed your labor law research paper, allocate ample time for editing and revision. Review your paper for coherence, clarity, and consistency. Check for grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and proper citation of sources. Consider seeking feedback from peers or professors to refine your paper further.

By following these guidelines, law students can produce an insightful and well-structured labor law research paper that contributes to the understanding of labor rights and the legal framework governing the world of work. Embrace the opportunity to engage with labor law intricacies, and let your research paper be a testament to your dedication to promoting fair and just labor practices.

iResearchNet’s Custom Research Paper Writing Services

At iResearchNet, we understand the complexities of labor law and the challenges that law students face when tasked with writing research papers on this subject. Our custom labor law research paper writing services are designed to provide students with professional assistance in crafting high-quality, well-researched papers that meet academic standards and exceed expectations. With a team of expert writers who hold advanced degrees in law and have extensive knowledge of labor law, we are committed to helping students excel in their academic pursuits and achieve their goals.

• Expert Degree-Holding Writers: One of the cornerstones of our custom labor law research paper writing services is our team of expert writers. Each writer is carefully selected based on their qualifications, experience, and expertise in labor law. Our writers hold advanced degrees in law, and many of them have practical experience in the legal field. This ensures that they have a deep understanding of labor law and are equipped to handle complex topics with confidence and precision.
• Custom Written Works: At iResearchNet, we believe in providing personalized solutions to our clients. When you order a custom labor law research paper from us, we take the time to understand your specific requirements and preferences. Our writers will work closely with you to develop a research paper that aligns with your unique needs and academic goals.
• In-Depth Research: Our writers are skilled researchers who know how to access and utilize reputable sources to gather relevant information for your labor law research paper. They have access to a wide range of legal databases, academic journals, and other authoritative sources to ensure that your paper is well-informed and backed by credible evidence.
• Custom Formatting: Our writers are well-versed in various citation styles, including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, and Harvard. They will format your labor law research paper according to the specified style to ensure consistency and professionalism.
• Top Quality and Originality: We take pride in delivering research papers of the highest quality. Each paper is written from scratch, following your instructions and adhering to academic standards. We guarantee originality, and every paper is thoroughly checked for plagiarism before delivery.
• Customized Solutions: Our writers are dedicated to providing custom solutions tailored to your research paper requirements. We understand that each topic and assignment is unique, and we ensure that your paper reflects your understanding of labor law and your specific research objectives.
• Flexible Pricing: We understand that students may have budget constraints, which is why we offer flexible pricing options to accommodate your needs. Our pricing is competitive and transparent, with no hidden fees.
• Short Deadlines: We are equipped to handle urgent orders and can deliver high-quality labor law research papers with short deadlines, providing you with the necessary support when you are pressed for time.
• Timely Delivery: We understand the importance of meeting deadlines, and our team is committed to delivering your labor law research paper on time. Whether you have a short deadline or a more extended timeframe, you can rely on us to deliver your paper promptly.
• 24/7 Support: Our customer support team is available 24/7 to assist you with any queries or concerns you may have. Whether you need updates on your order or have questions about our services, our friendly and knowledgeable support staff are here to help.
• Absolute Privacy: We prioritize the confidentiality and privacy of our clients. Your personal information and order details are kept secure and will never be shared with third parties.
• Easy Order Tracking: With our user-friendly platform, you can easily track the progress of your labor law research paper and communicate with your assigned writer. This transparency allows you to stay informed and involved throughout the writing process.
• Money Back Guarantee: We are confident in the quality of our services, and we offer a money-back guarantee to provide you with peace of mind. If you are not satisfied with the final paper, we will refund your payment.

With iResearchNet’s custom labor law research paper writing services, you can focus on mastering the concepts of labor law while leaving the research and writing to our skilled professionals. Let us help you achieve academic success and submit a labor law research paper that reflects your knowledge and dedication to the field of law. Place your order today and experience the difference of working with a trusted and reliable research paper writing service.

Empower Your Labor Law Research with iResearchNet

Are you struggling to find the right labor law research paper topic or feeling overwhelmed by the complexities of the subject? Look no further! iResearchNet is here to empower you on your academic journey and provide the support you need to excel in your labor law studies. Our comprehensive range of services is designed to make the research and writing process smooth, efficient, and successful. Whether you need assistance in choosing a captivating research topic, crafting a well-structured paper, or meeting tight deadlines, we’ve got you covered.

Let iResearchNet be your trusted partner in labor law research. Our custom research paper writing services are tailored to help you succeed in your academic journey and make a lasting impact in the field of labor law. Embrace the opportunity to deepen your understanding of labor rights, workplace justice, and legal principles with the support of our expert team.

Empower your labor law research today with iResearchNet’s custom writing services. Embrace the opportunity to excel in your academic pursuits and present a labor law research paper that reflects your dedication and expertise in this essential field. Place your order now and unlock the full potential of your labor law research with iResearchNet. Together, let’s make a difference in the realm of labor law!

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

share this!

March 25, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Study finds political beliefs shape the way the public interprets history

by City University London

Research shows that when exploring attitudes in the U.S., UK, Italy, South Africa, Mexico, and Poland—countries with different economies, cultures and political regimes (past and present)—right- compared to left-wing supporters evaluated the past more positively.

The data reveal that, in part, this occurs because right-wing supporters are more nostalgic about tradition. While the right looked more favorably to the past, in the U.S. and Poland (and potentially in the UK too), the left was more optimistic about what humanity can potentially achieve in the future. Though these observations indicate that political opinions matter when people consider the past and the future, the study found no difference in how people on the right versus left evaluate the present.

Published in the journal Political Psychology , the paper shows that how history is interpreted is central not only to political elites but also to lay people reporting divergent political opinions. These findings are particularly relevant today, given the number of prominent election campaigns taking place this year.

Politics and history

When looking at classical political texts, one realizes that the way history is interpreted is one of the major aspects. Marxism, for example, offers a view of history where, following original communism characterizing ancient hunter-gatherer societies, new economic systems replace old ones, with class conflict being common to all. This process is believed to culminate in a new age of communism, where economic scarcity is finally overcome and class conflict ends.

As another example, central to many classical liberal writings is the idea that, before civilization emerged, mankind lived in a state of nature where individuals survived without being part of an institutionalized community. History is central to fascist ideology too, where people are mobilized towards a struggle to recreate a mythical past during which the folk expressed all its power and glory.

As these examples illustrate, the pivotal role of history in the thinking of political elites is well established. This raises the following question: is history interpreted differently also by laypeople with divergent political opinions?

Assessing history

To understand more about how history is assessed by lay people reporting different political orientations, Dr. Francesco Rigoli, Reader in the Department of Psychology at City, conducted an online study with 1,200 participants from the U.S., the UK, Italy, South Africa, Mexico, and Poland where, in addition to reporting their positioning on a left-right political spectrum, participants evaluated the recent past (i.e., the period ranging from 1950 to 2000), the present, and the near future (i.e., society in 25 years).

The data show that, in all countries, right- compared to left-wing supporters evaluated the past as more positive. To elucidate this effect, a second study manipulated the appraisal of the past between groups, but found that this did not influence participants' political ideas.

A third study manipulated the prominence of political opinions between groups. Here, the high-prominence group displayed a stronger link between political ideas and evaluation of the past, indicating that embracing certain political opinions encourages a specific interpretation of the past.

Exploring the factors mediating this effect, one last study found that nostalgia for tradition partially explains why right-wing supporters cherish the past more.

Dr. Rigoli said, "It is remarkable that the rhetoric employed by politicians often evokes images of the past or visions of the future, such as the recent slogans of Barack Obama ('Yes we can') and Donald Trump ('Let's make America great again'). I wanted to explore whether these messages resonate with the general public by exploring whether people on the right of the political spectrum appraise the past, present, and future differently from people on the left.

"My observations indicate that a better appraisal of the past distinguishes the right from the left, an effect evident in all nations and thus reflecting a general phenomenon. Moreover, the data suggest that this does not arise because people with a better opinion about the past are attracted towards the right, but rather because the right-wing ideology provides a framework to interpret the past as being a better age.

"This suggests that nostalgia for tradition might mediate this effect, at least partially: people on the right report a longing for tradition, for hierarchical order, and for family connections, which they attribute to the recent past.

"The analyses also reveal that left-wing supporters believe that human actions can make a difference: their opinion is that, if appropriate choices are made, the future can improve substantially. However, the left's optimism was evident only in the U.S., Poland and possibly the UK, indicating that this is not a general phenomenon.

"These observations may help to clarify why people on the right often resist change: this may occur not much because they like the present, but, rather, because they like the past and they may view change as being a further step away from the past."

Provided by City University London

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Scientists discover how caterpillars can stop their bleeding in seconds

3 hours ago

Genetic secrets from 4,000-year-old teeth illuminate the impact of changing human diets over the centuries

4 hours ago

Advancing towards sustainability: Turning carbon dioxide and water into acetylene

Rock-wallabies are 'little Napoleons' when biting, thus compensating for their small size

New genetic analysis tool tracks risks tied to CRISPR edits

11 hours ago

Researchers show that introduced tardigrade proteins can slow metabolism in human cells

Examining the delicate balance of lepton flavors

Elephant hunting by early humans may explain proximity between extensive Paleolithic stone quarries and water sources

Behavior of ant queens found to be shaped by their social environments

Sleeping supermassive black holes awakened briefly by shredded stars

12 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Metal, rock, instrumental rock and fusion.

21 hours ago

Interesting anecdotes in the history of physics?

22 hours ago

Who should have been the 4th laureate in the Nobel Prize in Physics?

Mar 25, 2024

Cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better?

Mar 22, 2024

For WW2 buffs!

Who is your favorite jazz musician and what is your favorite song.

Mar 20, 2024

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

How political nostalgia predicts political outcomes

Jul 27, 2021

Nostalgia—a rhetorical tool for populists and the radical right

Oct 27, 2022

Nostalgia in politics: Study sheds light on how (and why) parties appeal to the past in their election campaigns

Nov 21, 2023

Are American voters really as polarized as they seem? Research suggests 'yes'

Feb 20, 2024

Republicans and Democrats consider each other immoral. Even when treated fairly and kindly by the opposition

Feb 1, 2024

Extreme political advertising can hurt campaign efforts

Dec 15, 2020

Recommended for you

Survey study shows workers with more flexibility and job security have better mental health

18 hours ago

We have revealed a unique time capsule of Australia's first coastal people from 50,000 years ago

Prestigious journals make it hard for scientists who don't speak English to get published, study finds

Mar 23, 2024

Using Twitter/X to promote research findings found to have little impact on number of citations

Exploration—not work—could be key to a vibrant local economy

New study suggests that while social media changes over decades, conversation dynamics stay the same

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

Articles on Eclipse April 8, 2024

Displaying all articles.

Photographing the eclipse? You’ll join a long history of people seeking proof of experience

Amy Friend , Brock University and Keri Cronin , Brock University

Total solar eclipses provide an opportunity to engage with science, culture and history

Nikhil Arora , Queen's University, Ontario and Mark Richardson , Queen's University, Ontario

Archeoastronomy uses the rare times and places of previous total solar eclipses to help us measure history

Sarah Sadavoy , Queen's University, Ontario

Related Topics

• Science communication
• Solar eclipse
• Total eclipse
• Total solar eclipse

Top contributors

Assistant Professor, Physics, Engineering Physics & Astronomy, Queen's University, Ontario

Manager for Education and Public Outreach, Adjunct Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Queen's University, Ontario

Postdoctoral fellow, Physics, Engineering Physics & Astronomy, Queen's University, Ontario

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

In paleontology, correct names are keys to accurate study

Researcher resolves historical inconsistencies in name of popular fossil.

When the skeletal remains of a giant ground sloth were first unearthed in 1796, the discovery marked one of the earliest paleontological finds in American history.

The animal, named Megalonyx by Thomas Jefferson in 1799, was the first genus of fossil named from the United States. Thought to have roamed North America during one of the last ice ages, the extinct giant ground sloth was an herbivorous mammal resembling a large bear -- at full size, it likely reached nearly 10 feet tall (3 meters) and weighed about as much as a small elephant.

The report made by Jefferson, an avid fossil collector who was known to keep bones at the White House, was among the earliest papers in the scientific field that would eventually become paleontology, and may have played a role in the development of certain zoological naming conventions.

Though Jefferson named only the genus Megalonyx, public misinterpretation of the spelling of the scientific name began with the second published paper on this giant ground sloth. Later on, confusion about the true author and timing of the report caused paleontologists to debate over what the specimen's true name should be.

In an effort to settle the dispute, Loren Babcock, a professor of earth sciences at The Ohio State University, reviewed the nomenclatural history of the animal and argues that misinterpretation or spelling errors of the original harm the scientific process and disregard the importance of early paleontological work.

In an article published recently in the journal ZooKeys , Babcock asserts that since Jefferson fulfilled all the necessary requirements for establishing the formal zoological name of the giant ground sloth, he should be recognized as the true author of the genus. And because Jefferson's original moniker was spelled as Megalonyx, any other subsequent spellings of the name, like some that utilize the -onix suffix, are incorrect. Additionally, the report notes that the original spelling of the animal's species-group name, Megalonyx jeffersonii, is only correct when written with an - ii ending.

"At the time, there were no standards for publication of new names in zoology," said Babcock. "There was a binomial system of nomenclature, a genus and species name that would be attached to things, but there were no rules other than that."

Today, when a new species is discovered, scientists give it a name with two parts: The first name describes the animal's genus, or group, and the second is its species name. Until the mid-1800s, it was common practice to label animals with only a genus name, which is how Jefferson's original paper described Megalonyx. Although his observations were published more than a quarter century before paleontology was considered a formal science, it does meet modern naming requirements -- meaning his authorship of it is valid, said Babcock.

"We have rules in science just like we do in other aspects of our culture," said Babcock. "They ensure that the correct procedures are followed and we can give credit where it is due."

Resolving some of these long-standing issues is important, Babcock said, and it's worth setting the record straight. "I want to set the original usage in stone because Jefferson had done it correctly from the start," said Babcock. "It's pretty black and white. There's not much room for ambiguity when you go back and read the original manuscripts."

In the long run, having strict naming conventions also helps scientists accurately document the history of life on Earth, because what paleontologists choose to call a specimen can have profound implications for how it's studied and how those findings are communicated.

Megalonyx jeffersonii , for instance, was initially mistaken as a carnivore when its "giant claw" was compared to that of a large African lion. Jefferson soon corrected this, but his initial observations of the giant ground sloth's remains contributed to the way that Megalonyx would later be reconstructed and influenced some of the earliest developments of the discipline, and earned him the title of father of American paleontology, said Babcock.

Decades later, the first relatively complete skeleton of Megalonyx jeffersonii was found in 1890 in Holmes County, Ohio. "This skeleton has had a major impact on the history of science," Babcock said. "It's really influenced so much of the perception of paleontology and paleontological art over time."

Asone of the earliest free-standing prehistoric specimens to be mounted and displayed in an American museum, it's been used as a unique learning tool for past and future paleontologists alike. It was also a model that was later applied for dinosaur skeleton reconstructions, said Babcock. This popularity has led many other versions of Megalonyx jeffersonii to appear across digital media and pop culture throughout the past century, most notably in the "Ice Age" films as Sid the ground sloth.

Today, the reconstructed skeleton of Megalonyx jeffersonii resides in Ohio State's Orton Geological Museum, where it has been on display since April 13, 1896. And for decades, it's been known by many as simply "Jeff" for short.

Although few truly know all the details of its backstory, Babcock, who is the current director of the Orton Museum, remains confident that the legacy of Thomas Jefferson's Megalonyx jeffersonii will stand tall for centuries to come.

"Understanding the history of paleontology casts light not just on the evolution of organisms, but on the evolution of science and how we interpret that evolutionary history," he said. "So names are something that I think historians will always pay attention to."

• New Species
• Wild Animals
• Paleontology
• Early Climate
• Ancient DNA
• Archaeopteryx
• Recent single-origin hypothesis
• Skeletal muscle
• Homo ergaster
• Giant Panda

Story Source:

Materials provided by Ohio State University . Original written by Tatyana Woodall. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Loren E. Babcock. Nomenclatural history of Megalonyx Jefferson, 1799 (Mammalia, Xenarthra, Pilosa, Megalonychidae) . ZooKeys , 2024; 1195: 297 DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.1195.117999

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• Could Tardigrade Proteins Slow Aging in Humans?
• Supermassive Black Holes Awakened
• Beethoven's Genes: Low Beat Synchronization
• Common Household Chemicals Threat to Brain?
• Tiniest 'Starquake' Ever Detected
• Amazing Archive of Ancient Human Brains
• Night-Time Light and Stroke Risk
• Toward Secure Quantum Communication Globally
• Artificial Nanofluidic Synapses: Memory
• 49 New Galaxies Discovered in Under Three Hours

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.

History, Latin America

• Background Sources
• Primary Sources at USC Libraries
• External Primary Source Databases
• Oral Histories
• Citing Sources
• Evaluate Sources

This research guide compiles resources related to Latin American History. Use the side navigation to locate background, scholarly, and primary sources for your research needs. We have compiled resources available through USC Libraries and in the larger community. Included you will find research strategies and additional ways to get help from a librarian . 

Top Resources

• Next: Background Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 26, 2024 12:56 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/HistoryLatAm