Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exclusive representation and american industrial democracy: An historical reappraisal

  • Symposium Exclusivity Of Union Representation In The Public Sector
  • Published:
Journal of Labor Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Exclusive representation in the public sector has been defended on the basis of private sector experience, which purportedly demonstrates that stable, orderly, peaceful collective bargaining is otherwise impossible or impracticable. Nevertheless, nonexclusive collective bargaining was the norm in most industrial nations when the Wagner Act was passed in the 1930s, and it still is the rule outside the U.S. Historical evidence is presented for the thesis that exclusivity was adopted in the private sector primarily in order to pave the way for a corporative state. Peaceful, orderly collective bargaining by “responsible” unions in a competitive economy was a minor, secondary consideration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adair v.United States, 208 U.S. 161 (1908).

  • Arias, Gino. “Trade Union Reform in Italy.”International Labour Review 14 (September 1926): 345–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, Edward. “The Supreme Court Interprets the Railway Labor Act.”American Economic Review 20 (December 1930): 619–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, Irving.The New Deal Collective Bargaining Policy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottai, H.E. Giuseppe. “Trade Union Organization in Italy.”International Labor Review 15 (June 1927): 815–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, Ralph.German Theories of the Corporative State. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Kurt.The Right to Organize and Its Limits. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brissenden, Paul F. “Genesis and Impact of the Collective Bargaining Provisions of the Recovery Act.” InEconomic Essays in Honor of Wesley Clair Mitchell. New York: Columbia University Press, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter v.Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 (1936).

  • Chamberlain, Neil. “The Organized Business in America.”Journal of Political Economy 52 (June 1944): 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___.The Union Challenge to Management Control. New York: Harper, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Julius.An American Labor Policy. New York: Macmillan, 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “Collective Bargaining and the Law as a Basis for Industrial Reorganization.”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 90 (July 1920): 47–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___.Law and Order in Industry. New York: Macmillan, 1916.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commons, John R. “Is Class Conflict in America Growing and Is It Inevitable?”American Journal of Sociology 13 (May 1908): 756–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___. “Representation of Interests.”The Independent 52 (June 1900): 1479–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condliffe, J.B. “Experiments in State Control in New Zealand.”International Labour Review 9 (March 1924): 334–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coppage v.Kansas, 236 U.S. 1 (1915).

  • Croly, Herbert.Progressive Democracy. New York: Macmillan, 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___.The Promise of American Life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965 [1912].

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutscher, Isaac.Soviet Trade Unions: Their Place in Soviet Labour Policy. New York: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, William.Labor and Socialism in America: The Gompers Era. Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duguit, Leon. “Collective Acts as Distinguished from Contracts,”Yale Law Journal 27 (1918): 753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___. “The Concept of Public Service.”Yale Law Journal 32 (1923): 425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___. “Law and the State: French and German Doctrines.”Harvard Law Review 31 (1917): 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ___.Les Transformations du Droit Public. Translated by Harold Laski asLaw in the Modern State. New York: B.W. Huebsch, 1919 [1913].

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “Objective Law.”Columbia Law Review 20–21 (1920–1921): 817, 17, 126, 242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, W. Y.The Pragmatic Revolt in Politics: Syndicalism, Fascism, and the Constitutional State. New York: Macmillan, 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farr, Grant N.The Origins of Recent Labor Legislation. Boulder: University of Colorado Press, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, G. Lowell.The Syndical and Corporative Institutions of Italian Fascism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findlay, John B. “Industrial Peace in New Zealand.”International Labour Review 4 (October 1921): 32–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, Sidney. “Proportional Representation of Workers in the Auto Industry, 1934–1935.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 12 (January 1959): 182–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, Clyde. “Use of Federal Power in Settlement of Railway Labor Disputes.” United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,Bulletin 303. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, Ralph. “Collective Labor Agreements in German Law.”St. Louis Law Review 15 (1929): 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “The French Law of Collective Labor Agreements.”Yale Law Journal 41 (1932): 1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galenson, Walter.Rival Unionism in the United States. New York: American Council on Public Affairs, 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, Lloyd. “7 (a) and the Future.”Survey Graphic 24 (February 1935): 53–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geldart, W.N. “The Present Law of Trade Disputes and Trade Unions.”Political Quarterly 1914 (reprinted by Oxford University Press, 1914).

  • ___ “Status of Trade Unions in England.”Harvard Law Review 25 (1912): 579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gompers, Samuel. “An Analysis of Fascism.”American Federationist 30 (November 1923): 927–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___.Labor and the Common Welfare. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___.Labor and the Employer. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronlund, Lawrence.The New Economy: A Peaceable Solution of the Social Problem. Chicago: Herbert Stone, 1898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, James A.The Making of the National Labor Relations Board Volume I (1933–1937). Albany: State University of New York Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, Arthur T. “Economic Theory and Political Morality: Presidential Address.” American Economic Association,Publications, 3rd Series, 1 (February 1900): 45–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamburger, L. “The Extension of Collective Agreements to Cover Entire Trades and Industries.”International Labour Review 40 (August 1939): 153–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, Henry. “A New Province for Law and Order: Industrial Peace Through Minimum Wage and Arbitration.”Harvard Law Review 29 (1915): 13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Labour Conference.Methods of Collaboration Between the Public Authorities, Workers’ Organizations, and Employers Organizations. Geneva: International Labour Office, 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Labour Office.Freedom of Association. Studies and Reports, Series A: Industrial Relations, Nos. 28-32. Geneva: International Labour Office, 1927–1930.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___.The Trade Union Movement in Soviet Russia. London: P.S. King, 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.I. Case Co. v.NLRB, 321 U.S. 332 (1944).

  • Kahn-Freund, Otto, ed.Labor Relations and the Law: A Comparative Study. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klaus, Ida. “Labor Relations in the Public Service: Exploration and Experiment.”Syracuse Law Review 10 (1959): 183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauck, William Jett.The Industrial Code. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Rossignol, James E. and William D. Stewart.State Socialism in New Zealand. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, Henry Demarest.A Country Without Strikes: A Visit to the Compulsory Arbitration Court of New Zealand. New York: Doubleday, Page, 1900.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “Australasian Cures for Coal Wars.”Atlantic Monthly 90 (November 1902):667–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “A Visit to the Compulsory Arbitration Court of New Zealand.”The Outlook 63 (December 9, 1899): 877–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___.Labor Copartnership. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1898.

    Google Scholar 

  • ___. “New Zealand Newest England.”Atlantic Monthly 84 (December 1899): 789–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorwin, Lewis and Arthur Wubnig.Labor Relations Boards: The Regulation of Collective Bargaining Under the National Industrial Recovery Act. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorwin, Val. “Reflections on the History of the French and American Labor Movements.”Journal of Economic History 17 (1957): 25–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loth, David.Swope of G.E.. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lusk, H.H.Social Welfare in New Zealand: The Result of Twenty Years of Progressive Social Legislation and Its Significance for the United States and Other Countries. New York: Sturgis and Walton, 1913.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, Leverett, et al.The National Recovery Administration: An Analysis and Appraisla. Washington: Brookings Institution, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBain, Howard Lee and Lindsay Rogers.The New Constitutions of Europe. New York: Doubleday, Page, and Co., 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCrosty, Henry. “State Arbitration and the Minimum Wage in Australasia.”Political Science Quarterly 23 (March 1903): 112–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millis, Harry A. and Emily Clark Brown.From the Wagner Act to Taft-Hartley. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • NLRB v.Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation, 301 U.S. 1 (1937).

  • Northup, Herbert. “Unfair Labor Practice Prevention Under the Railway Labor Act.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review 3 (April 1950): 323–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Note. “Labor Relations in the Public Service.”Harvard Law Review 75 (1961): 383.

  • Note. “Municipal Employment Relations in Wisconsin: The Extension of Private Labor Relations Devices into Municipal Employment.”Wisconsin Law Review (1965): 671.

  • Note. “Union Activity in Public Employment.”Columbia Law Review 55 (1955): 343.

  • Parsons, Frank. “Compulsory Arbitration.”Arena 17 (March 1897): 663–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling, Henry.Labour and Politics, 1900–1906. London: Macmillan, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennsylvania Railroad Company v.Railroad Labor Board, 261 U.S. 72 (1923).

  • Petro, Sylvester. “Civil Liberty, Syndicalism, and the NLRA.”University of Toledo Law Review 5 (1974): 447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumb, Glen and William Roylance.Industrial Democracy: A Plan for Its Achievement. New York: B.W. Huebsch, 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radosh, Ronald. “The Corporate Ideology of American Labor Leaders from Gompers to Hillman.”Studies on the Left 6 (November–December 1966): 66–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, Nathan.Labor Relations in Republican Germany. New York: Oxford University Press, 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, Philip.The Government as a Source of Union Power. Providence: Brown University Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, John A. “A Country Without Strikes.”Catholic World 72 (November 1900): 145–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, Minier. “Majority Rule in Collective Bargaining Under Section 7 (a).”Illinois Law Review 29 (1934): 275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schechter Poultry Corporation v.United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935).

  • Schlabach, Theron.Edwin Witte, Cautious Reformer. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin Press, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, Herbert.Making the Fascist State. New York: H. Fertig, 1968 [1928].

    Google Scholar 

  • Seager, Henry Rogers. “The Legal Status of Trade Unions in the United Kingdom, With Conclusions Applicable to the United States.”Political Science Quarterly 22 (December 1907): 611–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidman, Joel. “State Legislation on Collective Bargaining by Public Employees.”Labor Law Journal 22 (1971): 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, James T.The Career of Lujo Brentano: A Study of Liberalism and Social Reform in Imperial Germany. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Russell A. “State and Local Advisory Reports on Public Employment Labor Legislation: A Comparative Analysis.”Michigan Law Review 67 (1969): 891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, William H.Collective Bargaining Under Section 7(a) of the National Industrial Recovery Act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spero, Sterling.Government as Employer. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972 [1948].

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturmthal, Adolf. ed.Contemporary Collective Bargaining in Seven Countries. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Summers, Clyde. “Union Powers and Workers’ Rights.”Michigan Law Review 49 (1951): 805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Texas and New Orleans Railroad Company v.Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, 281 U.S. 548 (1930).

  • Tillyard, F. and W.A. Robson. “Enforcement of the Collective Bargain in the United Kingdom.”The Economic Journal 48 (March 1938): 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S., Commission on Industrial Relations.Final Report. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1915.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S., National Labor Relations Board.Decisions of the National Labor Board, August 1933–March 1934. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____.Decisions of the National Labor Relations Board, July 9, 1934–December 1934. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____.Legislative History of the National Labor Relations Act, 1935. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1949. 2 Vols.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viglione, Raffaello, et al.The Structure of the Corporate State. Translated and abridged by Anna Waring. London: The British Empire Fascist Party, 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virginia Railway v.System 40, Railway Employees, 300 U.S. 515 (1937).

  • Waks, Jay. “The Privilege of Exclusive Recognition and Minority Union Rights in Public Employment.”Cornell Law Review 55 (1970): 1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walling, William English.American Labor and American Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyand, Ruth. “Majority Rule in Collective Bargaining.”Columbia Law Review 45 (1945): 556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte, Edwin.The Government in Labor Disputes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, Frieda.Labor Under German Democracy: Arbitration, 1918–1933. New York: New School for Social Research, 1940.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 10016, New York, NY

    Howard Dickman (Contributing Editor, Harper’s Magazine)

Authors
  1. Howard Dickman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Editor’s Note: This Symposium was jointly sponsored by theJournal of Labor Research and the National Institute for Labor Relations Research and was held February 10, 1984 at the Westpark Hotel, Rosslyn, Virginia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dickman, H. Exclusive representation and american industrial democracy: An historical reappraisal. Journal of Labor Research 5, 325–350 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02685087

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02685087

Keywords

Search

Navigation