This paper examines the Republican Party's efforts to restrict organized labor and undermine the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in the early 2010s. It traces the history of the American labor movement from the 19th century through the passage of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, then analyzes GOP strategies at both the state and national levels. State-level battles in Wisconsin and Ohio illustrate the public backlash against anti-union legislation, while national tactics — including legislative attacks on the NLRB, the Boeing Corporation dispute, and efforts to prevent a board quorum — demonstrate a coordinated Republican effort to curtail collective bargaining rights. The paper concludes by considering the political implications for the 2012 presidential election.
The paper demonstrates multi-level policy analysis: it disaggregates Republican anti-union strategy into state-level and national-level components, then treats each level with distinct evidence. This layered approach allows the author to show both the breadth and the coherence of the GOP's strategy rather than treating individual incidents as isolated events.
The paper opens with a historical introduction establishing the NLRB's origins, then dedicates a section each to Wisconsin and Ohio as state-level case studies. It transitions to national legislative battles, with a focused subsection on the Boeing case. A synthesis section identifies three distinct GOP tactics before a concluding section raises unanswered questions about Democratic counter-strategy and labor's long-term political role. An annotated bibliography closes the paper.
This paper explores the state of the current relationship between the Republican Party and the labor movement in the United States. The first section briefly traces the history of the labor movement and the passage of the National Labor Relations Act and the emergence of the National Labor Relations Board. The second section discusses the GOP's strategy at the state level, with special attention paid to Wisconsin and Ohio. The third section discusses the GOP's strategy at the national level with respect to their attacks on the National Labor Relations Board — focusing specifically on the House's refusal to appoint or approve new board members and their passage of the Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act. Finally, the paper explores the future prospects of union-busting strategies and their implications for the Republican Party heading into a presidential election year.
A union is a group of workers who have organized themselves so that they can negotiate with employers in a united manner (Dubofsky, 1991). Unions emerged in America when the country began to move from agriculture — where most Americans were self-employed — to an industrial economy where many people began to work for wages. The modern labor movement is generally said to have begun during Franklin D. Roosevelt's efforts to end the Great Depression through the New Deal proposals (Dubofsky, 2011).
Until the 1800s it was rare to find a union in the United States. The first union in the U.S. was the Carpenters' Union of Philadelphia, founded in 1724 (Zieger, 2002). It was not until the 1930s and 1940s that significant numbers of the workforce became union members. In the years since the 1960s, union membership has declined — nowadays only about 7% of the workforce consists of union members (Devaney, 2011).
Unions use their ability to strike as leverage to reach agreements with employers about fair wages, safe working conditions, and benefits (Levi, 2003). They are protected by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which was created through the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA). The NLRB is the regulatory agency that governs, in part, labor violations in America. Unions turn to the NLRB for support against employers who violate the fair labor practice provisions of the NLRA. The NLRA also provides guidance on union elections and empowers the NLRB to pursue companies that violate labor laws (Zieger, 2002).
In the earlier part of November 2011, the Republican Party appeared to have underestimated the American public's commitment to and support of its labor unions. In Ohio — a state that had been very supportive of Republicans during the 2010 midterm elections — the public struck down a law that attempted to limit the ability of union members to use the collective bargaining tactics established by the National Labor Relations Act (Tavernise, 2011). There was little ambiguity in the sentiments of Ohio's citizens. Governor John R. Kasich, a Republican, had actively advocated the curtailing of union power as a budget-reducing measure in the spring of 2011 (Tavernise, 2011).
It became clear that the public would respond to the passage of the law. Had it been allowed to stand, the legislation would have eliminated the ability of unions in Ohio to bargain collectively or to strike, and would have severely weakened their influence in state elections. According to Tavernise (2011), during the first week of November, Ohio moved to repeal the union-busting legislation — the measure passed by "62% to 38%." The overwhelming majority of the state elected to preserve union collective bargaining rights. Notably, members of law enforcement agencies, who are often the bedrock of the Republican Party in Midwestern states, voted overwhelmingly to repeal the anti-union legislation (Tavernise, 2011).
The anti-union legislation in Wisconsin originated in the proposed budget of Governor Scott Walker (Moberg, 2011). The budget would have eliminated collective bargaining rights and limited even the formation of new unions. Additionally, it would have restricted the ability of existing unions to renegotiate wage increases. Support for the protesters opposing Walker's budget came from teachers' unions, law enforcement officials, and many others in between (Moberg, 2011). In the wake of the budget's passage, Wisconsin's citizens mobilized in significant numbers.
In Wisconsin, the public went even further than the citizens of Ohio. Alongside efforts to repeal the anti-union legislation, Wisconsin initiated recall elections in response to the anti-union laws (Buhle, 2011). With leadership from the state Democratic Party and volunteers energized by their support for unions, recall petition drives moved into high gear. Petitions to recall six Republican senators and three Democrats were filed (Moberg, 2011). Numerous elections were set for July 12, 2012, including a recall election for Governor Scott Walker himself.
In recent months, the House passed two bills intended to directly curtail and restrict the reach of the National Labor Relations Board. Republican leaders had begun calling the NLRB "a rogue agency." The two measures — known as the Protect Jobs From Government Interference Act of 2011 and the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act — were unlikely to survive the Democrat-controlled Senate (Devaney, 2011). They remained important, however, because they served as a continued warning to the Obama administration of the GOP's commitment to disrupt the work of the NLRB if it ruled too favorably toward unions. Republican members of the House repeatedly vowed to stall the appointment of any new NLRB members (Harold, 2011).
On September 5, 2011, Capitol Briefs reported that House Republicans were urging the Republican member of the NLRB to resign (Capital Briefs, 2011). The previous year, the Supreme Court had ruled that the NLRB needed at least three members to continue issuing decisions on labor violations (Devaney, 2011). At that time, the board consisted of three members — two Democrats and one Republican. The Republican member had already used the threat of resignation to roll back some of the language proposed by the NLRB that summer. The proposed ruling was intended to protect unions by limiting employers' ability to interfere with union votes through prolonged litigation (Devaney, 2011).
In response to the NLRB's ruling to guarantee that union votes proceed before litigation begins in the courts, the House passed the Workforce Democracy Act of 2011. This bill attempted to circumvent the NLRB's decision by stating that legal challenges to union elections could proceed before the unions could vote. The bill itself was used primarily as a rebuke to the NLRB — it had little chance of passing the Senate and becoming law. It did, however, serve to weaken the language the NLRB used in its final ruling (Devaney, 2011). Even though the Democratic members scaled back the language of the ruling — prompting elections to be held within 35 days rather than immediately — the Republican NLRB member still rejected the modified proposal, though he agreed to remain on the board (Devaney, 2011).
It is clear that the Republican Party had a clearly articulated, cohesive national strategy addressing labor and unions. On the other hand, the Democratic Party appeared to be represented by individual unions at the state level and other individual actors and volunteers working to uphold labor rights in America. It will be interesting to observe how the conversation shifted in the lead-up to the 2012 presidential elections. Would the GOP continue to dominate the national conversation about the role of unions in the future of the American labor market? Would the Democratic Party ever articulate a national strategy on par with the GOP's — one that involved legislation, litigation, and active fundraising at both the national and state levels? The answer remained unclear.
What could be said, however, is that unions would not be slinking away silently. As Devaney (2011) observes, "exit polling over the past 30 years shows that unionized white working-class men vote Democratic at a rate 20% higher than their non-union counterparts." Even if significantly disempowered, organized labor remains a loud and influential constituency — one that both parties must continue to consider in their political strategies.
Buhle, P. (2011). Wisconsin's cheese-head revolt. New Politics, 13(3), 27–30. Retrieved from
Devaney, T. (2011). House rebukes labor board in effort to check rogue agency. The Washington Times. Retrieved from
Devaney, T. (2011). Boeing pact sidesteps NLRB suit. The Washington Times. Retrieved from
Dubofsky, M. (1991). The origins of the labor movement in the United States: Themes from the nineteenth century. Pennsylvania History, 58(4), 269–277. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org. This article provides an overview of the origins of labor in the United States. It includes discussion about the history of unions, the emergence of strikes, and the changing relationships between the courts, union members, unions, and federal agencies.
Green, W. (1940). Should Congress curb the powers of the National Labor Relations Board? Pro. Congressional Digest, 19(3), 77–80. The importance of this article lies in the fact that it dates from the Congressional Digests of 1940. It illustrates that the conversation about unions and the NLRB is one that the nation has been having for multiple generations.
Levi, M. (2003). Organizing power: The prospects for an American labor movement. Perspectives on Politics, 1(1), 45–68. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org. This article provides an in-depth look at the future possibilities of the American labor movement by tracing, in part, its historical emergence.
Moberg, D. (2011). Wisconsin: From protest to movement. American Prospect, 22(6), 30–34. Retrieved from
Schieber, S. (2011). The fallacy of union busting. Washington Monthly, 43(5/6), 30–33. This article challenges the Republican assertion that unions are expensive and that curtailing their influence would save the public money. Schieber argues that the problem is not unions but rather government pension funds that are continuously borrowed against. He reframes the pro-and-con labor debate around fiscal considerations.
(2011, September 16). Boeing is not the poster child for overregulation. St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Syndicated column addressing national issues including labor and unions.
National Labor Relations Act of 1935, 29 U.S.C. §§ 151–169 (2011). Legal Information Institute. Retrieved from The National Labor Relations Act, codified in the United States Code, is the principal law governing labor disputes in the United States — along with opinions produced by the federal courts and the NLRB. The Cornell Legal Information Institute provides digital versions of many of the more important U.S. laws and legal documents.
Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act of 2011, H.R. 2587, 112th Cong. (2011). Retrieved from The full text of this as-yet-unenacted law is available on the Library of Congress website. The bill is brief — containing only three sections — but is notable both for its content and its specific language, as well as for its sponsors. It was introduced by, among others, congressional representatives from South Carolina, the state that stood to lose the most if the NLRB continued to prosecute Boeing Corporation for labor violations.
Tavernise, S. (2011, November 8). Ohio turns back a law limiting union's rights. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/us/politics/ohio-turns-back-a-law-limiting-unions-rights.html. Tavernise succinctly covers the bipartisan nature of the resistance to the GOP's efforts against unions in Ohio.
The Workforce Democracy Act of 2011, H.R. 3094, 112th Cong. (2011). The Workforce Democracy Act of 2011 is the proposed law passed by the House on November 30, 2011.
United States National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). (2011). The NLRB process. Retrieved from The National Labor Relations Board's website contains extensive information pertaining to the board's duties and mission. The site houses a copy of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and its subsequent amendments, an explanation of the NLRB's duties, its dispute resolution process, directions for filing a complaint, and an overview of the life cycle of labor law violations.
Zieger, R. H., & Hall, G. J. (2002). American workers, American unions: The twentieth century (pp. 13–56). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Zieger and Hall catalogue the history of the American labor movement beginning with an examination of unregulated industry in the first quarter of the twentieth century. They trace the rise and fall of the labor movement, including the emergence of strikes, legal battles, the intersection of race and labor, and the state of labor in the United States at the start of the 21st century, providing an extensive historical and legal overview of the unions' rise.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.