Your search

[The author] brings to the pages of this journal two closely intertwined debates regarding the meaning of social movement unionism and strategies for rebuilding labour movement power in Canada and the United States. It offers an important overview of this debate and raises critical points about the meaning and place of union democracy. The author provides a pertinent critique of the “organizing unionism” “model” that has emerged in the United States. It also serves as a useful foil for distinguishing greater member participation of the sort called for by the organizing model from greater member control.

The article reviews the book, "Union Revitalisation in Advanced Economies: Assessing the Contribution of Union Organising," edited by Gregor Gall.

As many of the traditionally unionized sectors of the economy experience crisis, unions are turning to social unionist strategies of coalition-building and community mobilization as a means of defending jobs through external solidarity. This paper explores the politics and dynamics of the Canadian Auto Workers' (caw) organization of a union-community coalition and rally in Windsor, Ontario as a means of defending the manufacturing base. The paper contends that while Windsor's May 2007 Manufacturing Matters rally was quite successful in its short-term aims, due to the caw's strong mobilizing structures and longstanding relationships between local unions and community organizations, internal coalition dynamics and framing processes led to decisions which limited the longer-term capacities of the campaign. The coalition opted to emphasize place over class as the unifying element, to produce non-adversarial discourses and tactics so as to avoid appearing anti-business, and to marginalize more militant talk and tactics. These outcomes raise questions about both the sustainability for ongoing solidarity and mobilization amongst the Windsor working class, and the capacity of the local labour movement to articulate counter-hegemonic interpretations of economic problems and promote policy options not dominated by the needs and interests of economic and political elites.

The article reviews the book, "Labour Left Out: Canada’s Failure to Protect and Promote Collective Bargaining as a Human Right ," by Roy J. Adams.

The article reviews the book, "Canadian Labour in Crisis: Reinventing the Workers' Movement," by David Camfield.

In academic and activist debates about union renewal, the replacement of business unionism with social unionism is seen as central to the labour movement's short- and long-term survival. Social unionism, generally understood to involve both engagement with social justice struggles beyond the workplace and methods of union activity beyond the collective bargaining process, is claimed to increase the labour movement's organizing capacity, bargaining power, and social and political weight. However, despite its increased importance, social unionism's various meanings, strategies, and implications remain relatively unexamined, and very different approaches are often lumped together. Using concepts from social movement theory, this paper proposes an analytical framework for systematically comparing different concrete manifestations of social unionism. In particular, social unionist initiatives vary according to 1) the ethos or collective action frame used to rationalize union activity; 2) the repertoire or strategic means used to act on that ethos; and 3) the internal organizational practices and power relations which shape who is involved in defining and carrying out union goals and initiatives. I argue that whether social unionist projects are able to reach immediate instrumental goals as well as generate renewed working class / movement capacity is shaped by both the mix of frame, repertoire and organizational practice as well as the relationship between these three. The paper therefore asserts that the category "social unionism" must be more nuanced, and calls for a more explicitly comparative and multi-methodological approach to reveal such complexity.

The February 2012 closure of London, Ontario’s Electro-Motive Diesel by the notoriously anti-union US multinational Caterpillar symbolizes the deep challenges faced by private sector unions in globalized industries. This closure was the final blow in Caterpillar’s negotiations with Canadian Auto Workers Local 27. This article explores the implications of changes in corporate structure, investment, and labour-relations strategy in manufacturing that have reduced capital’s dependence on production and increased corporate power over workers. Through a detailed case study based on extensive analysis of a range of sources, the authors argue that union strategy must be guided by a more differentiated understanding of corporate structure. While unions can effectively mobilize in response to attacks by anti-union employers, union strategy must first be rooted in a careful study of the employer’s structure, strengths and weaknesses, and industry context. Second, unions must develop capacities to intervene at scales beyond the local employment relationship and community. Third, unions must consider more carefully the nature of the various forms of power they seek to deploy and how these forms of power can amplify each other. Even the most effective campaigns will fail to muster leverage over an employer or industry if they neglect developing these forms of knowledge and capacity.

Given [the] hostile political and ideological climate in which, rightly or wrongly, unions are seen as defenders of sectional rather than the general interest, the question of new and effective political strategies and tactics to combat austerity is all the more urgent for the labor movement. It is within this context that contributors to this special issue of Labor Studies Journal and other labor educators from across North America presented their research at the United Association for Labor Education conference in Toronto in March 2013 as part of six panels focused on labor’s strategic response to austerity. Panelists represented a wide range of different approaches, produced rich and varied research aimed at clarifying some of the obstacles facing unions, and explored the various routes open to the labor movement in its efforts to confront austerity. --From Editors' Introduction

This article explores the contradictions in the Canadian Auto Workers Union’s (CAW) approach to environmental issues, particularly climate change. Despite being one of the Canadian labor movement’s leading proponents of social unionism— understood as a union ethos committed to working-class interests beyond the workplace, and a strategic repertoire that involves community-union alliances— the CAW’s environmental activism demonstrates the contradictory way that social unionism can be understood and practiced by unions. Through a critical discourse analysis of CAW policy documents and leadership statements, we show the union has not reframed its bargaining demands to emphasize both economically and environmentally sustainable production. Instead, the CAW’s relatively uncritical defense of the North American auto industry and the jobs it provides, despite the clearly negative role such production plays in the climate crisis, its acceptance of the structures of automobility, and its emphasis on environmental issues that have little to do with the nature of their industry, indicates the way that social unionism can be an add-on rather than a fundamental reorientation of a union’s role and purpose. We argue that, for social unionist environmental activism to be effective, the CAW must incorporate social unionist goals and analyses into their bargaining priorities, and confront the contradictions between their members’ interests as autoworkers, on the one hand, and as workers and global citizens who require economically and environmentally sustainable livelihoods, on the other.

This article seeks to engage Jansen and Young’s recent research on the impact of changing federal campaign finance laws on the relationship between organized labour and the New Democratic Party. Jansen and Young use models from mainstream comparative politics to argue that unions and the NDP retain links due to a “shared ideological commitment” to social democracy, rather than an expectation of mutual rewards and despite changes in the global economy. We critically assess the evidence, method of comparison, and theoretical assumptions informing their claims and find many aspects unconvincing. Instead, we propose that better explanations of this enduring yet strained relationship can be formulated by drawing insights from Canadian political economy, labour history and working class politics, and comparative social democracy.

This article uses case studies from three comparable Ontario-based universities to explore the relationship between bargaining unit structures and collective bargaining outcomes for unionized sessional contract academic faculty. The article charts the complex network of bargaining unit structures and inter-union or association relationships in Ontario universities and uses both quantitative and qualitative data to illustrate how different structures influence internal debates about sessional contract academic faculty, bargaining priorities, and collective bargaining strategies. The authors conclude that bargaining unit structures have less of an impact than practitioners assume and that success at the bargaining table for sessional contract academic faculty is dependent on a broad range of factors rather than any particular structure.

This article explores the relationship between unionization and academic freedom protections for sessional faculty in Ontario universities. Specifically, we compare university policies and contract provisions with a view to determining whether unionized sessionals hired on a per-course basis have stronger academic freedom protections than their non-union counterparts. We then explore whether particular kinds of bargaining unit structures are more conducive to achieving stronger academic freedom provisions. Finally, we consider whether academic freedom can be exercised effectively by sessionals, whether unionized or not. We conclude that unionization does help to produce stronger academic freedom protections for sessional faculty and that faculty association bargaining unit structures are most likely to help deliver this outcome. We further conclude that academic freedom is difficult to exercise for sessional faculty, regardless of union status, but that unionization offers greater protections for sessionals facing repercussions as a result of asserting their academic freedom.

Introduced by editors Sangster and Smith, this roundtable offers papers by former students of Panitch on his multifaceted legacy. Themes include Panitch as organic intellectual (Warskett), the fall and future of social democracy (Blanc), money and the critique of capitalism between political sociology and political economy (Konings), Panitch and the practice of socialist mentorship (Maher), and Panitch as a transformative teacher (Ross).