When Bread and Butter Are Not Enough: A Theory of Racial and Ethnic Workplace-Community Congrunce

Over the second half of the 20th century, Blacks, Latinos, Asians Native Americans, and women have won political and economic rights, which enable them to compete in labor markets with privileged groups. Concurrently, unions, whose role has been to protect higher-priced labor, have fewer members and less strength. Higher-paying manufacturing jobs have moved overseas and have been supplanted by lower paying service sector jobs. Where there is potential for union growth, the service sector, unskilled or semi-skilled workers derive less bargaining power through striking because they can more easily be replaced. For these reasons, unions have a diminished capacity to maintain higher wages, better benefits and working conditions.;Given increasing political, social and economic incorporation of previously marginalized groups and a weakened labor movement, how does higher-priced labor win? What strategies do unions use to address both these changes in the demographics of the labor market and the impact declining union density has had on their political power? This dissertation argues that unions are more successful when the racial and ethnic compositions of their memberships reflect that of the community in which they are embedded. By necessity, many labor unions have had to look beyond their memberships for support. One form of support that they have sought is from organized stakeholders from the surrounding locality. In this context, the degree to which unionized workers inside the firm are perceived to be closely allied with those living in that community matters for that union's strength. When the racial and ethnic composition of the firm reflects the racial and ethnic composition of the surrounding locality, I call this workplace-community congruence. When a racial or ethnic group is underrepresented in a firm, I refer to this as workplace-community incongruence..;I argue that a union has more bargaining strength when the groups in a locality believe that they have a fair share of the jobs in a workplace that the union represents. This perception of fair representation matters for two reasons. First, if members of a group in a locality perceive that they are fairly represented in a unionized workplace, they will more likely be stakeholders in the union's bargaining outcome. They will be more likely community allies, becoming involved in broad-based campaigns to support those workers. In contrast, perceiving that members of their racial or ethnic group are underrepresented in a workplace may cause them to remain apathetic to the union's campaign or even organize against the union. Second, during a strike employers often look for replacements from outside of the bargaining unit. Workplace-community congruence makes it more difficult for employers to divide workers and community members. In particular, employers may find it more difficult to recruit replacement workers from the local labor force if those in the local labor force have ties to the striking workers. However, if a group is significantly underrepresented in a firm, members of that group may be more willing to labor as replacement workers. They may feel marginalized by the union and its members, thus less sympathetic to values of union solidarity. Or they may be disconnected from the issues at the workplace and cross the picket line simply for economic reasons.;By examining the relationship between workplace-community congruence and union strength, this dissertation builds upon split labor market theory to argue that unions exclude groups of workers at their own peril. Racial and ethnic hierarchies and exclusion have become less effective tools for higher-priced labor to preserve wages, benefits and working conditions. This dissertation argues that unions are better off when their memberships reflect that of the surrounding locality. Savvy unions recognize that there are limits to what they can win without the support of community stakeholders and these unions strive for workplace-community congruence..;I test this argument using multiple empirical methods. I analyze an original dataset consisting of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) strike data, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) firm-level demographic data, and U.S. Census data. In addition, this dataset contains a variable indicating whether firms used replacement workers. The data used to construct this variable draws upon original phone interviews with leaders of unions engaged in strikes between 1998 and 2002. After testing the general predictions of this dissertation using a large-n analysis, I develop in-depth case studies in New Haven, Connecticut and Los Angeles, California to illustrate causal mechanisms. Specifically, I demonstrate that these unions perceive a threat from incongruence and respond with strategies to increase the proportion of underrepresented groups in the workplace.