l I. II aha” 13.11”. {5: 1.. V 1.3.3! 5.» vi fivv1g1tt. 312.. ‘ .30...“ . nun" . gmml; I. .w . .dn‘ufl.,§_fi.ww%d§lf s «aha... _ ‘ . .33 . 1.3... 1. - . .Era..;nh%4uwurfi:fi.mmmu .flmwuu new». um. Evin-hf. ... a. .1: [a JIIEI ‘91... [itrznlonl 3 III. .1111. 3!!!) 11-15... I! .30 1Q 53 aha . . inflow»! cl... .ilixlx it; '1',. - a . 3-" "I" '! , i .. . 4.1.... 3....llll. . A.,:I,! , A..‘\1r:p\a..a.al . “HumWW“with -‘ This is to certify that the thesis entitled Orientations Toward Unionism: An Attitudinal Study of a Local Union presented by Harry Kirk Dansereau has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. S ‘ _ degree mm and Anthropology W Major professor Date September 10, 1956 0469 OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records . 2)., ; I v”- ORIEWTATIONS TOWARD UNIONISM: AN A‘ITITUDINAL STUDY OF A LOCAL UNICN By Harry Kirk Dansereau AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Sociology and Anthropology Year 1956 Approved AN ABSTRACT The data for this study were gathered by interviewing one hundred forty-two urban unionists who had been members of a local union for at least three months. The study of the behavior and attitudes of the members sought first to classify the orientations which the members have toward the loca1.in terms of their expectations of the local's major function. After classi- fication of union orientations, tests were made to determine whether social types related to the orientations could be distinguished accord— ing to nineteen selected social characteristics. Second, the study sought to learn whether there was a relationship between orientation toward unionism and varying degrees of integration at the work plant, neighborhood, and community levels. Third, an attempt 'was made to ascertain whether active members differed from inactive mem— bers in several attitudinal areas. The same test was made in reference to the officers and rank-and-file members. This research determined the existence of five empirically feasible orientations toward unionism: political, economic, social, apathetic, and hostile. However, little in way of positive conclusions could be reached concerning relationships between the existence of a social type and any given union orientation. The study showed that those members who exhibited political, economic, and social orientations toward the union were well integrated at the work plant, neighborhood, and community levels of interaction. Apathetic and hostile members seemed less well integrated at those behavioral levels. Harry'Kirk Dansereau The findings of this study indicated that attitudes toward the union, the employers, and union officers, as expressed by members of this local, were very much like those found in other similar studies. This was also true for members' attitudes relating to politics and government. The majority of the members of this local union appeared.to be politically con— servative and generally favorable toward the union, its efforts and accom— plishments. Those members who were politically, economically, and socially oriented toward the union appeared to be the active members of the union. These latter stood in contrast to the apathetic and hostile members who were inactive. Yet attitudinal differences between active and inactive members were slight. This study indicated rather conclusively, at least in the local under study, that there was little or no attitudinal cleavage between officers and rank—and—file members. Generally, however, officers Showed a slightly higher degree of activity in the local. They were also slightly less critical of the union and somewhat more critical of the employer than the rank-and-file members. The research pointed to the need for continued study of an institution of such dynamic nature and to the recognition of changing attitudes which may lead to smooth, efficient, democratic functioning of the local union. Harry Kirk Dansereau ORIENTATI OIC'S TOHARD UNIONISM: All ATTITUDINAL STUDY OF A LOCAL UNICN By Harry Kirk Uansereau A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Sociology and Anthropology Year 1956 yaw/5- 7 ? AR 61‘? MINORIEDGMFNTS Many persons must be thanked for their encouragement and invaluable aid during the undertaking of this thesis project. There are many not listed here to whom the writer will always be grateful. The writer wishes to express appreciation to all members of his guidance committee, Professors C. P. Looms, C. C. Killingsworth, D. C. Cline, W. H. Form, D. L. Gibson, and J. Useem, for their aid, criticism, and suggestions. Especial gratitude is extended to the writer's major professor, Dr. William H. Form, who met numerous times “with union officers, drew the sample for the study, procured interviewers, and generally saw to it that the study was launched. Further the writer is indebted to Dr. A. E. Levak who gave much time and effort to sorting data. Needless to say, had the writer not been granted a graduate assistant- ship and an instructorship at Michigan State College, doctoral work could not have been initiated. Added encouragement and assistance came from Professors M. B. King, Jr., J. R. Tatum, and A. C. Schnur of the Department of Sociolog and Anthropology of the University of Mississippi. The writer is appreciative of secretarial help from that departmnt, particularly the typing of bliss Alice Jo Miller. Dr. J. S. Harbin, Director of Libraries, University of Mississippi, is thanked for use of the library at all hours as is Miss Hallie Eggleston and her staff in the circulation department for their many kindnesses. Mr. Roger Burford aided considerably with statistical matters pertaining to this the sis. iii AC KN OWIE DGMEN TS (c ontinue d ) This study could not have been done without the active cooperation of officers and members of the U.A.W. , particularly those of Local 72).; who spent many hours answering questions. Especial thanks go to Messrs. Frank Corser, Harold Darrow, Robert Dingwell, Jack Holt, C. Johnson, and William Rioux who encouraged an objective study and have waited patiently for the results. The writer offers life-long gratitude to his understanding wife, "Gene," who labored through the first long—hand draft of this study, played a dual role of mother and father for many months, and made home a place to which it was always a pleasure to return. Harry Kirk Dansereau candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Final examination, September 10, 1956 Dissertation: Orientations Toward Unionism: An Attitudinal Study of a Local Union, Amalgamated Local 721; (UAW—01C) Behavior and Attitudes of the Members Outline of Studie 8 Major subject: Sociology Minor subject: Labor economics Biographical Items Born, September 22, 1921, Baltimore, Maryland Undergraduate Studies, University of Maryland, 1939-18 Graduate Studies, West Virginia University, l9h6—h8, Michigan State College, 1950-53- Experience: Member of the Army of the United States, 191434.63 Chemistry Laboratory Assistant, West Virginia University, 191:7449 5 Assistant Professor of Social Science, Presbyterian Junior College, Maxton, North Carolina, l9h9-SO; Graduate Assistant, Michigan State College, 1951-52; Instructor, Michigan State College, 1952—53; Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Mississippi, 1953-56 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTICN A. B. C. D. Some Basic Ideas About Unions Two Contrasting Views of Local Unions 1. Local 1276 2. Local XYZ local 721: Specific Problems of This Study 1. Orientations Toward Unionism 2. Degree of Integration 3. Attitudinal Differences: Rank-and-File and Officer CHAPTER II BASIC THEORY AND METHODS A. The Theoretical Frame of Reference 1. Purpose 2. The Union as an Institution 3. Attitudes Methods 1. Initiation of the Study 2. The Schedule 3. The Sample 1;. Interviewing S. The Determination of Categories 6. Analysis CHAPTER III THE MEMBERS OF LOCAL 7211 A. B. C. D. Who They Are Why They Joined the Union Basic Union and leisure Time Activity 1. Union Activity 2. leisure Time Activity Selected Attitudes 1. Attitudes About Community and Work 2. Attitudes About Office rs and Union 3. Attitudes About Politics and Government CHAPTER IV TYPES OF ORIENTATICNS TOWARD UKIONISM AND A. B. SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF UNION PIEMBERS Hypothesis Number I 79 80 1. Social Characteristics and Orientations Toward Unionism 81 2. Summary Hypothesis Number 11 1. Degree of Integration in the Work Plant 2. Degree of Integration in the Neighborhood 3. Degree of Integration in the Community 11. Summary 109 111: 115 115 115 119 CHAPTER V ATTITUDES OF ACTIVE AND INACTIVE MEMBERS A. Some Comments on Participation B. Role Orientation as Related to Degree of Local Union Activity C. Hypothesis Number III 1. 2. 3. h. S. 6. 7. Meaning of Union Treatment of Workers by Employers Treatment of Workers by Union Equality of Opportunity to Become Officer Attribution of Union Success and Failure Local 7211 Compared to Other Lansing Locals Local Union Accomplishment on Specific Items D. Conclusion CHAPTER VI ATTITUDES OF OFFICERS AND NOW—OFFICERS A. Local Union Officers 1. 20 3. h. 5. Who the Officers Are Need for Officers Education for leadership Some Attitudes About Officers The Orientations of Officers of Local 72).; B. Hypothesis Number IV 1. 2. 3. h. S. 6. 7. Meaning of Union Treatment of Workers by Employers Treatmnt of Members by Union Equality of Opportunity to Become Officer Attribution of Union Success and Failure Local 72].; Compared to Other Lansing Locals Local Union Accomplishment on Specific Issues C . Conclusion CHAPTER VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A. The Nature of the Study B. A Review of Findings 1. 2. Significant Findings General Tendencies C. Inferences and Suggestions APPENDIX A APPENDIX B BIBLIOGRAPHY vi 122 122 126 129 129 130 135 138 1h1 1h3 156 158 158 158 16h 166 168 169 171 171 172 175 176 180 181 181; 188 193 193 199 200 201 20h 208 233 2h2 CHAPTERII INTRODUCTICN A. Some Basic Ideas About Unions The study to be presented is one of a local labor union in a middle sized industrial city. Traditionally, labor locals have been studied by labor economists. They have investigated differences in ideology between American and European unions and differences among American unions in historical and contemporary contexts. In addition, many studies have explored the reasons why unions were founded, why workers join unions, and why they resist becoming members. Historical analysis has documented conditions in the pre-union era. Not uncommonly the picture is presented of the Oppressed worker, laboring under'unhealthful conditions, receiving low pay, working long hours, suffering from unilateral, arbitrary decisions of management, and generally having little or no control of his work situation. Despite the fact that this picture often has been overdrawn, painstaking study has revealed that labor unions arose in response to such conditions. Concerning collective bargaining, Whitney states: In the last analysis, collective bargaining is essentially a negative and protective institution. It limits the hand of management, imposes obligations on employers, and assures workers of a series of industrial rights. These, of course, are the historical and traditional purposes of unions. Labor organizations earn their birthright by accomplishing these objectives.1 irred Witney, Government and Collective Bargaining, J. B. Lip- pincott Company, Chicago, 1991, p. 5. Selekman points out that popular opinion about labor relations has been dichotomized into "good" or "bad'§ "stable" or "unstable," "con- structive" or "destructive," without any consideration of a possible middle ground. He then categorizes, on the basis of different patterns of interaction, eight distinguishably different structures of labor- management dealings. These structures are listed as: (1) containment- aggression, (2) ideology, (3) conflict, (It) power-bargaining: (5) deal- bargaining, (6) collusion, (7) accommodation, and (8) cooperation.2 Selekman implies no evolutionary process here, but the terms them- selves indicate the potentiality of a continuum from containment-aggression to cooperation. Any one of these structures may be found in the United States today. Investigation of these structures would, without doubt, reveal that dichotomies such as “good or bad" result from oversimplified judgments of complex social, economic, and political phenomena. Men who feel oppressed are most likely to band together in organiza- tions designed to relieve their oppression and the American workman apparently felt this need even before the arrival of the industrial revolution. Carr has indicated that the worker obviously felt that he was not receiving a fair day's pay, he was not being treated as a person, and he was gradually losing status in the community.3 Bakke, after having 2Benjamin M. Selekman ,TVarieties of Labor Relations ,T Harvard Business Review XXVII (19119) , 175-186. 3Lowell J. Carr, Analytical Sociology, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1955. pp- 538-9. Broadly speaking, unions seemed to be working toward three major ob- Jectives: (l) to improve the organized wage worker's economic conditions; (2) to establish a structure of worker rights in industry-a code of rights which management would be bound to respect; and (3) to raise the status of Wage labor in American culture. analyzed the responses of workers, found "almost universal recognition that one is living successfully if he is making progress toward the ex— perience and assurance of":h A. The society and respect of other people B. The degree of creature comforts and economic security possessed by the most favored of his customary associates 0. Independence in and control over his own affairs D. Understanding of the forces and factors at work in his world E. Integrity One sees here essentially the same elements as those suggested by Carr. Bakke goes on to explain that men join unions if they believe such member- ship will. be consistent with their already existent associations. Further, the degree to which workers are willing to join is directly related to the degree to which the worker believes his union membership and behavior as a union man will be consistent with accepted folkways. Indeed, the southern worker may well see economic gains stemming from unionism; but, unless the union can be shown to be socially legitimate, he may refuse to join. Such membership has not habitually been a part of his "way of life." The last of Bakke's criteria for “living successfully" is "the experience and assurance of integrity." Here integrity means "wholeness." It connotes a sense of belonging and a relationship to a larger whole. Of the criteria presented it is the most difficult to define and something which is less amenable to empirical observation. 11E. Wight Bakke ,my Workers Join Unions ,rin Labor Economics and Industrial Relations, Edited by Joseph Shister, J. B. Lippincott Company, Chicago, 19g1, p9. 30-360 What Carr and Bakke have said certainly indicates that membership in a local union does not result from purely economic motivations. If a man believes the union can get him such benefits as higher wages, shorter hours, better conditions, and fringe benefits, he is a potential member. Yet Reynolds' work should warn against the particularism of a theory of economic determinism. He states, "The decision to join is by no means strictly a rational decision. It is probably more like religious conversion than like deciding to buy a pair of shoes."5 There are obviously zealous unionists who attempt to convert the new employee. Union officers no doubt wish there were more such "devout ," crusading rank-and-file members. In addition to the conversion aspect there is purely "secular" social pressure. "Most of the workers join because others have done so, and hold outs are gradually brought into line by the pressure of social ostracism in the plant."6 Despite alle- gations that such tactics are "undemocratic," it is pertinent to indicate that today, by law, there is no u__r_1_i;9_n_ in a plant unless the majority of those eligible to vote have cast their ballots favoring organization.7 Furthermore, the same tactics for inducing membership are undoubtedly operative in trade associations, professional societies, churches, civic clubs, and fraternal organizations. Witney points out the importance to the individual of a well rounded personality and states that unions provide a "vehicle for self—expression," ngoyd G. Reynolds, Labor Economics and Labor gRelations , Prentice- Hall, Inc., New York, 191:9, p. 79. 5.1120: 21.2- 7Labor Management Relations Act, l9h7. Section 8, Article 3. necessary to the attainment of that goal. Further, unions may be considered as "the springboard for a fuller participation by workers in the affairs of the community."8 Nonetheless, in spite of the apparent values that a union would seem to have for its members, there are many workers who prefer to be "indepen— dent." Reynolds briefly attempts to show why this is true and reports that little study has been made of the characteristics of those who do or do not join. Why don't men join unions? No doubt many variables are involved. Reynolds' list includes length of service, degree of skill, income, promotion prospects, and personal relationships with management officials. Of additional importance is the worker's "position in a parti— cular 'clique ,‘ work group, or other informal social grouping in the plant..."9 While some workers may not want to become union members, Huberman emphasizes the individual's need for union membership in view of manage- ment's dominant position. The following quotation prOVides evidence of the power struggle that has existed between labor and management. Workers, unorganized, are weak. Workers, organized, are strong. That's why workers join unions. There are no if's, maybe's, or but‘s about this. It's a fact. Employers know it. Experienced workers know it. And the Supreme Court of the United States knows it. Whatever control the union has of the work situation in the plant has been wrested from management over a number of years. Most union prerogatives 8Witney, 22. 933., pp. 10-11. 9Reynolds, op. cit., p. 78. loleo Huber-man, The Truth About Unions, Reynal and Hitchock, Inc., New York, 191.16, p. 3. were not obtained by a "sit and wait" policy, but came as a result of aggressive programs. A well-known union organizer summarizes the union's role: Historically, of course, unions have been organized for defensive and protective purposes, as well as for reasons of mutual aid. The voluntary association has always proved the most effeccive form of protest against injustice and the means for securing re- dress of grievances and improvement in conditions of employment.11 The formation of the union mav have been fostered by the need for defensive and protective measures, but positive action is likewise a part of modern union policy. The union not only guards its gains, but constantly strives for new benefits for itself and its members. The dis- tinction between the union and its members is intentional. In support of the distinction Arthur Ross compares the union to any institution which "experiences its own needs, develops its own ambitions and faces its own problems.":12 He stresses the idea that the institution has needs which differ from those of its members. The employee, the union, and the employer, three parties, are involved in collective bargaining. Each of these has specific needs, and at times these needs conflict. Reynolds sees three main stimuli to union expansion. These are "strategic necessity, missionary zeal, and the institutionalization of the organizing function."13 Regardless of the simplicity of any given answer, the literature in the field shows that there is no simple answer IfClinton 5. Golden, "Understanding Union Attitudes ,Fllarvard Business REView, Vol. 27, 191:9, p. 1412. 12Arthur M. Ross, Trade Union Wag: Policy, University 0 California Pr‘eSS, Berkley and Los Angeles, 1938: p. 23- 13Reynolds, 92. cit” p. 73. to either question: ‘Why do unions organize? Why do workers join unions? To return to Witney, he states, It can be argued that unions would have a place in our society even if they failed to accomplish much on the economic front...unions are an integral part of our life, arising out of the nature of our societal structure. .They sergfi basic and persistent needs of the workers of American industry. Regardless of which "need" a particular author chooses to discuss as most important, there are allusions to other "needs." Perhaps four are outstanding: psychological, social, economic, and political.15 host works deal with the latter two, but research on the first two is now beyond the embryonic stage. This research is concerned with the basic problem if whether poli- tical, economic:, social or other functions appeal to different types of union members. Stated differently, it focuses on the type of appeal, if any, the union may have for workers of different social backgrounds. To the ordinary worker, the local union is the part of union structure which he contacts most frequently. His attitudes toward unions reflect, at least in part, the experiences he has had with his local. Therefore, this study concerns a specific local union and the attitudes of its members ‘1hfiltney, 22. 212., p. ll. The development of the unisn reflects the attitudinal milieu in which the union exists. See Reynolds, 22, 232., p. 73. For a discussion of violence see Wilbert E. Moore, Industrigl figlations and the Social Order, The MacMillan Company, NeW'York, 1951, p. 370 and Jack Barbash, Labor Unions in Action, Harper and Brothers, New York, 19h8, pp. h-b. ‘See also The Mohawkfivalley Formula in Witney, 22, git,, Appendix A, pp. 633-35. Florence Peterson discusses management programs to forestall organization. See her Survey of Labor Economics, Harper and Brothers, NeW'York, 19h7, p. hdl. The C.I.O. Proceedings, 12, 1950, p. 23, gives eviience of how that international union deals with communist dominated member unions. lgflPolitical" as used here refers to any power struggle not necessarily struggle in the sphere of government. toward its functions. It may be well to compare the local under inves- tigation with others to provide a setting for the study. B. Two Contrasting Views of local Unions Without doubt, no two unions are exactly alike; and until now, rela— tively little scientific study has been done to Ffiove the question. Few if any generalizations can be made. There are, however, some interesting subjective reports which give different pictures of what the local is like, how it Operates. Tw: of these may prove of interest to one concerned with the attitudes of rank—and—file union members. 1. Local 1276 The first of these situations is depicted by Huberman who is an avowed prOdunion man. Joe Worker goes to work for a steel company; he can decide for himself if he wishes to join the local union. He is properly initiated and becomes a member in good standing. "He had read, of course, that all unions are razkets, that ordinary members don't have much say, that the officials are tough guys who run meetings steamroller fashion to put over what they want." He is pleasantly surprised to find that this is not true. All the officers are workers in the plant. "They're ordinary guys like himself." Joe volunteers to serve in an election campaign. He learns that strike action is a last resort when employers refuse to bargain. Social activities are also a part of the union man's lot; rather dull meetings are not the only activity he has with fellow workers. He also finds that the union's top officials dcrufiitake a rake-off from his dues. The local's BybLaws protect the members' financial interests. Unions publish a certified semi-annual financial statement. Further, the union makes work—life toler- able. Are all unions alike? Huberman says: Naturally not. There was wide variation, as there is among business organizations, religious groups, teaching bodies, social clubs. Some were run honestly, efficiently, and democratically, others were not. Some were wide-awake alive organizations, others were asleep. Some encouraged participation by the rank and file, others discouraged it. Some had low dues and initiation fees, others had high dues and initia- tion fees. But by and large, they'were set up and run pretty much like Joe Worker's local 1276. 2. Local XYZ John WOrker had a somewhat different experience and.warns that what he has related is strictly the story of a single union, one to which he belonged. The Harvard Business Review presents it "simply for its use- fulness in filling in a small part of a large picture." John Worker found that the qualifications for membership in the XYZ Union "were references evidencing ability, a minimum of two years experience at the trade, a clean record as far as antiunion activities were concerned — and a friend on the committee." A friend named Stumpy satisfied the last requirement and argued for John's admission with the aid of "synthetic" 'work experience. "...rather than call Stumpy a liar and start a fist fight on the spot, they would accept the fact that for a 'seasoned worker' 'I was pretty dumb, and let it go at that.'" John received probationary mem— bership and was surprised that he didn‘t have to pay off to Sam for getting him into the union. He, like Joe, found "that union leaders could be sincere, helpful, and friendly fellows. Sam Tomasio was not at all like liaHuberman,.gp. 933., Chapter 8, pp.—E9-62; direct quote, pp. 61462. 10 the corrupt 'union bosses' I had imagined." Worker then goes on to discuss the members. The rank—and-file was made up of a large proportion of drifters, thirty-f ive years of age or over, unemployed for several months, and many formerly married. Some had had penitentiary experience, and most were "well acquainted with strikes, violence and employer abuses. Yet they were peaceful men who seemed to go out of their way to avoid violence and trouble." The gig thing which all the rank and file had in common was a hatred for the employer and the abuses which had followed the common working man for a generation. Conditions in union shops were now satisfactory, .... It was the memory of past abuses and the constantly fostered fear that the employers would seize upon even the slightest opportunity to force laboring men back to filtlnr shops and starvation wages which was the great uniting and driving force of the militant XYZ. Known Communists or at least fellow travelers were in attendance at the meetings. Those thrown out as "Commies" were very likely not to be "Commies," but brothers in good standing. One man exposed as a Communist and not "a worker at all...was beaten up as he left the hall." A strike was called almost without warning and dissenters were thrown out before the strike vote was taken. The vote favoring a strike was unanimous. The strike was not one over wages and conditions, but was purely for the purpose of extending the jurisdiction of XYZ. John Worker wound up on a "flying squad" or "strong arm squad" which was out to end strike breaking activities. The action was the antithesis of the minimization of violence. The company countered with "goon squads." Finally, at a National Convention, the union was reorganized; apparently the Communists took over. According to the author, things began to move like clockwork; meetings were better conducted, and there were fewer arguments.17 fiJohn Worker, "My Union—1m Inside Story,‘I Harvard Business Review, Volume 26, l5’h8, 108—111;; principal quote 109-110. 11 The reader should perhaps be reminded again that the above is the story of one local union. It may very well be typical of unions inhabited by Communists; but it should also be remembered that, traditionally, American unionists have been, and are, much opposed to Communists' practices. The fight to eliminate violence and suppression continues and is ceaseless. y c . Local 72h \ This study pertains specifically to Amalgamated Local 72h, Interna- ‘ tional Union, United Automobile Aircraft and Agricultural Implement'Workers of America, UAW-Clo, hereinafter referred to as Local 72h. This amalgamated local includes sixteen member units.l8 Local 72b is located in Lansing, Michigan and was established in 19h0. Malling Forge and Machine, the charter unit, signed its first contract on May 1h, l9h0. Although one can find ample material on the rise of unionism in regard to the broader movement, information about the history of a particular local union may be somewhat less in evidence. Local 72b is in this respect, not unlike what the writer had eXpected to find. In discussions of local history at both the subregional office and local union office, no information from written records was volunteered. Perhaps there are no such records which deal specifically with the local's history. lDMember units at the time of the study: Atlas Drop Forge, Atlas Office Beurmannéharshall, Duplex Truck Mfg. 00., Federal Drop Forge, Hill Diesel Engine Corp., John Bean, Kish Plastic Products, Kold—Hold Mfg. Co., Lansing Drop Forge, Lansing Foundry, Lapaco Chemicals, Lindell Drop Forge, Lundberg Screw Products, Malling Forge and Machine, and Renaud Plastics. John Bean did not appear on union stationery at the time when the study was initiated; formerly Local 781, this local affiliated and merged with and became a unit of Amalgamated Local 72h on April 7, 1953. 12 However, local officials reported that the organizing campaign was relatively quiet and that first negotiations were not particularly tough; in their words, "the company went along.“ The Atlas Drop Forge unit, however, had some difficulty in its fight for recognition and its attempt to procure check-off. A strike of about three weeks duration occurred at Atlas in 191:1. Kold-Hold later had a brief strike to eliminate piece work. No violence was reported. When Local 721; was founded, there were many who believed that manage- nent could and would eventually destroy the union. Pitched battles had been waged when attempts were made to organize the auto workers. Homer Martin, first president of the UAW—CID, had felt the pressure of "out- siders" as well as that from within his own union. Communists were present in the union and were struggling for control. The Addes-Thomas block eventually (gained control but were ultimately to be soundly defeated by the Reuther group (19h7).l9 .i'ith the existing fear of trade-unionism itself, coupled with a fear of the union's communist domination, it is indeed remarkable that in 19110, "the company went along." This local was apparently split into two equal factions in the Reuther—Addes-Thomas struggle for power. This even division may be related to the fact that Reuther himself was alleged to be a Socialist, who, although Anti-Communist, was ready to strike even during war rather than to surrender his position against "speed—up" and incentive pay plans. Perhaps less well known was the fact that the Addes-Thomas group, sometimes designated as Aides- Satlinist Bloc, adhered rather closely to the Conmnmist line. Even if TVIrving Howe and B. J. Widick, The UAW and .‘Ialter Reuther, Random House, New York, 1929, Chapter 3,9,66-872. this knowledge were widespread, it should be recalled that Communism was then not emphasized as a critical issue. Insofar as factional struggles within the international are concerned, the large majority of the nembers of Local 72h are today considered to be pro-Reuther. No one person has been president of local 72h for any extended time. Since its founding until the present, there have been eight different presidents. The secretary—treasurer, however, has retained his position since l9hh. Traditionally, this would not be unusual; this office is conceived of as one which lends continuity to local officialdom and en— hances uninterrupted operation of the local union.20 Except for this office, local officers go unpaid for their work, an indication that such services must have other than purely financial rewards. Other offices included are vice—president, recording secretary, ser— geant-at-arms, guide, and three trustees. Each of these is elective, the individual serving one year. One trustee is elected each year for a three year term. These then are the elected leaders of Local 72h, who plan the year's activities and guide the rank-and—file in their everyday union affairs. Their primary concern, as reported to the writer, has been working con— ditions, including the elimination of hazards, wages, job security, and to be treated as human beings. There are other local unions in the city and the interrelations of locals is of prime importance to the officers. They report that 20The By-Laws of Local 72h Article VI, Section 1, list Secretary— Treasurer as one of the offices. The Constitution of the International Union calls for a Financial Secretary, Article 36 Section 1, p. 75. relations between Local 72h and other Lansing locals are good. Local 72h is apparently proud of its "progressive" nature. Permission for this study is itself indicative of the liberality of local policy; In Selekman's scheme, "accommodation" would probably characterize the structure of labor-management relations involving this local. According to Selekman: By and large, managements and unions who deal together within re— lationships of accommodation tend to confine their cooperative approaches to what may be termed the traditional agenda of collective bargaining. They still concentrate practice and procedure upon establishing wages, hours, and conditions of employment, and than upon administering the jointly established standards. Although not unduly alarmist about the potential of every demand for encroach- ing upon managerial prerogatives, or of every counterdemand for undermining valid shop rights, the parties to accommodative bargaining do maintain alert watchfulness upon these ramparts of principle, these orbits of respective equities and privileges.21 Slichter considers three principal periods in the development of the American labor movement: (1) “grass-roots", until the 1880‘s. (2) Dominance of national.unions, until the 1930‘s. (3) Government encouragement of trade unions, until the present.22 By either Slichter's or Killingsworth's classifications, Local 72h was established during a period of government encouragement of collective bargaining, a period when protective policy was predominantly in force. Herein may lie part of the answer to why "the company went along." fiSeiekman, 92. 9333.. p- 185- 22Sumner H. Slichter, The Challenge of Industrial Relations, Cornell University Press, Ithica, 19h7, p. 6. Also see Killingsworth's discussion of protective and restrictive policy in Charles C. Killingsworth, State Labor Relations Acts, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1953, pp. 13-23. Many conceive of the Labor—Management Relations Act, 19h? (Taft-Hartley Act) as a restrictive law. 15 D. Specific Problems of This Study It is difficult to pin point the exact sources leading to the formu- lation of this research project. Those familiar with this particular field of interest will readily admit to two classifications of sources relating to the union's functions for its members. The first area is comprised of general remarks dealing with the reasons for the existence of a labor movement. Such writings ordinarily deal.with types and purposes of unions, and do not make a specific refer- ence to what the worker wants from the union, why he has joined, or what he gains from union membership. Generally these works are not based on empirical research efforts. The second major source of ideas is that of studies based on em— pirical investigation. Not infrequently these studies have been done, at least in part, under union auspices. These researches usually deal with the behavior patterns and attitudes of workers in specific locals. An unstated proposition of these investigations often is that the attitudes are positively related to overt behavior, and a study of them will facili— tate learning something about labor-management relationships. The re- searchers in Illini City emphasized the importance of attitudes: When one man has a certain attitude toward his union, his employer, or his felIOW'workers, his remarks and actions will affect a feW' individuals in his neighborhood. When the majority of workeag hold a certain attitude, this becomes a pexvaSive influence. The writings of Bakke, Carr, Reynolds, Witney, and Worker have been cited as sources of information concerning the subject of why workers __._Am T:Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, Labor-Mane ment Eglations in Illini City, Champaign, Illinois, 195h, Vol. 5, p. 35. l6 join.unions. From his own experience in the labor movement Golden examined the role of the union in fulfilling the workers "needs." The basic needs of the human beings who make up American industry's -working force are threefold: 1. Economic - an adequate plane of living and the necessary amount of job and wage protection. 2. Psychological - the personality needs of freedom of action, self expression, and creative outlets. 3. Social - the ties and bonds of group relations and community life.2h Selekman has called attention to the pragmatic, possibly intuitive, knowledge of the labor organizer who "fortifies sentiments already inclin- ing workers toward unionism." He neutralizes fears. He overcomes indifference and beats down opposition. He galvanizes positive feelings and transmutes negative feelings into loyalty that will make workers join up. Whatever’the differences in specific tactics, he usually seeks to harness to his cause three powerful human drives: (1) the desire for economic improvement, (2) the craving to belong tggthe group, and (3) the impulse toward aggression and hostility. , Roper and.1ester have also been concerned with the problem of what labor wants. They emphasized the need for security, a chance to advance, being treated like a human being, financial gain, job protection, social approval, and escape from personal fear or discontent.26 In.view of the above speculations and studies, the first research goal was to attempt a classification of cases according to what the worker 2hClinton S. Golden and Harold J. Ruttenberg, The Dynamics of Indus- trial Democracy, Harper and Brothers Publishers, New York, 19h2, p. 7. Generally see Chapter I, "Motives for Union membership." 25Benjunin r. Selekman, Labor Relations and Human Relations, licGraw— Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, l9h7, p. 15. 26Richard A. Lester, Labor and Industrial Relations, The MacMillan Company: New York, 1951, p. 98} See also Elmo Roper "What American Labor Wants," American Mercury, Vol. 58, No. 2h2, pp. 180-18h. n ‘ 115:2}..(Cr: ),C . JCTZNWC m< (Ill- . i... 147, .0, T222; .1 £33152»? :025‘ \civSMlCZv. Ox OOUVIQWZ \msx \OOP\ avCrr 7:533 2:: i t : . a : i _ _(1' 1+ _ 34.35.11.111]: - 17 thought the union should accomplish for him. These classifications will be labeled "role orientations," i.e., the worker's orientation toward.the 1ocal.union in terms of what he expects of the union. The review of re— search suggested three main role orientations: (1) ideological or political, (2) traditional or economic, (3) social. However, experience showed that many members have a low degree of ego identification with union goals and activity and that some are even openly antagonistic toward the union. Thus, two additional categories were included: (1) Apathetic (2) Hostile. As a corollary to the first research goal, this study explored possible relationships between role orientation and social characteristics of the 'worker such as his age, amount of education, and marital status. 1. Orientations Toward Unionism a. Ideological or Political Orientation This orientation is used to refer to the workers' expressed state- ments of the need to resist the employer or to have protection from.the employer or his representative. Ideological or political as used in this study has a considerably more limited meaning than that found in the gene— ral.literature. Ideological usually can be equated with revolutionary unionism. Hoxie gives an excellent short description of that type of unionism. Revolutionary unionism, as the term implies, is extremely radical both in vieWpoint and in action. It is distinctly class conscious rather than trade conscious. That is to say it asserts the complete harmony of interests of all wageworkers as against the representatives of the employing class, and seeks to unite the former, skilled and unskilled together, into one homogeneous fighting organization .... It looks upon the prevailing modes of right and rights, moral and 18 legal, as, in general, fabrications of the employing class, designed to secure the subjection and further the exploitation of the workers. The protective function of the union is probably expressed more frequently by members than is any other union function. A study by Walker and Guest listed twelve prosunion Quotations. All of these emphasized trouble with.management and the union's protective role.28 b. Traditional or Economic Orientation This orientation is based on "job and wage consciousness." Perflnen commented on traditional unionism. It was indeed.a.new species of trade unionism that was thus evolved. It differed from the trade unionism that the native American labor movement had evolved earlier, in that it grasped the idea, supremely correct for American conditions, that the economic front was the only front on which the labor army could stay united. While there were and are issues other than the purely economic, the importance of wages can hardly be neglected. Commons mentions some of the goals of labor which were important at the time of transition from.the "old" to traditional unionism. Instead of experiments in co—Operation or leadership by humanitarians we find rules for apprenticeship, closed shop, minimum wage, time and method of payment, initiation fees and dues, funds for strike bene- fits, union employment offices, and the exclusion of employers, politicians, and friends of labour not actually working at the trade.30 more, rt ““1“. Hoxie ,‘Trado Unionism in the United—States, D. App let on— Century Company, New York, 1935, p. h8. See also Selig Perlman, A Theory g§_the Labor Movement, Augustus h. Kelley, New York, 19h9, pp. 219-233. 28Charles R. Walker and Robert H. Guest, The Man on the Assembly Ling, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1952, pp. 128—129. 29Per11nan’ .920 92.310, p0 197' 30John R. Commons, History of Labour in the United States, The MacMillan Company, NeW'xork, 1916, vol. 1, p. 576. On page hOl one finds emphasis on "that right which is the right of every labourer, of setting our own price on our labour." Concerning the wage movement see pp. 39S-h01; 582-585- 19 Rose and Komhauser have both indicated some of the more recent union goals related to the economic orientation. Rose stresses the economic function but also shows the simultaneous diversity of member expectation. ...members get a wide range of benefits from union membership. Getting higher wages (or the equivalent) stands out in most workers' minds as the most important purpose of a union, of course, but substantial proportions spontaneously mentioned getting job security, gaining rights, and getting benefits off the job (such as oppor— tunities for recreation, medical care, and legal advice). Komhauser's findings are quite similar. Other institutional devices are planned to increase the loyalty of the membership. Such devices include sickness or death benefits, unemployment compensation, pensions for retired members, strike benefits, medical and hospitalization plans, educational and recreational programs, and a variety of similar benefits or activities.32 The terms, traditional or economic, as used in this study are closely related to what is often called "here and now" unionism or business unionism. 0. Social Orientation where is more to unionism than economic gain and control of the job situation. As with any expanding institution the union's functions tend to multiply. In the fringe of economic purpose further goals of insurance of all sorts, vacations, and more recently a guaranteed annual wage have developed. In addition distinctly social functions have developed. As paternal capitalism sought worker favor through social welfare and recreational activities, so the union seeks to create membership solidarity using similar 3IArnold M. Rose, Union Solidarity, The University of Minnesota frees, Minneapolis, 1952, p. 6?. 32Arthur Kornhauser, Robert Dubin, and Arthur Ii. Ross, Industrial Conflict, McGraw-Hill Book Companv, Inc., New York, 1951;, p. 11 . 20 techniques. Lester has indicated some of the areas of activity in which the union competes with other social institutions. Unions may also help to fulfill the needs of members on the social side. Through such activities as educational, health—and-welfare, and community service programs they may develop new patterns of working-class life outside the plant and open to working people greater possibilities for participation in community affairs. In providing recreational, counseling, medical, financial, political, and similar services, unions compete for favor and prestige with other social institutions that are engaged in community service activities, such as churches, charitable agencies, political parties, chambers of commerce, and businessmen's clubs. There is little doubt but that as union services are increased, union stability and perhaps responsibility increase. Union officers interested in gaining and maintaining an active membership attempt to increase ser- vices. One of these lies in the potential of the union to provide for sociability amongst its members. In his discussion of the "Parkinstown Local" Ginzberg deals with such an attempt by union officers. The officials encouraged the use of headquarters as a social center. Tables for card playing were set up in the main hall. A concession for the sale of soft drinks was granted. Saturday movies were arranged for the children.3 Ginzberg reports in addition that there were attempts at educational pro- grams in English, labor history, etc., but these failed for want of en— thusiasm. More informal types of activities were tried, dancing, athletics, etc. Enthusiasm was maintained, but new members were not added to the union roster. "There was a general feeling, both expressed and unexpressed that union headquarters was no place to relax".35 ”Lester, pp. cit., pp. 29-30.’For an interesting discussion of the union's problems in coping with management welfare techniques see Perlman, .03. 2:15.20, pp. 207-2190 31lEli Ginzberg, The Labor bader, The MaeMillan Company, New York, 19148, p. 1370 35133. cit . 21 Hart's report on UAW Amalgamated Local 195 in Windsor, Ontario gives a somewhat different picture. Regarding a bar in the basement of union headquarters he says: Here the union member can drink his beer in much more attractive surroundings and among much more congenial companions than in the usual deplorable atmosphere of an Ontario tavern. ... Because of restraints imposed by the presence of his fellow workers, the average union member who uses the union bar is likely to drink less, enjoy himself more, and go to work in the morning in much better shape than he did before the union got its license.36 Hart reports how the union member finds a more satisfying social life within his union and how he turns to his union rather than to Ford or Chrysler "to undertake the job of cleaning up that social chaos and rebuilding the community along more satisfying lines." 37 While many writings give a broader connotation to the term "social" than that intended by this writer, they nonetheless serve as a background for this study. "Social" in this study refers particularly to such union sponsored recreational activities as picnics, parties, dances, and athletic events. In addition "social" as used here refers to the informal associations of member with member, not under union sponsorship. d. Apathetic Orientation There is much talk of apathy among local union members; and there are many reports of poor attendance, lack of enthusiasm for union programs, and general shoulder shrugging. Although most members may be expected to be oriented toward the political, economic, and social functions of the 36534151. Hart,TI—ndustrial Relations Research and Social Theory?— Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, l9h9, Vol. 15, p. 61;. 37Ibid., p. 73. 22 union, there are no doubt other members who are indifferent to union motives, goals, and activities. Hoxie wrote of bread and butter union- ists and their apathy. They are apt to regard the union--when all is going well--as a matter of course, or an instrument for food and shelter. While meetings are held regularly and members are free to go and determine the conduct of affairs, as a matter of fact, in time of peace, they are lax about attendance. They are content to leave the running of affairs and the thinking to the officers.38 Apathetic as used in this study refers to the member who either has expressed indifference toward the union or who, in reporting his activities, has indicated a subordination of union activity to other interests. e. Hostile Orientation The hostile member, often played up by the anti-unionist, apparently is found less frequently than believed. These members do exist however, and their number need not be large to disturb the equilibrium of the institution. Iester indicates the manifestation of a need to suppress hostile activity. Common in union constitutions is the prohibition of such activities as slandering an officer or member, creating dissension, undermining the union or working against its interest, and circulating written material dealing with union business among members or locals with- out permission of the national's executive board. The penalty may be reprimand, fine, suspension, or expulsion. 9 There has been considerable emphasis concerning the worker, hostile to the union, who belongs only because he must. Member hostility is a common theme of anti—union editorials which stress the worker's "loss of individual freedom." Yet a study by Walker reports no "active opponents" Jafioxie, 92. cit” p. 178. 39Lester, 92. 933., pp. rut-ms. 23 of the union and less than one—tenth "antagonistic." In the same study, however, slightly over one-tenth of the members "accept the union with reservations," and about one-fourth were regarded as "passive."}40 Walker and Guest reported “a vociferous minority" as a hostile group.b'1 Hostile as used in this study refers to the member who has stated an unwillingness to become a member or has expressed other anti—union sentiments. f. The First Guiding Hypothesis While the works cited here are by no means exhaustive, they serve as a sample of the writings concerned with why men join unions or at least of what their orientations are toward the union after they are members. What Seidman, et. al, say concerning motivations for joining a union may well apply to the members' later expectations of the local. ...the reasons for Joiningaunion do not fit neatly into any preconceived motivational scheme. The reasons for joining a union are found in the concrete circumstances surrounding the lives and work experience of employees. Such factors as prior union sympathy, informal group pressure, and militant union tactics of the dues - inspection - line type are of crucial importance. Discussion of the social characteristics of persons showing any of the above orientations has usually been treated in only an incidental manner in research. This investigation has as one of its problems an exploratory effort to determine whether there is a social type (i.e. a composite of i‘GCharles F. Walker, Steeltown, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1950, p.914. mWalker and Guest, 22. 91.3., pp. 131-132. ll2Joe1 Seidman, Jack London, Bernard Karsh, "Why Workers Join Unions," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 271, March 1951, p. 80. 2h social characteristics) which shows a propensity toward a given orien- tation. HYPOTHESIS: DIFFERENT "TYPES" OF UNION MEMBERS HAVE A DIFFERENT PRIORITY OF ORIENTATIONS TOHARD THE IOCAL UNICN. 2. Degree of Integration It may well be that the member's orientation toward the union is a function of his broader social relationships in the community. The worker is also a friend, a neighbor, a citizen. It is highly possible that the union serves as a source of social integration for those who have few other social ties. On the other hand, the active union man may be active ‘becauae he is generally integrated in his family, friendship groups, neighborhood, and community. One of the objects of this study is to examine the relations among various sources of social integration. Degree of integration as used in this study pertains to the degree to which the member has expressed a "feeling of belonging" or a relation- ship to others in three different areas of interaction, plant, neighbor- hood, and community. Further, the degree of integration is based on some of his actual patterns of participation. Related to a consideration of the union member's degree of integration or participation is Blum's discussion of "Group Belongingness and the World of Labor" which indicates something of the interrelatedness of emotional identification of the member with the union and an evaluative description, "apathy." In spite of the appreciation of the services rendered by the union, we must recognize a certain lukewarrmess in workers feelings about the union. ... But more fundamental ... are the social forces determining emotional identification with the union. It is impossible to judge today the strength of the group feelings prior to and following the formation { 25 of the union. But there is no doubt that something existed at that time that has vanished since. ... a decline of emotional identifica- tion with the union and of the comrmmity experience with work and labor. .... The decline in emotional identification shows itself clearly in workers' participation in union affairs. Involvement growing out of relatedness leads to participation, whereas apathy is always the sign of a "broken," disrupted relationship between ourselves and the group to which we belong or the "cormmrnity" or "world" in which we are living. Though referring primarily to the union steward Chinoy's comment could readily apply to any union member. The more deeply involved a man is in union affairs, the more extended is his social participation. In an ever increasingly urban world, the union may come to serve as an institutional centfifi where active participants can find companionship and sociability. Mayo found "two symptoms of social disruption in modern society." First, the number of unhappy individuals increases. Forced back upon himself, with no immediate or real social duties, the individual becomes a prey to unhappy and obsessive personal preoccupations. ... Second, ... It is unfortunately completely characteristic of industrial societies we know that various groups when formed are not eager to cooperate wholeheartedly with other groups. On the contrary, their attitude is usually that of wariness or hostility."5 Mayo's work is replete with references from which one might infer that one of the groups which is wary or hostile is the union membership, a group of poorly integrated, unhappy individuals. Moore was concerned with the services of the union in providing "a sense of belongingness and of social participation." He offers an hypothesis 1L3Fred H. Blum, Toward a Democraticgfi'ork Process, Harper and Brothers M‘Ely Chinoy, Automobile Workers and the American Dream, Doubleday and Company Inc., Garden City, New York, 1955, p. 106. See also Theodore Caplow, The Sociology of Work, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1951:, p. 208. "SElton Mayo, The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization, Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston, 1915, p. 7. 26 which is related to one which this study tests. Moore hypothesizes: ...it appears probable that careful study would reveal an inverse relationship between the intensity of union activity and the extent of participation in the more traditional forms of fami ’al and neighborhood life and types of voluntary associations. This study tests a second guiding hypothesis. HYPOTHESIS: THREE IS A RELATIWSHIP BETWEEN THE WORKER'S SOCIAL INTEGRATION OR PARTICIPATION AT THE WORK PTANT, NEIGHBORHOOD, AND COMMUNITY IEVEIS AND HIS ORIENTATION TOWARD THE LOCAL UNION. 3. Attitudinal Differences: Rank—and—File and Officer Local union organization is a democratic structure which can remain effective only if rank-and-file and officers maintain interest in the or— ganization and come to some agreement about its purposes and functions. The dynamics of the local union may be better understood if the differences and similarities in attitudes of active and inactive members or officers and rank-and-file members are known. This research will attempt to examine the differential perceptions of members who vary in their degree of union activity and who have occupied different positions in the formal union structure. There has been considerable discussion but little really known about differences in attitudes of rank-and-file members of varying degrees of activity in union affairs. One would expect perhaps that a high degree of activity would lead to emotional involvement and favorable feelings toward the union. Blum discusses a few general attitudes of union members. He indicates that while there are differing degrees of identification, most hémoom, 32. 311-, p- 313- 2? members feel that the union is doing a good job. Many agree that the union makes them feel they are partners "in doing something important."h7 Seidman queried the effects of the disappearance of a steelworkers' local and found that most members felt that its loss "would make a great difference." Officers felt they would be discharged. While inactive members did not share that feeling, they believed "that there would be a return to oppressive treatment by foreman, which they would be powerless to prevent." Seidman concludes "that even inactive members feel a con- tinuing need for the union's protection. ..."h8 Chinoy stresses attitudes of "sacrifice" on the part of union leaders as evidenced by "the devotion to a cause greater than oneself." The political nature of union office keeps the leader responsive and responsible to his constituents. Thus the normal circumstances in which the union official acts continue to give concrete sig- nific ce to the ideas of selflessness, responsibility, and leader- ship. These "ideas" may not be wholly held by union leaders, but shared as well by active unionists. A subsequent statement by Chinoy leads to this inference. In the course of his work the union official builds up social ties with other active unionists, to whom he consequently looks for social approval. Since their approval is largely granted on the basis of the tradition which stresses devotion to the union, the leader is steered away from actions which would brand him as a bad unionist. Although this may produce an in-group feeling among the leaders, *hYBlnm, 22. 233.. ppo 38-39. heJoel Seidman, "The Labor Union as an Organization," in Kornhauser, etc 31, 220 Elie, pp. 111-1120 h931:1 Chinoy, "Local Union Leadership," in Alvin w. Gouldner (Ed.) Studies in Leadership, Harper and Brothers, Publishers, New York, 1950, pp 0 168-169 0 28 vis-a-vis the rank and file, it may also produce a strong sense of loyalty to the interests of the union.50 The Illini City research distinguishes among attitudes of rank-and— file, union officers, stewards, top management, and foremen. Some differ- ence in the rank-and-file attitudes and those of others is seen. The general score of rank-and-file attitudes indicated an approxi— mately even division of approval between company and ‘ on, whereas other groups were biased toward one side or the other. For the purpose of investigating attitudinal differences, two final guiding hypotheses were selected as worthy of test. HYPOTHESIS: ACTIVE MEMBERS, AS OPPOSED TO INACTIVE MEMBERS, PERCEIVE THE EFFECTIVENESS 0]“ UNION ORGANIZATION DIFFERENTIX. HYPOTHESIS: OFFICERS, AS OPPOSED TO BTW-OFFICERS, PERCEIVE THE EFFECTIVE— NESS OF UKIC'N ORGANIZATION DIFFERENTLY. An over—view of the members' attitudes and behavior patterns will be presented in Chapter III. The hypothesis concerning the relationship between orientations toward unionism and social characteristics will be discussed in Chapter IV. That chapter will also consider the hypothesis relating union orientation and degree of integration. Attitudes of active and inactive members will be treated in detail in Chapter V, and Chapter VI Will deal with the differential attitudes of officers and rank-and—file members . ‘5UIbid. , pp. 172-173. SlInstitute of Labor and Industrial Relations, Q. 931., p. 355. For a discussion of leaders and rank-and-file see Hoxie, 92. _<_:_:_'i_t_., pp. 177-187, and for attitudes of the rank-and—file about officers see p. 1409. CHAPTER II BASIC THEORY AND METHODS A. The Theoretical Frame of Reference 1. Purpose There are many assumptions about unions and union members which are today accepted as fact. These "facts" do not usually derive from attempts at first hand objective study. Actually, relatively few objective studies have been undertaken. Rose and Moore have commented on the paucity of such stuch'es, and Rose has given a necessarily brief list of the "first steps toward studies of internal union relationships.“- This study deals with the responses of workers themselves putting aside, as much as is possible, the many assumptions appearing as "fact." It is felt that the issues herein pursued are of special interest to the rociologist, labor economist, and the lay student of labor. It would seem iat an understanding of labor relations at the plant level would be en— nced by a knowledge of the worker's own expressions concerning union sues vital to him. The sociologist presents himself as a proponent of an inductive or erahzing science. He is one interested in the structure of human aticnships and the social processes which occur within and among L—limolcffl. Rose, Union S?lidari_ty, The University ofTIinnesota Erase, leapolis, I952, V-VI. Also see Wilbert E. Moore, "Industrial SociOIOgy: :us and Prospects," American Sociological Review, XIII, 19148, 382-391. observable structures. His ultimate goal is to formulate propositions which have universal application to the structures and processes which he observes and analyzes. Perhaps his guiding precept, as a scientist, must be that of reporting what is, rather than what ought to be.2 As has already been indicated, few objective studies of the local union have bean undertaken. Caplow states: Our primary concern here is not with the vast area of labor relations, which has one of the most extensive literatures in the entire field of human behavior, but with the labor union as a form of social organization. In this, the sources are less satisfactory. There is an inexhaustible supply of constitutions, resolutions, programs, manifestoes, and partisan pronouncements, but only a handful of empircal studies, most of which are rather recent and of limited extent. Social scientists will not be prepared to generalize about attitudes or behavior patterns of union members until many empirical studies of local unions test a variety of current folk beliefs. Perhaps this under- taking may add to the store of knowledge necessary for generalization. However, it may serve as a single case whichr,in some respect, may con- ceivably refute some present unfounded "generalization." 2. The Union as an Institution There is an emerging interest in the local union on the part of 'th the labor economist and industrial sociologist in regard to both 3 structure and its function and also how these fit into the larger Heretofore sociologists and economists have each nature of unionism. Needless to say owed their special interests to guide their studies. 2For a brief description of industrial sociology see Ibid.,,,382—§83. 3Theodore Caplow, The Sociolggy of Work, University of Minnesota Press, neapolis, 19514, p. 191. 31 an analgamation of such seemingly diverse interests on the part of a research team would probably yield information which members of any single discipline or approach could not obtain independently. A recent suggestive study, employing a variety of disciplines, was done by mem- bers of the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations at the Univer- sity of Illinois. The eight senior staff members included three econo- mists, three sociologists, and two psychologistsJ‘ There is one important agreement between labor economists and indus— trial sociologists that bears on the question of studying the labor union. Both conceive of the union as a social institution, and labor economists who deal with the union from this point of view do a more than an adequate Job of demonstrating their insight. Ross says: Every institution has a formal purpose, a stated intention, an offi- cial rational.... The formal purpose is always a statement of the benefit which the institution provides for its rank and file. Or- dinarily the institution must feel that it satisfies the formal pur- pose as an incident to its activities; otherwise, it is not likely to survive.... As an institution expands in strength and status, it outgrows its formal purpose. It experiences its own needs, develops its own am- bitions, and faces its own problems. These become differentiated from the needs, ambitions, and problems of its rank and file. The trade union is no exception. Chapin provided a traditional sociological treatment of the concept, titution, when he dealt with attitudes and behavior patterns, symbolic L fiInstitute of Taber and Industrial Relations, Labor—Management Lions in Illini City, Champaign, Illinois, 19514, Vol. 2, p. 92. SArbhur M. Ross, Trade Union Wage Policy, University of California :3, Berkley and Los Angeles, 19113, pp. 22-23. 32 culture traits, utilitarian culture traits, and the code regulating inter- 6 relationships. Even a cursory examination of sociological literature reveals a variety of alternative definitions of institution. A few, in addition to Chapin's conception, are listed below.7 Regardless of one's preference for definition he cannot neglect a consideratim of some pertinent factors embodied in "institution" as a cmcept. Actors are involved, goals exist, there are rules and normative , expected patterns of behavior; and the behavior takes place within a recog- nizable structure. These ideas are inseparable except in the abstract. If the investigator is unable to study the institution in toto, he may select special segments, structures, or patterns for study. W. Stuart Chapin, Contemporary American Institutions, Harper and— Brothers, New York, 1935, p. If For the application of Chapin' s concept to the labor union see Delbert C. Miller and William H. Form, Industrial Sociolo , Harper and Brothers, New York, 1951, p. 230. 7R. M. MacIver, Societ , Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., New York, 1937, p. 11;. ...the established forms 93 conditions of procedure characteristic of group activity... Talcott Parsons, The Structure of Social Action, McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1927, p. 1107. Durkheim: ...the body of rules governing action in pursuit of immediate ends in so far as they exercise moral authority derivable from a common value system.. . Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociolggical Theory Pure and Applied, The Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois, l9h9, p. 276. ...patterns governing behavior and social relationships which have become interwoven with a system of common moral sentiments which in turn define what one has a "right to expect" of a person in a certain position... Wilbert E. Moore, Industrial Relations and the Social Order, The MacMillan Company, New York, 1951, p. 1417. ...a well defined rule of conduct having a normative sanction 3... Arnold W. Green, Sociolo , hEcGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952, p. 79. ...the organization of several folkways and mores (and most 0 ten, but not necessarily, laws) into a unit which serves a number of social fmictions... Lowell J. Carr, Analytical Sociolggy, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1955: P. 81. ...patterns of organization and organization-oriented behavior enforced by individuals who are culturally regarded as having the right to make and enforce orders to carry out the pattern... See also Moore, _o_p_. git. ,pp. h17-h18 and Everett C. Hughes, "Institu- tional Office and the Person", American Journal of Sociology, h3, 1937, hOh-h13. 33 This writer has chosen to study only a part of an "institution." He has selected Chapin's first type-part, namely attitudes and behavior patterns, as some of these exist in a particular local union. There is no implication that all attitudes and behavior patterns of all members have been subjected to study. Rather, a particular local union was chosen for the study of some selected attitudes. A small attempt was made to see whether there is a relationship between attitudes and be- havior patterns. The local union is the structural building block of the institution. It is the organizatimal unit within which the vast majority of union activities take place. The process of collective bargaining, perhaps most noticeable at contract time, is a continual (possibly continuous) daily process at the local level. Although the union organization "regu- larly operates at three levels: (1) the union ‘local,'... (2) the national or 'international'... and (3) the confederation of national unions..."8 it would seem that an understanding of the nature of the institution could "I well begin at the lowest level. William Foote Whyte, speaking of the local union, in the "foreword" to a work by Sayles and Strauss says: This then is not the whole institution, but we can hardly profess to understand unions until we observe them in action at the local larger: we understand union-management or worker-management rela- tions (in a unionized plant) without some knowledge of what is going on within the local.9 WOOI‘B, .920 93:20, p. 2990 9Leonard R. Sayles and George Strauss, The Local Union, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1953, IX. 3h 3 . Attitudes Since this study involves the relationships that possibly exist between attitudes and behavior patterns, it may be well to include a brief dis- cussion of what an attitude is conceived to be. The meanings of atti— tude have been somewhat exhaustively treated in the works of the psycho- logists; sociologists have extracted and used certain aspects of the definitions which they felt are most suitable for sociological analysis. Others have utilized the concept in a diverse number of ways without ever having tried to clarify its meaning. Some of the more common conceptuali- zations of "attitude" are presented below.10 There are certain characteristics of an attitude on which there is relative agreement. Holland's fine brief summaries of these characteris- tics help clarify the concept. (1) Attitude implies action tendency. (2) Attitudes are socially determined. (3) Attitudes are related to objects, the social values of the world of the observer. “Gordon W. Allport, "The Historical Backgrmmd of Modern Social Psychology," in Handbook of Social chhologv, edited by Gardner Lindsey, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. , Cambridge ’12, Mass. , 19511, p. 113. ...a neuropsychic state of readiness for mental and physical activity... Ibid., p. 15. ‘Droba: ...a mental disposition of the human individual to act for or against a definite object... David Krech and Richard S. Crutchfield, Theory and Problems of Social P cholo , McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 15318, p. 152. ...an enduring organization of motivational, emotional, perceptual, and cognitive processesses with respect to some aspect of the individual's world... John F. Cuber, Sociolo , Second Edition, New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts, Inc., 1951, p. 213. ...first, an orientation or a "tendency to act" in some way toward some person or situation or object or idea... Chapin, 32. git.,p. hll. ...a set toward a person or situation that calls for adjustment... Bert Green, "Attitude Measurement," in Lindsey, pp. £13., p. 336. ...an enduring syndrome of response consistency with regard to a set of social objects... 35 (it) Attitudes are organized, not randomly occurring. (5) Attitudes are generally considered to be enduring. (6) Attitudes have emotional content. (7) Attitudes are learned, not innate. (8) Attitudes have direction, intensity, and saliency.11 The most common meaning of "attitude" seems to be that an attitude is some kind of "behavioral tendency," and that overt expression merely evidences the existence of the underlying tendency. It is often assumed that the expression is usually consistent with the attitude held; such is a basic assumption of this study. Thus far, students of the subject have been able to study attitudes only indirectly; and precisely what relationships exist between and among expressions, attitudes, and non- verbal behavior is not yet known. In this study the writer uses the term "attitude" when he discusses the verbal responses of the local union members on a given issue. These expressions (attitudes) have then been related to such items as social characteristics and behavior patterns. It is hoped that these efforts will contribute something new to present knowledge about local unions or will at least aid in the prevention of the spreading of misinformation. B. Methods 1. Initiation of the Study Prior to the beginning of the actual field work the writer made an informal attempt to get approval of the study. While the first attempt 11from lecture notes in a course entitled "Social Attitudes" taught by the late Dr. John Holland. 36 was unsuccessful, it and a subsequent effort may provide information which will be of value in a future effort to study a local union. In the spring of 1953 it was decided to approach the editor of the Lansing Labor News to discuss the prospects of doing a case study in one of the Lansing locals because it was felt that he would know the situation in most of the locals since he gathered news from them regularly. This would require the cooperation of the rank-and-file and the officers in the local selected. The editor felt that a study could be done; and when asked about alternatives in case of a refusal, he replied that "we" could choose another local.12 Needless to say, the researcher felt that he had taken a proper initial step; he had talked with an "influential." The editor had a personal interest in the project and requested that some questions about readership of the Lansing Labor News be included in the schedule. Several questions were included as requested, although they are not directly related to the purposes of the study. It was first intended to study the largest local in the city. A second informal contact with the president of the largest local, was made for the writer by a friend who knew the labor leaders in the city. It appeared that approval for the study was about to be obtained. All that was needed presumably was a perfunctory approval by the members. However, at the first meeting with the local president, the writer was informed that any study in that local was doomed; for the executive board of the local had voted unanimously against approval. Perhaps as a result of a pre-test of the schedule, a rumor was abroad that the study was being IZThe writer was surprised to learn, in the sunmer of 195b, that the editor had apparently forgotten this earlier contact. 37 sponsored by the National Association of Manufacturers. Actually, at that time, no one in local off icialdom had seen the schedule, and there was no valid reason for suspecting the schedule or the researcher. The executive board reported its action to the local membership, and the membership perfunctorily voted against the study as recommended by the executive board. In a later discussion with the writer the president indicated that if approval from the International could be obtained, he would use all his influence to get approval at the local level. How- ever, it was decided that in light of what had happened, research possi- bilities with this local were wearing extremely thin. One of the socio- logist's "pets," primary interaction at the informal level, had failed to produce desired results. In order to obtain approval for the project it appeared necessary to start at the top and work down through formal channels. To those who believe that international officers always tell local officers what to do, a word of warning is offered. In this instance international officers told local officers nothing. Entree to higher eschelons was obtained via a fellow sociologist who had been working on a study conducted under the auspices of the union. It was apparently made clear to higher officials that the person who would conduct this study had no "axe to grind," that the findings would be handled in an objective manner, and that only the truth would be pre- sented. When these ideas had been "sold," the "approval procedure" was activated. Although a chain of command from the international through the regional to the sub-regional levels became visible, no higher official asked any local official to permit the study. 38 The writer's first personal contact with any part of the latter pro- cess occurred when two regional union representatives and the writer met for lunch. An appointment was made for a discussion to take place at the sub-regional office. One of the sub-regional officials spoke of Local 72).; as "his local," and he suggested that perhaps the study could be done there. Two days before the writer was to leave the Lansing area, per-— mission to do a study of Local 721; was granted by the local officers. The process of getting approval had taken the time during which the re— searcher had hoped to complete much of the necessary interviewing. 2. The Schedule Earlier the schedule had been submitted to a pre-test, but at that time no union officials had had an opportunity to analyze and criticize it. Further, since members were to be sampled and "quizzed," union offi- cials had certain questions which they thought theyiwould like to have Local officers insisted that the study be a collaborative answered. effort. They stated a desire to participate in the study actively. They wanted to approve the schedule and be permitted to add to it items which they thought important. Much of this was formality, for they made no radical changes. Apparently, as with higher officials, the local officers had to be convinced that those with an academic interest in the study would be objective, at least not anti—union. In the summer of 1951;, the writer reported some marginal data to local and subregional officers. These officers informed the writer at that time that unless mly the truth and all the truth were reported, the study would be of no value to them. 39 The local union selected for study was comprised of units represent- ing the following industrial operations: forge and foundry - 6, metal fabricating - 6, and chemical and plastics - 3. In addition one forge plant office is a member unit. A copy of the schedule may be found in Appendix A. 3. The Sample Since there was little or no information available concerning the composition of the population in regard to the characteristics of interest, a simple random sample seemed most feasible. The sample was drawn in the fall of 1953. Cases were selected at regular intervals; every sixteenth name was drawn from an alphabetical list of local union members, excluding those of fewer than three months' membership. In attempts to make appoint- ments for the actual interviewing, it was found that roughly one-third >f the cases selected could not be located at the address given. Many ould not be found at home, but the majority had moved. No evidence railable concerning these cases is indicative of bias in any given rection. In view of the fact that many members could not be located was decided that a supplementary list of one hundred names be drawn a similar fashion, these names to be substituted for those which Ld not be contacted from the original list. An examination of the lists thus drawn showed a number of strictly L residences, i.e., somewhat isolated from other cases in the sample. rse of the high cost of obtaining these rural cases, the study had 2 restricted to members from the central city and its urban fringe. arrangement allowed an interviewer to get more than one interview particular trip. In all, one hundred forty-two interviews were ho obtained, one hundred four from the central city and thirty-eight from the fringe. In the original sample there were fifty-six rural addresses that were not contacted. Rose has reported a loss of rural members from his sample as producing "insignificant bias." dwellers frequently refrain from union activity because they "live too However, since fringe far out," it can be expected that rural members would be at least as inactive. Further, the numberll'ggtLto this study is six times the loss sustained by Rose and can hardly be called insignificant.13 In fact, a report by Whyte would indicate strong possibility of having "lost" a number of hostile cases.1’4 The factors listed above thus demonstrate that the sample is not completely representative, thereby placing some limitations upon general- izing from the sample to the local's population. Further, the exact size of the population being studied was not known. Information supplied to the writer indicated a membership of about 3200. At the time of the lrawing of the sample, selection of every sixteenth case excluding rural ases yielded a total of 200. There may be some criticism of asample arm from regular intervals. In his discussion of a sample of marriage rtificates McCormick says of this method: If the interval is not too large, this method should also be more lgt takes representative than other types of random sampling, since certificates proportionately from every part of the list. rijAmold M. Rose, Union Solidarity, University of Minnesota Press, eapolis, 1952, p. 32. 1hSee William Foote Nhyte, "Who Goes Union and Why," Personnel nal, December, 191m, pp. 215-230. 15‘I‘hornas C. McCormick, Elenentary Social Statistics, New York , McGraw . Book Company, Inc., l9hl, p. 226. hi One assumption of the study is that the membership of the local constitutes a finite universe. Referring to a finite universe and sampling by regular intervals Young states: This procedure has been used for many years and from experience has proved satisfactory both from the mathematical and practical points of view. It is obvious that this technique can be used only on finite universes where complete listings are available.16 The size of the sample is perhaps as open to criticism as is the sampling method. Since every sixteenth case was chosen, the sample is 633% of the membership which is considered as the population, i.e., those members who live either in the central city or the fringe area. If one can consider the sample to be representative, its size may be considered A major weakness, however, is that ! adequate in terms of pure numbers. the researcher has attempted to determine the existence of a number of different categories; and for statistical treatment the number of cases Still, once the data is felt to in these categories is somewhat wall. If he had hoped e "in," the investigator must make of it what he can. 3 do a more analytical study, he may be obliged to settle for one that satisfactorily descriptive with as much analysis as appears warranted. Often the exigencies of time and expense preclude a complete census even the use of a very large sample. However, samples ordinarily uld not be discarded as unreliable merely because they are small, nor 11d work be categorically classified as unscientific merely because 8 not subject to rigorous statistical manipulation. Jerome states: The principle upon which the extensive use of the sampling process rests is known as the law of statistical regularity. This law is, if>Pauline V. Young, Scientific Social Surveys and Research, Prentice- IHCQ, New York, 19,49, p0 3360 h2 "that a moderately large number of items chosen at random from among a very large group are almost sure, on the average, to have charac- teristics of the larger group." This law does not imply that the resemblance between the sample and its universe will be perfect. There is no one criterion which can be applied in the determination of the adequate size of a sample. The size of the sample for this study was unwittingly specified by the writer in an effort to improve upon the often stated minimum requirement that the sample be "not less than 5%" of the universe under investigation. Further, the selected size of the sample was related to what the writer had thought he could afford. h. Interviewing At the time of initiation of the interviewing two important problems were foreseen. First, it was felt that the local members might cooperate only if they believed that the union officials approved of the study. Second, there was some contemplation of the idea that official approval :ould be overdone, i.e., that members would possibly respond according 0 what they thought the officers would like to hear. Unlike the study me by Rose in St. Louis, this project was initiated outside the union, rtially alleviating the second problem. Each interviewer carried two :ters for the purpose of identifying himself. Each letter was on offi- .l stationery of the respective sponsoring organizations. The reader I. note the emphasis on the confidential nature of the identification he inte r'viewee.18 The research employed four trained interviewers, a. Negro to interview Negro respondents. if r Harry Jerome fStatistical Method, Harper and Brothers, NewTAork‘; , pp. 13-17, as quoted in Wilson Gee, Social Science Research Methods, aton—Century—Crofts, Inc., New York, 19 O, p. 266: 18For cepies of the letters of introduction see Appendix A. h3 The actual interviewing began late in the fall of 1953 and extended to September 15, 1951;. The time element here perhaps may lead to another criticism; interviews were made over approximately a nine to ten month period. For purposes of justifying a possibly similar classification of respondee number one and respondee number one hundred forty-two, one must rely on the assumption relating to the persistent, enduring nature of attitudes. The interviewees were selected at roughly the same time; the change in attitude from the time of selection to the time of reaponse in unknown. 5. The Determination of Categories = (a) The primary categories to be considered are the respondents' role orientations toward unionism, (b) degrees of integration at the work alant, neighborhood, and community levels, (c) degrees of union activity, nd their (d) occupancy of union offices. This section outlines how the Ltegories were derived and what responses were used to establish them. a. Orientations Toward Unionism The orientations toward unionism perhaps need further explanation. re is some arbitrariness in the selection of what is called the er's role orientation and the expected relationship between that itation and degree of union activity. That relationship as presented 'amatically: Degree of Union Activity Role Orientation Toward Unionism Ideological or political Traditional or economic Actives Social Inactives Apathetic Hostile hh Role orientation, as used here, refers to the member's own concep- >f his relationship to the local organization, usually considered ms of what he feels the local's dominant function should be, and :ularly what function the local should perform for him. ideological or political orientation refers to an expression of .des on the part of the member which indicates that he feels that ion's first task concerns a political or power struggle at the level. This relates to but a microcosmic contest by comparison he way in which ideological is usually employed, i.e. , referring overall working-class movement. ase ideological unionists are more concerned with "extracurricular" rotions, such a public ownership, political action, public hous- 3, socialized medicine, and international politics, than with a immediate issue of a ten-cent-an-hourraise in plant X in the L1 of 1950.19 are is a distinction here in that those classified as ideological [own little interest in purely economic gains. editional or economic, as the diagram indicates, alludes predomi- to concern for economic goals. Unionists with this orientation :t interested in wage increases to the exclusion of other gains. :peaks of business unionism in terms which help clarify the writer's ion. is essentially trade-conscious, rather than class-conscious. t is to say, it expresses the viewpoint and interests of the kers in a craft or industry rather than those of the worldng 53 as whole. (sic) It aims chiefly at more, here and now, for filler and Form, 92. 933., p. 261. 16 he organized workers of the craft or industry, in terms mainly E higher wages, shorter hours, and better working conditions,....2 ain difference between Hoxie's and the writer's use is that in atter, the purely economic items are stressed. the social orientation shows that the worker has replied primarily reference to some type of recreational need, more "outside activi— ' "more recreation." Sentiment may also be expressed showing a a for friendship and social contacts. the apathetics are usually conceived of as those who are not par— irly interested in union activities; they have no desire to hold a or serve on committees. They seldom attend meetings or vote. are merely members because their dues are paid up, perhaps because nust pay dues to retain their jobs. ?hey who have a hostile orientation, unlike the apathetics, may be to be vociferous about their dislike for the union; nothing about rim is good. The union has accomplished less for them than they re they might have done on their own. They would not belong if lid not have to. .‘wo plans were used to determine the members' orientations toward tion. The first plan was felt to be weak in that too many cases ' into a category of mixed orientation. Likewise, an equal number res could not be classified utilizing the first plan. The second on which the findings of this study are based, was devised in an '. to eliminate the overlapping and unknown categories. This plan W Hoxie, w“Trade Unionism in the United States, D. Appleton and 1y, 1923, as quoted in Joseph Shister (Editor), Readin s in Labor gps and Industrial Relations, J .B. Lippincott, New York, 1931, p. 72. 1&6 was felt, would allow a more detailed analysis and interpretation of r one-half of the cases in the sample. The responses used to construct orientational categories are presented below. Political Orientation: Those of this orientation are members who .that "the most important job of the union" deals with protection welfare of the members and the settling of disputes. iJéonomic Orientation: The economically oriented believe the union's job should be concerned with wages and hours and the acquisition of :e benefits. This and the above orientation were determined by use to the same question, "What do you think should be the most tant job of the union?" In cases where the respondent gave both a and a monetary answer, more weight was given to the latter. In respect the political is a more pure category than is the economic. gial Orientation: This category is based on considerations both ire for social favor and on actual "social"participation. Members fied as socially oriented expressed a willingness to join the union 2 others with whom they work belong, their recreation is most often allow members, or they participate in union sponsored athletic or ." activities . Ehetic Orientation: Actually this classification was determined While apathy or indifference still seems to be illustrated by irregular participation, a low degree of participation may be Lble by a would-be active, enthusiastic member. An examination :chedules shows that some members have other jobs, poor health, f _ _ . i W c. which prevent attendance at meetings. With this fact in mind, the asons for poor attendance were used as criteria, rather than the fact poor attendance. Apathetics are those who, among other things, feel it the meetings are unimportant or take too much time, those who have [er things to do, or are not interested. Cases giving these responses e withdrawn from other categories and classed as apathetic. The itical category yielded twelve apathetic cases, and the economic and 13.1 classifications each contributed eight cases. Since hostile mem- 3 had previously expressed anti-union sentiments, it was felt that me for their poor participation would not add to a clarification heir classification. In addition, seven residual cases were included he apathetic category. [gstile Orientation: The hostile members are those who expressed willingness to join the union and those who expressed a dislike for 3. Table 1 presents a summary of the totals for the above procedure in classifying cases as to role orientation. b. Degrees of Integration he determination of various degrees of integration is based on see which concern both sentiments and participation. An effort is to establish the extremes, high and low degrees of integraticn work plant which include the local union, neighborhood, and (1) Plant Integration t3: These members are either satisfied or very satisfied with obs. When asked about their "department as a place to work," EDIE ORIENTATIONS TOWARD UNIONISM TABLE 1 Orientation Total Political hz Economic 30 Social 23 Apathetic 35 Hostile 12 Total 1h2 h8 149 hey feel that it is good, very good, or excellent. These are the mem- are who vote in union elections "most of the time" and consider them- elyes to be either "active union rooters" or "active supporters" of he union. b).EEE‘ Those of low degree of integration report that only a few or one of their friends are people with whom they work. They attend union eetings once or twice a year or less. They vote in union elections "less han half the time ," "almost never," or "never." c) medium: The cases which did not "fit" either of the above categories re obviously those of neither high nor low degree of integration using he above criteria. These cases have been classed as those of medium agree. (2) Neighborhood Integration a) gigh: Cases of high degree of integration at the neighborhood level elieve their neighborhood to be either a good, very good, or excellent lace to live. As an unsolicited response they mentioned people as re- ated to so high an evaluation. Further, most of their friends live in re neighborhood. b) 921‘ The friends of these members primarily live outside the neighbor- ood in other parts of the city. They have no friends who live in the eighborhood. As a place to live they rate the neighborhood as only fair r poor. Members were asked with whom they spent their leisure time other man that spent participating in organizations to which they belong. Four lternatives, including "neighbors," were presented. These members spent SO 3 time alone or with friends other than relatives, fellow workers, neighbors . Medium: The majority of the cases "fell" into this category, having t" into neither the high nor low group. (3) Community Integration 5.553.133 These members rated their city as good, very good, or excellent 1 asked what they thought of the city as a place to work. They rated similarly as a place to live. They belong to religious, civic, fraternal, rting, or other organizations. Most of their friends live in parts the city other than their own neighborhood. _I_c_w: These members belong to none of the above mentioned types of anizations. In addition, the majority of their friends are reported live outside the city. In the case of those dwelling in the fringe 3., their friends live outside of "the Lansing area." Medium: Again the majority of the cases are found in this medium tee of integration. The results of this procedure show that no large 3k of members has answered consistently in the same direction. A nary of the findings may be found in Table 2. (c) Degree of Union Activity The writer learned from local union officers that the union sponsored atively few "extra-curricular" activities. Therefore, determination the degrees of activity is based solely on voting behavior and atten- ce at union meetings. TABIE 2 DEGREES OF INTEGRATION AND UNION ACTIVITY 51 If Degree of Degree of Degree of .y Neighborhood Plant Union '10 Totalylntegration Total Integration Total Activity Total 25 High 19 High 35 Active 70 100 Medium 99 Medium 91 Medium ’40 18 Low 2h Low 16 Inactive 32 11:2 Total lh2 Total llr2 Total lh2 52 High: Those of a high degree of activity vote in union elections ’ of the tine or more frequently. They also attend union meetings about of the time or more often. a: By way of contrast members who show a low degree of activity less than one-half of the time or even more infrequently. They also 1d meetings less than half of the time or more infrequently. iedium: Conceivably, cases in this classification either vote or d meetings more or less regularly, but do not do both consistently. The summary figures concerning degree of activity are also to be in Table 2. d. Officer and Non-Officer iince it was known that at any given time there are usually relative- ' local union officers, the investigator decided to classify stewards, teemen, and chairmen of local committees as officers. This was done, r, only when the members had indicated that these were officer posi- Under these conditions, thirty-two cases were classified as offi- 6. Analysis .e interpretation of the data for this study is partially based on stical analysis. Yet Arthur Boss makes one wonder whether he dare make any application of statistics to such a study. Ross states: fact is that among all the open questions in the study of social avior, the great majority cannot be answered in any manner, and only am can be penetrated by statistical analysis.21 arse, 0p. cit., p. I9. 53 pits Ross' warning, the writer has attempted a minor statistical me. For the statistical analysis of the data in this study, the investi— »r chose to use the chi-square test for a number of reasons. First, . of the data to be related was strictly qualitative. Second, since square can be used for qualitative data only or for a combination of itative and quantitative data, a given chi-square value is most ily compared to another chi-square value. Third, the additive quality hi-square may be of value if categories need to be collapsed to be ingful. Fourth, a simple correction can be applied where expected zency in a given cell does not satisfy the usually required number We cases. Fifth, even when thelchi-square value shows little sig- :ance of difference, the sign of the "observed minus expected fre— :y" values adds to a descriptive knowledge of the factors under in- .gation. In regard to the point about the size of the expected frequency in iven cell, the authorities seem to differ. In quoting Snedecor isher and Yates respectively, Hagood discussing "correcting for unity" states: 118 method is applicable for any chi-square test where there is only as degree of freedom. It should be used according to George W. Seede- ar, whenever the expected frequency in any cell of the table is less Ian 59; or according to R. A. Fisher and F. Yates, whenever the :pected frequency in any cell of the table is less than 292. [Emphasis me] The correction is important when the value of chi square is near 1e significance level, since the correction reduces chi square, and Lilure to apply the correction might lead one So judge as significant chi square which should not be so considered. 2 imargaret Jannan Hagood, Statistics for Sociologists, Henry Holt mpany, New York, 191:1, p. 312. 51: A corresponding statement by Pearson and Bennett: men the theoretical frequencies are smaller than ten and especially men smaller than five _, [emphasis min] the ordinary table values of ni-square...are inaccurate. This is especially true when there is 11y one degree of freedom. It is true to a lesser extent for two or nee degrees of freedom. However, the error is negligible with more ran three degrees of freedom.23 find from McCormick: 3 is a general principle of the chi square test that no cell should mtain much [Emphasis mine] less than five eXpected frequency. Any 111 that offends in this respect should be combined with the cell >ove it.2 'he above quotations tend to give evidence of some magical quality 'e or a multiple thereof. Since some of the cells to be presented ,ned fewer than five eXpected frequency, it seemed advisable to ex- nt with the "correction for continuity" to see how the chi-square would be affected. However, in most of the tables the number of s of freedom exceeds three. There are no tables with fewer than degrees of freedom. Further, many of the tests show that many of i—squares are not statistically significant. The correction used "decreasing by .5 each cell frequency which is greater than expected creasing by .5 each cell frequency which is smaller than expected"— gested by Hagood.25 1e writer selected two tables with chi-square values for which the ility level was below .05 and applied the above corrective technique. Lue for the first table was altered from .01 - P - .001 to .05 -- P - .02, Wank A. Pearson and Kenneth R. Bennett, Statistical Methods, John and Sons, New York, l9h2, pp. 398-399. *McCor-mick, 92. cit.,p. 205. ;Hagood, 92. 313., p. 512. 55 e of correction. For the second table, the table chi-square value was , but the value of P remained within the .05 — .02 range. Since the ction resulted in but slight change it can be assumed that the un- cted table chi-square and probablilty values can probably be accepted liable. l problem confronts one engaged in this type of research; namely, rriters use "significant" as it is apparently used generally by rticians, but without stating what probability level they have chosen. this decision is usually that of the individual researcher, the term d in this thesis when P is equal to or less than .05. agood states, "No arbitrary level has been adopted in most fields iological research, and the choice of level is up to the individual 26 1! ch person. TagoTDH,.gp. cit., pp. hh7-hh8. CHAPTER III THE MEMBERS OF LOCAL 72).; he of the purposes of this study was to gather pertinent information ming attitudes of mien members toward issues of relevance and in- ; to the union and to scholars. No attempt was made to‘ select a to range of issues. Rather, the literature on attitudes of union 5 was explored; and recurrent themes were selected for inclusion in esearch. In a sense a comparison of the literature and the findings 5 study serve to "place" the union members of Local 72).; in reference on issues and attitudesin the broader universe of union studies. Lcally, data was gathered in the following areas: (1) who the mem- e in terms of their social characteristics, (2) why they joined the (3 ) basic union and leisure time activities, (h) attitudes about munity and work, (5) attitudes about the union and union officers, attitudes about politics and government. is chapter summarizes these characteristics, attributes, and atti— In some cases the findings reported have been compared with those ginning that the sampling technique yielded a representative sample, >1e will be discussed as if it were the membership. Data on which Lowing discussion is based may be found in Appendix B. ’ew schedule questions are those used by Arnold Rose. Some of those : to job satisfaction and governmental responsibility were suggested er Centers, The PsychologLof Social Classes, Princeton University rinceton, 1949 Others, concerning opinion of Lansing were prompted r W. Kornharser, Detroit as the People See It, Wayne University Press 1952. Some referring to ideology come from Theodore Newcomb, "Labor 5 Seen by Their members: An Attempt to heasure Attitudes ," in In- Conflict: A Psychological Inter retation, edited by G. W. Hartman ewcomb, Cordon Company, New York, 1939:9313-338. 57 ther researchers. At times, these comparisons serve to indicate the :e of typicality of Local 721;. It should be remembered, however, that le research on union locals has been guided by the hypotheses used in study. Nor have the same techniques been used in gathering and analyz- ;he data. For these and other reasons the comparisons are not entirely to A. :Who They Are The members of Local 7214 are similar in‘ background to workers in industrial centers. In occupational composition the plurality are semi-skilled workers; thirty percent are slcllled and seventeen nt unskilled. Seven percent of the members are clerical workers. Most of the members have been in manual occupations throughout their lives. While the exclusion from the sample of those members with less three months of seniority may have biased the findings in favor of 1 degree of job tenure, the members seem to represent a stable group rkers, having job tenure of 10.2 years and union seniority of 7.3 . About half have had two or more previous jobs at somewhat lower levels than that of their present job. Their socio-economic rank is probably best described as upper—lower Their fathers' occupations ran the full range of Edward's classi- .on. Almost two-fifths of the fathers were farm owners or tenants; .ghth were skilled workers or f oremen, and one—twelfth were semi- ~d workers. The members of the local are overwhelmingly native born 's.2 They were either born in cities or moved to cities during their Any census data for Ilansing comes from the 1950 Census ojLPopulation, II, Characteristics of Population, Part 22, Michigano The percentage sign born in Local 72h is 5. 5%. The percentage of foreign born in s 18 5%. 58 3d. Their average length of time in the Lansing area is about rears with three quarters of them now living in the central city remainder in the fringe and the smaller communities surrounding 3 average amount of education of the members is 9.2 years, some- 58 than the median for Lansing males. However, the members are to mates of about the same amount of education and of similar conomic background.3 Close to one-fifth of the wives have been embers with an average membership of h.7 years. Nearly half of es are favorable toward the union; others feel that the union is theory but has faults in practice. Nevertheless, with the gener- vorable attitude toward the union, it could be expected that married would not be discouraged from active union participationJl The Lnembers have an average of three children. ; a group the members have an average age of h2 years, and most of :perienced unemployment during the great depression. Although two- of the members expressed a desire for a different job, probably .' them are now doing the kind of work which will be theirs for the m of their working lives. Chinoy points to the dream of upward :y and the function of the talk of excape from the factory. Yhe age of thirty-five would seem to be the point of no return re. After that dreams of glory must be located not only outside garage education of mates is 10.3 years. The median for Lansing Ls 11.1 years. The figure for the urbanized area is not used since asence of Michigan State University would bias that figure toward a higher median value, 11. )4. Eighty-six percent of the members are married. This figure shows he percentage married in Local 721; is larger than that for adult in Ingham County (70.32;). 59 Company but also outside of much practical effort to make them e true. ... But as pressures to hold their jobs increase with age and grow— family responsibility, the quick impulse is more like? to be eased 1n talk. Pent-up feelings are released 1n talk. mbers indicated a wish for self employment either in their own see or on their own farms. .st of the members belong to one or two formal community organizations, »-fifths have belonged to another union prior to their membership L1 721;. About one-fifth reported that they have been local officers littee officers in the present local. The following positions have .assified as officers with the number of actual cases included in 1ple: vice presidents-2, secretaries and treasurers-h, international :ntative-l, and unit chairmen-5, stewards and committemen—ZB, and ice officers (bargaining, credit union, etc.)—5. Forty "officer- have been held by thirty-two men and their average time in office an 39.3 months. Ten of the cases report having held office for wenty—four to fifty-nine months, and seven were officers for over years. The high proportion of officers in the sample probably re- the long tenure of these employees. B. Why They Joined the Union any of the members of Local 72h have had little choice but to be- nion members. Maintenance of membership, "one of the six main 8 of treating union membership in relation to employment ," is Ely Chinoy, Automobile Workers and the American Drefl, Doubleday mpany Inc., Garden City, New York, 1955, po 114- See 3180 P380 60 ‘teristic of the contracts of Local 7214.6 Under this arrangement who are not members at the time of contract need not become mem- but those Who are employed subsequent to the signing must become '8 after having acquired seniority. Such membership may be rescind— 'written notice just prior to the end of the first full year of 'ship. The ggreement between Malling ForgingACompany and Local 72h '-CIO furnishes a clear example: rction 2. (b) Any employe who on the effective date of this Agree- :nt is not a member of the Union shall not be required to become a :mber of the Union as a condition of continued employment. Any Lch employs, however, who during the life of this Agreement joins 1e Union must maintain his membership thereafter as provided in Lragraph (a). 1) Any employe hired on or after the effective date of this Agree— ent shall become a member of the Union upon acquiring seniority, and : shall, as a condition of employment, maintain his Union memberh Lip for one year to the extent of paying membership dues and Inter- Ltional and local Union general assessments uniformly levied against .1 members, subject to the following: (i) If not more than twenty days and not less than ten days immedi- ;ely preceding the first anniversary date of his acquisition of :niority such employs notifies the Company and the Union in writing Lat he has resigned from Union membership, such action shall auto— Ltically cancel his "Authorization for Check-Off of Dues," and such zploye Shall not be obligated thereafter to maintain his membership 1 the Union, nor pay any dues or assessments as a condition of employ- :nt during the remaining life of this Agreement. (ii) In case no such notice is given, such employs shall maintain .s membership in the Union as a condition of employment during the .fe of this Agreement. . . . he acquiring of seniority in Local 72h usually entails a probation- eriod of employment of thirty days in some units and as much as sixty ners. The members were asked, "Were you willing or unwilling to join the when you were first employed where you now work!" Less than one-tenth EIlloyd G. EeyHOIds, Labor Economics and Labor Relations, Prentice:f Inc., New York, l9h9, p. 203. 61 [that they had been unwilling to become members of the union. Of .ne memberS'who indicated that they had."had no choice," two were lg to join. Another 6.3% have been members less than one year and Lvably can yet "escape." Over'nine-tenths are known to have been rs for from one to twenty years or more and either chose to be mem— >r simply forgot to get out. It must be admitted that such forget- ss is possible; unless one planned to get out of the union, the ten ariod could come and go. There are ostensibly more reminders to 1 than to get out. Since this local came into existence between a and twelve years prior to the initial interviewing for this study, apparent that over three—fifths of the members actually had to be- members, for at least a_year. There are, however, a variety of reasons for why these men wanted to nbers. Almost one-fifth indicated they wanted protection against ement, or self protection. If one were to include the responses re- g to seniority protection (3.5%) and security (h.9%), the importance 3URITY can be seen to outweigh wages (18.3%). However, the writer ang those who believe security to mean primarily economic security.7 Almost one-fourth of the responses touched on no concrete item of it. Classified as general pro-union, they constitute the largest 3 category. Other categories were: helps me at my work, working tions, need representation, need union, and social pattern. Twenty- members gave more than one reason for joining. F§Ee Ibid., p. h2. See also Arnold N. Green:"Sociolo , New York, v-Hill 300k Company, Inc., 1952, p. 2&0. ' 62 hose known to have been unwilling to join when first employed generally to have had more than a single reason for their unwill- 8. Some of the main reasons were that the union was too radical or for "things I didn't believe in," ineffectiveness of strikes, no 1 benefits obtained, unions used illegal methods, the initiation 3 too high, and the company had always been fair.8 G. Basic Union and Leisure Time Activity 1. Union Activity ocal 72h appears to have a rather active membership as reflected by ance at meetings. A majority reported that they attended half the r more, and close to one sixth attended all the time. Local offi— estimated about twenty-five percent "regular" attendance at meet- Sayles and Strauss report that in the nineteen locals they studied, 1 attendance" in locals of 110 to h,OOO members ranged from 33% to n a new local of 1,800 members, the "attendance gradually stabilized ercent after an early peak during contract negotiation.9 Less than lf of the members of Local 72h reported that they attended less than if the time, including almost one-tenth who never attended. n Illini City low attendance was reported. There was some concern about attendance at union meetings and e consequent difficulty in keeping membership informed about Local—72h's initiation fee is $5. See UKW#Constitution, p. 53. ’Leonard R. Sayles and George Strauss, The Local Unign, Harper and :rs, New York, 1953, pp. l72-l7h. "Frequently less than 5 per cent :total membership attended meetings, and it was difficult to draft »accept minor union positions. ...“ p. 190. 63 on affairs and relations with management. Ordinarily, less n 10 per cent of the members attended meetings, although an lost completioturnout took place when voting on bargaining issues ImM®k¢ e of the weaknesses in the schedule was that it sought reasons for Lt not for high attendance. Reasons most frequently given for .tendance (less than half the meetings) were: other things to do, crested, live too far out, or work at time of meeting, meetings . important, they take too much time, or I don’t approve of the . at meetings (don't do much, bickering, drinking, not businesslike). 'easons are similar to those reported by Rose.“- .' those who attend one-half the time or more, one-third feel that .on has everything or that no new programs are necessary. One- 1 of the "regulars" see a need for more recreation or social acti- . The remainder made miscellaneous suggestions. >ting is an important activity which is encouraged by the officers. L officer estimated 80-85% participation. This study reveals that >hree-fifths of the members vote "most of the time," and one-fifth never vote. The remaining fifth vote less than half the time. The will recall that the designation of "active union member" is made ".hose who both attend meetings and vote one-half the time or more. ategory constitutes just under half of the membership. 1 addition to attendance and voting which appear to be high in this about one-sixth of the members have served on local committees. 5Institute Sfifiabor and industrial FETZEEEHEI‘EEBoriuanagemept gas in Illini City, Champaign, Illinois, l95h, Vol. 1, p. 339. 1Arnold M. Rose, Union Solidarity, The University of Minnesota Press, polis, 1952, p. uB. 6h r all of these have served on committees made up of both union and ement people. Over three-quarters of the members reported they had he contract. About two-thirds felt they understood the contract, is others reported an inability to understand it. Most one-tenth reported that they did not receive the Lansing _L_a__b_o__r Almost all who received it reported they read it, and over one-half .ly read it all." Over two-thirds reported that their shop has a in the 11m, and that workers read that column most often and dis- it at the shop. When asked what improvements they would suggest paper, nearly half suggested that no improvement was necessary. fth made miscellaneous suggestions, but the greatest single sugges- as "more shop news." 2. Leisure Time Activity 1e recreational activities of the members are varied, but almost percent reported that they take part in none. Over half are ob- 7 outdoor, participant sportsmen, who engage in hunting and fishing. cth of the members bowl. In addition, over one-quarter take part :ellaneous activities such as dancing, cards, movies, and motoring. le~tenth reported taking part in union sponsored activities. Local L18 admit that lack of organized recreational activities is a real IS in the local's over—all programming. However, nearly half of the : reported specific activities sponsored by the various units; and L quarter spoke of similar activities sponsored by the amalgamated. .bly many of the reported affairs occur only infrequently or not isiting is the most frequent single form of informal activity, engaged slightly more than one-fifth of the membership. More leisure time ty occurs with relatives than with any other group. Whereas over ird of the cases spend their leisure time with relatives, relatively occurs with felloW'union members.12 However, almost one-third ,that half or more of their friends are people with whom.they work. 1d appear that in this area of informal activity the union has an unity to develop internal solidarity. lmost three-fifths of the members have affiliations with formal zations other than the union. About one-third said that they are or fairly active and over one-sixth have been officers or committee s in those organizations.13 A conclusion reached in another study r impression is that in most locals 60 to 90 percent of the execu- ve board members participate in outside organizations. At least third attend meetings of one kind or another two or three nights month. This compares with a probably figure of hO to lg percent r working class membership in organizations generally. gures presented here make no distinction between local officers nk-andrfile members, but the findings here are similar to those of and Strauss. About two fifths of the members appear to account 1 of the "outside" memberships listed. Of those reporting, fifty 2The questions on informal activities, how many, which most frequent- d with whom, is perhaps the weakest in the schedule. At least it was ndled as anticipated and over a quarter (28.2%) of the cases could classified. 3Actually there are eighty-five different affiliations reported. n the sample belong to more than one organization. Here is another oint in the schedule, in terms of ease of handling. hSayles and Strauss, op. cit., p. 123- 66 t mentioned membership in a church, forty-three percent in fraternal zations, five percent in civic clubs, fifteen percent in sporting and twenty-eight percent in other organizations. D. Selected Attitudes l. Attitudes about Community and Work Le data gathered for this study show the members of Local 721; to be .y "satisfied" group of peOple. They like the Lansing area, both .ace to live and a place to work. Over eight-tenths rated it as a ace to live, and roughly the same proportion rated Lansing as a ace to work. Only three cases rated it poor or very poor as a 0 live, and no one rated it very poor as a place to work. Forty- the members volunteered favorable remarks about wages, conditions, adiness of work when asked about Lansing as a place to work. These ry comments indicate that for many, living conditions and working ms go hand-in-hand and that the fundamental items of collective .ng are not forgotten when the worker leaves the shop. addition, over seven-tenths rated their neighborhoods as good, d, or excellent. Only five percent rated their neighborhoods as 'thermore these men, for the most part, thought highly of the de— 3 in which they work. More than three-quarters of the respondents d their departments as good, very good, or excellent, and one- nked their departments “fair." low points out that "the curve of job satisfaction is heavily award satisfaction," and so it is hereJ-s Forty—one pemont “men- ‘heodore Caplow, The Sociology of 'z'iork, University of Minnesota 1111188130113, 195,4, p0 1330 4;— 67 :isfied with their jobs; a similar number were satisfied. Only five ants reported dissatisfaction. The principal category explaining .sfaction. is "type of work." Two fifths said that their work was >eady, involved responsibility, had variety, had mental require-— Lnd was interesting. Over one-fifth of the respondents reported ere is nothing in particular from which they derived satisfaction; .th liked the pay; one—tenth liked their co-workers, and slightly .dicated freedom from supervision. The content of job dislikes . around "type of work" which included difficulty, unsteadiness, , lack of opportunity for advancement, and the work's being be- e worker's mental ability. Almost one—tenth did not like their occupations. The greatest number of complaints concerned con- typical in forges such as dirt and heat. About one—fifth found source of dissatisfaction. members of Local 721; attributed a variety of meanings to pro- Promotion in this study was found to mean a "better job," i.e., steadier, more variety, and cleaner work to about one-fourth of ers.16 To about one—tenth promotion meant moving into super- to over five percent it meant doing more skilled work, and to 3 members did it mean more money. One—fifth of the members Ye Reynolds, op. cit., p. 7.13. The main criteria which workers seem to have in mind in apprais- ing a job as "good" or "bad" are the physical nature of the job, the treatment received from supervisors, the level of wage rates and weekly earnings, and the fairness with which the worker feels he has been treated by the company. 68 red that they did not "want any" promotion or did not "think ." Chinoy's discussion points toward what might have been ex- union concept of how promotion should be determined is quite ly set forth in the Plant Labor Agreement between John Bean of Food Machinery and Chemical Corporation and Local 72h. Article niority, Section 3. otions to higher paid jobs or better jobs with equal pay are based arily on merit and ability but when all other things are equal, the oyee having the greatest seniority will be given preference. The man will notify the steward of any change considered a promotion also of all pay raises when they are put into effect. cussing this kind of provision, Chamberlain says: union is empowered to protest decisions, on the ground of unfair rimination, through the grievance procedure. ... a without such unofficial pressure to recognize the seniority ziple, management is far from free to promote as it wills. ... 3n officials make no secret of their desire to obtain greater gnition for seniority in advancements.1 iently members of Local 72h do not share whole-heartedly the of the "union officials." About one-tenth thought promotion 2 determined by seniority. Over one-fifth believed in promotion a combination of seniority and ability, but the majority favored x solely on the basis of ability. About one—eighth felt that f; Chinoy, 92. 933., p. 121;. Security, it has been frequently asserted, is replacing advance— :ent as the major objective of most industrial workers. It seems Lighly probable that the automobile workers studied in this inves- .igation are actually more interested in security than in traditional >atterns of advancement. Workers' attitudes toward specific aspects >f their job would reveal clearly their intense concern with security. :il W} Chamberlain, The Union Challenge to Management Control, 1d Brcmher, New York, l§h8, pp. 281-282. 69 .ability" should determine promotion. The remainder gave a variety onses such as education, desire, interest, and vote. bare majority of the members aspired to different jobs. Of these, tie-third mentioned a desire to have their own private businesses; ook toward "promotion," and almost one-tenth of the members would doing "more skilled work." Taken together, nearly one-sixth of bers desired jobs outside of their present work situs. The reasons Lring different work are diverse. In order of increasing numbers wanted to "meet the public ," to make better pay, to be one's own 1d to haVe better working conditions. Others wanted easier work, phority, more respect, and jobs that would keep them busy. nold's findings are the same as those for this study except that . 72).; the majority have expressed a desire for different work. : says: ne asks what kind of work they would like to do, they will usually ess a preference for something other than what they are actually g--generally something outside of manual labor altogether. ... workers aspire to a better job in the company where they are ently employed. ... Relatively few workers aspire to supervisory tions. ... ther sizable group of workers aspire to become small independent rietors. ... great majority of workers are not merely resigned to the kind of they are doing, but also want to remain with the same employer. 1 indicated earlier most of the members liked their departments and Lsfied with their jobs. Seven-tenths of the respondents also stated r think workers are usually treated fairly by employers. One- alt they are usually treated unfairly. The remainder gave quali- rers, i.e., it depends on the employer or on the scarcity of labor. :rync—Dlas, 92. cit., pp. moan. 70 'uch a pervasive feeling that they are usually treated fairly pro— indicates a rather high degree of company loyalty. The question raised whether those who are so favorable toward the company can t be loyal union members. Walker's study reveals that loyalty to v and union can exist simultaneously. videly held popular belief is that genuine loyalty to a company incompatible with loyalty to a union. The evidence gathered from Ls study indicated that this was not true in the Ellwood Works.20 re preponderant majority in the local, almost seven-eighths, felt >mpany rules were fair or very fair. No consensus of reasons could :d for the belief that companies' rules are unfair. we following is a list of company rules in force at the Lansing ‘ Company; these rules seem typical of those evaluated by members 1 72h. ATTENTICN LLOh'JNG ARE A LIST OF RULES BY WHICH EMPLOYEES OF THIS COMPANY 3D TO ABIDE: Punching another man's card, illegal punch on time card, habitual Llure to ring own clock card. Abnormal absence without reasonable cause (days per month). Eating food other than candy bars, coffee, coke, must be done in a locker room. Committing a nuisance, creating or contributing to unsanitary 1ditions. Theft from company or employees. Throwing refuse on the floors or out windows. Frequent garnishments. Fighting on company property. (At any time) Loitering on permises when not on duty. Time must be punched 15 minutes after the hour, to make it the .1 15 minutes. If punched before the 15 minute period, you will receive the time. harles R. Walker, Steeltown, Harper and Brothers, New York, 199,0, 71 1. Union dues must be paid promptly, an allowance of 60 days will be ermissible. Dues that are delinquent more than 60 days, time cards ill be pulled and employees will not be allowed to continue work ntil it is taken care of. HFRACTICI-C' OF ANY OF THESE RULES IS PUNISHABIE TO THE EXTENT AGREED r YOUR UNION commas AND THE MANAGEMENT.21 2. Attitudes About Officers and Union T those who have not been or are not now officers, about one-quarter a a desire to hold "office." ’hro-thirds of these wish to become ls or committemen. Eighteen members who would not want to hold voluntarily gave such reasons as too much grief, too time consum- d too much responsibility. Some rejected the idea of holding office of a feeling of personal inadequacy. out five—sixths of the member‘s believed "that all members have a ance to become union officers if they want the job." Nearly one- aported that "any one can get on the ballot" or "the union encourages run." Somewhat more felt that ability, initiative, and interest art of anyone will culminate in election. Fewer than one-third I that this opportunity is denied because "southerners run the local," ls seniority, pull, or clique membership, and some can't speak up. e than one-half stated without qualification, that the present were elected because of their ability; about one-quarter attri- ection to friends or popularity. A few stated that social skills ortant . Egreement between Lansinfioundry Company aid Local No. ”mm-15. E‘ sixty-three rules will be found in the "Agreement between Melling lompany and Local 72h of UAW-010., 1950,21,,61-67. The majority , however, are concerned with safety. 72 "or the most part officers appear to get credit and take blame for successes and failures. Almost three-tenths attributed union success .ilure to the organization; somewhat more than a third attributed s to the leadership, and one-fourth to a combination of organization adership. lyles and Strauss say: the union were really a social movement, then they must participate. . of course it isn't, they reason; it is only a business organization 1, consequently, there is no need to attend meetings or engage in er activities. As a result, the average member tends to look upon union as "they," a form of insurance, with all its limitation, an ncy which will provide certain types of protection -- for a fee. ... st of the time both union and government are considered necessary ls. ... In a limited sense the rank-and-file member is a good citizen, he leaves the routine work to others. 2 members were asked, "When you use the term 'union' do you usually Ler members like yourself or the officers?" In this local, "union" mbers to three quarters of the respondents. For slightly over th "union" meant officers, and for the remainder it meant a com- of the two. Interestingly, "union" usually meant members, but ass or failure was attributed primarily to the leadership. Peas somewhat over one—half felt that the present officers were yecause of their ability, fewer rated the quality of local officers vr excellent, and forty-five percent rated them fair or poor. The f the local was evaluated as good or very good by a bare majority or poor by about two-fifths. Slightly over half believed the is. treated all members fairly, and about a third stated that anally the case. Only one-tenth disagreed. Almost all of the 5E8 and StrauSS, _030 9-1—2" p. 237' ~ 73 ndents felt that members were never or rarely expelled from the union tly. "legitimate" reasons for expulsion included: conmunism, gambling, age, "don't do the work," anti-union behavior, drunkenness, "good reason," .sobedience. Despite reasons for eXpulsion expressed by the members, abor Management Relations Act, 19147," Section 8, Article b, Para- 2, referring to unfair labor practices on the part of unions states shall be an unfair labor practice for a labor organization or s agents...to discriminate against an employee with respect to cm membership in such organization has been denied or terminated some ground other than his failure to tender the periodic dues i initiation fees uniformly required as a condition of acquir- ; or retaining membership3... 1e quality of international representatives, regional directors, ",ernational union officials was generally evaluated as good or ant, but nearly one-fourth rated international representatives and 's and regional directors as fair or poor. Local officers received ' ratings. The local educational leaders may see a need to discuss ‘ional and international activity, for almost one quarter of the mem- felt unable to rank regional and international officers. er three—quarters felt that their local compared favorably or vorably with other locals in Lansing. Members felt about the same 3heir international. as than one-half considered themselves active members; the majority it they were "ordinary" members. Almost half responded unfavorably 'hitch-hikers" or "free-riders," but a few said that being a "free- .3 "their business." One—seventh said there "aren't any," i.e. : a closed or union drop. Four percent had never heard the terms. hs reported that "hitch-hikers" are not treated differently, but 7h t one—fifth said that these non-members do, at least at times, get ment not usually accorded to fellow members. One-seventh spoke of gum-members the cold shoulder, treating them in an unfriendly r, and playing practical jokes on them. Bakke makes an excellent distinction between "the good union man" at is here referred to as a "free-rider or hitch-hiker." a "good union man" who is loyal to his "brothers" denotes a new atus. It is defined and buttressed by a code of conduct, by mbols such as buttons and the union card, and by responsibilities 1 Opportunities for service which distinguish him from nonunion rkers. The very contrast with those laggard workers who "don't Ll their own oar" and who at worst may be "scabs" or "finks" or raitors" makes him more aware, by negative implication of his Ltus and the consequent role he plays as a "good union man."23 I stated above, the majority of the members appeared satisfied Leir officers, believed Local 721; was satisfactorily run, and that ared favorably with other Lansing locals. It will be recalled er one-fourth‘of the members have, at one time or another, been on and over three-fourths felt that they had a voice in making that decision. Over fifteen percent behaved they did not. Almost rds felt that the local membership was the final authority in a lecision; over one-fifth believed there was a higher authority. h believed the higher authority was vested in local officers. ne-tenth thought the authority rested with stewards or committee- 3 "Constitution of the International" makes the following de- 718: Lon l: ...the local Union involved shall call a meeting of all are to decide whether the prOposed changes shall be accepted or .rgAht Bakke and Clark ferr, @ions, Management and the Public, Brace and Company, New York, 19W9, p. T. 75 ejected. The majority of those present and voting on the question hall decide. If, as a result of this decision, a strike vote is ecided upon, the Local Union Executive Board shall notify all mem— ers, and it shall require a two-thirds vote by secret ballot of those oting to declare a strike. action 2: ...Upon receipt of the statement of matters in controversy rom the Regional Director, the International President shall prepare 1d forward a copy thereof to each member of the International Executive Jard together with a request for their vote upon the question of ap- éoving a strilce of those involved to enforce their decision in re- Ltion thereto. ction 3: In case of an emergency where delay would seriously jeo- .rdize the welfare of those involved, the International President, ter consultation with the other International officers, may approve strike pending the submission to, and securing the approval of, 3 International Executive Board, providing such authorization be writing. 3tion 1;: Neither the International Union nor any Local Union, nor r officer, member, representative or agent of the International Union, :al Union or subordinate body shall have the power or authority to stigate, call lead or engage in any strike or work stoppage, ... :ept as authorized by the International Board or the Internationfil :sident in conformity with the provisions of this constitution.2 ‘ percent who believed that the power of strike decision belonged mational officers came closest to "knowing" what was fact on this 3 strike, as usually conceived, is a last resort measure when the :e procedure fails as a vehicle for settling any given dispute. The 1t Local 72h appears "strike-free" may well be attributable to the 'eness of its grievance procedure. Generally, Local 72h adheres to :tep procedure.25 In this area members were again found to be satis— hree-fifths considered the procedure to be effective or very effec- most half as many believed it fairly effective, and only seven percent Wicie 719, 99—100. See also Section 8, p. 101. 3r an example see the "Agreement between Melling Forging Company L 721‘," 1950, pp. lair-l7. 76 it not effective. Two-thirds felt that the processing of grievances quickly or very quickly, and one-quarter reported the process as very slow. Unfortunately it cannot be determined here whether a espondent has ever been a party to a grievance, nor what "quickly" rly" mean to the respondents in terms of actual time. It is plain 'hat for an overwhelming majority there is but one way to handle t. Over nine-tenths indicated that disputes should be settled on aid. The reSponses given, arbitration,collective bargaining, d, grievance procedure, though not couched in identical terms, indicate that most members do not want to "go-it-alone." Three suggested that disputes be worked out with the foreman, actually I: step in the grievance procedure. 3. Attitudes About Politics and Government 118 study of Teamsters local 688 in St. Louis, Arnold Rose reports: members support political action overwhelmingly if it involves Ly being encouraged to go the the polls, being told what candi- : are Qrflolabor, and helping to get prolabor legislation passed. are against being told whom to vote for. Tgey are divided equal- :garding having a Labor party at this time.2 members of Local 721; seem not to be "overwhelmingly" interested .cal action, although 010 history might lead one to expect such st. A bare majority did believe the union should be active in just over two-fifths did not agree; the remainder did not know ndifferent. Of those favoring political participation by the er half reasoned that labor needed representation. Of those 0 participation, about three-tenths felt that "business and 3?, 9p. cit., p. 100. 77 tics don't mix," and almost three-tenths stated that people should as individuals. However, if unions were going to participate in politics, members most interested in having pressure exerted at the different levels vernment as follows: national level, local level, all levels, and level in that order. Local 72).; members were certainly not "equally divided" when the .on of a "Labor party" was raised. Close to one-seventh favored the 6 having its own party; but more than four times as many felt that ion should back candidates from the present parties. till, almost one-half believed the "country would be better off if rking people had more power and influence in government" than they 7w. Over one—quarter felt that working people should have no more Of those favoring more power, about two-fifths felt that the y should have the power, and nearly half believqlthere would be representation or that the working man would get more benefits if more power. Somewhat less than a tenth of the membership believed Litical power is presently ideally balanced between labor and man- Scattered responses showed a belief that workers have enough M and that more power would lower taxes, but perhaps the govern- ,ld become socialistic or communistic. Close to five percent that labor was not capable of wielding more power, but slightly t that labor's power should be on a par with that of monied people. 351; two-thirds stated that the government's job was to provide 1 an opportunity to get ahead on their own; however, almost three- rlt the government should guarantee every person a decent and steady 78 1d standard of living. The most frequently given reason for oppos- government guarantee was "you have to make your own way 3" one-seventh 'ed it would destroy initiative; one-tenth feared dictatorship or ism. Most of those favoring a government guarantee believed that uarantee would provide more security for the working man, avoid problems, eliminate unemployment, or eliminate depressions. early sixty percent of the membership favored a guaranteed annual '.hirty percent did not. Of those favoring a guaranteed annual wage, vuld accomplish it by collective bargaining, a few by legislation. spite of the fact that nearly one-fifth of the members would ac- h a guaranteed wage by legislation, only four percent favored ant control of industry. The most frequently given reasons for ; private control were: the government's job is (government, govern- 1trol would be communistic, socialistic or dictatorial, there are too many controls by government, we are doing all right this way, orical precedent. above findings indicate that the members of local 72).; have 1 and economic attitudes consistent with traditional American 3. A number liked the idea of having the government provide them )Od job; fewer wanted the government to have ultimate authority r much money they would make. Most of the members liked their 1 while some felt that employers treat workers unfairly, very have government replace the private employer. findings show Local 7214 to be very similar to other unions in parable studies have been made. If there is any important ex- Lt is found in the rather conservative political attitudes of .ty of Local 7214 members. CHAPTER IV TYPES OF ORIENTATIONS TONARD UNIONISM AND SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF UNION MEMBERS efore testing the hypotheses to be dealt with in this chapter, 1d perhaps be well to make one major point. The great majority of nbers of the local felt that they needed the union. Using the same m as that employed by Rose -- Do you think you need the union to re employer for you, or could you do just as well by yourself? -- found that almost seven-eighths indicated a need for the union 3 and ,ainder felt they could do as well or better by their own efforts. ne-tenths of the members of the AFL local studied by Rose evinced for the union.1 vles and Strauss also found enthusiasm for union membership. >st every worker interviewed was sold on his union. He was con- :ed that he needed it for protection against arbitrary management Lon and as an instrument to obtain economic security. There was >st unanimous agreement that "Without the union we would be lost. company could really take advantage of us." Local 72!; a few members volunteered that they "could not demand ; without the union,“ and others stated that they needed "organi- Almost one—fifth gave a general pro-union response, not capable fic classification 3 and almost two-fifths answered in terms of 101d M. Ease, Union Solidarity, The University of Minnesota Press, 113, 1952, p. 60. anard R. Sayles and George Strauss, The Local Union, Harper and , New York, 1953, p. 222. 80 .g the need for a pressure group, e.g., "The union gives us more =nce." Fhile some members may see a particular local function as more im— xt to them, the local may serve many functions for some of its mem- The establishing of union orientations, as discussed in the second er, was an attempt to learn what member expectations of the local ed. Assuming that'the expectations or orientations have been satis- rily determined, a test of the guiding hypotheses of this research I in order. A. Hypothesis Number I lESIS: DHFERENT "TYPES" OF UNION MEMBERS HAVE A DIFFERENT PRIORITY CENTATIONS TONARD THE LOCAL UNION. it the initiation of this research, the writer pre-established five ale orientations; ideological or political, traditional or economic, L, apathetic, and hostile. While thought was given to the possible upping of categories or evidence of mixed orientation, little thought Lven an unknown category comprising those cases which did not "fit" she pre-established classifications. Since, as discussed in Chapter any cases originally were classified in mixed and unknown orientations, tempt was made to learn more about those cases. That effort led to classification of cases into the five previously posited empirically nined orientation categories. The analysis leading to a discovery of the component characteristics "social type" is based primarily upon inspection of chi-square tables, ally with reference to the representation in any given cell and with d to significant row and table chi-square values. Where overrepresen- n occurs in more than one cell in any row, the greater overrepresentation 81 1 be stressed. Nineteen basic characteristics were selected.3 In 'Ltion to these, the degree of integration of members, and officer and «and-file differences will be considered in subsequent sections. 1. Social Characteristics and Orientations Toward Unionism a. Demographic Factors : A.cursory examination of literature, prior to the present analysis, red.to indicate that younger members would be likely to emphasize the Ltical function of the union. It could be expected perhaps that these zers would take pride in being members of a "fighting organization." light also be eXpected that older members, now past the peak of their luctive capacity, would look to the union for its protective function. .her, since younger workers are likely to seek social contacts and re— ;tional outlets for their energies it might also be anticipated that "would exhibit a social orientation. Table 3 shows little consistent .tionship between age and orientation toward unionism. However, two ceable tendencies are apparent. First, members under thirty-five most likely to be apathetic. Second, those in the 35-Sh age classi- tion indicated a strong tendency toward hostility. While this age p includes only slightly more than one—half of the membership, it in- es two-thirds of the hostile members. jifhe nineteen basic social characteristics are: age, race, marital us, father's occupation, amount of education, place father was reared, e of birth, place of longest residence, present residence, length of dence in the Lansing area, organizational participation, degree of l, vocational training, length of vocational training, seniority, in present department, unemployment, desire for different job, as- tion for self employment. Sex is omitted since so few female cases ared.in the sample. Union ientation litical >nomic :ial whetic tile ‘otal TABLE 3 82 ORIlNTA‘I‘IOf-l TOWARD UNIQ‘IISM BY AGE Under 35 E? *4 E? CD CD {3 35-5h 22 18 ll 17 76 Age 55 and Total Row over X2 7 h2 .oh7 h 35 .507 )4 5} .299 h 35 1.1453 3 12 3.077 22 1142 5.383 Chi square - 5.363 .75 P .70 83 2‘ Traditionally the Negro's work life has not been particularly asant. He has had little in way of job security and at times has 1 even less fortunate regarding wages. In view of these facts one It have anticipated that the Negro worker would be both politically economically oriented. As in most industrial cities, lensing has Negro neighborhoods; and the Negro worker probably spends most of leisure time there, not expecting to use union facilities for his 31 life and recreation. Possibly a prior unpleasant experience might produced some hostile Negro members. Seidman reports on union dis- mation against Negro workers. Most widespread and shameful has been the discrimination against 'egroes. In a 1930 publication of the National Urban league there 5 a list of 21; national and international unions, 15 of them rail- oad workers, that exclude Negroes through provisions in their con- titutions or rituals. Other unions admit Negroes to membership ut discriminate against them in a variety of ways, as by restricting heir opportunities to advance to skilled work, segregating them etc Negro locals, or making them ineligible to hold office or to arve as delegates to conventions. 14 indicates no consistent association between race and type of union >ation. It does indicate, however, that the Negro was likely to em- e the economic orientation toward unionism. This table also reveals hite members comprised over nine—tenths of the apathetic group and one of the Negro members showed hostility toward the union. I. Status: It might well be expected that married members, par- ?ly those with children, would look to the union for job security a vehicle to economic advancement. Further, the union might be . Wight Bakke and Clark Kerr, Unions , Management and the Public: 1:, Brace and Company, New York, 19749, p. 191;. TABLE h ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISM BY RACE Jnion Race entation Negro White Total Row x2 Ltical 6 36 h2 .100 :1 omic 6 2h 30 1.159 ial 3 20 23 .002 thetic 3 32 35 .535 tile 0 12 12 1.7ho 'otal 18 12h 1h2 3.836 Chi square = 3.836 .50 P .30 85 s best bulwark against loss of any economic gains already realized. In dition, one might anticipate that the unmarried would be the best source the socially oriented as well as of apathetic or hostile members. Although ble 5 indicates no significant association between marital status and ion orientation it can be seen, in accordance with anticipation, that e married members were most likely to express the political orientation. the other hand, the unmarried members were overrepresented in the eco- mic orientation. While the tendency is very slight, there was also some dication that the unmarried were somewhat more likely to be hostile ward the union. b. Socio-economic Background ther's occupation: There is little doubt but that one's first impressions the world of work derive from home contacts. These impressions, though dified by other experiences, are later carried into one's own work setting. might be expected, then, that sons of manual workers would have stronger o-union sentiments as indicated by the political and economic orientations, ile sons of white collar workers would be either apathetic or hostile mbers. workers from farm families might also show apathy or hostility. examination of Table 6 reveals, however, that there is basically no sociation between orientation toward unionism and father's occupation. ere is a very slight tendency for sons of white collar workers toward e economic orientation and for farmers' sons toward the social orien- tion. Contrary to expectation, it was not sons of the petit bourgeois, t rather it was the sons of manual workers who showed apathy or hostility. ant of education: The least educated worker, perhaps having been in- mmally'taught that he is disadvantaged by little education, may be Union ientation litical onomic cial athetic stile Total TABIE S ommvrm‘ruv TOWARD umovrsm BY mama smus Marital Status Married Other Total 38 h h2 23 7 30 2O 3 23 30 S 35 9 3 12 120 22 1A2 Chi square 2 3.521 .50 P .30 1er = Single, divorced, unknown 86 Rowxz 1.1% 1.1106 .101; .038 .827 3.521 nion entation itical iomic Lal :hetic :ile Dtal e C ollar .ers 3.15 TABLE 6 Father's Occupation White Collar Farmer h 18 h 12 l 9 3 ll: 2 3 1h 56 ORIENTATION TONARD UNICNISM BY FATHER'S OCCUPATION Manual Indeterminate Total 7 13 ’42 8 6 30 h 9 23 10 8 35 h 3 12 33 39 1142 Chi square = 7.11;? .90 P .80 includes Professional; Wholesale 8:. Retail Dealers; Other Proprietors, Managers, & Officials; Clerks and Kindred Workers . = Farm Owners and Tenants. Skilled Workers 8r. Foreman; Semi—skilled; and Unskilled. terminate: Indeterminate; Don't know; Deceased; No Response. 88 pected to turn to the local as his protector. The highly educated may expected to be divided, one group showing "liberal" tendencies and the her, upwardly mobile, displaying a "conservative" leaning, antagonistic ward the union. Table 7 shows no significant association between amount education and union orientation. Two slight tendencies, however, are ggested. First, workers of high school education predominated among e economically oriented. Second, while the high school educated were most ghly represented in the hostile group, the college educated tended ward both hostile and economic orientations. 0. Residential History age father was reared: Perhaps as important as father's occupation in fecting a given attitudinal direction in the son, is the father's own sidential history. The son's expectation of the union could be a action of whether the father's formative experiences were in rural or ban, north or south, or possibly foreign setting. Table 8 is extremely nplex for the size of the sample; this complexity exaggerates the pro- oility value of the table. Thus the findings should be couched only terms of slight tendencies. Members whose fathers were reared in ising exhibited greater political orientation toward the union. The 13 of southern fathers appeared to be both economically and socially Lented. Those members who were of foreign parentage were apathetic ward the local; and those who were the sons of fathers born in the rth, in states other than Michigan, accounted for two-thirds of the nbers who demonstrated hostility. age of birth: Table 9 is subject to the same criticism as was Table 8, : it shows that about half of the members were born in Michigan. The 89 TABLE 7 OKIENTATIQ‘I TOWARD UNICNISM BY AMOUNT OF EDUCATION] 1 . non 0—8 9-12 13-16 Total Row X2 a1 20 20 2 I42 .287 .c ‘ 10 18 2 ‘0 1.303 12 10 1 23 .688 bio I? 17 l 35 .70).; e 3 7 2 12 3.737 1 62 72 8 15h 6.719 Chi square :2 6.719 .70 P .50 90 OH. m ow. mam.sm u masses flee mmm.:m maa hma.ma NH 0:0.m mm Hem.e mm mmm.m om on~.m NJ NM tom Hence w ma NH mm mm ma ma 0 H H o m H a a m o m 2 a a o m m m m m m m m 4 w m m a m s m 0H m N a emcee .30Hz omwouom ousom Azowfiucozv.zow2 .sowz Immm oz .HO emeD €02 89H: Hag swamme mae_eoesaa cease mama ass male: mafia em 2352: 226.... EHsgszo meanneq depoa oflapmom unpoepea< deacon oduocoom asonsnaom ooaaepooano GOflZD 91 eme.em $93 mmom mee.m mam.o 30m NNBDm mo. e 2. NNQAM I madman ..Eo Nae m m an mm mm mm NH 0 o o e H 3 mm N a a 4 a m mm a H m m m m gm 0 m w a m a m: m N as a m e ampoa .eons amnonoa epsoma.eonsweozv.eons .eoas .86.: efioz fine: The sauna do suede NN (I) mnemomq H38. maapmom capoeema< Hmwoom owsoeoom Ha owpflmom Sapspeoso moan: 92 mm in Lansing emphasized the economic function of the union and 'e southerner most often exhibited the social orientation. Mem- 1 in other urban areas of Michigan were most likely to demonstrate md those born in the North, in states other than Michigan, were ' oriented. longest residence: One might expect that place of longest resi- le be more discriminating than place of birth in reference to .on toward unionism. Such an hypothesis possibly is upheld by in this study, for the chi-square value for Table 10 is consider— ;er than the value for the preceding table. ing from Warner’s study it might be expected that members who reared in foreign countries would emphasize the union's social at times a major function of unions in EurOpe. Warner stressed ionship between social activities and solidarity. However, a portion of the workers in .V'arner's study were of foreign extrac- sh, French, Italian, and Greek.5 No estimate of association oreign residence and union orientation can be made in the present r the sample includes only eight members who were foreign born four who have resided longest in other countries. e from the North, outside of Michigan, were most prone toward mic orientation. Contrary to expectation, those who had lived n the Lansing area showed the social orientation or were hostile ion. Those from other Michigan cities were frequently apathetic Lloyd Warner and J. 0. Low, Eli-ha; Social System of the Modern—F‘fitory, srsity Press, New Haven, 191:7, pp. 141 and 229- 93 .8. m «o. 03$: u 2.25m Eu cad: 3H H mH a Hm HH 4H a 3 Hate ommé NH 0 H H o H H H a 338m 3:: mm H H H m o m m 0H saucepan: mafia mm o H o m H m H mH H308 eduHH on o H o a. m o o NH venomous Hmea me o a N e a m H S HSEHHom mm 8m H38 oases 8E dHfioa ceasefieoaséozv 8E 53.: means ..QO oz .86.: efioz 5t: Hess gangrene 025.3QO pmmmflod mo nomad down: mozmnHmmm HmmwzQH mo @045 Mm Emu—”EH5” Q5509 ZOHBAEZMEO Dd. 33H. 9h gsent residence: This item was divided into two dwelling areas, cen- el city and fringe. It is generally expressed that workers who live 1‘ away from the plant or the union hall can be classified among the :thetics. Yet these same members may indicate a need for the union's momic aid since the cost of fringe residence may be higher than that 'Lansing porper. Table 11 indicates that the more than one-hundred tral city dwellers were overwhelmingly in the majority in emphasizing economic orientation. There is, on the other hand, indication of a lency for fringe dwellers to be apathetic toward the union. Eh of residence in Lansing area: It would seem logical that members ecent residence in the Lansing area would be most likely to look to mion for benefits. This would apply since they would probably have ocal social ties, would not "know the boss," and could expect little than the "going rate" for wages. While there appears to be little .ation between length of residence in Lansing and union orientation, 12 shows first that a majority of the members have been in the area enty years or longer. This group provided many members who indicated onomic orientation. As expected, those with one through three years' ice in Lansing were highly represented among the members who exhibited ial orientation. The most significant fact revealed by this table relationship between one's having lived in the Lansing area for ough nineteen years and the existence of the apathetic orientation. :ion, it is significant that those of longest residence in the ounted for three quarters of the hostile members. Eionaljarticipation: This factor, though not an item of resi- hi story, may be expected to be somewhat related. It is unlikely TABLE 11 ORIENTATION TONARD UNIONISM BY PRESENT RESIDENCE Present Residence ‘ Central City Fringe Total 29 13 142 28 2 30 15 8 23 23 12 35’ 9 3 12 101; 38 1142 Chi square - 8.3147 .10 P .05 95 Row X2 .377 6.183 .760 1.008 .019 8.31:? 96 TABLE 12 ENTATION TOI'JAPJJ UNIOI‘JISEE BY LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN LANSING AREA m1 Time in lensing Area :ation Less than 20 or Row l.year 1-3 h-9 10—19 more Total X2 :al 1 5 8 20 142 1.207 c O S 2 S l'l‘i 3 ..I 2 . 602 0 S 3 3 12 23 2.31h ic 2 h b, 12 13 35 6.90h O O 2 l 9 12 b, . 206 3 19 19 29 72 M2 17.233 Chi square = 17.322 .50 P . 30 97 :nt arrivals in the area will participate in organizations other Lr local union or church. It is possible of course that some may memberships in other national and international associations. y it might be anticipated that those without other associations :ek the social activities of the union. Table 13 indicates no :ant association between participation in other organizations and rientation, but three tendencies are suggested. First the worker "fairly active" in organizations other than the union was likely r the political orientation. Second, those active in other organi- s were likely to express an economic orientation toward the union. members active in other organizations were even more prone to de- ate hostility toward the union. A comparison revealed slightly Lifference among members of varying degrees of activity in other .zations than between those who had affiliations and those who did not. d. Occupational Factors 1. Skill and Training se of skill: The worker's degree of skill, according to papular 3f, should be an important variable related to his orientation toward union. Semi-skilled and unskilled workers are most readily replace- : on the job and may be expected to stress a need for the union in both aective and economic areas. These same workers probably feel the need associate with fellow workers, for ordinarily they may be excluded :11 other kinds of participation. when one thinks of the traditionally ieved upward orientation of the white collar, clerical worker and his lationship to the boss, it is understandable that he might be apathetic 98 TABLE 13 ENTATIW TOWARD MICK-ISM BY ORGANIZATIONAL PAI'LTICIPATICN L Organizational Participation Ltion Fairly None 8: N 0 Row Active Active Inactive Response Total X2 cal 7 S 6 2h h2 1. 772 L10 9 l 3 17 30- 1. 60h . h 3 3 13 23 1.138 atic 7 2 u 22 3 S .161; 1e 5 O 1 6 I 12 3 . 1h 8 11 32 11 17 82 M2 8.1.16 Chi square -.-.- 8.116 -80 P .75 99 DStik toward the union. Mills discusses the white collar—boss lip. elation to the "boss" is an often crucial and unusually compli- matter. On the one hand, the technological and educational .arity of white collar work to the work of the boss; the physical ess to him, the prestige borrowed from him; the rejection of worker types of organization for prestige reasons; the greater .leges and securities; the hope of ascent—all these, when they 3 predispose the white—collar worker to identify with the boss. 6 earch showed little association between degree of skill and exis- either the political or economic orientation. On the other hand, L does indicate some tendency for the semi—skilled to be socially i. A slight tendency also appears in the association between a degree of skill and the apathetic orientation. As expected, clerical seemed most likely to have a hostile orientation. £131 training: Vocational training might be thought to be related an orientation since workers with such training may wish to believe an fend for themselves. It would perhaps be expected that trained '3 would be either apathetic or hostile members. However, Table 15 that in this local no such association existed. h of vocational training: A comparison of the findings for those ave had vocational training was indicative of two minor tendencies. 516 shows first that those members who have had over a year of such iing were most frequently politically oriented. Second, it shows those members with less than one year of vocational training were .ined toward apathy. 65. Wright Mills, ‘u'lhiteTolliai, Oxford University Press, NEW York, 51, p0 3050 TABLE 1h ORIENTATION TOIJARD UNICEFISN. BY DEGREE OF SKILL Clerical Skilled Semi—skilled Unskilled Total on tation Lcal 2 nic 2 1 tie 2 e 3 1 10 12 8 1:3 2o 15 1h n: E? 8 WWW“ 2h Chi square = 12.628 .50 P .30 142 30 23 35 12 1142 100 Row x .u97 .252 2.136 1.575 8.168 12.628 TABLE 15 101 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNICNISM BY VmATIQ‘IAL TRAINING ion ntation tical omic al hetic ile ;a1 Vocational Training No 31 22 18 28 10 109 Yes Total 11 h2 8 30 5 23 7 35 2 12 33 . 1h2 Chi square : 0.930 .95 P .90 Row X2 .206 .198 .030 .20h .292 0.930 102 TABLE 16 ORIENTATION TONARD UNIQVISM BY LENGTH OF VOCATIONAL TRAINING nion Iength of Vocational Training entation 1 year over No or less - 1.year Response Total Row X2 itical 3 7 32 h2 2.130 10mic h 3 23 30 .132 1.3.1 3 2 18 23 01h]. thetic S 2 28 35 1.081 tile 1 1 10 12 .190 >ta1 16 15 111 1112 3.671; 8 Chi square = 3.671; .90 P .80 103 2. Occupational Stability niority: Long-time unionists have often bemoaned the "fact" that newer mbers do not appreciate the union's efforts and therefore display apathy. w members, however, could be illustrative of political or economic orien— tion dependent upon the factors used to "sell" them on the union. In .dition, if recency of membership coincides with recency of arrival in .e area, it could be expected that these members would seek union spon— pred recreational functions. Table 17 shows no over—all association be- rteen seniority and type of orientation. However, some slight tendencies ppear. Members of one through four years of seniority emphasized the >litica1 orientation. The most recent members stressed the union's :onomic function. Those of most seniority were socially oriented. Those to have been in the union for ten through nineteen years were most fre- tently apathetic members. 325th of employment: This factor will not be identical with seniority >r in many cases members were working in their present places of employ— ant prior to the entry of the union. Further, data gathered for this ialysis referred to time in present department; in such cases the mem— ars' seniority may appear to exceed length of employment. while Table 3 discloses little association between length of employment and orien- stion toward unionism, several tendencies are indicated. Members with me through four years tenure were inclined to be politically and economi- ally oriented. As in the case of seniority those of longest job tenure ndicated the social orientation. Those members of one through four years f tenure, as well as showing political and economic orientations tended 0 include a number of apathetic members. The group employed five through ine years showed the greatest propensity toward hostility. TABLE 17 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISM BY SENIORITY m1 less Than 1 year lab 1 15 3 10 l h 3 10 1 h 9 hh 5-9 x» (r cr .4 K3 35 Seniority 10-19 12 10 w h6 20 or more Unknown Total 1 1 0 O 2 2 l 0 O l h h Chi square .90 P 1:2 30 23 35 12 m2 = 1h.29h . 80 10h 105 TABIE 18 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISIV: BY EINGTH OF EMPLOYMENT ion length of Employment ntation Less Than 20 or No 1 year 1-h 5-9 10-19 more Response Total Row 1:2 tical 1 15 10 ll 3 2 112 5 . 2 65 omic 3 ll 6 7 3 0 30 1.053 31 2 6 S 6 L; 0 23 1.775 hetic 3 11; 5 11 2 o 35 3.1161; ile 1 1 6 l 3 O 12 10.203 tal 10 h? 32 3 6 15 2 1L2 21 . 760 Chi square : 21.760 .50 P .30 106 23112.: Members who have been involuntarily unemployed could readily :ted to exhibit either the political or economic orientations toward an, especially the former. The union perhaps most often presents as protection against arbitrary firing or lay-off by management. 9, however, indicates no relationship between occurrence of unem- t. and existence of the political, economic, social, or hostile Ltions. As might be expected, from the conversation of union offi— those men without a history of unemployment were a good source of tie members. 3. Occupational Aspirations ifor different job: It might be assumed that workers who have other spirations would look to the union for aid. This thought would lead > believe that those members who desire other jobs would profess the ical or economic orientation toward the union. Table 20 shows no g association between desire for a different job and union orientation; er, those desirous of other jobs accounted for two-thirds of the ratio members. These may be apathetic because of a belief that the 1 cannot or will not aid them. Those who reported no desire for aer occupational mobility comprised two-thirds of the hostile members. ility may derive from a feeling of frustration or defeat. ration for self-employment: Perhaps those who do not desire self- .oynent are the occupational realists. This group comprises over seven— ;hs of the membership. Those who desire self employment no doubt con- we of their present jobs as temporary and might therefore tend to be thetic toward the union. litany expressing out-of—plant occupational TABLE 19 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIQVISM BY UNEMPLOYMENT im Yes 20 16 87 Unemployment No 17 10 7 17 h 55 Total b2 30 23 35 12 1112 107 Chi square = 2.660 .70 P .50 TABLE 20 RIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISM BY DESIRE FOR DIFFERENT JOB tion a1 ic Desire for Different Job No 20 1h 11 11 Yes 22 1h 12 2h 76 Don't Know 000 2 Total 112 30 23 35 12 112 Row X2 .660 6.225 .366 3.hl6 2.332 12.999 Chi square : 12.999 .20 P .10 108 109 may only be verbalizing for self benefit. Robert Guest reports: rkers do not look for nor do they expect jobs which will.give em a.higher economic and social status within the existing organi- tion. ... In the long range picture, assembly line workers entertain pes, on the verbal level at least, which are in keeping with the eply rooted American tradition of Opportunity. They want to quit e present job altogether and strike out on their own. Yet to leave ans facing the unknown. ... Others appear to resolve it, the dilemma ‘wanting to leave but fearing the unknown, simply by day-dreaming out going into an independent business of my own," knowing full 11 the idea is out of reach. ing to the present study, no significant association between aspira— or self employment and union orientation was found. Table 21 points ery slight tendency toward the political orientation on the part se who did not desire self—employment. It would seem that if one destined to remain in the plant, union protection would be beneficial. nd relationship indicated by the data is that those desirous of self- ment were overrepresented_in the apathetic orientational category. 2. Summary enerally speaking the findings of this research do not permit general ; ance of the hypothesis that different "types" of union members have i erent priority of orientations toward the local union. No social as related to orientation toward unionism was adequately established. =r, certain tendencies did stand out. These tendencies may well serve »oint of departure for future research. Should this be the case, the cher would of necessity refine the instrument used in gathering the Lnd draw a tighter research design in the relationship to the formu— tof the sub-hypotheses dealt with in this section. The present IEgbert H. Guest, "fibrk Careers and Aspirations of Automobile Workers," gen Sociological Review, Volume 19, April l95h, p. 163. App051t1ve mine. llO TABIE 21 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISM BY ASPI RATIQJ FOR SELF EMPLOYMENT nion Aspiration for Self Employment entation Yes No Total Row X2 tical 8 3].; L12 1.068 omic 9 21 30 .2hl al 5 18 23 .222 1etic 13 22 35 2 . 233 Lle 2 10 12 .552 :al 37 105 1112 11.316 Chi square .-.- 11.316 .50 P .30 111 Ltory study suggests the possibility of numerous important relation- >etween orientation toward unionism and selected social characteris- ' local union members. a. Political Orientation rmbers with this orientation stress the protective or security In of the union. They were primarily the married men whose fathers ared in Lansing. They belonged to organizations other than their nion and were fairly active in those organizations. These were t who had had over a year of vocational training and had one through ars seniority. They obviously felt that they would be life-time es, if not life-time manual workers; for they expressed no desire f—employment. b. Economic Orientation mbers with this orientation are those who look to union as a to financial gains. Negro members, unmarried members, and those athers were non-manual workers dominated in the economic orientation. tion they tended to be those with some high school education and hose fathers were reared in the South. The members themselves st likely to have been born in Lansing or in the North outside of n. The economically oriented resided in Lansing proper and had the area for twenty years or more. Unionists active in other ations were also likely to indicate the economic orientation. In 11, very new members of this local tended to exhibit this orientation. 0. Social Orientation e socially oriented seek union sponsored social and other recreational ns and generally seem to prefer the company of their fellow unionists. 112 pressive of this orientation were the sons of southern farmers, southern born. Generally they had been in the Lansing area for to three years. In addition, however, those who had lived in Longer than in any other area and semi-skilled workers with ten rears of seniority also showed the social orientation. d. Apathetic Orientation apathetic is by definition one who takes little active part in fairs. He is one whom local officers will have "to reach" if they stantial attendance other than at time of crisis. Actually, the 1's participation in his Lmion democracy differs little from that rank-and—file national citizens. He is lackadaisical in atten- 1 voting, willing to let others run the union. Miller and Form an apathy: 1g the organizing phase of unionization or during a wage demand, (e, or grievance, union matters are of dominant interest. ... lays most of the workers' waking hours may be preoccupied with 1 matters. When crises are over, however, the union preoccupation participation of the average worker is limited to an occasional an compulsory) monthly or bimonthly meeting of the local. The 1y of the rank-and-file union member in noncritical periods is an knowledge. 1 all associations, there are active leaders, enthusiastic follow— and apathetic followers.8 present research actually gives more information about apathetic than about those exhibiting any other orientation. Important as were indicated for fourteen of the nineteen social character- ;u die 6.. fbert c. Miller and j-William H. Form, Industrial Sociolog, Harper 1ers, New York, 1951, p. 229. 113 whetic members tended to come from the youngest group of unionists. [bers apparently had "other things to do" with which active union Ltion would have interfered. Members of the white race dominated Lp. Their fathers were most likely to have been foreign born >rkers. The apathetics came primarily from among those born and 1 Michigan cities other than Lansing. They frequently lived in :e of Lansing and had been in the area for ten to nineteen years. rorkers who may have felt that union seniority policies impeded >gress often showed apathy. These unionists had had a slight ' vocational training, but had ten to nineteen years seniority. not suffered from unemployment, another reason why they may have :eling of need for the union. In addition apathetics, desiring ant job, also expressed an aspiration for self-employment. They asent the most mobile and upward aspiring group in the sample. e. Hostile Orientation hostile members were perhaps as difficult to characterize as was antational group. A cursory survey of the data showed that there few in this category. There are in the schedules a number of anti- sponses, but these are scattered and rather inconsistent. Obviously 1 does not keep everyone happy all of the time, and some anti-union 3 found in other segments of the society are taken into the local member. bers most likely to show hostility were in the thirty-five to fifty— group, were white and unmarried. Their fathers frequently were have been manual laborers from northern states other than Michigan. ars who expressed hostility were born in the North, but had lived 1114 n the Lansing area, having been there for twenty years or longer. hostile orientation were most likely to have been active in other ions, to have been clerical workers, to have had no desire for Ob. B. Hypothesis Number II S: THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE WORKER'S SOCIAL INTEGRATION IPATIQI AT THE. WORK PLANT, NEIGHBORHOOD, AND COMhUNITY IEVEIS AND TATION TOWARD THE LOCAI.UNION. he first major subdivision of the chapter there has been an attempt ut something about the union man partially in regard to what he the union to mean to him. In addition, knowledge of his social istics was sought insofar as they were related to his orientation. lt that more would be known about him if an effort were made to ittle of how he feels he gets along with those with whom he does ssociate. The degrees of integration in the plant, neighborhood, nity'to be discussed below are believed to be important, for they 1e areas of interaction which account for a significant portion rking individual's behaviors Further, knowledge of the members 72h should be more refined if a relationship between degree of an and orientation can be established. writer has tried to provide an over-all index of integration at levels of interaction for'memberS'who show various orientations a union.9 This index was arrived at by arbitrarily assigning a :hree to high, two to medium, and one to low. An average value :pp. h7-50 for how the degrees of integration were determinedj 115 > was classed as high, less than two as low. It should perhaps 1 here that generally the relationships to be discussed are not :ally'significant. However, some important tendencies are indicated. 1. Degree of Integration in the Work Plant chi-square value for Table 22 is statistically significant. This licates a potential relationship between a member's degree of inte- it the work plant level and the eXpression of a political orien- yward the union. The moderately well integrated at this level of .on appeared to be politically oriented. Those of moderate inte- [t the plant level also leaned toward the economic orientation. 2 presents compelling evidence that those of highest integration Lant were socially oriented. The most poorly integrated at the 'el are the apathetic and hostile members. It is obvious that ' toward the union is reflected in the member's lack of friendly contacts with fellow union members on or off the job. 2. Degree of Integration in the Neighborhood Le 23 indicates a slight relationship between degree of integration :ighborhood and expression of either the political or economic .ons toward the union. Here it is seen that memberS'who Showed ltegration in the neighborhood exhibited a social orientation 1e union. Others of a low degree of neighborhood integration 1 at Least a tendency toward apathy. Members who were moderately ed in the neighborhood accounted for all of the hostile members. 3. Degree of Integration in the Community positive relationship between degree of integration and orien- Jward the union is hardly borne out by the data in Table 21;. 116 TABLE 22 DEGREE OF PLANT INTEGPLATION FOR TYPES OF ROLE ORIENTATICN TOWARD UNIONISM 1 Plant Integration ltion High medium Low Total Row x2 al 11 29 2 AQ 1.778 c 8 22 o 30 3.8u2 12 9 2 23 9.h36 Le b 2h 7 35 1.971 0 7 5 12 12.891 35 91 16 1&2 32.918 Chi square = 32.918 .001 1? o 117 TABLE 23 DEGREE 0F NEIGHBOH-IOOD INTEGRATION FOR TYPES OF ROLE ORIENTATICN TOWARD UNIONISM n Neighborhood Integration ation High Me dium Low Total Row X2 :al 6 31 5 112 .7118 .c S 21 h 30 .1171; 2 1h 7 23 3 . 1117 lo 6 21 8 35 1.577 0 12 0 12 5.2011 19 99 211 1112 11. 150 Chi square :- 11.150 .20 P .10 118 TABIE 2h DEGREE OF COIx'l/IIH'JTY INTEGRATIW FOR TYPES OF ROLE ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIOKISM Lion Connnunity Integrati on ntation High Medium. Low Total Row 12 .i cal 8 29 S 112 . lid; mic 5 23 2 30 1.019 L 3 16 , h 23 .605 tic 5 25 5 35 . 216 e 3 7 2 12 . 8611 1 2h 100 18 1L2 2.8h8 Chi square ; 2.8u8 -9S 3? .90 119 a slight tendency appears. Members who were moderately integrated :ommunity tended to be economically oriented. h. Sumary findings for Local 7214 generally do not permit the general accep- the hypothesis that there is a relationship between the worker's ntegration or participation at the work plant, neighborhood, and y levels of interaction and his orientation toward the union. A ant association between degree of integration at the work plant 1 type of orientation toward the union was evidenced by the low Lty value of Table 22. Other tables indicated associations that statistically significant. However, the writer feels that degree 2ation is perhaps a paramount social characteristic and that evi- sinted up by this research should not be discarded as unimportant. .es and Strauss seem to imply that a high degree of integration ' over from one area of interaction to another. in larger commities it is still possible for workers in a depart- to live near each other. This greatly increased the social unity e group involved. A recent study of a local union in a large ship- showed that high participation on the part of machinists was in part ult of their living close together and having built a tight social which extended beyond the plant.10 of this it probably should not have been expected that a given integration would transfer directly from one to the other two 1 levels. Yet it may be expected that workers who have intimate as plant level may have similar ties in other interactional arenas, as not to the same degree. Smith, Form, and Stone state that social relationships do exist and contribute to social integration Plies and Strauss, 92. 91.13., p. 202. 120 ity. They found that local intimacy is likely to be higher in ome areas, but that persons of low income, though they achieve a »f local intimacy, have intimate social relationships which show r spacial dispersion. In addition, they found that most urban s have both local and city—wide ties.1l ng only those factors for which the most apparent tendencies are d by Tables 22, 23, and 211 it can be seen that the politically showed moderate integration in the plant. Those members of orientation showed moderate integration at both the plant and y levels. The socially oriented appeared to be well integrated lant level, but poorly integrated in the neighborhood. This inding agrees with the previously cited finding of Smith, Form, e. apathetic members were most likely to be poorly integrated, show- integration at both plant and neighborhood levels. Hostile mem- played a tendency toward poor integration at the work plant but degree of integration in the neighborhood. Workers with this ion, it may be recalled, were white collar workers who probably the "better" sections of the city. Thus this finding appears with studies of social intimacy in an urban area.]-2 aelfinith, "mliam H. Form, and Gregory P. Stonef'FLocal Intimacy ile Sized City," American Journal of Sociolog, Volume 60, pp. See also William H. Form, Joel Smith, Gregory P. Stone, and Whig, "The Compatibility of Alternative Approaches to the Delimi— '.‘ Urban Sub-Areas," American Sociological Review, Volume 19, pp. The authors' analysis shows that "lowest intimacy sections were the oldest section of the city and along some thoroughfares." 121 setflfpolitical, economic, and social orientations show an over-all integration of two. If other lesser tendencies were included in ysis, the index value would be somewhat above that average figure. c and hostile members have an index value below two, indicative er—all low degree of integration. CHAPTER V ATI'ITUDES OF ACTIVE AND INACTIVE MEMBERS A. Some Comments on Participation paucity of studies in this area of interest has already been noted, 3 are some few which have been completed and others in progress at ant time. One which should prove important is being conducted at :rsity of Chicago. It is an interdisciplinary approach to a study 1des of union membership; data is in the process of being analyzed. ampleted studies, most comparable to the interests of this thesis, Sayles and Strauss and Rose have provided most guidance to the As previously mentioned, other somewhat related studies have 1 some of the questions used in the present schedule.l pt for information from the few studies which have been under-— ch of what is said about union members must be conjecture. What e is available is more likely to deal with differences between and rank-and-file than with any differences which exist within and—file group. Most of the interviewing which takes place is :1 officers and those, usually, national and international rather 1.. Thus, actually, little is known about what the rank—and-file rink and not much more about the thoughts of local officials. >fficers of Local 72).; have shown themselves to be "progressive" EFoatTnote i in Chapterjfl'l. 123 .re and have encouraged this study because they are interested in participation on the part of rank-and-file members. The feeling n expressed that if the local officers had more information about attitudes toward the local, etc. , positive programs toward that Id be undertaken. The intent for this study does not seem to differ from that for the study at the University of Chicago for which the 1g objectives were stated. to build greater rank and file participation and involvement in m affairs, to develOp improved techniques and skills of communi- .on between rank and file and officers, to identify the structural administrative problems that impede the effective operation of the Lnization, and to broaden the base of union leadership by creating programs that will train and utilize these new leaders. »rt states that there is "very little rank and file participation he most elementary union'activities." determination of active or inactive in this study is based on no n what the writer would consider to be the bare minima of partici- The actives are the "regular" voters and those in "regular" attend- meetings. It can be assumed, however, that these include the most E‘ the members of Local 7214. In discussing participation Rose says: Lcipation is not only a matter of meeting attendance, but also of things as speaking up from the floor at a meeting, supporting the 1 committee during periods of contract negotiation, reading and under- ling the contract, and serving on picket lines during times of strike.3 Les and Strauss take in a little more of the union man's behavior definition. Lrticipation we mean expenditure of time on union affairs. Par- »ati on is more than emotional involvement in unionism: it is doing. Ely Labor Review, Volume 76, p. 593. old M. Rose, Union Solidarity, University of Minnesota Press, is, 1952’pph8‘4490 are are many degrees of doing, ranging in scope from paying dues, ading union newspapers, filing grievances, going on strike, bring- g the family to picnics--all these can be classified as forms of ion activityJJ sactive, as used here, refers to those members who both vote and meetings less than one half of the time. In this chapter no dis- on is made between officer and non-officer, but perhaps most of what wn about degrees of activity in any local comes from the local offi- They frequently complain that they can get the members to do nothing. olds not only for local unions, but for such organizations as civic social clubs, churches, and athletic organizations. hose officers who apparently harbor resentment because of rank-and— ailure to be active could possibly benefit from a couple of sugges- which come from the Industrial Center at the University of Chicago, ced in training programs. rst, local officers are urged to view their participation and in- lvement problems "not so much in terms of 'lazy' members as in terms the need to stimulate membership participation and involvement with aginative programs and activities." econd, because intralocal union communication is usually a serious oblem, positive methods of improvement, such as making stewards a more ucial part of the communication chain of the local are discussed./ his weakness in communication could easily account for any problems ctivity that the officers of Local 72h feel exist. Needless to say, he local small enough to permit primary interaction, channels of .ication other than informal might not be necessary. Local 72h, be- of its size, needs formal channels for its communication process. Ibonard R. Sayles and George Strauss, The Local Union,¥Harper and :I‘S, New York, 1953, p. 191. ;Monthly Labor Review, Volume 76, p. 59h. 125 .tion, this local, similar to any amalgamated local, is plagued by L segmentation. With the existence of multiple units within the the chain of command is of necessity more complicated, and fluent Lcation is beset by this internal structural peculiarity as well as t of the need to overcome the spacial dimension. re of the writer's anticipations when the study was initiated was a would be dealing with a local which was rather homogeneous. The y of member units of Local 72h illustrates the error, and a listing jobs held by members indicates considerable diversity. This hetero— y further complicates attempts to increase activity or participation; y be dealing with a sociological principle when he says increased geneity increases problems of coordination. Officers may find it ; to try to plan programs which will be satisfactory to the majority so much variation exists. 'his chapter attempts to analyze some of the attitudes of the local 'ship with only a distinction between varying degrees of union acti- The areas investigated are felt to be some that are of primary >ance to the members, as decided by discussions with experts and with local union officers. It is further hoped that knowledge of ides in these areas will be contributory to an understanding of the tion of this particular local. The difficulty of planning and im— .rting worthwhile programs may be alleviated by learning more about rship attitudes. At times expression of attitudes on an issue may well have a directional influence; or attitudes in conflict with ty may indicate a need for an educational prOgram. For example, members expressed dissatisfaction with what it cost them to be 12 6 3 of Local 721;. The monthly dues, when the interviewing was done, ro dollars and fifty cents. Over five-sixths felt that the amount mt right. The dissatisfied (lh.l%) expressed the opinion that the was too great. This segment is large enough for union officers :oncerned. While information on how dues are Spent is available to nbers, perhaps they would be better satisfied if they were informed Ly concerning that expenditure. Conceivably they may be correct in feelings that dues are too high. here are fewer complaints about the initiation fee ($55.00) with less ive percent stating that it is too high. Over four—fifths of the ship think it is about right. Responses concerning assessments are at cogent example of the membership's lack of knowledge. Almost fifths have attitudes toward assessments, but over one—third report here are none. The one-third who felt that assessments were about may mean that "about right" and "none" are to be equated. As far writer knows, there had never been an assessment on members of 7214, at least not prior to the time when the interviewing for this was done. These are examples concerning the issue of local finances, e writer is confident that there is erroneous thinking and misinfor— in other areas as well. Dissatisfaction may well be diminished in these areas with an intensive presentation of facts. Participation increased and interest stimulated once these dissatisfactions are t to light and acted upon. Role Orientation as Related to Degree of Local Union Activity he writer hypothesized that actives would tend to be those with :al, economic, and social orientations. It was also hypothesized F 127 hose with apathetic and hostile orientations would be the inactives. able 25 it is evident that there is a significant association between of union activity and orientation toward unionism. As anticipated, tive members were highly represented among those with political, 10, and social orientations, while the moderately active and inactive s were concentrated among members who displayed the apathetic and e orientations. That these findings are unlikely to be due to the ion of chance factors is demonstrated by a probability value as .001. he inactive category may very well include members who were at one Lore active. However, for one reason or another, they may have be- .ax in union affairs. Many may believe they have nothing to con- ,e or would not be pennitted to contribute if they did attend. Un- ‘ately for the local officer who wants high participation, partici— 1 tends to wane unless continually stimulated. Sayles and Strauss say: )st new locals start life being democratic and then go through a period ’ decline in which they lose some of their youthful vigor. However, LiS decline goes further in some locals than in others. ... mmdiately after a new union is organized, interest is high and this ;ref1ected in meeting attendance, as it is in other union activities. m once the original excitement has passed and the first contract is .gned, meetings become increasingly dull. Attendance picks up when 1e contract is being negotiated or a strike is imminent, but there is trend for negotiations to become less dramatic. As relatiogs with magement become more "mature" there is less to fight about. use relates participation of a member to the belief in the democracy 3 local. rrticipation in union activities is a matter of whether or not the embers believe they should be active in the union and whether or it they believe that their activity has any effect in guiding the >Sayles and Strauss, 22. git., pp. zhh-Ehs. TABLE 25 ORIENTATION TOWARD UNIONISM FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY 1 ition Active :al 25 Lc 20 18 31c 7 2 O 70 Degree of Activity Medium 16 to mRSwtoo 32 Chi square - 37.206 .001 P O Inactive Total h2 3c 23 35 12 1&2 128 Row X2 1.798 3.672 7.925 12.055 11.756 37.206 129 ion's policies. In other words, participation is connected with e members' belief that union democracy is desirable and that union mocracy exists.7 C. Hypothesis Number III ESIS: ACTIVE MEMBERS AS OPPOSED TO INACTIVE MEMBERS, PEECEIVE THE [VENESS OF UNION ORGANIZATION DIFFERENTLY. 1. Meaning of Union xcept when the American citizen is trying to prove a point, he pro- seldom behaves as if he were the government or that he, and others im, control the governmental process. The same is no doubt true average union member. The expression, "Let George do it," symbolizes 'Lstence of some anonymous somebody who will see to it that things will mning. The anonymous somebody is probably "the union" or perhaps she officers. Identification of members with "the union" is a con— :roblem for local officials. Rank—and—file members are less likely re officers to consider themselves part of a social movement, and ioubtful whether they internalize the idea that "it's your union" we than the average citizen usually thinks "it's my government." .scussing the importance of the worker's identification with the Rose states: the extent that the individual worker identifies himself with his .on, he gains psychological rewards from the union's large—scale .ivities, and these rewards are in turn a stimulus to further identi- :ation. If the union wins a controversy, the average member gains . only in material advantage but also in a sense of achievement. If : union loses, the member has not lost much more than he would have It if he were never a member of the union, and he has had the Ese, pp. cit., p. Sh. 130 wehological satisfaction of having participated in an effort to im— bve his position. Layles and Strauss are convinced that workers do make a distinction n officers and union. Many comments made would be almost treason- n nature if such a distinction were not possible. Speaking of ex— ons of antagonism and suspicion they say: ese feelings could be directed against the union but, since most mem- rs are clearly convinced of the union's value, it is psychologically fer to express them against the officers, particularly if, as Gorer ggests, the officers are culturally approved scapegoats. For many nbers this ambivalence of attitude is resolved b saying: "The union good -- it's the officers who are spoiling it." embers were asked the following question: When you use the term ," do you usually mean other members like yourself or the officers? ;ential for solidarity and united action in Local 72b should indeed 1 since, as indicated in Table 26, over seventy—five percent of the ship actually identified themselves with "the union,‘ rather than Lg union and officer. The table indicates that there is no associa rtween activity in union affairs and what "union" meant to the mem- This can be interpreted to mean that officers in the local are not ted with a basic problem of changing the meaning of "union" for 'ho are not active in union affairs. 2. Treatment of Workers by Employers r an approach to this area a rather general question was asked-- think working people are usually treated fairly or unfairly by rs? See, op, cit., p. 10. ayles and Strauss, pp. 933., pp. 232-233. in g of ion MEAI‘JILT G Active 52 7O TABIE 26 01" UNION FOR DEGIEE OF ACTIVITY Degree of Activity 131 Medium Inactive Total Row 12 32 23 107 .177 5 S is" .159 3 h 1 L . 706 no 32 11:2 1 . 0112 Chi square - 1.0).;2 .95 P .90 132 hany members related this question to some of their own experiences. .8 noted in Chapter III, about seventy percent felt they were usually ed fairly. The treatment they received was probably at the hands of en. Reynolds would certainly concur with the latter statement. he importance of good supervision can hardly be overstated. To the orker, the foreman is "the boss" -- the only living embodiment of that ague creature, "the company." The worker knows and cares little about igher levels of management. He is unimpressed by general statements f company policy. The personnel manager may announce regularly every ask how much the company loves him; but how the foreman actually treats m is what really matters. If the "boss" is good, the company is good.10 The relatively few (125%) who reported unfair treatment by employers include some who are perennially in some kind of difficulty. There 3f course, those who look to the union to keep a running battle with ement alive. In the words of a British factory's managing director: .. Works Councils, committees, and trade union movements have in the 151': so often arisen out of the hard feelings created by inefficient r selfish management that many people still regard them merely as a :apon with which to fight management. They frequently look upon magement as something which needs fighting all the time. It would appear from Brewer's study of h375 cases of severance from ment, done before unions were very capable of protecting the employee's hat workers had little cause for alarm concerning unfair treatment .g to discharge. The study presents a list of the most common causes .scharge: incompetence, insubordination, general unreliability, ab- ism, and laziness. The statistics confirmed the assertion sometimes hat nearly twice as many employees are discharged for moral shortcomings, 111110de Reynolds,7§abor Economigs _a_nd labor Relatidris, Prentice; nc., New York, l9h9, p. 1.6. lElliott Jaques, 111.2 Changing Culture of a Factory, The Dryden Pmss New York, 1952, p. 30. 133 :ts of character, as for lack of ability to do the work.12 It is that had Brewer provided some definition of "causes," the reader a in a much better position to know how secure the workers' jobs 1 whether unions were really needed to protect them. r this study Table 27 indicates no statistically significant asso- between degree of union activity and the workers' evaluations of V were treated by their employers. However, the data tend to show sive union members were more likely to perceive treatment by em— as fair whereas greater prOportions of the moderately active and a members were found among those who evaluated employer treatment in are is surely some feeling in this industrial society that one can- loyal to union and company at one and the same time. Other studies, as this one, seem to indicate the fallacy of such a belief. The ation between company and worker is no doubt emphasized, at times ated, when there is an attempt to organize a plant; but before long agonisms must be reduced or both company and union will suffer. must have Jobs; the company Imxst have production. The state of ution of members concerning direction of their loyalties is pointed ayles and Strauss. average worker may resent being dominated bv his boss, but he is .teful for his job. This ambivalence crOps up again and again.... me believed that the only thing really wrong with the company was personal selfishness of one or two people. "If only these were Loved, things might be very different." Thus the only purpose of 75m M. Brewer, "Causes of Discharge," The Vocational Guidance LE. (Occupations), January 1928, 1149-150, as taken from The Personnel :, Vol. VI, No. 3, October 1927. 13b TABLE 27 IEATMENT OF WORKERS BY EMPLOYERS FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY it of Degree of Activity 3 by we Active Medium Inactive Total Row X2 52 28 20 100 .h33 10w ars 11 8 6 25 .295 r 7 h 6 17 1.586 70 ho 32 1&2 2.31h Chi square 2 2.31).; .70 P .50 135 Lnion, as they saw it, was to deal with these few obstinate in- luals who refused to treat their employees like men. worker attitudes toward company and union are ambivalent and con- 1. Although they want to be independent of the company, they fear by becoming too active in the union, they will place in jeopardy benefits they have already won. ... To some extent these failings >e displaced in the form of hostility against the officers. 3 Llar attitudes seem to have existed in Teamsters Local 688. ruestion may be raised as to whether the high degree of worker iarity is associated with antagonism toward the employer. ... evidence which arises from this study seems to suggest that there 0 inflexible antagonism toward employers on the part of the large rity of workers. ... Workers dg.fear arbitrary treatment and dis- al by the employer, and there is consequently some hostility. ... r position seems to be that the union should protect them.agfiinst oyers, but that the union should also be fair to employers. bers of Local 72h, most likely to believe there was usually mana- istreatment of workers, were in fact these least active. They ntended to refrain from remedying the situation which they dis— ' believed that their participation in local affairs would be wasted, e local could not help. 3. Treatment of Members by Union : ambivalence in loyalty between union and company is a problem 1 management and union. Dual loyalty to company and union is Lustrated by a finding in the Illini City study. 1 general, the rank-and—file worker seems to describe the company favorable terms. Favorable reports outweigh unfavorable by a to one ratio for all but two of the establishments, and these 3 by a narrow margin. Similarly the average worker perceives his m in a favorable manner, although the mean percentages of approval Sayles and Strauss, pp. cit., pp. 226-227, 229. Rose, pp. cit., pp. 65—66. 136 .ower. Perhaps all this means is that people living with a given .ty tend to adapt to it and to find it satisfactory.l .his subject, members were asked: Do you think the union treats :rs of the union fairly? This question is somewhat comparable to '.ion above which deals with the fairness of treatment by manage- data in Table 28 indicate that over half of the members felt that ion always treated its members fairly, while only about ten percent t this was true only "some of the time." However, there appears t moderate association between degree of union activity and the evaluations of their treatment by the union. Although not a cally significant association, there appears to be a slight ten- r moderately active members to be overrepresented among those who .t the union did not always treat its members fairly. Loubtedly there are some union members who resent the union not rause they feel they should be accomplishing for themselves, but :ontrol the union is able to exert over them. Certainly some would embers if the modified union shop did not exist. For at least a r workers must become members and regularly pay their dues. In spect members of Local 7214 are similar to members of many other A study of 602 contracts, conducted by the National Industrial ice Board, showed that in eleven and one-half percent of the con- "maintenance of membership" existed.16 frTstitute of Labor arrdTndustrial Relations, fiber-Management He- :in Illini Ci_ty, Champaign, Illinois, 1951;, Vol.7, p. 51. "How Unions Control Workers," 0.8. News and World Report, March 27, ‘P. 86, 89-900 TABLE 28 FAIR TREATMENT OF MEMBERS BY UNION FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY 137 :atment of s by Union Active Medium. Inactive Total Row X2 2n and the time h 6 h 11; 2 . s19 26 15 8 h9 1.081 to 18 20 78 1. 112 70 ho 32 1&2 7.160 Chi square : 7.160 .50 P .30 BB 3 a worker has been a member beyond a year, he is committed to Lp for the remainder of his employment or for as long as the plant ized. He could learn something of the disciplinary powers of the ion. Article 314, Section 5 of the Constitution of the International ovides an example: .1 Unions may levy fines for non-attendance at membership meetings for other reasons, provided that such fines do not exceed one dollar 00), and further provided that the provisions for such fines (l) are verly adopted by the Local Union, (2) are approved by the Internation- Lxecutive Board, and (3) are administered on a reasonable and non- :ssive basis. In cases where the facts involving the application such fines are not in dispute, the Local Union is empowered to provide the forfeiture of the membership of the delinquent member for non- ient thereof without the necessity of proceeding by the filing of rges and the conduct of a trial.l 1;. Equality of Opportunity to Become Officer 3 issue of how democratic or undemocratic a particular union is is tly subjected to debate. Those of antithetical views, in discussion, the extreme cases. The union, any union, is probably less bureau- than anti-unionists claim. Moreover, it is probably less democratic has been depicted by many speakers and writers with pro-union sym- :. The functions which the union must perform for its members, and :elf if it is to survive, demand a measure of authority which at .s incompatible with virginal democracy. Richard Lester says: 2 functions that unions have to perform are bound to affect their >emal management. In bargaining, they are dealing with business ms, in which the president has complete authority over subordinates. conflicts with management, solidarity of the membership may be sential. In some cases, secrecy is an important element of strategy, pecially in the matter of strikes. Often in negotiations or strikes, aisions must be made quickly. Democratic processes not only involve FEor the procedure for conduct of the trial of a member charged “vi-Eh raking of the constitution see Article 1:8, pp. 90-98. 139 closure but also are time consuming. Union leaders may feel com- led to act first and obtain rank-and—file approval later. Business cutives make commitments without a ratifying vote by the stockhold- . Moreover, if unions are to be responsible, businesslike organi- ions they must be in a position to insist that their members live to signed agreements.l . article by Herbert Shepard discusses a study in the Toronto Dis— »f the Amalgamated Clothing .i'orkers. It deals With the criteria ermining the extent of democratic control in a labor union. While :cussion relates to the district level, there is little reason to : that these same criteria are not applicable to the local union. Maintenance of communication through-out the organization Recognition by officers of the sentiments and interests of diverse groups among the membership Ability of rank and file to displace by means of elections, officers who offend their sentiments or fail to advance their interests.17 embers of Local 72).; were asked: Do you think all members have a fair to become union officers if they want the job? Table 29 shows that :ponderant majority (811.573) believed all members had a fair chance ome officers. Nhile the degree of association between degree of activity and fairness of access to officerships does not satisfy Lterion of statistical significance, the data indicate that the :tive members had greater confidence in mobility opportunity to rships in the local. Almost nine-tenths of the active members ed there was opportunity for such mobility. Just over one—tenth active as opposed to one-fifth of the inactive members did not e all members had a fair chance to become officers. aRichard A. Lester, Labor and Industrial Relations, The liacliillan y, New York, 1951, pp. 1113-1111;. 9Herbert A. Shepard, "Democratic Control in a Labor Union," American Ll_of Sociology, Vol. 51:, 19119, p. 311. See also p. 313. lhO TABLE 29 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME OFFICER FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY >portunity Degree of Activity e officer 2 Active Medium Inactive Total Row K 8 5 6 19 .9111 low and mse O l 2 3 11.058 70 to 32 1&2 S-hSl Chi square = 5-1151 .30 P .20 M1 5. Attribution of Union Success and Failure ile members of an organization are often eager to allow others to responsibility, they often do not hesitate to take credit for the of a given venture. Most assuredly someone will get the blame if ture is unsuccessful. .‘Jhile one might expect the same pattern of as to questions on the meaning of "union" and the attribution of as and failures, that is not the case. If union means members, why hat union successes and failures are not more often attributed to anization? The scapegoat explanation seems to stand up well. In ses officers have been successful in fighting for particular issues dissatisfy another group of members. In this event a success is as for some members, a "defeat" for others, and a defeat for the rles and Strauss document this point. are complicated case concerns an industrial union which won unusual- 'loose" incentive rates for "labor pool" jdbs. As a result, unskill- nen obtained earnings nearlv double those of skilled workers in the a plant. ...Of course, the men in the "pool" argued that their high- earnings were entirely the result of hard work rather that. faulty a setting. Union leaders were in a quandry. If they were a party reducing the earnings of the men in the labor pool they would be Ised of playing management's game. On the other hand, the skilled workers were protesting that the anion was "just run for the bene- of those unskilled pieceworkers." 0 this study of Local 7211 the members were asked: Do you feel that 18 and losses in your union result from the quality of the organi- >r the quality of the leadership? >1e 30 reveals that more members attribute successes and failures .eadership than to either the organization or to a combination of Eyles and Strauss, 9p. p_i__t_., p. 116. 1112 TABLE 30 ATTRLBUTION OF UNION SUCCESS AND FAILURE FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY :ion of Union Degree of Activity and Failure 2 Active Medium Inactive Total Row X ition 26 10 6 112 2.899 trip 20 19 13 52 2.669 19 8 8 3.5 «531 now 5 3 S 13 1.891 70 ’40 32 1112 7.990 Chi square = 7.990 .30 P .20 1b3 Ltion and.leadership. However, sizable representations appear in :e responses. The writer had felt that active members would be .0 emphasize the importance of the organization. While the data satisfy the criterion for statistical significance, a probability T 30 - 20 points to a tendency to uphold that position. The moder— :tive members tended to attribute successes and failures to the lip. The inactive members also tended to give leadership as an nut they were even more likely not to knOW‘tO whom successes or 3 should be attributed. 6. Local 72h Compared to Other lensing Locals re idea of favorable attitude toward the local may be discerned responses to the following question: How well would you say your ampareS'with other locals in lensing in bargaining with employers? :arisons which members of a local are able to make within their nunity are extremely important to them and to the union. How well cer's local compares with others may in fact be the key to an under— ; of the intensity of his participation or lack of it. If his , and even acquaintances, out in the community are "doing better" ars of another local, his loyalty to his own local is considerably med. After all, if one of the functions of the local is to enable oer to maintain his self respect, it is understandable that this 3 difficult in face of unfavorable comparison with other locals ich the member is familiar. Why belong to a local which cannot on at least even" with others in the locality? In this study were asked nothing directly about their own'wages, i.e., how well mpared with others paid in Lansing. They were asked about working lhb ons and fringe benefits. These areas were discussed just prior to ing of the question being discussed. The comparisons which members ie may be based on these items alone; but even so, there is little to doubt that the comparisons are unimportant. Ross' discussion comparison should apply as well to comparison of other factors. parisons are important to the worker. They establish the line ween a square deal and a raw deal. He knows that he cannot earn t he would like to have, but he wants what is coming to him. In ighly competetive society, it is an affront to his dignity and a eat to his prestige when he receives less than another worker with n he can legitimately be compared. At times he is not sure what as a legitimate comparison, and needs guidance on the point; this one source of moral authority enjoyed by the union leader. ... proposition might be offered that "face" and prestige are bargained a closely than money, especially in a period of general prosperity.2 ble 31 indicates a significant association between degree of union by and the members' comparisons of their local with other local in the city. While one might expect active members to give the vorable responses, the data seems not to bear out that idea. Local 72h it was chiefly the least active members who compared the ifavorably with other locals in the city. The inactives also pro- 1e dominant group among those who did not know what the comparison a. The moderately active members were most overrepresented in the Lving favorable responses and least likelv to respond unfavorably. ‘were actually also slightly overrepresented in the group stating able comparison. This probably shows that some actives claim a 3 criticize the local even though such criticism is not expected Krthur M. Ross, Trade UnionWage—Folic , University of California Berkley and Los Angeles, 19h3, pp. 51- 2. 1b5 TABIE 31 J COMPARED TO OTHER LANSING LOCALS FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY >mpared to Degree of Activity tnsing Locals Active Medium Inactive Total Row x2 favorable arable 9 l 6 16 b.h86 Le & rorable S6 35 19 110 l . 936 10w 5 h 7 16 [“327 70 110 32 11;? 10.7149 Chi square -.- 10.719 .05 P .02 1L6 . The negative responses of these active members, though few >£ the actives), should not be completely discounted. 3e makes a generalization which holds for most of the specific sudied here. more a member participates in his union, the more favorable is his Ltude toward it. This generalization, ..., has implications for >ns everywhere in the United States. It cannot be said, of course, lher participation is the cause of high evaluation or whether high tuation is the cause of higher participation. Nevertheless, the 5 that the two are definitely associated would indicate that unions 1 high membership participation are likely to have greatest soli- Lty. 7. Local Union Accomplishment on Specific Items Lle members of Local 7214 rated their union favorably in general, npt was made to get their appraisal of the union's effectiveness 3 of several specific issues. The issues selected in consultation Lon leaders were: unemployment insurance, better working conditions, t insurance, health insurance, vacations, life insurance, and guaran— rlual wage. It might be well to emphasize that these issues are lly relevant to forge workers who experience seasonal unemployment exposed to a greater than average amount of accidents and unhealth— king conditions. a. Unemployment Insurance ble 32 indicates that members were divided in their evaluation of ccomplishment on the item of unemployment insurance. While nearly the believed the union had done a good or excellent job in this er half evaluated union achievement as fair or poor. The table R668, .020 2130, pp. $1.52. TABIE 32 1b? ON OF UNION ACCOMPLISWT IN OBTAINING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FOR EGREE OF ACTIVITY :omplishment Degree of Activity nent Insurance Active Medium, Inactive Total l Poor 15 19 6 36 20 8 12 to (cellent 33 12 9 5h 7w&No 2 5 S 12 70 to 32 1L2 Row K? 3.30h 1.9u5 3-035 5.298 13.582 Chi square - 13.582 .05 P 1118 es a significant association between degree of union activity and ion of union accomplishment on this issue. as was expected, active were most likely to give the most favorable evaluation. The moderate- ve were prone toward a poor rating, and the inactive members were resented among those giving an evaluation of fair. b. Better Working Conditions .ong with wages and hours, working conditions have been traditional ’or collective bargaining. The effect of success or failure on this : felt by the member on a daily basis. Those familiar with the kind 1 that many members of Local 72b, perform will know that good working .ons are at times especially difficult to obtain. This would be true ' management set good working conditions as a goal on a par with the of profit. It will be recalled that about six percent of the members .heir jobs, among other reasons, because of good working conditions. .wenty—two percent disliked their jobs because of poor working con- 3 such as dirt and heat. In spite of this latter figure only seven 3 reported that the union had done nothing about working conditions 5 the union’s accomplishment had been poor. Almost three-tenths ed fair accomplishment, and nearly two-fifths gave the local credit ad or excellent accomplishment. The remainder admittedly did not r gave no response. able 33 reveals a significant association between degree of union by and evaluation of union accomplishment in the area of working ions. The actives provided the majority of these who gave the union or excellent rating; they were most underrepresented among those a rating of fair. The moderately active most frequently rated local lh9 TABIE 33 ION OF UNION ACCOl.‘!PLISHI‘.6ENT IN OBTAINING BETTER WORKING CONDITIONS FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY :complishment Degree of Activity rorking Conditions Active Medium Inactive Total Row x2 & Poor 3 7 O 10 9.202 17 10 15 h2 14.173 xce lle nt 116 23 15 8h 1 . 3143 ow & No I; O 2 6 2.368 70 no 32 D42 17.086 Chi square = 17.086 .01 P .001 150 .shment as nothing or poor, while inactive members seemed most a evaluate accomplishment as fair. Inactives were least likely to Lchievement as good or excellent. c. Accident Insurance is item and the two to follow deal with some of the fringe bene- ich many members of local 72h receive. These are items which have issues in the collective bargaining process within relatively recent .ree—fifths of the members were satisfied that the accomplishment .r union had been good or excellent. Five percent rated it poor, 1ost eight percent stated that the union had done nothing. Others respond or do not know. DeSpite these differences, Table 3h shows aciation between degree of union activity and member evaluation can— ; accident insurance. d. Health Insurance t might be expected that the pattern of responses for health insurance closely assemble that for accident insurance. These two items are covered under the same insurance policy. However, an examination of »f the contracts reveals that all members of Local 721. apparently do tjoy the same degree of coverage on these two items. This could lead me unsatisfactory comparisons within the amalgamated local itself. rences in coverage could account for any discrepancies in evaluation aident and health insurance programs. while Table 35 shows that almost two—thirds of the xxx-embers were satis— with the union's gains in the field of health insurance coverage, about uarter of the members rated union achievement as fair and only half as 151 TABLE 3h LTION OF UNION ACCOMPLISIMENT IN OBTAINING ACCIDENT INSURANCE FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY \ccomplishment Degree of Activity 1t Insurance 2 Active Medium Inactive Total Row X g & Poor 8 6 h 18 .256 13 7 7 27 .188 Exce llent 1:6 23 18 87 . 1:50 Know Response 3 h 3 10 l . 500 L 70 to 32 1u2 2.39u Chi square = 2.391; .90 P .80 TABIE 35 152 IATION OF UNICN ACCOMPIJSHMSNT IN OBTAINING HEALTH INSURANCE Accomplishment Insurance Active Nothing 6 15 Excellent h? Know 2 1 70 FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY Medium 21 1:0 Degree of Activity Inactive Total 3 l7 12 3h 15 83 2 8 32 m2 Chi square = 10.565 .20 P .10 Row)(2 3 .007 3.339 1.381 2.338 10.565. 153 :pressed dissatisfaction. 'While the table does not show a signifi- ;sociation between degree of union activity and evaluation of union LiShment for health insurance, some tendencies do appear. Active 3 again predominated among those giving favorable evaluations. The ;ely active most frequently responded.unfavorably, and the inactive 3 leaned toward an evaluation of fair. e . Vacations 1e number of favorable responses concerning this item.is similar to >und for other items. Table 36 shows the majority were satisfied as union‘s efforts in obtaining vacations. One—sixth felt that union Lishment was no better than "fairs" and showing slightly more dissatis- 1 than for previously discussed items, one-fourth reported the accom- ent as poor. The data show no association between degree of union :y and union achievement in obtaining vacations. f. Additional Items 1 addition to the issues discussed above, union accomplishment for ier benefits, life insurance and the guaranteed annual wage, were ted to the members for evaluation. These however are not analyzed a presentation of gross findings, for in the case of life insurance nefits receive differential treatment in the copies of the contracts vailable to the members. Concerning the guaranteed annual wage, the mad not yet made a concerted drive for that benefit when this study itiated.23 3The data on which the discussion in this section is based may'be‘ in Appendix B. 15h TABLE 36 LLUATIC.‘ 0F UNION ACCOMPLISHMENT IN OBTAINING VACATIONS FOR DEGREE OF ACTIVITY :complishment Degree of Activity 18 Active Medium. Inactive Total Row X2 & Poor 16 ll 10 37 .6378 11 8 h 23 .6355 Excellent h3 21 17 81 .h681 10w 0 o 1 1 3.5355 70 to 32 1h2 5.2769 Chi square = 5.2769 .70 P .50 155 ) life insurance: The majority of the members expressed satisfaction at the union had accomplished in obtaining life insurance benefits. ;y over one-fifth felt that union achievement had been fair and about 'enth rated the effort as poor or reported that the union had accom— 1 nothing on this issue. The remainder did not know. ) Guaranteed annual wage: This issue was just being presented for :hip consumption when this study was initiated. The inside of the over of UA'N-CIO Ammunition, May, 1953, carries a drawing and promi- 'int emphasizing the importance of the guaranteed.annual wage. 1 the subject of the guaranteed annual wage none of the members ed that the union's accomplishment had been excellent. However, six percent stated that the union's effort had been good. About :ereent felt that the accomplishment had been fair. Quite correctly, 7 as tangible evidence was concerned, the majority reported that the lad done nothing on this item. Members who reported favorably either their local to "look good" or had information unavailable to other 3. 3) Items suggested by members: The members have suggested a number ns which they thought the local was working for while this study progress. There were twenty—seven respondents who offered sug— ns. Thirteen of these reported that the local was working on a pension plan or a lower retirement age. Three said the local was to get a wage increase. One thought the union was striving for it sharing plan. Ten gave a variety of responses such as more safety, nterference from foreman, and split'vacations. 156 g. An Index of Union Effectiveness n preparing an index of union effectiveness, values were assigned responses given by the members. Values of one through five were ed to responses of nothing, poor, fair, good, and excellent res- ely. These values were multiplied.by the number of members giving esponse, totaled, and divided by the number of respondents. The nt was then divided by seven, the number of issues on which the 8 expressed an evaluation. Those cases for which there is no se and for which the response is "don't know" have been omitted. he average index of union effectiveness on seven issues is 3.12 shows a very slight inclination toward a favorable evaluation of ion. On two issues, unemployment insurance and guaranteed annual the index is below a rating of fair, on the latter between poor ’thing. Eliminating the item of guaranteed annual wage, on which Lion had not yet made a concerted effort, the overall index is Lat more favorable, 3.39. D. C onc lusion Fhe data support the general idea that there is a relationship be— degree of union activity and role orientation toward unionism. How- on the basis of statistical evidence, the hypothesis that active rs as opposed to inactive members perceive the effectiveness of union ;zation differently cannot be completely accepted. The hypothesis to be refined in accordance with the activities of the local union. the data indicate a statistically significant association between a of union activity and comparison of Local 72h to other unions in Lty, union accomplishment in obtaining unemployment insurance, and accomplishment in obtaining better working conditions. 157 mile not statistically significant other important tendencies appear lcate slight association between degree of union activity and the s' perceptions of his local. Such association is found for the 3' evaluation of opportunity to become an officer, the members' ution of success and failure, and the union's accomplishment in ing health insurance. ittle or no association was found to exist between degree of union ty and the meaning of union, evaluation of treatment of workers by are or union, and union accomplishment in obtaining accident insurance ations. espite a failure to find significant associations in many instances, ta show important directional tendencies to exist between degree on activity and the members' perceptions and evaluations of their union. Disclosure of such tendencies was a primary function of the tie a1 analysis. CHAPTER VI ATTITUDES OF OFFICERS AND NON-OFFICERS A. Local Union Officers 1. Who the Officers Are The cases which were classified as officer in this study include president, secretary and treasurer, international representative, chairman, steward, committeeman, and committee officer. This desig— n of officers is very similar to that of local union leaders as lyed by Chinoy.l One may object to the equating of officers and leaders, but it can y be denied that these are the actors by whom most tasks are accom- ed at the local level. Their behavior is reflected in the daily mentation of the agreement, and their cumulative experience may spell ifference between "success" and "failure" at contract time. Generally it can be expected that these are the most active of the rship. The Constitution of the International specifies a high degree tivity for them if they intend to continue in elective office. rticle 31;, Section 6. Local unions shall make reasonable provisions n their by-laws or in case Local Unions have no by-laws, rules govern— ng the attendance at meetings by nembers holding any Local Union lective position. The Local Union shall establish penalties that ay include automatic removal from such office or position upon heir failure to attend a stipulated number of meetings as required ffli Chinoy, 'I'Iocal Union Leadership" in Alvin ‘a’l. Gouldner, editor, as in Ieadersh_ip, Harper and brothers, New York, 1950, p. 158. 159 by their by-laws or rules. Local Union by-laws so amended or 3 rules established where Local Union by-laws do not exist must be submitted to and approved by the International Executive Board before becoming effective. Local 72h has complied with this requirement of the Constitution insofar as executive officers are concerned by a provision in its by— laws. Article VII, Section 2. It shall be mandatory that all elected Executive officers of Amalgamated local 72h, UAN-CIO attend at least eight (8) regularly scheduled.Executive Board and Local Union meetings per year. Section 3. If the officer does not attend the established number of meetings, he shall be automatically removed from his office, and he shall not be eligible to run for any elective position for the remainder of the term of office from which he was so removed. In addition to this requirement for executive officers, provision is found in the by-laws which has the effect of keeping committee mem- bers active, at least, if the committees themselves are functioning. Article XI, Section 5. Any member of a committee who fails to attend three (55 consecutive meetings of the committee without excuse acceptable to the committee shall be removed from the committee and a new member elected at the next Executive Board meeting of the Local Union, subject to approval of the member- Ship. These provisions point out the fact that there is a tendency, even among some local leaders, to be somewhat apathetic toward the duties which they have been elected to perform. It is possible, of course, that some officers would actually prefer to be rank-and-file members but re— luctantly ran for office. Literature in the field reports difficulty in getting members to hold office. Acceptance of union office involves certain social demands and ob- 1i gations that in the eyes of many workers make it undesirable and a task to be avoided. Active participation can entail an enormous investment of time, even though it may only be necessary because 160 too few members volunteer their services and a relative handful must carry the burden.2 It will be rememnered that over five—sixths of the members felt that every member had an equal opportunity to become an officer. without questioning the beliefs of the respondents, it must be admitted that such is not the case. Experience shows that union office cannot be held by just anyone. The answers strongly indicate the belief that the machinery for getting into office is formally available, but they say nothing of the need of a candidate to have a following, the prestige requirement for nomination, or the effect that machine politics may have in determining the outcome of an election. Undoubtedly most local officers come from the rank-and-file, usually after having served in a relatively minor capacity. Committee membership may serve as a stepping stone to local officialdom. The same appears to be true for officers above the local level. Barbash indicates: A further imperative of union leadership, which stems from the politi— cal character of unionism, is the fact that leadership almost always works its way up from the ranks. The personal following that is the indispensable ingredient of leadership is not at the heck and call of any Johnny-come-lately, and is only available to the men who have 'worked their way up within the union.3 While activity in the local appears necessary to advancement within the local, the efficiency of the machine may preclude mobility of members of an Opposing faction. In one local, top officials had been members of the education committee. After these officers had reached the "top," the education committee no longer functioned regularly. Appointive members —__‘ 2:b1g., p. 159. 3Jack Barbash, "Imperatives of Union Leadership," in Robert Dubin, Human Relations in Administration, Prentice—Hall, Inc., New York, 1951, p. 1100 161 to the committee were drawn almost equally from the opposing factions, the faction in power slightly in control. This vehicle to upward mobility in the local was thereby eliminated. In spite of the above incident, studies show that active members are most likely to become officers. Local leaders become active for a variety of reasons, many of them similar to the reasons for which workers become union members. Seidman presents some of the reasons. The local leaders were asked, "How did you happen to become active?" The interview data, supplemented bv observation of the local and its leaders, provides the following reasons: (1) resentment against treat- ment by~managerial personnel; (2) dissatisfaction with working con- ditions or wages; (3) failure to receive desired or expected promotions; (1;) lack of other available leaders; (5) prior union sympathy; (6) de— sire to obtain personal power, recognition, or financial gain; and (7) unsatisfactory marital or home experience. Sayles and Strauss have pointed out three factors that are partic- ularly important to an understanding of who gets elected. 1. Pay Rate. Our research indicates a general tendency for union leaders to be selected from higher paid and more skilled workers. Union wide officers often hold the highest paid jobs under the jurisdiction of the local; stewards are the highest paid in their department. 2. Seniority. Seniority and age are almost as important as pay in determining a worker's chance of being elected to union office. ... Supersenioritv permits younger officers to keep their jobs when older non-officers are laid off. Members are reluctant to permit a relatively young worker to gain such complete seniority pro- tection. 3. Communications. .Therever there is rivalry for office a given candi- date's chances for success depend to a considerable extent upon his communications Opportunity. ... Other things being equal, those who have the greatest chance to talk to others are most likely to become leaders. fiJoel Seidman, Jack London, and Bernard Karsh, "leadership in a Local Union," American Journal of Sociology, Volume 5.6, 1950.451, pp. 229-237. 5Leonard R. Sayles and Jeorge Strauss, The local Union, Harper and BI'Others, New York, 1953, pp. lhh, 11:7, lh8. 162 Other factors, which probably have some influence on who is select— ed as an officer, may be what Sayles and Strauss have presented as the social characteristics of local.union administrators. (1) middle class family connections, (2) a desire to progress in ed— ucation, (3) residence in rural, suburban, or at least noneworking class sections of town, (b) a disapproving attitude toward gambling, (S) a high number of associational memberships, (6) middle-class part- time jobs. It seems obvious that there is more to getting elected than merely having an opportunity to get on the ballot, but certainly that opportunity is a partial measure of the degree of democracy within the local union. In the final analysis it is all members of the local who have an opportunity to participate directly in the selection of local officers. While voting participation in Local 72h appeared to be relatively high, it could perhaps be more 5! if were “enmers knew how often local elections are held. Data which may be found in Appendix B show that almost one—third of the members definitely did not know how often local elections were held. An additional fifteen percent did not reSpond to the question. Thus a little over one-half know that lgggl elections were held once each year. Apparently proximity to a political situation leads to increased knowledge. Almost four-fifths knew that unit elections are held once each year. The remainder responded that they did not know, gave an incorrect response, or did not answer the question. When local bv-laws provide for localawide and unit elections on the same ballot, it must be discouraging for the active and interested unifn members to note the above discrepancies unless they as a group prefer limited participation and thus enjoy uncon- tested control. Article VIIT of the Bv-Laws provides: films-1., p. 126. 163 Section I. Nominations for local Executive officers shall take place at the Hay general membership meeting of the local union. The election shall take place in May or June. Section 2. It shall be mandatory that all.units elect their unit Chair- man, Vice—Chairman, Bargaining Committee, on the same day and date that the local union has its annual election for local union officers. Section 3. Each unit shall have its own ballot. It shall list the candidates for the local union officers at the top of the ballot, to be followed by the candidates for Unit Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Bar- gaining Committee, etc. One of the reasons for attempting to determine whether the attitudes of officers and rank-and-file members differ is attributable to the writer's interest in learning something more about these recognizably different groups. It is understandable that some segmentation should develop as a result of the relationships which exist. In modern society bureaucratic tendencies will inevitably result when numbers of people are involved. While democ- racy is the keynote at the local level, some bureaucratic characteristics must exist if the local is to function other than intermittently. Decisions must be made between local meetings and usually without rank-and—file par- ticipation. Ultimately, at least ideally, all decisions for the local must have membership approval. When this is not regularly obtained, rank-and- file members soon note a cleavage appearing between themselves and the officers. Although many may object to what has been decided without them, they probably would not have been available if asked to play a role in the decision making process. This is not to condone behavior on the part of officers who might well obtain rank-and-file participation. (n the other hand, officers probably consider themselves the doers. It is possible that many of them feel that they are almost solely responsible for whatever is accomplished. Euch of their decision making takes place under circumstances in which the interaction is less formal and primary in nature. Such 16b situations may readily lead to the development of in-group feelings quite impossible of attainment by the mass of rank-and—file members. The latter may in fact resent the clique-like relationships which exist among the officers. flith suspicions aroused, segmentation can increase noticeably, and for every pair of "we" groups in existence one can expect correspond— ing “they" groups. Speaking of cleavage between officers and the rank— and—file, Sayles and Strauss say: When the union is new its leaders are anxious to recruit peOple to help them. Anyone with sufficient time and energy can participate, not only in the ratification of decisions already made but in the decision making process itself. But as it grows older a twofold change takes place. The leaders tend to restrict the number with 'whom they consult before making a decision; the rank and file in— creasingly look upon the officers as ”they” rather than "we," a group separate and distinct from themselves. Miller and Form also document this point. This segmentation or cleavage between officers and members is rein- forced by the fact that officers are relatively few in number. Consequently, they get to know one another rather well. The inter— action among them between meetings is much higher'than their interb action with rank and file. As full-time paid officers, their iso— lation from rank and file may be almost complete. Under these circumstances union officers tend to support each other and stick together as a group.b 2. Need for Officers Since the rank—and-file members, at best, usually take part in only the most elementary of union activities, someone has to "watch the store." This somewhat tedious and even more thankless task falls to the local of- ficials. fihen the "store goes unwatched" they are reminded that they hold (Ibid., p. zus. 8Delbert C. killer and milliam H. Form, Industrial Sociology, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1951, p. 251. 165 an office and more often than not their duties may be recalled for them. It is little short of remarkable that as many things get done with so few working at them on a fulletime basis. Of course, not all that is accomplished results from the efforts of full-time officials, but for the most part they are responsible for the coordination of the over-all process. What they coordinate is usually that which is done by part—time leaders who are included here in the officer category. Grievances must be processed, agreements made, dis- cipline maintained, disbursements paid, and records kept. Further, the local officer is a public relations man at the community level, a liaison between his own and nearby locals, and a link in the chain-of—command to state and national arenas. The kinds of tasks to which the labor leader must devote himself are pointed out by Sylvia Kopald. For a union is not a single thing but an organization with a three— fold character. It is in the first place, a :usiness organization. ... In addition to its business character the union functions as a fight- ing organization. ... Finally, the union is a political organization. ...9 Selekman speaks of what the labor leader's expected performance is and of the conflicting roles he must play if he WOJld live up to expectation. For the labor leader's central objective remains unchanged; it is simple, clear out, dynamic: improvement in conditions of working and living for his members. In pursuing that objective, however, in the stage of ad- ministration quite as much as in the organizing stage, the good union executive must fill a variety of conflicting roles. He must be the potent commander of a fighting organization, the rallying leader of a fraternal society, the democratic director of a political association, and the efficient business administrator of what amounts to a marketing 7Svlvia Kopald, "Jemocracy and Leadership," in E. Jight Bakke and Clark Kerr, Unions, Eanagement and the Public, narcourt, trace and Company, Lew York, 1911?, pp. 180-181;. cooperative: a group of men acting together to sell their own product, which is labor. Selekman comes closer than does Kopald to agreeing with Arthur Ross concerning reference to the sale of labor. One of Ross' major contentions concerns the political nature of the union. "The central prOposition, then, is that the trade union is a political agency operating in an economic en- vironment." Later Ross says "..., but the union does not sell labor. It participates in the establishment of the price of labor, but the sale is made between the wcrker and the employer."11 Respondents in this study were asked to agree or disagree with the statement: A main purpose of the union local is to set a price for a man's labor. About three-fifths agreed with the statement. Exactly one half as many disagreed. The remainder either did not know or did not respond. Jhat is important is that so many members felt quite dependent upon the union, expecting the local to set the wage for them. 3. Education for leadership In spite of the difficulty involved in recruiting officers from the rank-and—file, that is still the only source. Education committees in locals all over the country have the task of informing and educating rank- and-file members. This was undoubtedly the initial training toward holding office for the vast majority of the present local officials and will con- tinue to be such in the future. Following this initial phase many potential IOBenjamin M. Selekman, Labor Relations and Human Relations, Redraw- Hill Book Companv, Inc., New York, lyhT, p. 130. 11Arthur M. Ross, Trade Union Nage Policy, University of California l’I‘ess, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 19h8, pp. 12, 28. 16? officers will be permitted or requested to attend one of a growing number of labor schools, short courses, and conferences. These are the places wherein many who might have become "average" or even apathetic members will be developed into the labor leaders of the future. The International Ladies' Garment Workers’ Union initiated officers' Qualification Courses as fa r back as 1937. There are obviously many things which officers need to know about their union and its policies, workers and their needs, management and its principles, the "public" and its attitudes, and school systems and their teachings if the officer would perform his prescribed functions effectively. Some surely hold office who are not informed on these issues. Mark Starr offers a warning which applies equally to offi- cers of all ranks. The trade union leader must be aware of the dangers which come to the individual wielding power. The individual "drest in a little brief authority" may well mistake his own decisions for the voice of destiny and may arrogate to himself a larger mandate than his members ever conferred upon him. While being aware of the corruption which comes to men in the exercise of power, the union leader cannot escape the re- sponsibility of leadership and of trying to anticipate changes which are going to affect his organization and the community materially. Not only are present rank-and-file members being trained for eventual leadership, but present officers are being trained to perform the functions of their offices more effectively. At the same time, training is intended to give the individual a feeling for membership in a larger movement. Major emphasis is on provoking thoujt and awareness, as means of stimu- lating the individual to be more active and more effective in his office. ... Most important of all, in the staff's opinion, is the creation of a sense of belonging and of being part of a broad and important movement. izfiark Starr, "Education for Labor Leaders,“ Forum, Volume CV11, June, 19147 a P130 502-505 0 13M. M. Smith, "3.1.0. Training for Active and Effective Local Leader- ship," Monthly Labor Review, Volume 7h, 1hO-lhh. 168 Needless to say, the labor schools offer tremendous opportunity for the teaching of the fundamentals of democracy and the development of leader— ship potential, not only for local unions but for the communities of which these locals are a part. b. Some Attitudes About Officers As has been stated, the majority of the members indicated satis— faction with the quality of their officers at the local, regional, and international levels. Most felt that international officers are not too radical, too conservative, too interested in their own success, or too indifferent to doing a good job. Only one—seventh felt that international officials were generally radical; one-tenth felt they were too conservative, and almost one-fifth believed that these officials were too interested in their own success. However, in spite of these criticisms, considerably fewer (5.6%) felt that the officials were too indifferent about a good job. The remoteness of the international level is again evidenced by the number of members who could not give an Opinion. When asked to evaluate inter— national officers, over one-quarter of the members gaze a non-directional response. If any single group of officers received more credit for having tried to obtain economic benefits, it was local officers. Almost three-tenths said that lgggl officers have done more for them than any other group "in the whole union set—up." About one-seventh said it is the inter- national representatives, and an equal number attributed most economic effort to the work of international officers. The largest group, over one— third felt that the effort had been shared equally at all levels. 169 The officer no doubt has some ideas as to how he differs from rank- and-file members. If the union functions effectively he, as an adminis- trator, can claim much of the credit. He probably feels that the union's success is in large measure the result of his acumen. Ordinarily he fights for the job because he feels he is qualified to perform the required duties, and usually the rank—and-file elect him because they are in accord with his belief. Gouldner has presented some of the basic attitudes which pro— gressive leaders hold. The union is viewed as that institution through which the progressive leader works for his "principles," and for "humanity." The progres— sive leader believes that his own goals are qualitatively different from.those of the ordinary worker's in that they are superpersonal. The progressive leader places the greatest importance upon the ful- fillment of those obligations which he has voluntarily undertaken or which inhere in his office. The progressive leader believes that the offices in his union should be occupied by people who have ascended from the rank—and-file. "Modesty," "humility," and other forms of self-effacement are deemed necessary virtues to be manifested by the progressive leader during the daily conduct of interpersonal relations. S. The Orientations of Officers of Local 72h While it might be expected that officers as opposed to rank-and-file members would exemplify the political, economic, or social orientations, Table 37 indicates no significant association between the holding of office and union orientation. The principal tendency indicated by the data is that non-officers accounted for almost nine—tenths of the apathetic mem— bers. 1hAlvin u. Gouldner,'“Attitudes of fProgressiveTwTrade-Union Leaders," American Journal of Sociology, Volume 52, lyu7, 389-392. 170 TABLE 3? ORIENTATION TWAFD UNIONISM FOR NON-OFFICER AND OFFICER Union Orientation Non-Officer Officer Total Row X2 ‘ Political 32 10 h2 .039 Economic 22 8 30 .293 Social 16 7 23 .825 Apathetic 31 h 35 2.h76 Hostile 9 3 12 .Oh3 Total 110 32 1h2 3.676 Chi square = 3.676 .50 P .30 171 B. Hypothesis Number IV HYPOTH'ESIS: OFFICERS, AS OPPOSED TO NON-OFFICERS, PERCEIVE THE EFFECTIVE- NESS OF UNION ORGANIZATION DIFFERENTLY. Eleven factors were used to compare the perceptions of officers with those of rank-and-file members as was the case when the perspectives of active and inactive members were compared. The factors for which responses were analyzed include: the meaning of union, treatment of workers by em- ployers, treatment of members by the union, the equality of opportunity to become an officer, attribution of union success and failure, a compari- son of Local 721; to other Lansing locals, and evaluation of union accom- plishment in obtaining unemployment insurance, better working conditions, accident insurance, health insurance, and vacations. 1. Meaning of Union When some union leaders hold that union means leaders rather than members, they are probably more than half right. This is particularly true when accomplishments are related to whose efforts were involved. These efforts can be measured in terms of time expended, both formally and informally, in the pursuit of union affairs. Officers are certainly in a position to realize their importance to the organization, and this importance is likewise recognized by many rank-anci—file members. Rank— and—file members, as individuals, no doubt realize that even if they were not members the union would continue to operate. Further, after a man has worked a full shift, it can hardly be expected that he devote con- tinuous time to union endeavors. There are such "work horses," but gen- erally workers will not devote much time to administrative details and could not perform those functions if they would. 172 While unionism as a whole is the spontaneous outcome of the con- ditions, needs and problems of the workers, the rank and file in general are not in a condition to formulate methods for meeting needs or solving problems, and, apart from the direction of com— petent leaders, have not the intelligence to combat employers success- fully. Therefore, unionism as a fact, in its constructive aspects is taught to the rank-and-file by the leaders. Only when the union is weak and the leaders unsuccessful do the rank—and-file take control.1 Officers, then, as long as they are successful, may stay in power term after term. This of course lends continuity to the union-management re- lationship, and it may mean smoother relations at contract time and dur- ing the life of a contract. One should not forget that what "Tom got for us" ten years ago may be looked upon today as what "the union got for us." Here union and of- ficers become the same thing. Three quarters of the members of Local 72h.neant "members” when they used the term union. However, Table 38 indicates no significant association between the holding of office and perception of the union. The writer had anticipated that officers would take a firm middle ground and respond that union meant both officers and members. Such a response would serve to obscure any positional segmentation and would have been socially acceptable. On the contrary, the data show no positional segmentation regarding the meaning of union. 2. Treatment of Jorkers by Employers Table 39 compares the rank-and—file and officer evaluations of the employer's treatment of workers. The chi-square value for the table in— dicates small defcrentiation between the groups on this factor. There sears, 131bid., p. 177. Meaning of Union Members Officers Both Total 173 TABIE 38 MEANING OF UNIQI FOR NOT-OFFICER AND OFFICER Non-Officer Officer Total Row x2 83 2h 107 .0006 1b 5 19 .1563 13 3 16 .1331 110 32 1u2 .2900 Chi square : .2900 Treatment of Workers by Employers Fairly Don't Know & Others Unfairly Total 17h TABLE 39 TREATMENT OF fiORKERS BY EXPLOYERS FOR Nm-OFFICER AND OFFICER Non-Officer Officer Total Row X2 80 20 100 .367 17 8 25 1.276 13 1; l7 . 010 110 32 1142 1.653 Chi square = 1.653 .20 P .10 175 however, to be a slight tendency in the hypothesized direction, that officers are somewhat more critical of employers than are non-officers. It may be more accurate to state that the officers stand out as people who prefer to respond in a qualified fashion. These are those who hesitate to respond directly, perhaps not using "fairly" or "unfairly" at all, or perhaps they respond with a do not know. This type of question possibly puts the offiv cer on the defensive; he must constantly justify the existence of the union and that of the position which he occupies. 3. Treatment of Members by Union It can be assumed.that when members are asked if they think the union treats all.members fairly that their responses refer to the treatment which members feel they are accorded by the local officers. In any event the of- ficers, while subject to removal, are still the local oisciplinarians. It is they who hold "court” and interpret the constitution and local by—laws. It may be they who "did not fight hard enough" on a particular grievance or who permitted an enforced vacation for Joe while Jim stayed on the job. These are the kinds of issues and evaluations which can lead to an unfavor- able attitude toward the union. Caplow remarks: Industrial sociologists have been repeatedly struck by the fact that the worker's attitude toward the union -- in mass industry —- is not Iinuchfriendlier them toward managemezig, even where the union is ef- ective and commands a deep loyalty. As suspicion can lead to segmentation, so can segmentation lead to impersonal relationships. These in turn may lead to unfriendliness. M 16Theodore Caplow, The Sociology of Work, University of Minnesota— Press, Minneapolis, l95h, p. 121. 176 Caplow points to what could be a contributory factor; in speaking of the rank-and-file--officer relationship, he says: The union functionaries with whom he comes into contact are met as functionaries, exercising a certain power and enjoying a certain superiority. How their formal role of representing the worker will be perceived depends largely upon the accidents of personal relations—- for example, the popularity of a foreman. They man easily come to be regarded as part of the intangible They to whom the manual worker is subject in so many‘ways.1 Table hO, while not indicative of a significant association, does reveal a slight, but important tendency. As expected, non-officers were most likely to report unfavorable treatment of members by the union and officers were somewhat inclined to report that the union always treats members fairly. In any event the majority of officers and non—officers felt that members are always treated fairly. Four percent stated that the union had to treat members fairly; about five percent complained that partiality was shown to friends of the local officer or to members wno were friends of the company, and one—sixth rationalized "unfair” treatment bv remarking that anyone can make a mis- take or some members do not c00perate. h. Equality of Opportunity to Become Officer A question relating to this factor must be somewhat difficult for an officer to answer without some qualifying ccmment. A response in one direction may tend to serve as evidence of the officer's oeing overimpressed With his own importance. Response in the other direction could appear as self-condemnation in regard to his performance of functions eXpected of him. In this question, for example —— Do you think that all members have _—~ Ruin. , p. 208. 177 TABLE ho FAIR TREATMENT OF MEMBEiS BY UNION FOR N (N -—OFFICER AND OFFICE R Fair Treatment of Members by Union Non-Officer Officer Total Row 12 Not Often & Some of the Time 13 1 114 1.393 Usually 37 12 h9 .107 Always 60 18 7 8 . 013 Don't Know 0 1 l 3.3h8 Total 110 32 1142 S. 3 61 Chi square : 5.361 .20 P .10 178 a fair chance to become union officers if they want the job? —- should the officer answer negatively, it might be interpreted as an admission at least of his acquiescence to undemocratic practices in the local. Should he respond affirmatively, he might be accused of being willing to have just anyone as a union official. Fair could mean "pretty good" to one and ex- istence of equality of opportunity to another. Table hl shows little association between position in the local and evaluation of opportunity to become an officer. It can be seen, however, that over four-fifths of the rank-andrfile members and an equal percentage of officers believed that mobility to officerships was available to all members. The few officers who felt that everyone did not have an equal opportunity stated that to be an officer one needed seniority and that some members were not capable of holding office. The Constitution of the International requires that a member must have a year of seniority before he can become a candidate for office. No member shall be eligible for election as an Executive Officer of the Local Union until he has been a member in continuous good stand— ing in the Local union for one (1) year immediately prior to the nom- ination, except in the case of a newly organized Local Union.1 While pay rate and seniority seem to be important factors in the selection of union officers it should be remembered that over half of the members of Local 72h felt that the present officers were elected because of their ability. This must include "mental ability." It may be true that many of the officers come from among the "sharper" members. Hoxie's comment, though somewhat harsh, emphasizes apparent officer —- non-officer differences in knowledge. I6Article 36, Section h. 179 TABLE hl EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME OFFICER FOR NOW-OFFICER AND OFFICER Equal Opportunity To Become Officer Non—Officer Officer Total Row 12 No 11; S 19 .156 Yes 93 27 120 .000 Don't Know 8:. No Response 3 O 3 .863 Total 110 32 1142 1.019 Chi square -.-. 1.019 .70 P .50 180 The rank and file are ignorant and impulsive; they do not know any- thing about business and.market conditions and trade. They think all business is making enormous profits, and that there is no limit to the amount they can squeeze out for themselves if strong enough. 5. Attribution of Union Success and Failure Investigation of this factor actually relates to who should get credit and who does get blame. One might contemplate that either credit or blame would go to those who make most of the decisions. Were the union completely democratic, there would be little question. The membership, i.e., the organization to most members, would be making all of the decisions. Officers could not be blamed or praised. However, officers, some at least, do make most of the decisions which must be made between regular meetings. This leaves them open at times to stinging criticism. Miller and Form direct attention to the need for officer freedom and a rank—and-file anxiety in the face of such freedom. The mass of the membership of the union cannot exercise all of its authority. It cannot rest assured that officers will not overstep their assigned powers. The fact that union deals with emergencies means that officials must have power to act quickly. Different of- ficials must have power at different tines. The greivance committee or executive board may occupy the focus of attention during some periods. Its members must have almost independent power during bar- gaining sessions. In another situation,28he business agent or inter~ national representative must have power. As has been shown previously, members of Local 72h attribute success and failure to three sources, the quality of the organization, its leader- ship, and a combination of these. Of these, leadership receives the nod most frequently. Thoma-.77. Roxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, Second Edition, D. Appleton—Century Company, New York, 1936, p. 179. 20Miller and Form, 32. cit., p. 2116. 181 The data in Table h2 indicate that there were no strong differences between rank-and-file members and officers concerning sources of union effectiveness, for the probability value of the chi-square is just below the .20 level. The only tendency to appear is that officers seemed to feel that they should have been given more credit than the rank-and-file was willing to accord them. 6. Local 72h Compared to Other'Lansing locals Those who set policy for the local union, whether by democratic or bureaucratic process, are faced with a dilemma when they do so. Their efforts in bargaining are inevitably toward the creation of a favorable comparison with nearby locals. Those locals within one's own community are the most important elements for comparison; for in spite of efforts to obtain companvdwide or industrydwide bargaining, the local, with its familiarities, is still the principle bargaining area. In trying to make their union "look good" bargainers may incur company antagonisms which may be difficult to overcome in the future. Should they avert this by bargaining for only nominal gains, they may alienate members of their own local and be returned to rank-and-file life. Further the bargainers and their fellow members could be subject to the "jeers" of members of a more "successful" local union. Actually, the union-management relation— Ship in a given plant may be quite contributory to the reputation which that plant holds in the community. The worker would perhaps like to work in the "best plant in town;" this might be impossible if his union has done "too well" for him on a specific issue. As Table h3 indicates, only one of thirty—two officers has rated Local 72h unfavorablv when compared to other locals in lensing. Non-officers 182 TABLE 1‘42 ATTRIBUTION 0F UNION SUCCESS AND FAILURE FOR N 0N -0FFICER AN D OFFICER Attribution of Union Success 8: Failure Non-Office r Officer T otal Row X2 Organization 33 9 )42 . O2 88 Loade rship 37 15 S2 1. 1851 Both 2 7 8 35 . 0019 Don't Know 13 O 13 3.7825 Total 110 32 11:2 b, . 9983 Chi square = h.9983 .20 P .10 TABLE 143 183 LOCALICOMPARED TO OTHER LANSING LOCALS FOR NOW—OFFICER AND OFFICER Local Compared to Other Lansing Locals Non—Officer Very Unfavorable & Unfavorable lS Favorable & Very Favorable 8h Don't Know 11 Total 110 Officer 26 32 Total Row X2 16 2.h37 110 .077 16 .691 1&2 3.205 .30 P .20 1814 were predominant among those who rated the local unfavorably, almost one— seventh of their number having given an unfavorable evaluation. Officers, though slightly more likely to compare their local favorably with others nearby, were somewhat overrepresented in the group which did not know how the local compared with others. 7. Local Union Accomplishment on Specific Issues In recent years there has been a slight swing away from a strict interest in job control and wages alone. There has been a growing concern for benefits which cost management money that does not show up in the 'worker's pay envelope. Members were asked, e.g. How good a job do you think the union has done in providing unemployment insurance? The res- ponses discussed below concern items of collective bargaining presently very important and familiar to union members. These were chosen as repre- sentative of those benefits which would be most familiar. Hhile some of the items lean toward what may be called social welfare issues, this writer sees them as but a part of the union's growing economic function. a. Unemployment Insurance Table hh indicates no consistent association between whether one is an officer and evaluation of union accomplishment in obtaining unemploy— ment insurance. Yet officers appeared to be curiously divided on this particular issue. while the way in which some have responded may be a function of the amount of knowledge they have an the issue, it would hard- Lv be expected that officers wouli admit that the local had d=ne poorly or had done nothing toward obtaining unemployment insurance. Perhais the; attributed what had been accomplished to pressure applied at a higher level. TABLE M 185 EVALUATION OF UNION ACCOMPLISIMFNT IN OBTAINING INEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FOR NON-OFFICER AND OFFICER Union Accomplishment Unemployment Insurance N on-Office r I Nothing 8: Poor 26 Fair 32 Good & Excellent to Don't Know & No Response 12 Total 110 Officer 10 32 Total Row K2 36 .569 no .119 5b .355 12 3 .1181; 11:2 11.557 Chi square a 14.557 .30 P .20 Officers were slightly overrepresented in the group reporting unfavorably, but were likewise so in the group reporting good or excellent accomplish- ment. Rank-and-file members were quite likely to report the accomplish- ment as fair, or they reported that they did not know. No officer case was found amongst those who could not evaluate the accomplishment. b. Better working Conditions Table h5 presents data on how rank-and—file members and officers evaluated the local union's traditional function of obtaining good work- ing conditions. There it is seen that no significant association exists between position in the union and evaluation of union accomplishment. However, it can be seen that over hwo—thirds of the officers rendered a favorable evaluation; this proportion exceeds the proportion of favorable responses from officers concerning any of the other specific issues. The officers appeared to be proud of "their" success on this traditional item for collective bargaining. Simultaneously, however, officers were over- represented among those who did not know what evaluation to make. Rank- and-file members could consider this unforgivable, especially if it could be shown that some officers did not consider the comparison important, or were too far removed from the work situation to be able to compare condi— tions prevailing in their units with those attained in other shops. c. Accident Insurance Briefly discussed in the preceding chapter was the fact that health and accident coverage for members varies among units. This fact may help explain why officers rather than non-officers were more likely to feel that the local's accomplishment had been only fair on this issue. Should the 187 TABLE 16 EVALUATI-CN 0F UNICN ACCOMPLISHMENT IN OBTAINING BETTER WORKING C(NDITIQIS FOR NON-OFFICER END OFFICER Union Accomplishment Better Working Conditions Non-Officer Officer Total Row X2 Nothing & Poor 9 l 10 .896 Fair 36 6 h2 1.6hl Good & Excellent 62 22 8h .6h3 Don't Know & No Response 3 3 6 2.602 Total 110 32 1h2 5.782 Chi square c 5.782 .20 P .10 188 officer, as he is expected to be, be familiar with coverage in the various units, he would perhaps feel that a rating of fair would be as good as conscience would allow. Table h6 reveals little differentiation between the rank-and-file and officers in evaluating the results of union effort on this issue. However, since about three—fifths of the non-officers and over half of the officers rated accomélishment as good or excellent, it could be interpreted that most were generally satisfied with the local's overall efforts in this area. Still, about an eighth displayed considerable dissatisfaction. d. Health Insurance The data in Table h7 show very little differentiation between rank— and-file members and officers in evaluating union acheivement in the field of health insurance. As in the case of accident insurance, the majority of the members evaluated union acheivement on this issue favorably, and only one-eighth indicated dissatisfaction. e. Vacations Table h8 shows little difference in attitudes between the rank—and- file and officers in regard to union achievement in obtaining vacations. Over three-fifths of the officers commended the union for its endeavors 0n this issue, and favorable evaluation came from over half of the rank— and-file. ibout one quarter of each group gave an unfavorable evaluation. C . C onc lusion The data indicate that the hypothesis that officers, as opposed to non-officers, perceive the effectiveness of union organization differently cannot be completely accepted. However, some tendency toward differential 189 TABLE 146 EVALUATION OF UNION ACCCMPIISPUIEFNT IN OBTAINING ACCIDENT INSURANCE FOR NOT-OFFICER AND OFFICER Union Accomplishment Accident Insurance Non-Officer Officer Total Row X2 Nothing a Poor 1h h 18 .001 Fair 19 8 27 .782 Good & Excellent 68 19 87 .025 Don't Know & No Response 9 1 10 .896 Total 110 32 m2 1.701; Chi square = 1.70).; .70 P 050 190 TABLE h? EVALUATICN OF UNION CCOMPLISI'MENT 1N OBTAINING HEALTH INSURANCE FOR NON-OFFICER AND OFFICER Union Accomplishment Health Insurance Non-Officer Officer Total Row X2 Poor 5. Nothing 13 h 17 .010 Fair 27 7 3b .073 Good &.Excellent 65 18 83 .035 Don't Know 5 3 8 1.032 Total 110 32 1142 1. 150 Chi square : 1.150 .80 P .70 TABLE ha 191 EVALUATION OF UNION ACCOMPLISHMENT 1N OBTAINING VACATICNS FOR NON-OFFICER AND OFFICER Union Accomplishment Vacations Nothing & Poor Fair Good & Excellent Don't Know Total Non-Officer 29 19 61 1 110 Officer 20 32 Total 37 23 81 1 1h2 Chi square : .866 .90 P .80 Row x2 .018 . 3h? .21h .287 .866 192 attitudes was indicated for the following factors: treatment of workers by employers, treatment of members by the union, attribution of union success and failure, comparison of Local 72h to other Lansing locals, and union accomplishment in obtaining unemployment insurance and better work- ing conditions. The hypothesis perhaps should be restated to read: Where segmentation between officers and the rank-and-file is great, the two groups perceive the effectiveness of union organization differently. Where segmentation is small, as appeared to be the case in Local 72h, the differentials in perception of effectiveness are reduced. This analysis in reality shows that in Local 72h, though differences in attitudes of officers and non-officers did exist, these attitudes were not quite as diverse as they are often depicted. This investigator is led, by these findings, to believe that he either studied an unusual local union or that "assumptions appearing as fact" are more widespread than he had believed. This is not to deny the importance of those differences which did exist; for a few influentials, operating from choice positions, could possibly wreak havoc not only within the local, but could make or break the local.in the eves of the larger community. A local is most secure when officers and rank-and—file see eye—to-eye. The degree to which rank-and—file and officers are in accord is one measure of the effectiveness of local leaderdhip. CHAPTER VII SIWARI AND GCNCIDSIQIS A. The Nature of the Study One does not have to be a member of a labor union to be involved in almost daily discussions about labor unions, their policies and prac- tices. Inevitably the discussions are resolved to comments about union members and what they are like. Perhaps differences between rank-and- file and officers are considered or the treatment which rank—and-file receive at the hands of the officers. Many feel that the rank-and-file have more to fear from officers than from management. They 'suggest that management would never lead workers politically astray, but only in the "right" direction. Unfortunately many persons who voice strong opinions have absolutely no factual knowledge upon which to base their opinions. They do not know a union man, but they know how he is treated and what he is like. On the other hand there are persons who know many union men; Dome are self-styled experts who report only of the fraternal nature of unions. This study has had fact-finding as one of its purposes. The expressions of the members themselves have been sought. Their identities have been safeguarded. It is hoped, and there seems little reason to doubt, that their answers are straight-forward. \If this is accepted as fact, there is here a sample of uncoerced reaponses, a better guide to knOWledge than an infinite amount of hearsay. It must be mderstood that the union is primarily a product of the wOI‘kingman. Not only did he receive little or no help in creating it, g _ 19h but he had to struggle to keep its life from being snuffed out. The growth of the labor movement is marked by violence, unfriendly court de— cisions, the influence of company spies, and the visits of "missionaries." Protective legislative policy reduced many of these practices to a mini- mum. Yet many in the nation were and still are convinced that the unions are generally bad for the national welfare. Union growth in numbers and power forced anti—union people to seek important reasons for curtailing further expansion. Killingsworth speaks of some of the attitudinal con- comitants of large unions. Moreover, now that many unions are large scale organizations , some- times with little contact between the rank-and-file and the leader- ship, many people have been converted to what might be called the "racket theory" of unionism. Much union organization is considered the result of false promises, persuasion, and threats by "outside agitators," "professional trouble makers," and "Reds." The union organizer, according to this theory, can usually find a few malcon- tents in any establishment; and, under the protective labor laws, once this minority is organized, it can exert telling pressure on the contented majority-"by strikes and threats of strikes, picket— ing, boycotting, and physical violence.1 With such attitudes abroad, it is understandable that leaders of labor organizations would be suspicious of an outsider who wished to study any part of their institution. Further, while a student may present himself as an impartial observer, there is little reason for a union member to accept that at facc value. Traditionally, ties between academicians and business and industrial lead- ers have existed, but not between academicians and labor leaders. Stu- dents have persistently been subject to the thought—ways of the business- man, accomplished through the schools, at all levels, and through all Eharles C. Ellmgwomh, State Labor Relations Acts, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 19148, p. 18. 195 of the mass media. This, to say the least, gives the union man cause for anxiety. Labor people, particularly the leaders, are forced to fight a con- stant battle to prove the respectability of their institution. They must show that their policies, practices, and goals harmonize with those of the rest of the society. One local in Lansing offered proof by per— mitting college students to sit-in on local meetings. It was reported that one student, taking notes on the procedings, prefaced with "Comrade" the name of each speaker taking part in discussion. Little wonder that the writer was not permitted to conduct this study amongst members of that local. Even when permission to do a study is granted, some of the desired data is difficult to obtain. This is particularly true in regard to the history of the local. Eby helps explain this difficulty. He points out that most leaders clear their files regularly, for they are not writing for history. Many of the pamphlets which are produced are purely for pro- paganda purposes, either for membership or public consumption. While the most important documents are those prepared for the convention by the international president or executive board, most information which the researcher wants is best obtained from lower* echelons within the union ranks. Eby suggests keeping questionnaires short; but more important for an understanding of unionism, one must get to know the people involved.2 This study is essentially a study of but a small part of the larger union institution. In fact, it deals only with some of the attitudes zKermit Eby, "Research in Labor Unions," American Journal of §oc- iolog, Volume 56, 1950-51, 222-228. .,_-. "-s_--.—.__ 196 and behavior patterns, both formal and informal, found within a given 10- cal. Apart from a fact finding venture this study sought to determine what orientations members have toward the local, how social characteris- tics are related to these orientations, and how these orientations are related to varying degrees of integration exhibited by members at differ- ent behavioral levels. In addition an effort was made to explore differ- ences in attitudes as expressed by active as opposed to inactive members and officers as opposed to rank—and-file members. Herbert Blumer has listed three "legitimate and important kinds of social theory" two of which are specifically represented in this study. The first of these is the attempt to find facts which may help clarify an aspect of the world of work. Blumer speaks of the need for "meaning- ful clarification of basic social values, social institutions, modes of living and social relations." The dynamic nature of the union, even at the local level, makes it worthy of continuous study for this purpose. A second kind of theory, toward which this study is not so intentionally directed, is "policy" theory. "It is concerned with analyzing a given social situation, or social structure, or social action as a basis for policy or action." Those familiar with the local union know full well that officers and non—officers alike are in part policy makers. Some may see fit to utilize the findings of this study, particularly those interested in the local's educational programs. The writer has implicit- ly attempted to theorize along these lines as he has sought to inter- pret some of the findings. The endeavor to establish the existence of certain categories and to show their interrelationships bears on what Blumer refers to as the 197 t‘ theory in empirical science." aoretical schemes are essentially proposals as to the nature of :11 classes and of their relations where this nature is problem- ic or unknown. Such proposals become guides to investigation to 3 whether they or their implications are true. Thus, theory ex- cisea compelling influence on research -- setting problems, stak- ig out objects and leading inquiry into asserted relations. In mm, findings of fact test theories, and in suggesting new prob- ems invite the formulation of new proposals.3 The justifications for a study such as this are obvious. The in- ;igation deals with a study of the validity of "facts" which are ely "lcnown." Moreover, it deals with the ascertaining of relation- Lps which have been hypothesized to exist between empirically deter- nable classifications or categories. The testing of the hypotheses onceivably contributes to the fund of knowledge generated by research thich has adhered to the canons of empirical science, as these are appli- cable in the study of phenomena recognized as amenable to investigation by members of a given discipline. The sociologist has, as his laboratory, any area of human interaction which can be meaningfully interpreted and researchably delimited by his concepts, his fundamental tools of analysis. The "elements" with which he may deal are many, necessitating a division of labor within the field if multiple "elements" are to be analyzed. Such a division of labor has led to the titles of rural, urban, educational, and industrial sociologist. The latter has chosen to delve into various aspects of the world of work; and while relatively new to the list of possible titles, he uses the theory, Jflerbert amen—What is Thong with sac‘iai‘i Theory-,3": fifican soc- 101 ical Review, Volume 19, 19Sh, 3-10. 198 arch methods, and techniques previously developed by the older mem- of the broader discipline. Attempts directed toward proof in industrial sociology are as fraught :1 difficulty as are other segments of the discipline, and the locating tentative relationships has consumed much of the industrial socio- gists‘ time. Homans concurs when he discussed differences between .dustrial sociologists and social psychologists. Industrial sociologists are concerned with discovery more than with proof. It is true that preoccupation with proof can have strange results. It affects the choice of questions to be studied. In- vestigators seize on hypotheses just because they can be given quan— titative demonstration, although a problem does not become more sig— nificant by being easy to handle elegantly. We should make what i 8 important mathematical and not what is mathematical important. . . . This is the stage that industrial sociology has reached at the pre— sent time: identification of the variables and some rough notion of their relations in particular cases. Since Homans wrote the above, there have been new efforts at quantifi- cation and control of variables. Yet findings, for the most part, must still be presented as things plausible rather than in terms of compul- sive proof. When all the data for this study were collected, there was still a problem of classifying the cases even though such classification had been considered when the schedule was constructed. The investigator decided to “filter" the cases into established categories, but in many instances very few cases resulted in most classifications. There were large mixed and unknown categories. Cases were redistributed using less rigid quali- fications for "placement." While much of the interpretation derives hGeorge C. Romans, ""The Strategy of Industrial Sociology? American igumal of Sociology, Volume 514, 19h8-h9, pP-330-337- 199 from "Verstehen sociology," there has likewise been an attempt at "scien- tific" analysis. B. A Review of Findings It should be recalled that the findings of this study are based up- on responses of a sample of members. That sample is approximately six percent of the non-rural membership of a local union. Since this is the case, although the writer has spoken of attitudes of the membership, neither the entire membership nor necessarily representative cases from all segments of the membership were canvassed. Any generalizations one would care to draw would at best apply only to the city dwelling and fringe dwelling members. In spite of the limitations of the sample, findings seem not to deviate greatly from those obtained in other studies. The reader has perhaps noted that positive, descriptive hypotheses, rather than null hypotheses have guided this research. The use of null hypotheses would perhaps have been a more cautious approach, but actually little more would have been learned than has been found here. l‘rhen a number of variables are involved it is unlikely that the hypotheses which the researcher would have liked to "prove" were the only possible alter- natives. Hagood and Price discuss the legic of the null hypothesis. ...we can by statistical methods come nearer to proving that some- thing is z_1_o_t true about a universe than that something is true. This means that often we shall use a negativistic approach. If we want to establish one hypothesis, we shall not test it directly but shall formulate the opposite hypothesis which we shall call the null hypothesis, and test it on the basis of the evidence from our sample . If the evidence is such as to cause us to reject or discard the null hypothesis and if the hypothesis we wanted to establish is the only 200 ltemative hypothesis, then the rejection of the null hypothesis 3 the equivalent of confirmation of the original hypothesis.5 he guiding hypotheses of this study been stated as null hypotheses would have been accepted, since the findings generally were not stically significant . 1. Significant Findings Despite the fact that many over-all tables do not show significant ;ation8, there are significant relationships indicated by numerous [138 of the tables. .‘he economically oriented were likely to have been born in the Lansing and lived in Lansing proper when the interviewing was being done. They Lyed moderate integration in the work plant. be socially oriented members were well integrated at the work plant of interaction and showed a high degree of union activity. pathetic members were most likely to be those who had lived longest er parts of Michigan. Members from urban Michigan showed apathy 1y more frequently than did former rural residents. The apathetics ften from the group having resided in the Lansing area for ten to en years. Those with an apathetic orientation were poorly integrated plant and were least active in union affairs. 1e hostile members were either born in the North outside of Michigan rural Michigan.6 Whyte's findings indicate that hostility toward Ergaret Jarman Hagood and Daniel 0. Price ,‘gtatistics for Socio- s_, New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1952, pp. 257-258. Villiam Foote Nhyte, "Who Goes Union and Why," Eersonnel Journal, ~r, 191m, pp. 215-230. See also Fred H. Blum, Toward KfiDemocratic ’ocess, Harper and Brothers Publishers, New York, 1953, p. 113. Lpfies that the farm boys' hostility will subside as the union vns in their behalf. 201 union on the part of farm boys may be expected. Hostile members, like letic members, were poorly integrated in the work plant; yet they appeared we a moderate degree of integration in the neighborhood. Those showing lity were relatively inactive in the union, but they were slightly more 9 than were the apathetic members. Other findings indicate that inactive members were prone to compare local unfavorably with others nearby. Furthermore, regarding union plishment in obtaining better working conditions, inactives evaluated :hievement as fair while unfavorable evaluation was most 111me to be by moderately active members. 2. General Tendencies :‘renerally speaking, the members of Local 721; are satisfied with their Lnd community life. While there are those expressing dissatisfaction {iven issue, they are always in the minority. The members like the .ity in which they live, partially evidenced by the length of time ave lived in the Lansing area. Their particular neighborhoods are ying to them. There is some indication that high neighborhood inte- n is related to hostility toward the local. r1 the job the "likes" of some are the "dislikes" of others, showing onditions, pay, and other requirements vary con31derably. Here however, general satisfaction reigns. Members like the departments 3h they work and the jobs they do. Walker's discussion of job sat- Lon and dissatisfaction is very similar to the findings of this study. rd that dissatisfaction stems from wanting easier, less monotonous from working alone, and from noise and heat. Satisfaction derives >eing part of , or having membership in, the hot mill crew," inherent 202 nsibilities of the job, and variety of problems met. Good pay, edge and skill, easy work, and being used to the Job add up to work faction.7 Many look forward to no other kind of work, either by e or necessity. Members believe that employers usually treat workers y; this is particularly true of active members. Officers show a slight my to disagree with this idea. [here is general acceptance of the idea that the union treats all rs fairly. Non-officers dominate slightly the group which disagrees. .ndings of the interdisciplinary study in Illini City remarkably tel the findings of this research. Speaking of attitudes and be- ' of union members that study reports: ley were very strongly in favor of the union and felt that it yd greatly improved their position, although there was some feel- .g that the officers were too cautious at times. Despite this neral approval there was low participation in meetings and little terest in holding office. They had a strong feeling that the ficers were fair and did not show favoritism in representing irkers and administering the contract. ms evident that a relatively high degree of democracy exists in 72b, and members are in accord with the local's efforts to attain als. The major disagreement with union policy seems to exist on sue of seniority as a means to promotion. More than one-half of mbers believe that promotion should be determined primarily on the of ability. Yet one of unionism's major emphases has been on the mce of seniority. There has been an attempt to convince younger tharles R. Walker, Steeltown, Harper and Erothers, New York, 19573, '60. institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, Labor-Management ms in Illini City, University of Illinois, Champaign, 19514 , Volume 35. 203 >rkers that they will need this protection when they are no longer >1e to produce at the rate of their youthful capability. Much has boon aid of discrimination against older workers. Pollak would have one ronder whether such discrimination exists. He reports that if this dis- crimination does exist, it is very small. He believes that acceptance of overstatement of the problem is related to a culturally based prefer- ence for youth and a general fear of old age. He points out that zealous reformers are responsible for the confusion with which the situation has been presented.9 Another disagreement is in the area of the political activity of the union. A large minority, two-fifths, believed that the union should not be active in politics; almost one-third of these believed that "business and politics do not mix." In general rank—and-file attribute the local's success and failure to the quality of the organization; officers tend to attribute responsi- bility to themselves. Nevertheless, both groups compare their local favorably with other locals in lensing, and the local's accomplishment on specific issues is met with marked satisfaction. While satisfaction is general, officers are more inclined toward giving responses favorable to the local. It should be pointed out that neither the officer nor rank- and-file group is extreme in either its praise or criticism. An over-all index of union effectiveness is indicative of pro-local attitudes. Irwin Ross conducted a poll amongst journalists specializing in labor reporting to list their choices for "best" and "worst" labor 70m sonar, mscrimination Against OlderfiWorkers in Industry," ' American Journal of Sociology , Vol. 50, 19th-h5m99-106. The date of Follak's report may have influenced his findings. ns. Criteria for evaluation included," success on wages, union re- for public interest, existence of internal democracy, and improve- of life of the members. The UAW-CID appeared with the AFL Ladies ant Workers and AFL Machinists on the "best" list. The question of makes a union "good" or what makes it "bad" is worth thinking about 11y as an exercise in developing greater understanding of the prob— and aspirations of labor organizations. These problems and aspira- : shape the union}0 Not only do members of Local 72h generally give their local a good Lg, but they are part of an international union which has received st" evaluation from impartial "specialists." Satisfaction at the . level may be reflected in the policies and practices of the inter- nal. One should remember that most international officers and many workers have had their initial training in unionism as members of unions. For good or bad they are likely to carry that training and experiences with them as they move to higher echelons and play a active role in the formulation of general union policy. C. Inferences and Suggestions ['his study shows that members displaying the political, economic, >cial orientations show an over-all index of highest integration at >rk plant, neighborhood and community levels of interaction. By tSt those members who show apathy or hostility toward the union pre- Lte among those who are demonstrative of a composite low degree of 'ation. These findings may perhaps be surprising to supporters of ,- fDo You mluate a Union?" BusinessTYreek, December 13 , 19;? ”31—5. 205 essor Mayo. Critical of Mayo, Hart states: ...it is not only within the plant that the" disordered dust of ndividuals" reorganizes itself into informal groups to resist managerial pressure, but that outside the plant the same disor- lered dust is also organizing itself into formal organizations :alled unions that every day, as they find more and more outlets for '.heir activities, take on increasingly the character of social ins- situtions . 3] :rs of local 721; who express positive relationships to the union, 1 together by the union at the work plant level appear unlikely to .isordered dust" in broader areas of interaction. Those members who exemplify high integration are also those who are 'e unionists. Since the officers and active members are most favor— toward the local, it would appear that the union's propaganda cam- toward reapectability would best be waged by these members who have positive, respectable affiliations. This, it seems, would be par- arly for active rank-and-file members who would be least suspected ving vested interests in union expansion. As indicated, attitudes most favorable toward local operation and plishment are expressed by the most active members. Since many a members appear to be officers one might conclude that their res- s bias the findings in favor of the union. There is one fact which such a conclusion questionable. When officers were compared to non- srs with respect to attitudes concerning democracy within the local, bunity to become an officer, treatment of members by the union, and accomplishment on specific issues, no differences were found to be stically significant. On the other hand, when actives, including ars, were compared to inactives, three tables showed statistical :15 .33. . Hart, 11'I-[Cndustrial Relations Research and Social Theory," tan Journal of Economics and Political Science, Volume 15, pp. 57-58. 206 .gnificance, and generally these tables were closer to statistical sig- ..f.'icance than were those comparing officer and non—officer attitudes. 113 means that while officers are favorably disposed toward the union, here are some rank-and—file members, the actives, who are similarly so -nclined. A study of this sort seldom if ever exhausts the data which was col- lected. Those operations which have been performed sought merely to test a few of the many hypotheses which could have been formulated for the study of a. local union. One might have hypothesized, for example, that there was a relationship between the holding of union office and the existence of selected social characteristics. One could hypothesize a relationship between seniority and the hold- ing of office or directly test an hypothesis relating orientation to attitudes about union accomplishment. Certainly more research can be done regarding orientations and social characteristics. Refinements would have to be made for establishing the orientational categories; this explor- atory study has demonstrated some of the problems involved. With know- ledge of social types and related orientations, local officers and mem— bers should be in a better position to plan programs "aimed" toward those types and their interests. It is hoped that this study has answered as well as raised some questions pertinent to understanding a small segment of the world of unionism and that other students of the subject will find the reception which this writer ultimately received. The nation will know more about the union and the union man, and the union men will know more about them- selves as an increased amount of internal study is permitted. As findings are presented, it will probably become more apparent that most unions have little to hide. Only with this will come the respectability which the union man seeks. The need for continued study is implicit in the dynamic nature of the union movement and of the operation of the local union. The dis- covery of changing attitudes and the investigation of changing structures and patterns of behavior are important if the local is to operate smoothly, efficiently, democratically. APPEN DIX A LETTERS OF INTRODUCTION IETTER NO. 1 Dear Member of Local 721;: On behalf of the membership of Local 72h, UAW-GIG, we are pleased to announce the official approval by our Local Union of a survey of member participation in Local Union activities. The survey is a jointly sponsored project of Michigan State College Department of Sociology and Local 721;, UAW-CID. This letter will introduce _; I , an official interviewer for the Social Research Service of Michigan State College, and your full cooperation with the interviewer will be greatly appreciated. This survey will be of value only if you give completely honest answers. You will be interested to know that as a result of the methods and techniques used in classifying the information in the survey, no one will be able to identify your interview. Again, we invite your cooperation in this survey. Sincerely and Fraternally, SIGNED Harold Darrow, President Amalgamated Local 721;, UAW-CID LETTER NO. 2 ['he bearer as this letter is _____ __ #4 an official inter- riewer of the Social Research Service at Michigan State College. L'he Department of Sociolog at the College and local 72b of the United Lutomobile Workers are jointly sponsoring this study of membership Jarticipation in local union activities. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated. Rest assured that no one will be able to identify your interview. Lll information given will be treated statistically and kept in strictest confidence. This survey will be of greatest value only .1? you give completely honest answers. if you have any questions about this survey or your interviewer "on may call Dr. William H. Form at the College: Ph. ED—Z-lSll, xt. 71:11.14, or Ph. 5-3869 at your local union. Sincerely yours, SIGVED William H. Form, Professor UNICN lfllBERS IN THEIR COMMUNITY Interview Instructions 11: a sure that you interview only the union member whose name is given to m. It will not always be possible, but it is preferable that you iterview that person privately. 1e schedule number will correspond to the name (interviewee) given > you. Check this so that we may keep our records correct. Lternative responses on the schedule are preceded by a,b,c, etc. Me the response given by encircling the appropriate letter. 1 questions where more than three specific responses are possible, lrds are provided for presentation to the interviewee. Have him :lect the response which he feels most nearly applies to him. >ace provided for "Any remarks" should be used to record any qualify- Lg statement which the interviewee may make; e.g., he may feel that re list of alternative responses is inadequate. [structions to you, incorporated in the schedule, are entirely capital— ;ed. These, of course, are not to be read to the interviewee. ampere question #13 with question #32. Question #13a. begins with F YES", and questions 32a. , 32b., and 320. begin with "IF YES". In Le former case #13a precedes "Any remarks". To permit you to "catch" mments pertinent to the initial response, "Any remarks" precedes Le a,b,c, etc. sections of a question when there is more than one .her section which you must handle. ' you need additional space, please number the reaponse and use the LCk of the sheet. 211 fic: l Question #2 - Get town and state Question #1; - For cases outside of the city, you might indicate that you mean the Lansing Area. Question #6a - Is designed to help categorized the worker as skilled, semi-skilled, or unskilled. 2 Question #12 - As in #6a, skill category is what is wanted. t Question #l7a - Get town and state > Question #Zha - Merely record "yes" or "no" in the space provided if the reSpondent has ever held an elective office. Duration of memberships refers to membership in the particular union and not to duration in office. Question #29a - length of time refers to the time in the office named. Unit refers to the plant in which the man was working at the time of his election. Again, record only elective offices. Question #Bla - To get response to "Degree of Activity of Committee" you might ask, "How active was that connittee?", "Attendance at Meetings", "How often did you attend the committee meetings?" Record as "all, over half, about half", etc. Question #33b - To record in the table, find out if the activity listed is sponsored primarily by the Unit or the Amalgamated Union as a whole. Record U or A after the activity. Question #330 - Here again, since some activities are Sponsored by the Unit, others by the Amalgamated, be sure to list the activities on the proper line. D inestion 35 - Probe as in Question #16. L Question 39b - 3 Question #948 - 3 Question #51; - 5 Question #55 - 1 Question #59 - l9 and 20 Question 71 through 77 - 212 Ignore the lines appearing in this question and encircle the apprOpriate response. Probe to learn whether the interviewee thinks the local officers were elected because of leadership ability, “personal magnetism" , duration of member- ship, etc. "Fellow members" refers to fellow union members. In cases where the respondent lives outside of Lansing it may be necessary to check more than one space; e.g., most friends may live in his neighborhood and outside of Lansing. The word "mn" has been used intentionally instead of "union". This will give the respondent an opportunity to use the tern "union" in his response. If he asks what is meant by "the men", tell him the men at the plant where you work. N nothing P poor F fair G good E excellent Union Members in Their Community Lle Number . my name is . I'm working for a study done by Michigan State College. We‘re concerned about workers' par- ttion in Union activities, their recreational activities, what they about their jobs and Lansing, and things like that. We have per- >n from the Amalgamated Union and Michigan State College to do a study ihis and would appreciate it if you would give a few minutes of your ".0 answer some questions about these things. (Your name has been from a hat, so to speak, so no one will know who you are. Your rill never appear with these answers, so you can be perfectly frank mering these questions. Anything you say will be very valuable for 1rvey and we will appreciate any help you can give us.) we would like to know something about how you feel about Lansing and Du feel about yvur job. 3w long have you lived in the lensing area? iere were you born? more have you lived most of your life? hat do you think of Lansing as a place to live? l.— .h— a. What do you think of Lansing as a place to work? no you married or single? a Married 5a. IF MARRIED, How many children do you have? b Single c Divorced d Widowed e Separated hat is your occupation? TITLE a. Could you tell me briefly exactly what you do! 2115 at is the name of the department you work in? (NOTE: NAME, NOT MBER r__ __ A.— rw long have you been employed there? Lat do you think of that department as a place to work? = m w well satisfied would you say you are with your job? . Very dissatisfied . Dissatisfied , Fairly satisfied Satisfied Very satisfied 'a. Is there anything you especially like about your job? [__'_ .— b. Is there anything you especially dislike about your job? A on you speak of promotion, what are the things you usually think 9 a. How do you think a man's promotion should be determined? 'd like to know something about other full-time jobs that you've held. CHART FOR JOB HISTORI ON FOLIONDIG PACE. 215 ‘ob History: (FROM mosr RECENT, nor INCLUDING PRESENT JOB) Job Description Plant City, State Approx. Dates l. .10 Elave you ever been unemployed when you wanted to be working? a N0 b YES 13a. IF YES, How long were you unemployed? c Any remarks 2 16 3 you look forward some day to doing some kind of work which is ifferent from what you do now? a No b Yes 0 Any remarks lha. IF YES, What type of work? : lhb. IF YES, What do you especially like about that type of work? Ould you mind telling me how old you are? Age low many years of school have you completed? (NOTE: DOJ'T ACCEPT ENERAL RESPONSE OF "GRADE SCHOOL" OR "HIGH SCHOOL"; PROBE FOR UMBER 01" YEARS COMPLETED.) umber of years .69.. Have you had any vocational training outside of regular school? N 0 Yes Any remarks OO'ID 6b. 11“ YES, What kind was it? r be. IF YES, How long a training period? That kind of work did your father do when you were about 15 years old? ___‘ .A __._. I—__ L73. Where was your father brought up? L7b. Was he ever a union member? a No b Yes 0 Don't know IF YES, What union(s)? 217 How did he feel about unims generally? Ira A like to know something about your participation in union activities. a you willing or unwilling to join the union when you first were Loyed where you now work? filling Inwilljng my remarks :— #A‘ . What is the main reason for your answer? I:_ “— . Are there any other reasons? '__l .H long have you been a member of this union? 1d you say you are an: active union rooter active supporter ordinary member dislike unions dislike unions Very much ogoo'p . Why do you feel this way? .t do you think of "free riders" or "hitchhikers"? .. Do fellows in the union treat "free riders" or "hitchhikers" any differently than they treat each other? a No b Yes c Some of then :. IF YES OR SOME OF THEM, What kind of different treatment do they get? 218 often would you say you attend union meetings? all of the time more than half of the time about half of the time less than half of the time once or twice a year less than once a year never RESPONSE TO QUESTION 22 IS d, e, f, or g ASK, Why don't you go 3 often? l__ _ . IF a, b, or c ASK, What kinds of programs would you like to see added? 5“ .._-_.A_ k ....A 9 you even been a member of another union? No Yes Any remarks I; —-—-- A ._.A_ . IF YES, meow IN TABLE. I— Name of Union Ever an Officer?w Duration of Membership I‘—r t kinds of services do you think the union should provide for its bers, which it doesn't provide them now? Lu ‘— you think the union's initiation fee is: , too high 26a. Any remarks about right t l ngoopipgion or don't know ‘ 219 about the dues? too high about right too low are none no opinion or don't know . Any remarks |—* about assessments? too high about right too law are none no opinion or don't know . Any remarks I:‘ 3 you ever been elected to an office in your present union? N 0 Ya 5 Any remarks I: “ . IF YES, FLUORD IN TABIE Office Legith of Time V Unit [— .‘IO TO QUESTICN 29, Would you like to become a union officer in your sent union? N 0 Yes Any remarks 220 IF YES, Which office? = you ever been on a committee in your union? No Yes Any remarks '__.__._ _ IF YES, RECORD IN TABLE :Wane of Committee Degree of Activity Attendance at Meetings of Committee 4‘ A A you ever served on a committee mach up of both union and manage- people in your present union? No Yes Any remarks __ IF YES, What kind of committee was it? LFT' IF YES, What kind of a job do you think you did? IF YES, Why do you feel that way? F“ kinds of recreational activities do you take part in? 221 9.. IF MENTIONED, Are any of these sponsored by the union? 1 No a Yes 3 Don't know 3. IF YES, Which ones? (RECORD IN TABIE BELOW) _—~ Union sponsored Unit or How often held? fiPercent of time?! activities Amalgamated attended? -— “— w— a :. What other kinds of recreational activities does the union sponsor? .t __ ngamated A _ ' often are there elections for local union officers? 1'. lgamated . How often do you vote in these elections? most of the time half of the time less than half of the time almost never never Any remarks ABOUT VOTING OTHER THAN F OR OFFICERS 222 HEB) ----- let's go back to your (wife, husband) for a moment. as, GO TO QUESTION 37) rmany years of schooling has your (wife, husband) completed? IOBE FOR NUMBER OF YEARS) Number of years 1. Has (she, he) had any vocational training outside of regular school? L No > Yes Any remarks ,, IF YES, What kind was it? :. IF YES, How long a training period? Lt does (she, he) think about unions? ,_ 0 Has your (wife, husband) ever been a union member? No b Yes Any remarks ». IF YES, What union(s)? I. IF YES, How long was (she, he) a member? (each union) I: the way, do you receive the Lansing Labor News? . No » Yes Any remarks .. IF YES, Would you say you usually read it all the way through read some parts all of the time look at it most of the time read it once in a while never read it 223 b. Does your shop have a column in the News? a Yes b No 3 Any remarks I: 3. (IF RESPCNSE TO 37a IS b, c, or d) What "sections" of the paper do you read? 3—..— you think most of the people in the plant read the Lansing Labor News? l N o 3 Ye s 3 Any remark s I. How would you suggest that the paper be improved to increase the interest of readers? If.— you think the union should be active in politics? I. No 3 Yes : Any remarks to Why do you feel this way? >. If unions are going to participate in politics anyway, would you prefer that they exert most pressure at the a local level? b state level? c national level? you think the union should have its own political party, or do you nk that it should back candidates from the present parties? I. Own party D Back candidates Other responses; specify 22h . you think the country would be better off if the working people .d more power and influence in government, or would you say that 'd all be better off if the working people had no more power than ey have now? More power No more power Don't knmv Other 900'!” a. Why do you feel this way? '_A you think the government's job is to see to it that there are oppor- nities for each person to get ahead on his own or do you think the vernment ought to guarantee every person a decent and steady job :1 standard of living? a Get ahead on own b Guarantee job, etc. 3 Don't know d Other 9.. Why do you feel this way? lf—‘v— you favor a guaranteed annual wage? 1 Yes 3 No 3 No opinion L. IF YES, How would you like to see it accomplished? L By lagislation L Collective bargaining L Other, specify I? you think working people are usually treated fairly or unfairly employers? L Fairly L Unfairly , Don't know or no opinion Other 225 you think we'd be better off if the government took over and ran r mines, factories, and industries or that we'd be better off under 'Lvate ownership? Gove rnment Private Don 't know Other wxaup 3.. Why do you feel this way? A #A‘. A _._. w I: v. v~ would like to know a little bit about the way you think your union 5 run. you think that all members have a fair chance to become union :‘icers if they want the job? L N o > Yes 3 Any remarks L. Why do you feel this way? '3 fl you think the union treats all members of the union fairly? L Not often > Some of the time . Usually I Always L. (IF RESPCNSB IS a, b, or c) Why is this the case? _, AA A =——— VV 7 w— v ' do you think the present local officers were elected? le you say your union is run-’ L Poorly L Fair Good Very good No opinion 226 N'would you.rate the quality of the local union officers? Poor Fair Good Excellent 9000'” a» How about international representatives and regional directors? 3 Poor b 'Fair 3 Good 1 Excellent 3. How about the international union officials? 1 Poor 3 Fair 3 Good 1 Excellent you feel that international union officials are generally radical? L ‘No 3 Yes Don't know too conservative? L No L Yes Don't know too interested in their own success? NC) Yes Don't know too indifferent to doing a good job? Nc> Yes Don't know ’ often do you think anyone is thrown out of your local union unjustly? Never Hardly ever Fairly often 'Quite often a. FOR.ALL ANSWERS EXCEPT NEVER, ASK: which a man can be expelled from the union? |__ V,’ 227 What are the reasons for would like to lmow something about the organizations and the tivities you are interested in outside of work. :1 clubs, lodges, other unions, churches, veterans organizations, hletic clubs, or other organizations? Do you belong to Organizat i one Fellow workers members How often does it 2 meet? (What percent of the meetings do you go to? Ever an Officer Ever 3 ? Committee Niembe r? I'— Lde from these organizations, how do you Spend your leisure time? STE: (E WITH WHEN ENGAGED IN A PARTICULAR ACTIVITY.) _ ne; 3 for Next Most time 3 _3_ for 3rd Most Often and _l_L. for best Often.) ASK INTERVIE' 13E WHICH CLASSIFICATION OF PEOPLE HE SPENDS MOST (USE: l for Most .ty Relatives Neighbors i Other Friends Fellow Members 1 I ‘— I IV Ln Lg ‘ .._- i is A“. u 1 .. L ‘- L I I i 3 l _ a T .— L _ __ _ r .' 3 i 7 I L L I n A I Y- s ‘ I I:_‘* 1 W“ ! L 1 ! 228 La. Which of these activities do you engage in most often? (LIST MOST FREQUENT FIRST, USING ABOVE IETI‘ERS TO INDICATE ACTIVITY) 1:4; “— are do most of your friends live? cation 93 Friends Most Some None ighborhood I l .her places in Lansing Ltside of Lansing is. How many of these friends did you first meet at your place of work? Most of them More than half of them About half of them Less than half of them Only a few of them None of them wounds» 0' . How many of your friends are people you work with? Most of them More than half of them About half of them Less than half of them Only a few of them None of them "H9 9.9699 at do you think of your neighborhood as a place to live? ander if you would tell me something about the relations which the is with management at the plant where you work. re you read the agreement (the contract) between your union and the npany? l N o 3 Yes 3 Any remarks ___‘ L. IF YES, How well would you say you understand it? L Very well 3 Pretty well L N at very well I Not at all 229 you feel that the plant or company rules are fair? Very unfair Unfair Fair Very fair No opinion val-"vow L. IF UNFAIR, OR VERY UNFAIR, Why do you feel this way? )— Lt do you think is the best way of settling disputes between the L and management? A.“ _.__._4 I___ — fiv L. Why do you feel this way? I: ‘ 3. What disputes do you have in mind? A __ I;— 3n you use the term "union" do you usually mean other members like Lrself or the officers? L Members 3 Officers you think you need a union to buck the employer for you, or could I do as well by yourself? We need the union Could do almost as well by wself Could do just as well by myself Could do better by myself Other SPECIFY L. Why do you feel this way? _ you feel that the gains or losses in your union result from the Llity of the organization or the quality of the leadership? Organization Leadership Both Don't know Any remarks __ “w"vr it 230 do you think should be the most important job of the union? a. What is next? fl :3. Can you think of any other important duties that the union ought to perform for the men? __ _ fi_ i at do you think are the main things that your union local should rk a b for right now? you ever participated in a strike? N 0 Yes Any remarks According to the U.A.W. constitution does the average member -have a voice in calling a strike? No Yes Any remarks A Is there anybody in the local who has more voice in calling a strike than the average member? No Yes IF YES, Who? e grievances generally processed: now O'w Very slowly? Slowly? Quickly? Very quickly? w effective do you feel the present grievance procedure is? “(30'5” Not effective Fairly'effective Effective Very effective 231 7 good a job do you think your union is doing for you in collective rgaining? “flavour Very poor Poor Fair Good Very good the whole union set-up, who do you think has done the most for you gaining economic benefits? (99:wa a. Local officers International representatives International officers None of these All of these equally IF NCNE OF THESE, ASK, Which officers do you think have tried to do the most for you in gaining economic benefits? uld you tell me if you agree or disagree with the following state- nts? (GET RESPONSE AFTER EACH STATEMENT.) .) A main purpose of the union is to struggle with the company for power to control conditions on the job. a agree b disagree c don't know A main purpose of the union is to get economic benefits for its members. a agree b disagree 0 don't know A main purpose of the union local is to set a price for a man's labor. a agree b disagree c don't know »d a job do you think the union has done in providing: .) Health insurance N P r o E ') Accident insurance N P F G E )Life insurance N P F G E ) Unemployment insurance N ) Vacations N ) Guaranteed annual wage N ) Better working conditions N a you think of some other things the union is working for? a No D Yes IF YES, What others? P P F F G G G G E E E E 232 I well would.you say your local compares with other locals in using in bargaining with employers? a Very unfavorable b Unfavorable 3 Favorable d ‘Very favorable 3 Don't know B Any remarks w well would you say your international compares with other inter- tionals in bargaining with employers? Very unfavorable Unfavorable Favorable Very favorable Don't know Any'remarks raw 9.0 Us“ Interview: __ InterView: of interviewee: about interview: I; muired: ewer: PRINT NAME ADDRESS_#_ TEIEPHONE 23h DATA FOR CHAPTER III THE MEMBERS OF LOCAL 72h A. Willingness to Join 1;. Place Father Was Rear-ed l. Willing 129 Lansing 8 Reasons* Rural! fichigan 19 Pay 26 Urban Michigan 13 Working Conditions 19 North (non-Mich. ) 28 Protection vs. M'gmt. 28 South 35 Need representation 17 Foreign l7 Helps me at my work 20 U.S. or Michigan 4.; Security 7 T ot al 13 Social pattern 11 S. Fathers' Occupations Seniority protection 5 Professional General pro-union 35 Farm owners and tenants 56 Had no choice 2 Wholesale and retail dealers 3 2. Unwilling 10 Other, prop, mgrs., and off. 5 Reasons Clerks and kindred workers 2 Had no choice 7 Skilled workers 8: foreman l9 Strikes 2 Semi—skilled workers 11 Too radical h Unskilled workers No Special benefits 5 Indeterminate 25 3. Others 3 Total Total Ill—2- 6. Fathers' Attitude Toward Unionism Favorable 143 B. Who They Are Mixed feelings 8 1. Age Unfavorable 11 Under 25 10 Total ”7‘2 25—314 3h 7. Length of Time in Lansing Area. 354m to less than 1 yr. 3 15-94 36 1—3 yrs. 19 55—60 11 )4-9 yrs. 19 65 and over 10 lO-l9 yrs. 29 Total IEI 20—39 yrs. 58 2. Place of Birth ’40 yrs. or more 1h Lansing 22 Total 3112' Rural Michigan 25 8. Present Residence Urban Michigan 23 Central City 10).; North (non-Afich.) 25 Fringe 38 South 31 Total E2 Foreign 8 9. Amount of Education U.S. or Michigan 8 None 2 Total 31?- Some grammar school 23 3 Longest Residence Completed gramm. sch. (8 yrs.) 37 Lansing 70 Some high school 38 Rural Michigan 8 Completed high school 3),; Urban Michigan ll; b‘ome college North (non-Mich.) 11 Completed college 3 South 21 Total w: Foreign 1; U S. or Michigan 13 Total TH *Many totals will not equal lh2 since many members have given more than one answer and only actual, relevant responses are listed. '— 10. Marital Status Married 120 Single 1h Other 8 Total 155 11. Number of Children 0 11; 1-3 78 h or more __2_?_ Total 119 12. Amount of Wives' Education* None Same grammar school 8 Completed gramm. sch.(8 yrs.) 23 Some high school 37 Completed high school hl Some college 9 Completed college _‘3 Total 122 13. Vocational Training of Wives* No Yes 93 Total 32' 1h. Wives' Attitude Toward Union Very favorable Favorable h2 Indifferent 2 Unfavorable 3 Very unfavorable 2 Knows nothing about unions 12 Good in theo., faults in prac. 9 Total 777' 15. length of Employment (present department) less than 1 yr. 10 l-h yrs. h? 5-9 yrs. 32 10—19 yrs. 36 20 yrs. or more 15 Total 315 16. Occupational Mobility Number of Previous Jobs 1 or 2 95 More than 2 .12 Total 130 Vertical Mobility Up 36 Down h Fluctuating up 6 Fluctuating down 10 Same 31 Indeterminate h3 Total I375 *Two respondents gave answers for for- mer wives. 235 17. Degree of Skill Skilled h3 Semi-Skilled 65 Unskilled 2h Clerical 10 Total TIT? 18. Desire for Different Job No Yes 76 Total 155 19. Desire for Self Employnent Private Business 28 Farming 10 Total ‘33 20. Unemployment Yes 87 Total 21. Strike Participation 3 22. Organizational Affiliations Religious Civic 3 Fraternal 26 Sporting 9 Other 17. Total -83 23. Race White 12h Negro 18 Total 2h. Previous Union Affiliation* No Yes Total A.F.L. 0.1.0. Other Foreign Total 25. Offices Held in Local 72h* Vice President Unit chairman Secretary or treasurer International representative Stewards and committeemen Committee officers Total n: \u \ncn EjV1UJFJ£rUnn> giUJ~JR;O\EiQJ? *More than one response possible G. Basic Union and Leisure Time Activity 1. Union Activity a.Attendance at Meetings All of the time More than half the time About half the time Less than half the time Once or twice per year less than once per year Never Total b.Reasons for Poor Attendance Not important, too much time 13 Work nights on another job Conduct at meetings Other things to do Phys. handicap,1ang. barrier Satisfied with officers Anti union or officers Total c.Additional Programs Desired Have everything or none More recreation & social Educational & speakers Emphasize present programs Clinic, nursery Others Total d.Voting in Union Elections Most of the time Half of the time Less than half the time Almost never Never Total e.Service on Union Committees N 0 Yes Tubal f.Understanding of Contract Very well Pretty well Not very well Not at all Total g.Reading of Labor News No Yes Total *Only 107 report having read their contracts. 18 10 21 7 6 h Family conflicts with meetingsgl O Wth—K’vy— 236 2. leisure Time Activities a.Recreationa1 Participation (Most Frequent) Visiting 32 Parties h Tavern 8 Sports 30 Cards 16 Movies 5 T.V. 13 Total T68 b.Activity in Formal Organizations Active 32 Fairly active 11 Inactive 17 Total 65 D. Selected Attitudes l. Attitudes about Work and Community a.Eva1uation of Lansing Area 1. Lansing as a Place to Live Excellent 13 Very good 29 Good 76 Fair 5 Poor 1 Very poor 2 Total 2. lensing as a Place to Work Excellent 11 Very good 25 Good 8h Fair 18 Poor 1 Very poor __9 Total 139 3. Evaluation of Neighborhood Excellent 9 Very good 22 Good 72 Fair 30 Poor 7 Very poor 0 Total 155 b. Evaluation of Work Plant 1. Evaluation of Department Excellent 3 Very good 31 Good 77 Fair 23 Poor 3 Very Poor ___ Total 137 2. Job Satisfaction Very Satisfied S9 Satisfied 5h Fairly satisfied 2h Dissatisfied 2 Very'dissatisfied 3 Total 352 n.8easons for Satisfaction Pay 19 Freedom 13 Coworkers 15 Type of work 57 Supervision 3 Hours & working conditions 12 Pride in work & skill 7 Total 353 b.Reasons for Dissatisfaction Pay 5 Lack of freedom 2 Coworkers 3 Type of work 1h Supervision 3 Hours and working conditions 3h Total 61 c.Meaning of Promotion More money 5 Moving to supervision 1b Better job,easier,variety,etc.3 More skilled work Self employment Don't think about it or don't want any Others Total d.Determination of Promotion Ability Seniority Ability and seniority Social ability “3030‘ e-Occupational Aspirations No Yes Total f.Type of Work Desired Private business Farming Promotion More skilled work Total #3 o d' W H e: ea P’n) ~a eJUJkJCD “JVJfii flEmom am? flwrrqwmo JON 237 g.Treatment by Company Fairly 100 Unfairly 17 Fairly (qualified) 23 Total 355 h.Fairness of Company Rules Very fair 23 Fair 110 Unfair h Very unfair _JE Total 139 2. Attitudes about Officers & Unions a. Attitudes about Officers 1. Desire to Hold Office No 81 Yes .21 Total 109 Reasons Too much grief h Too time consuming 6 Too much responsibility 8 Self criticism(not capable) 5 Others __2 Total 32 2. Office Desired President 1 Secretary-treasurer 1 Unit chairman l Steward or committeeman 18 Any office h Committee chairman __2 Total 27 3. Opportunity to Be Officer No 19 Yes 122 Total 139 h. Reason Present Officers Elected Ability 79 Education, interest 9 Experience 6 Popularity, friends 314 Social skills 7 Active participation 6 Other 6 Total 157 5. Running of local Very good 21 Good 5 Fair 55 Poor Total 13 6. Quality of Ofircers a. Local Excellent 6 Good 67 Fair 56 Poor J Total 137 b. International Hep. and Regional Directors Excellent Good 70 Fair 27 Poor b Total 158 0. International Union Off. Excellent Good 65 Fair 32 Poor ____2_ Total 107 b. Attitudes about Union 1. Meaning of Union Members 107 Officers 19 Both 16 Total 2. Union Treatment of Members (Treated fairly?) Always 78 Usually U9 Some of the time 12 Not often 2 Total 1E1 3. Unjust Expulsion of Member Never 116 Hardly ever lb Quite often __1 Total 131 h. Attribution of Success or Failure Organization h2 leadership 52 Both 3 Total 1 5. Comparison of Local 72b to Other Lansing Locals Very favorable 25 Favorable 85 Unfavorable 10 Very favorable 6 Total 121 238 6. Self Evaluation of Attitude Toward Local Active union rooter 32 Active supporter 33 Ordinary member 7h Dislike unions 2 Total 151 7. Attitude Toward Free—riders Favorable 2 Unfavorable It's their business Don't have any, don't know the expression, etc. 31 Total E6 8. Treatment of Free Riders Not treated differently 6O Treated differently 16 Some treated differently 11 Total 37 Kind of Treatment Ostracism, cold shoulder 20 Other 9 Total 59 9. Strike Decision (By average member) No 22 Yes 110 Total 132 (By others) Local officers 16 Strike committee 2 International officers 3 Others 13 Total ‘31: 10. Attitudes about Grievance Procedure a. Effectiveness Very effective 29 Effective S6 Fairly effective hl Not effective 10 Total I33 b. Speed Very quickly 16 Quickly 79 Slowly 30 Very slowly 7 Total 152 c. Preferred Method for Settling Disputes Arbitration 13 Collective bargaining 29 Union aid Grievance procedure 51 Talk to foreman b Other 6 Total $7 3. Attitudes About Politics and Government a.Union Should be Active in Politics No 60 Yes 7h Indifferent __;1 Total 137 1. Reasons for Activity Helps working man 9 Labor needs rep. hO Politics controls everything h Others 21 Total 75 2. Reasons for Inactivity Business and politics don't mix 19 People should vote as individuals 17 Others 26 Total b.Leve1 at Which Unions Should Exert Political Pressure Local 27 State 17 National hS All levels 23 Other combinations h None at all 5 Total lfil c.Direction of Labor Vote Should have own party 21 Should back other candidate98 Other 13 Total TEE 239 d.Desirability of Power for More power No more power Other Total e.fiesponsibility of Gov't to Labor Provide opportunity to get ahead Guarantee job Other Total Labor 69 39 10 ITS 92 h2 h l§8 f.Accomplishment of Guaranteed Annual'Wage* legislation Collective bargaining Other Total g.Government Control of Industry Favor Do not favor Other Total *Eighty-one members favored a guaranteed annual wage. 26 SO 2140 DATA FOR CHAPTER IV TYPES OF ORIENTATIONS TOWARD UNIONISM AND SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF UNIGQ MEMBERS Need for Union b. Reason for Unfavorable Need the union 123 Attitude Could do almost as well Good man can apply pres— by myself 6 sure 6 Could do just as well‘by myself 8 Know the bosses )4. Could do better by myself 5 No trouble in plant 2 Total IE2 Other 12 a. Reasons for Favorable Attitude Total 25 Couldn't demand anything without union 9 Need organization 12 Union does good job 2 Union gives us more influence 56 General pro-union 27 Total I16 ' DATA FOR CHAPTER V l ATTITUDES OF ACTIVE AND lNACTIVE MEMBERS A. Fees 2. Better Working Conditions 1. Dues Nothing 2 Too high 20 Poor 8 About right 118 Fair A2 Too low 3 Good 66 Total Ill-I Excellent 18 2. Initiation Fee Total T36 Too high 6 3. Accident Insurance About right 116 Nothing 11 Too low Poor 7 Isn't any 7 Fair 27 Total I37: Good 75 3. Assessments Excellent _l_2_ Too high 8 Total 132 About right ’47 A. Health Insurance Too low 0 Nothing 8 Aren't any __5_7‘ Poor 9 Total 112 Fair 3h Good 71 B. local Union Accomplishment on Excellent 12 Specific Items Total I37: 1. Unemployment Insurance 5. Life Insurance N othing 23 N othing 10 Poor 13 Poor 11 Fair 140 Fair 32 Good 50 Good 66 Exce llent ___)._£ Exce llent __1__2_ Total 130 Total 131 21:1 6. Vacations 8. Items on Which Union Nothing 23 is Horking Poor 1h Better pension plan 13 Fair 23 Wage increase Good 75 Profit sharing 1 Excellent 6 General benefits 10 Total IEI Total 27 7. Guaranteed Annual Wage Nothing 80 Poor 12 Fair 12 Good 9 Excellent 0 Total II? DATA FOR CHAPTER VI ATTITUDES OF OFFICERS AND NON—OFFICERS A. Frequency of Elections C. Interpretation of Behavior of Inter— 1. Unit national Union Officials Twice a year 3 1. Too radical? Once a year 113 Yes 20 Once every two years 5 No 78 Do not know 11 Do not know to Total I32 Total TEE 2. local 2. Too conservativei Twice a year 0 Yes 1h Once a year 76 N0 85 Once every two years 10 Do not know 36 Do not know 35 Total 133 Total I§I 3. Too interested in their own success? B. A Main Purpose of the Union Yes 8 1. To struggle with the company for N0 93 power to control conditions on Do not know h0 the job. Total IEI Agree 10h h. Too indifferent to doing a Disagree 31 good job? Total I3; Yes 8 2. To get economic benefits No 93 for its members Do not know no Agree 131 Total IE'i' Disagree 6 Total T§7 D. Officers Responsible for Economic Gains 3. To set a price for a man‘s Local 2 labor. International representatives 20 Agree 86 International officers 21 Disagree h3 None of these 2 Total T79 All of these equally 53 Total ES BIBLI OGRAPHY Allport, Gordon W. "The Historical Background of Modern Social Psychology," in Handbook of Social Psycholog, Gardner Lindsey, editor. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 19511,. Bakke, E. Wight. "Why Workers Join Unions ," in Labor Economics and Indus- trial Relations, Joseph Shister, editor. Chicago: J. B. E‘ppincott Company, 1 l. Balcke, E. ‘Night and Clark Kerr. Unions, Management and the Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1959. Barbash, Jack. "Imperatives of Union Leadership,” in Robert Dubin, Human Relations in Administration. New York: Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1951. , Labor Unions in Action. New York: Harper and Brothers, l9h8. Blum, Fred H. Toward a Democratic Work Process. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953- Blumer, Herbert. "What is Wrong With Social Theory," American Sociolchal Review, Vol. 19, 1951;. Brewer, John M. "Causes of Discharge ," The Vocational Guidance Magazine (Occupations), January 1928. Taken from The Personnel Journal, Vol. VI, No. 3, October, 1927. Caplow, Theodore. The Sociology of Work. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 195D. Carr, Lowell J. Analytical Sociology. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955. Centers, Richard. The P _ chology of Social Classes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959. Chamberlain, Neil W. The Union Challenge to Management Control. New York: Harper and Brothers, 19148. Chopin, Stuart F. Contemporary American Institutions. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1935. Chinoy, Eli. Automobile Workers and the Anerican Dream. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1955. 21:3 Chinoy, Eli. "Local Union leadership" in Alvin W. Gouldner, editor, Studies In Leadership. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950. Commons, John R. History of Labour in the United States. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1918. Cuber, John F. Sociolo . Second edition. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts, Inc., 1931. Dubin, Robert. H__uman Relatifiogs in Administration. New York: Prentice- Hall Inc., 1951. i Eby, Kermit. "Research in Labor Unions," American Journal of Sociology, ‘ Vol. 56, 1950—51. I Form, William H., Joel Smith, Gregory P. Stone and James Cowhig. "The ' Compatibility of Alternative Approaches to the Delimitation of Urban Sub-Areas," American SocioloEical Rovifl, Vol. 19, pp. Lou-Mo. Gardner, Burleigh B. "The Functions of a Union," in E. Wight Bakke and Clark Kerr, Unions Management and the Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, I959. Ginzberg, Eli. The Labor Leader. New York: The MacMillan Company, 19138. Golden, Clinton S. "Understanding Union Attitudes," Harvard Business Review, Vol. 27, 191:9. Golden, Clinton S. and H. J. Pmttenberg. The aggmics of Industrial Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1 . Gouldner, Alvin W. "Attitudes of 'Progressive' Trade-Union Leaders," American Journal of SOOiOlOfl. Vol. 52, 19117. Green, Arnold W. Sociology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1952. Green, Bert. "Attitude Measurement," in Handbook of Social Ps holo , Gardner Lindsey, editor. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison—Wesley sziblishing Company Inc., 1951;. Guest, Robert H. "Work Careers and Aspirations of Automobile Workers," American Sociological Review, Vol. 19, April, 1951;. . Hagood, Margaret Jarman. Statistics for Sociologgsts. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 191:1. Hagood, Margaret J arman and Daniel 0. Price. Statistics for Sociologists. New York: HenryHolt and Company, 1952. Hart, C.M.W. "Industrial Relations Research and Social Theory," Canadian Journal of Ecgnromics and Political Science, Volume 15, 19119. 2M: Homan, George C. "The Strategy of Industrial Sociology," American Journal of Sociolo , Vol. 51:, 19148—149. Hoxle, Robert F. Trade Unionism in the United States. Second edition. New York: D. Appleton—Century Company, 1935- "How U0 You Evaluate a Union," Business Week. December 13, 1952. "How Unions Control Workers." U.S. News and .‘iorld Report. March 27, 1953. Howe, Irving and B.J. Nio'ick. The UAW in.“ Walter Reuther. New York: Random House, 1929. Huberman, Ieo. The Truth About Unions. New York: Reynal and Hitchock, Inc., 191:6. Hughes, Everett C. "Institutional Office and the Person," American Journal Of SOCiOlO , 143, 1937. Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations. LaborManagement Relations iiplini City. Champaign, Illinois: 1951;. Jaques, Elliott. The Changing Culture of a Factory. New York: The Dryden Press, Inc., 1952. Jerome, Harry. Statistical Method. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1921;. As quoted in Wilson Gee, Social Science Research methods. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1930. Killingsworth, Charles C. State Labor Relations Acts. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 191:8. Kopald, Sylvia. "Democracy and leadership," in E. w’ight Bakke and Clark Kerr, Unions, Management and the Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 19149. Kornhauser, Arthur W. Detroit as the People See It. Detroit: .‘iayne University Press, 1952. Kornhauser, Arthur, Robert Dubin and Arthur M. Ross. Industrial Conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1951:. Krech, David and R.S. Crutchfield. Theogy and Problems of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 191:8. Iester, Richard A. Labor and Industrial Relations. New York: The Mac— Millan Company, 1951. Looms, Charles P. and J. Allan Beegle. Rural Social Systems. New York: Prentice—Hall, Inc., 1950. MacIver, R.l(.. Society. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., 1937. 21.5 Mayo, Elton. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Dusiness deinistration, Harvard University, 191:5- McCormick, Thomas Carson. Elements Social Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., 1951. Mills, C. Wright. White Collar. New York: Oxford University Press, 1951. Miller, Delbert G. and William H. Form. Industrial Sociolog. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951. Moore, Wilbert E. Industrial Relations and the Social Order. New York: MacMillan Company, 195i. , "Industrial Sociology: Status and Prospects," American Sociological View. Vol. HII, 191:8. Newcomb, Theodore. "Labor Unions as Seen by Their Members: An Attempt to Measure Attitudes ," in Industrial Conflict: A Psychological Interpretation. G. W. Hartman and Theodore NewcomB, editors. New York: Cordon Company, 1939. Parsons, Talcott. Essays in Sociolflical Tkgory Pure and Applied. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 191:9. , The Structure of Social Acticn. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1927. Pearson, Frank A. and K. R. Bennett. Statistical Methods. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 191:2. Perlman, Selig. A Theory of the Labor Movement. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 19,490 Peterson, Florence. Survey of Labor Economics. New York: Harper and Brothers, 191:7. Pollak, Otto. "Discrimination Against Older Workers in Industry," Amrican Journal of Sociology. Vol. 50, filth-4:5. Reynolds, Lloyd G. Labor Economics and Labor Relations. New York: Prentice Hall, Inc., 19149. Roper, Elmo. "What American Labor Wants," American Mercug. Volume 58, No. 2 2. Rose, Arnold M. Union Solidarl . Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1952. Ross, Arthur 11. Trade Union W e Polio . Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1953. 21:6 Sayles, Ieonard R. and George Strauss. The local Union. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953. Seidman, Joel, "The Labor Union as an Organization," in Arthur Komhauser, et. 3.1., Industrial Conflict. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., 19514. , Jack London and Bernard Karsh. "Leadership in a Local Union," American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 56. 1950-51. __ . "Why Workers Join Unions," The Annals of The American Acadgxy of Political and Social Science, 271, 1951. Selekman, Benjamin M. Labor Relations and Human Relations. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 191:7. . "Varieties of Labor Relations," in Harvard Business Review, “V61J‘XXVTY. 19b9. Shepard, Herbert A. "Democratic Control in a Labor Union," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 51:. 191:9. Shister, Joseph. Readings in Labor Economics and Industrial Relations. New York: J.B. Lippincott, 1951. Slichter, Sumner H. The Challenge of Industrial Relations. Ithica: Cornell University Press, 19147. Smith, Joel, William H. Form and Gregory P. Stone. "local Intimacy in a Middle Sized City," American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 60, pp. 276-2813. Smith, M.M. "C.I.O. Training for Active and Effective Local Leadership," Monthly Labor Review, Volume 71:. Starr, Mark. "Education for Labor leaders," Forum. Vol. CVII. June, 19h7. Useem, John. "South Sea Island Strike: Labor Management Relations in the Caroline Islands, Micronesia," in Edward H. Spicer, Hum Problems in Technological Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1952. Walker, Charles R. Stficltown. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950- , and Robert H. Guest. The Man on the Assembly Line. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952. Warner, Lloyd .7. and J.O. Low, The Social System of the Modern Factory. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 191:7. fihyte, William Foote. "th Goes Union and Why," Personnel Joumal. Dec ember, 19141:. withey, Fred. Government and Collective Bargaining. Chicago: J .15. Lip- pincott Company, 1951. 21:? Worker, John. "My Union--An Inside Story," Harvard Business Rei- Vol. 26, 19148. Young, Pauline V. Scientific Social Surveys and Research. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc . , 191:9. Government Documents: A. 1950 Census of Population, Volume II, Characteristics of Population, Part , Michigan. B. Labor Management Relations Act, 191:7. C. Monthly Labor Review, Vols. 71:, 76. U.A.W. — C.I.O. Documents: Constitution of the International Union, (UA‘. -CIO) Congress of Industrial Organization, Proceedin s, 12, 1950. flalgamated Local 721:, UAW-CIO, By—Laws. Agreement between Atlas Drop Forge Co. and Amalgamated No. 7211,. Agreement between Federal Drop Forge Co. and Local No. 7214. Egreement betweerTTansingFouidry Co'rpany and Local No. 721;. fleement between Lundberg Screw Products (TompaanLancYLocal N . 721;. Agreement between Melling Forging Company and local 721;. Agreement: Plant Labor Agreement, John Bean Division, Food Machiner and Chemical Corporation. RHUM USE GNU "f.'_. . 1' :..:..‘Il- '~ Date Due Demco-293 "IminimS