US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4999

what evidence do we have that US unions were too militant in the 1970s and contributed to the decline of manufacturing in America


The claim that U.S. unions were "too militant" in the 1970s — and contributed to the decline of American manufacturing — is a controversial one. It’s debated among economists, historians, and labor scholars. But there is some evidence that suggests union militancy was a contributing factor, though not the sole or even the primary cause.

🔍 Evidence Often Cited for Union Militancy’s Role:
1. High Strike Rates and Disruptions
The 1970s saw a high number of strikes, including major ones in auto, steel, and coal industries.

Example:

1970 U.S. Postal Strike

1974 UAW strike against General Motors

1977-78 coal miners’ strike

These strikes disrupted production and supply chains, leading to losses in productivity and missed market opportunities.

2. Wage and Benefit Demands Outpacing Productivity
In heavily unionized industries (e.g., steel, auto), wage and benefit increases outpaced productivity growth.

Automakers like GM and Ford had rising unit labor costs, while foreign competitors (especially Japanese firms) produced more efficiently with leaner labor contracts.

This created a cost disadvantage for U.S. manufacturers in global markets.

3. Resistance to Technological Change
Some unions resisted automation and job reclassification, fearing job losses.

Example: The United Auto Workers (UAW) often negotiated for “job security” clauses that made it harder to implement labor-saving technology.

Companies then delayed innovation or shifted production elsewhere.

4. “Featherbedding” Practices
Some contracts mandated unnecessary or inefficient labor practices:

E.g., multiple workers required for simple tasks

Protection of outdated job roles

Critics argue this created inefficiencies that made U.S. factories less competitive.

5. Labor-Management Hostility
In many industries, adversarial labor-management relations were the norm.

Instead of collaborative problem-solving (like in Japan’s keiretsu or Germany’s codetermination model), the U.S. often saw zero-sum negotiations.

This led to low morale, low productivity, and a lack of adaptability.

⚠️ Counterpoint: Unions Were Not the Main Culprit
Many scholars argue that blaming unions is oversimplified. Other larger structural forces were more influential:

Factor Description
Globalization Cheaper manufacturing overseas — especially in Asia and Latin America — undermined U.S. industry.
Technology Automation reduced the need for labor across all sectors.
Currency and trade policy A strong dollar, trade imbalances, and policy choices hurt U.S. exports.
Management mistakes U.S. companies often failed to innovate or ignored quality issues (e.g., 1970s Detroit vs. Japanese cars).

📝 Summary
Yes, there is evidence that unions in the 1970s:

Went on frequent strikes

Demanded above-market wages

Opposed labor-saving innovation

But this only partially explains the decline in American manufacturing. More important were global competition, technological change, and poor corporate strategy.

Would you like a timeline or a side-by-side comparison of unionized vs. non-unionized firms in the 1970s–80s?