Lainey Newman: How the UAW, and other unions, can capitalize on the momentum of the moment

Labor is seeing some of its biggest wins in years, and unions are back on the public radar and in the media limelight after decades of declining power and interest. Support for unionism amongst Americans is at a 50-plus-year high. The UAW is about to solidify one of the best contracts it has seen in decades with Ford, Stellantis and General Motors. The Screenwriters reached an “exceptional” agreement with the major Hollywood studios, and the actors followed shortly thereafter. Everyone is wondering: will this momentum continue? Are unions coming back?

That remains to be seen. With any successful wave of action, leaders must ask how to maintain — and push forward — achieved gains. Lessons from the heyday of Big Labor can help.

Since the 1950s, union membership and density has been on the decline. In particular, private sector union membership has dropped precipitously. Rising rates of public sector union membership obscure the reality that fewer and fewer traditional workplaces and firms are unionized. In recent decades, most of labor’s marginal gains have occurred in the public sector or among the higher educated. The UAW’s effective strike and promising new contract mark a departure from that trend. Its success signals the value that private sector industrial unions still have and the potential of unions in traditional workplaces to still thrive. Already, the UAW is looking to organize nonunion plants, and Toyota has preemptively raised worker wages with the hope of deterring just that.

As unions look to build and expand on this momentum, both executive and local union leaders should recall what gave unions such staying power in the minds of members and families at the height of labor’s power. In the 1950s and 1960s, unions were involved in many aspects of workers’ and their families’ lives. Local unions, and their brick-and-mortar union halls, were hubs of community engagement. This was especially true for local industrial unions — generally organized by individual plant, mill or facility — because workers lived close to one another, their workplace and their union hall.

Local unions were connected with religious institutions, fraternal and ethnic groups, and even schools. They sponsored soap box derbies and had softball and bowling leagues. Coin trading events, retirement parties and weddings were held at local union halls.

At the height of their power, unions were more than just economic bargaining units or political action groups. They fostered tight-knit communities amongst members, providing social and recreational outlets and a sense of belonging for workers and families alike. As one union publication wrote in the caption of a photograph of two members laughing, “socializing is just as important” as the business of the meeting itself.

Archival data from the heyday of Big Labor also reveal that unions were a key source of information — news and other — for members through local newsletters, national union magazines and local labor newspapers, funded by unions in the region. Local newsletters provided information about hunting season and updates on marriages and births among members; national magazines educated members on various federal benefits, such as Medicare and Social Security, and included such things as recipes and poems from members across the country.

When labor began to face political and economic challenges in the 1970s and 1980s, emphasis on community-building was one of the first things to go. It made sense. In one document, a UMW member called on his district representative to cancel its annual celebratory labor gala and instead use that money to lobby for policies to support laid-off miners.

Of course, political advocacy costs money and is important. But so is building union loyalty and identity. Think of the prototypical “union man” of historical lore: steadfastly loyal to his fellow workers and union — and to Democrats, as the party that supported the working-class coalition. Unions can serve as a counterweight to conservative influences, and for many years, even culturally conservative white workers voted for Democrats out of loyalty to their fellow workers and union.

Since the 1970s, though, more and more “traditional” union members — blue-collar workers in the private sector — have defected from the union cause, not seeing it as salient or reflective of their lives, communities or worldviews. In other words, members no longer feel compelled to prioritize union messages over other influences, such as the NRA.

As unions begin to actualize their gains, they should keep in mind that member buy-in is crucial to the long-term success of individual unions and advancement of pro-labor policies. People buy in to a group when they find a sense of belonging in it. The union movement looks very different today than it did in the mid-20th century, but the fundamental loyalties and attachments of that era’s “union men” are still relevant.

Pittsburgher Lainey Newman is a second-year law student at Harvard Law School and author, with Theda Skocpol, of “Rust Belt Union Blues.”