Thompson , Alfred Chandler , J. In particular, Urwick was attacked as the 'rhapsodic historian of the scientific management movement'. Sociological analysis was provided by such authors as Paul Sweezy , Paul A.
According to one source, the book sold , copies between and its reissue. Labor and Monopoly Capital was read widely in many languages and had particular impact on scholarly debate in Britain, to the extent that one author described the phenomenon as 'Bravermania'. Despite being overtly hostile to academic sociology ,  Labor and Monopoly Capital became one of the most important sociological books of its era.
Log in to My Virginia.
It revived academic interest in both the history and the sociology of workplaces setting the agenda for many subsequent historians and sociologists of the workplace. Historical studies influenced by Labor and Monopoly Capital include research into deskilling , bureaucracy , Marxist historiography , business history , historical sociology , the Bedaux System , Bedaux Unit , and the Taylor Society.
Some authors thought Braverman was overly pessimistic about how subordinated to capital labor had become,  and produced case studies as to how workers had resisted management interventions at the point of production. Several historians have responded to Labor and Monopoly Capital by revealing through archival research that the Taylor Society had been far more liberal than Braverman suggested Taylor's long-term influence had been.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Globalization and labor market integration in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Asia
New York: Monthly Review Press. Monthly Review. Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. Retrieved August 17, Most orthodox social scientists adhere firmly, indeed desperately, to the dictum that their task is not the study of the objective conditions of work, but only of the subjective phenomena to which these give rise: the degrees of "satisfaction" and "dissatisfaction" elicited by their questionnaires.
Transaction Publishers, Life and Times of a Happy Liberal. Reduced Worktime and the Management of Production. Cambridge University Press, Frederick Taylor and the public administration community: A reevaluation. White-collar workers in cities and towns suffered pay cuts but, for the most part, managed to keep their jobs. On the other hand, miners and others in the coal industry had seen tough times since the s. Virginia's industrial workers, especially in major cities, felt the most severe effects of the depression as manufacturers cut production and jobs.
Even cigarette manufacturing, Richmond's "depression-proof" industry, fell on hard times. By , Virginia's industrial output had fallen 17 percent, industrial employment was down 14 percent, industrial wages dropped by almost one-third, and statewide unemployment reached nearly , The depression produced several important developments in the world of organized labor that had a direct impact on Virginia's working people.
From labor's standpoint, one of the most important aspects of the NIRA was section 7 a , which guaranteed workers' right to organize and engage in collective bargaining, backed by the authority of the federal government.
It also prohibited employers from discriminating against workers who joined unions. This represented a major shift in the federal government's attitude toward organized labor, a result of Roosevelt's victory in Virginians had contributed to Roosevelt's success by awarding him 70 percent of the state's votes. In , eight unions under the leadership of John L. The new group conducted union-organizing drives of mass-production workers in the steel, automobile, rubber, electrical, and maritime industries. For the first time, there was competition in some industries to see which organization would represent workers, black and white.
The CIO endorsed powerful industrial labor organizations for all workers regardless of race, creed, color, or nationality. This was, however, a position that essentially doomed the CIO in its attempt to unionize the South. Efforts to organize labor and use the strike as a weapon failed to increase substantially union membership or the power of organized labor in Virginia. World War II — brought a wave of cooperation between labor and industry.
Each claimed the patriotic high ground in the war effort, just as they had done in But a series of strikes that swept through American industry at the end of the war convinced many conservative businessmen and politicians that organized labor had emerged from the war both communist-influenced and dangerously powerful.
Centuries of Child Labour: European Experiences from the Seventeenth to the Twentieth Century
In Virginia, labor's actions bolstered an antiunion campaign already underway in the immediate postwar period. A strike against the Chesapeake Ferry Company caused the state to seize the company and then operate it as a public service. Threats of a walkout by utility workers were met by Virginia governor William Tuck 's promise to take over the power plants and draft the workers into the state militia. Strikes at Virginia's coal mines, and the resulting gas rationing, rail service cutbacks, electrical brownouts, and job layoffs, cost organized labor the respect of most Virginians.
More significantly, these events prompted the General Assembly to act quickly on newly proposed legislation, the so-called right-to-work laws. Right-to-work laws were essentially voluntary union membership laws, but the choice of the label is an ironic one. Opponents of compulsory union membership appear to have chosen the phrase "right to work" because it reflected what they hoped to portray as a fight between traditional American individualism and the growing power of organized labor.
Especially in the South, where union-organizing seemed a particular threat, conservative politicians saw right-to-work as a means by which the political power of unions could be severely curtailed, if not eliminated, at the state level. Right-to-work statutes attacked the problem by outlawing several variations in union membership arrangements: the "closed shop," in which employers hired only union members; the "union shop," in which workers must join the union within a certain period of time after being hired; and all other agreements that required workers to maintain union membership in order to keep their jobs.
This opposition to unions was couched in arguments about the need to curtail the power of "labor czars" and the "unjust, undemocratic institution" of the union shop. Those opposing the proposed legislation came from the state's mining districts, where the United Mine Workers exercised significant influence and power, and Norfolk, a stronghold of unions in the shipbuilding trades. With the support of Harry F.
Byrd Sr. In the end, only one senator, representing the union stronghold of Norfolk, spoke in opposition to the bill. On January 21, , Governor Tuck signed the right-to-work bill into law. Virginia's right-to-work law initially faced several real-world limitations. In areas with strong rural representation or with weak unions, organized labor faced increasing hostility from public officials.
Conversely, in industrial cities like Norfolk and Richmond, where elected officials could count on the political strength of organized labor, right-to-work amounted to little more than a slap on the wrist to union shops. While right-to-work was often honored more in word than in deed, a far greater threat to organized labor was developing in Washington, D.
There, a conservative Republican Congress sought to curtail severely the power of unions while striking a major blow against communist influence in the labor movement. That blow came with the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act in The act banned closed and union shops under federal law as "unfair labor practices," and prohibited unions from engaging in supportive, secondary boycotts.
Cold War anxieties led to the demand that union leaders sign affidavits proclaiming their anticommunist convictions. Communists were active in a number of the CIO unions, and several unions were expelled from the CIO when officers refused to sign the mandatory affidavits. Truman kept his promise to veto Taft-Hartley, but the tide of anticommunist, antiunion sentiment was too strong, and Congress overrode Truman's veto.
In Virginia, Taft-Hartley complemented the state's ban on union shops in intrastate commerce with a federal ban on union shops in interstate commerce. Now all of Virginia's industries would have to provide workers with the "industrial democracy" of right-to-work. The race- and gender-based work hierarchies that developed within Virginia's trades and industries showed a remarkable staying power. By the s, they had survived mechanization, the Great Depression, a New Deal, communism, unionization, and two world wars. Decades into the postwar era, management, labor, and union alike ensured that white men's jobs and white seniority would be protected.
Twentieth century US labor history: Pedagogy, politics, and controversies Part 2
Not until the s did the courts begin to mandate changes intended to eliminate and redress the damage done by workplace segregation aimed at African Americans and women. By then, however, the industrial scales had begun to tip away from Virginia. For most of the postwar period, Virginia's largest industrial employer was the textile industry. Like other employers, including apparel, tobacco, and mining, its fortunes rose and fell with the economy as the century drew to a close.
And, like those others, textile manufacturing offered declining prospects for work. As the factories closed, industrial jobs ended, and union membership declined. By the end of the century it had reached an all-time low of only 5. For Virginians, far greater opportunities existed in the white-collar world of the public and private sectors.
Employment statistics covering the last three decades of the twentieth century are revealing. Industrial work as a percentage of total employment fell to less than 10 percent of all jobs, a decline of roughly 50 percent. During the same period, the service sector nearly doubled in size, accounting for 32 percent of all jobs. Retail and government-related jobs also outpaced manufacturing. Perhaps most revealing is that, at the turn of the twenty-first century, public sector workers had a union membership rate nearly five times that of those in the private sector.
For generations, Virginians toiled in factories, shipyards, mills, assembly plants, and the various trades that keep the commonwealth running. Rarely militant, sometimes outspoken, and always independent, their individualism and pride kept them apart as often as it brought them together. Caught between their beliefs in the freedom of "right-to-work" and the sense of camaraderie and mutual support gained from union membership, and badgered by anticompany unions and antiunion companies, Virginia's workers juggled often conflicting loyalties while trying to maintain their sense of independence.
Reflecting on his lost job in the wake of a factory closing, one eighteen-year tobacco factory veteran summed up not only his personal feelings but also, in many ways, southern workers' attitudes toward the world of labor.
Monthly Review | Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century
Love, R. Labor in Virginia during the Twentieth Century. In Encyclopedia Virginia.
Love, Richard. Virginia Foundation for the Humanities, 27 Oct. Thank you! Thanks to your advocacy efforts on our behalf, we're happy to report that the recently passed Omnibus Spending Bill includes a very small increase in funding for the National Endowment for the Humanities! While our work is not over with regards to the upcoming budget to be passed in the fall, the Omnibus Spending Bill represents an endorsement of the important work that the humanities do for our communities.
These funds will continue to support our work of providing free access to authoritative content about Virginia's history and culture.
Women in a Cigarette Factory Labor in Virginia during the Twentieth Century Contributed by Richard Love The history of labor in Virginia during the twentieth century reflects both the ever-changing nature of the workplace and the endurance of Virginians' long-held ideas about race, culture, and work. Industrialization Early in the s, Virginia was entering a new phase in its economic life. There, a conservative Republican Congress sought to curtail severely the power of unions while striking a major blow against communist influence in the labor movement That blow came with the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act in Time Line June - The Virginia Federation of Labor, Virginia's centralized union organization body, first permits black delegates, representing Norfolk's shipbuilding trades, to attend its state convention in Alexandria.
June - The U. Congress passes, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs, the National Industrial Recovery Act, which guarantees workers' right to organize and engage in collective bargaining, backed by the authority of the federal government. Congress passes the Taft-Hartley Act, which bans closed and union shops under federal law as "unfair labor practices," and prohibits unions from engaging in supportive, secondary boycotts. January 21, - Governor William M.
Tuck signs the right-to-work bill into law, curtailing the power of labor unions in Virginia. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, Flamming, Douglas.