book review - Union democracy - comparing two movements
Unions, Race & Popular Democracy:
Building a Progressive Labor Movement
By Kim Scipes, Cornell University Press, 2026
The 1930s Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) union upsurge is mythic in labor lore, as rank-and-file workers flocked to new unions that welcomed all, regardless of background.
The United Steelworkers (USWA), United Auto Workers, the United Electrical Workers, and others rode an ascending wave, including racially diverse workers in their new unions. In that process, they challenged racism, but did that challenge permeate the union?
Using diaries, memoirs, and union minutes, Kim Scipes examines that narrative, contrasting Chicago’s USWA and the United Packinghouse Workers of America (UPWA).
Scipes credits the UPWA with aggressively challenging racism, building an alliance with the “Back of the Yards” neighborhood that adjoined Chicago’s massive stockyards, and embracing an anti-racism agenda. This included educational and other efforts with white members. The union challenged racial practices in the city and nationally and supported civil rights organizations, cultivating a diverse leadership that included Addie Wyatt (1924-2012) and Congressman Charles Hayes (1918-1997).
In contrast, Scipes faults the USWA for failing to explicitly challenge racism, particularly in its contracts. In USWA contracts, seniority was often tied to jobs. Thus, African American workers, often hired for the dirtiest steel mill jobs, were trapped in those positions. If they attempted to move to another department, they lost seniority. This eventually resulted in a 1974 consent decree, which named the union and nine steel companies for restricting seniority by department. Both the industry and the union agreed to pay $31 million in back wages, and they abolished departmental seniority. CIO founder and United Mine Workers (UMWA) President John L. Lewis was infamous for his heavy-handed control of the UMWA. By appointing his Mine Worker associate Van Bittner to head the Chicago USWA District, Scipes charges that the union discouraged rank-and-file activism.
Scipes labels the USWA a “polyarchic democracy,” meaning it was controlled by leadership. Important to this thesis is George Patterson, a rank-and-file United States Steel South Works activist. He was fired for that activism, and in 1942, when the USWA was formally organizing, Bittner discouraged Patterson from running for office. Joe Germano (1905-1992) was Bittner’s favored candidate for director. Two years later, Patterson decided to run for district director against Germano. Ten days after the nominations, 37-year-old Patterson, married and the father of two, was drafted by the U.S. Army and sent to India. A coincidence? The author believes union machinations removed Patterson. Germano was reelected District 31 director, serving until 1973.
The UPWA encouraging shop-floor militancy and, at its conventions and meetings, gave everyone a chance to speak. Scipes credits UPWA President Ralph Helstein for fostering this atmosphere, not censuring those who disagreed with him, and identifies the UPWA as a “social justice union.”
After World War II, the CIO took a very public anti-communist stance, expelling unions it considered under communist influence in 1949. This included the Farm Equipment Union, which represented Peoria Caterpillar workers. The USWA’s Chicago area director, Joseph Germano, embraced this anti-communist effort. The UPWA was more tolerant of communist and leftist members and welcomed their energy.
The author focuses on the 1930s through 1960. Some contemporary USWA members may disagree with the author’s stance, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s, when union leadership was challenged, and members mobilized to stop plant closings. The USWA’s current Rapid Response team, which engages average members in union solidarity and political action, is a model other unions copy.
Union democracy is often debated; does union leadership embrace and empower average members not only to participate, but to voice disagreement?
Scipes deserves credit for probing deeply into memoirs, union minutes, and other historic documents to see how members and leadership both responded. He also devised analytical models to gauge member participation. The questions raised are not just historical, but a continual reminder that union democracy is more than rhetoric; it thrives when encouraged.
Mike Matejka