Monday, February 24, 2014
Your life and the Union
When I opened up this collection of documents just now to prepare the blog, at first I was kicking myself, thinking, "Unions?! This won't inform my class about society!" My initial instinct was to dismiss unions as mainly economic and political, but after thinking more carefully, it is difficult NOT to see how unions were integral to the social development of the Americas during the Depression. So, in your thoughts--what is the connection, if any, between labor unions and social status?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Overall, there are some similarities between the labor unions and social status. During the depression in the Americas, people began to split themselves up into even more defined social classes, such as rich businessmen and the working class that seemed to be stuck in the workshops forever. However labor unions were essential for the economic crisis, which is what led the high social status council members to push and strive for that kind of work ethic. However, like many political things the labor union campaigning process had a lot of propaganda, which made the working unions sound like a great place to be when in reality they were a hard place to work. Also in the reading it says how the capitalists "have assembled to themselves tremendous power and influence and they are almost 100 per cent effective in opposing organization of workers", the capitalists while it may seem that they think they are doing good for the people, they don’t seem to be thinking long term.
ReplyDeleteim going to be honest in the fact that im kind of confused about comparing social status and labor unions. So this response is kinda gonna be a guess on what the question is asking, because i dont even totally understand what a labor union is even after reading this article.But anyways, like meghan said, both are split into different classes, some higher (better) than the others, some much much worse. Labor unions and Social Classes are each grouped together. Thats the only connection i can make, due to the fact that social status is whre you are everywhere in life and work while labor unions are something you can join and are not automatically put in or categorized into by other people.
ReplyDeleteunions were one of the few ways for people who were being taken advantage of to fight back. unions allowed people to effectively organize and set a standard of living and workplace etiquette for both owner and worker to thrive in. unions are looked down upon because they slow production and profit of the companies they work for. when the union takes action during the depression and hard times it creates chaos.
ReplyDeleteAs laws began to be put in place for strikes and Unions to be protected by the law, and its members their popularity began to skyrocket. People began to see these Unions as the one place to get represented and protected. Especially during the great Depression as Unions began to arise the idea of social status was made more and more important. Often these Unions would confirm the different social classes and tell people to "band together" in their social classes in order to be able to protect themselves and their rights. However Unions often appealed to the lower class citizen, that person who felt they were being underrepresented. However, more richer people would often look down upon them because they would refuse to work so it would slow down production and cause them to lose money.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this text, I feel that there are some major similarities between the labor unions and also between the social status. Labor unions during this time were essential for the economic crisis, which is what led the high social status council members to push and strive for that kind of work ethic. But, There were more cons than pros. The social status during this time is everywhere in life and work while labor unions are something that is only in specific places.
ReplyDeleteWell there usually is upper, middle, and lower class. This all has to do with your income and how much money you have. Does not depend on how hard a person works but the money. Money is everything to people and always will be. Paxi if you do not know what labor union is usually an organization of people who are trying to protect there rights. So there are people who have never worked a day in there life and then there are the hard working people who work every day almost all day. So it does relate but it is all based on money.
ReplyDeleteI believe that social unions normally were formed by lower and middle class workers because rich people did not need to be part of a union and work for someone. In fact, rich people probably owned factories or industries and the lower classes worked for them. Unions helped the lower classes to spread their thoughts and ideas to the richer classes. It was useful at that time because rich people used to ignore what middle classes and lower classes had to say.
ReplyDeleteThus, I think that there was a connection between social status and labour unions because if you were in a union it meant that you were not rich.
Union is one of the best ways for working-class to gather together and gain status in a society. This is the connection I find after reading the article. It unites wooers together and give them rights on their wages, working conditions and so on. People join unions to feel a sense of belonging and secure. The union seems like a "promise" for workers' benefit. However, during the depression, emerging of the union does not appeal to most of the workers. Many worker do not make enough money to pay the membership fee, and are afraid of losing their jobs. Thus, overall, the union's effect does not kick in until the start of World War 2.
ReplyDeleteLabor Unions are something that are essentials for the lower class to gather together and strive for equality. However, in Argentina, Labor Union played a strong role in the politics of the nation. In Argentina, about 40% of workers in 1930 were unionized and it united the workers together and gave them more rights and better working condition. However, the formation of union threathened the federal government when workers started to give strikes and when Colonel Juan Domingo Perón, who was the secratary of the labor union, established a power base that threatened the government. Therefore, the labor union split the population up into a more defined social classes.
ReplyDeleteI think Laura has a good point. As Chandler explained what labor union means, I agree with what Laura said. I didn't know what labor union was either. The social status usually are divided into rich class, middle class and lower working class. Indeed, the rich class are usually the people who own factories and the working class work for them as labor. Therefore the rich class abuse their workers and ignore what they had to say so it's usually the lower and middle class who forms the labor union.
ReplyDeleteA labor union is an organized association of workers, often in a trade or profession, formed to protect and further their rights and interests. Yes, I googled that because I honestly had no idea what it was. It can kind of connect to social status. I think this because your social status is based on basically how much power or money you have. At least, thats how I see it. I know that some people see it differently and take other perspectives as to what social status is and how you achieve a higher social status. Most of the time people who have a higher social status are ones with money or power, or both. But anyways, they do connect. A labor union is something that is formed.. but what forms a labor union? People... right? So every individual has a different social status and all different people with different social statues form labor unions. Or maybe people with the same social statues form labor unions? It can really go either way.
ReplyDeleteThe connection is that the labor unions helped make the class divisions clearer and heightened tensions between people of different social statuses. Before the New Deal employers were able to exploit their workers and the unions were powerless because they had no leverage over employers due to the mad rush for work and because employers put pressure on their workers not to unionize. Clearly the unions drew a wedge between the exploited working class and the powerful employers. Luckily, the Wagner Act gave workers the protection and confidence that they needed to fight for fairer working conditions.
ReplyDeleteFrom the start the article shows the relationship between labor unions and social status. It states, “part of the reason for the decline in union membership during the twenties was that unemployment remained comfortably high even in the midst of general prosperity.” This means that there was a decline in union membership due to the loss of income for the members. If you had money, you were part of the Union. But, when the Great Depression rolled around, people became more aware of class divisions. This new awareness pushed the uncertain public right into the Union’s arms. During the Depression people needed to be a part of something greater, they needed something to drive them. Now, this is just my assumption but, the labor unions brought people together to feel as if they were all united, fighting and protesting for the same reason.
ReplyDeleteI think that the connection between labor unions and social status is one's social status is based off the labor unions. Also the amount of money one made based them in different social statuses. I do not believe the social status and labor unions mattered to the rich people, because everyone knew the rich were rich. I think that the labor unions gave the lower class different sections of social status. As in there were different sects of the lower class.
ReplyDeleteOverall, labor unions still connected to a lower social status, but they seems to have more power in United States political circles. The reason I said this is because is that most workers were still working in bad conditions and making a little money and they occupied most space in middle class population, but according to the reading, those unions had power in political circles because they helped coordinate and support strikes and eventually became a major player in national politics, which gave them a higher position in political society, but not actually made them rich and rose their social status. At the same time, labor unions were protected by laws, and their connections with the Democrats seem very close.
ReplyDeleteLabor unions became a thing of the low-income working class because they are the ones who needed that organized support to increase their wages and working conditions. To this day unions are more or less a thing for the lower class and, in my opinion, have growth much too big and powerful. Unions and the causes they fought for are great but like so many things people take it too far and it becomes out off control. Loaded comment: the teachers unions today are too big and powerful.
ReplyDeleteLabor unions are for people of the lower working class because they need job security and protection. They fight for better treatment, such as payment, and makes sure their jobs are secure. Labor unions bring people of the same standard and same views to protect themselves against their companies that they work for. They need this because it produces awareness. People with stable jobs might find them annoying because it could change rules that benefit them.
ReplyDeleteUnions were often comprised of the lower and middle class citizens trying to get better rights for the job they are currently in. The upper class was never involved with the unions because they are the ones that are monopolizing in the industry the unions are in. Most unions form when workers want better working conditions, higher wages, ect. Also the lower class really has nothing to loose by joining the union because they have nothing in their lives at the moment so to join a "brotherhood" and have people in the same position on their side create a huge power and have their voices be heard.
ReplyDelete