Social Movement Unionism or Social Justice Unionism? Disentangling Theoretical Confusion within the Global Labor Movement

After the election of John Sweeney as President of the AFL-CIO in October 1995, activists and supportive intellectuals in the United States began thinking about how to revitalize the almost moribund American labor movement. A key part of this literature has revolved around the concept of “social movement unionism.” This term touched a nerve, and has garnered widespread usage in North America over the past two decades. However, most researchers using this term have no idea that it was initially developed to understand the new unionism developed by members of specific labor movements in Brazil, the Philippines and South Africa, a type of unionism qualitatively different from that found in North America. This paper argues that the term “social movement unionism” should be confined only to labor organizations developing the same type of unionism, wherever in the world such should be found. Accordingly, this concept should not be utilized in North America today as there are no labor centers or unions present that are developing this type of trade unionism. It is important to clarify this confusion because it is leads to incorrect understandings and miscommunication. Accordingly, the current situation—whereby the same term is used to refer to two qualitatively different social phenomena —theoretically works against efforts to build global labor solidarity. What about the progressive, broad-scope unionism emerging in North America over the past two decades? Taking a page from labor history, this article argues that the proper precedent is progressive unionism developed by the United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO, and others, and therefore should be referred to as “social justice unionism.” An Appendix provides a measurement tool. The argument is empirically grounded and theoretically developed, allowing us to better understand trade unionism around the globe.

Three essays on labor liberalization and its effects on world economy

This dissertation consists of three theoretical essays on immigration, international trade and political economy. The first two essays analyze the political economy of immigration in developed countries. The third essay explores new ground on the effects of labor liberalization in developing countries. Trade economists have witnessed remarkable methodological developments in mathematical and game theoretical models during the last seventy years. This dissertation benefits from these advances to analyze economic issues related to immigration. The first essay applies a long run general equilibrium trade model similar to Krugman (1980), and blends it with the median voter ala-Mayer (1984) framework. The second essay uses a short run general equilibrium specific factor trade model similar to Jones (1975) and incorporates it with the median voter model similar to Benhabib (1997). The third essay employs a five stage game theoretical approach similar to Vogel (2007) and solves it by the method of backward induction. The first essay shows that labor liberalization is more likely to come about in societies that have more taste for varieties, and that workers and capital owners could share the same positive stance toward labor liberalization. In a dynamic model, it demonstrates that the median voter is willing to accept fewer immigrants in the first period in order to preserve her domestic political influence in the second period threatened by the naturalization of these immigrants. The second essay shows that the liberalization of labor depends on the host country's stock and distribution of capital, and the number of groups of skilled workers within each country. I demonstrate that the more types of goods both countries produce, the more liberal the host country is toward immigration. The third essay proposes a theory of free movement of goods and labor between two economies with imperfect labor contracts. The heart of my analysis lies in the determinants of talent development where individuals' decisions to emigrate are related to the fixed costs of emigration. Finally, free trade and labor affect income via an indirect effect on individuals' incentives to invest in the skill levels and a direct effect on the prices of goods.

Global Capitalism, Immigrant Labor, and the Struggle for Justice

Around the world borders are militarized, states are stepping up repressive anti-immigrant controls, and native publics are turning immigrants into scapegoats for the spiraling crisis of global capitalism. The massive displacement and primitive accumulation unleashed by free trade agreements and neo-liberal policies, as well as state and “private” violence has resulted in a virtually inexhaustible immigrant labor reserve for the global economy. State controls over immigration and immigrant labor have several functions for the system: 1) state repression and criminalization of undocumented immigration make immigrants vulnerable and deportable and therefore subject to conditions of super-exploitation, super-control and hyper-surveillance; 2) anti-immigrant repressive apparatuses are themselves ever more important sources of accumulation, ranging from private for-profit immigrant detention centers, to the militarization of borders, and the purchase by states of military hardware and systems of surveillance. Immigrant labor is extremely profitable for the transnational corporate economy; 3) the anti-immigrant policies associated with repressive state apparatuses help turn attention away from the crisis of global capitalism among more privileged sectors of the working class and convert immigrant workers into scapegoats for the crisis, thus deflecting attention from the root causes of the crisis and undermining working class unity. This article focuses on structural and historical underpinnings of the phenomenon of immigrant labor in the new global capitalist system and on how the rise of a globally integrated production and financial system, a transnational capitalist class, and transnational state apparatuses, have led to a reorganization of the world market in labor, including deeper reliance on a rapidly expanding reserve army of immigrant labor and a vicious new anti-immigrant politics. It looks at the United States as an illustration of the larger worldwide situation with regard to immigration and immigrant justice. Finally, it explores the rise of an immigrant justice movement around the world, observes the leading role that immigrant workers often play in worker’s struggles and that a mass immigrant rights movement is at the cutting edge of the struggle against transnational corporate exploitation. We call for replacing the whole concept of national citizenship with that of global citizenship as the only rallying cry that can assure justice and equality for all.