Search

The impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on labor has been variously interpreted in terms of wage and employment levels as well as labor market structures in [...]

Labour-controlled investment is often touted as an alternative, pro-worker form of finance. Since 1983, the province of Quebec in Canada has experimented with workers' participation in the form of workers' funds controlled by the two major trade union federations. Drawing on research from secondary sources, archival material and semi-structured interviews, this article offers a comprehensive portrait of one of Quebec main workers' funds, the FTQ Solidarity Fund. To date very little has been said about the impact of workers' funds on firm governance, employment quality and labour relations. The article argues that any attempt to use investment to shape firm behaviour in the interests of workers and local unions is a limited and contradictory project. The argument is sustained through a discussion of the historical formation and institutional practices of the Solidarity Fund. The presence of large union-controlled investment funds offers local firms an alternative source of capital investment, protecting small and medium-sized firms from more aggressive financial actors. However, the main results show persistent tensions and contradictions between the Fund's social goals and financial logics, as well as unintended effects on workplace union practices and power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article argues that 'renewal' and 'crisis' are inadequate descriptors of the current state of the American and Canadian labour movements. Many of the structural and strategic shifts that have remade labour unions in North America over the past two decades - including new organizing strategies, bargaining outcomes and political strategies - speak rather to a contradictory reconstitution of organized labour along neoliberal lines and the impasse of the renewal project. If there is a crisis in the labour movement, it is a crisis in the nature of trade unions as working-class organizations. The article builds this argument through, in turn, a historical overview, a critical reading of the labour renewal literature and a discussion of current trade union practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of service-sector unions in the United States have turned to urban land-use strategies in alliance with community organizations to achieve organizing goals and sustain bargaining regimes in a hostile environment. These union strategies typically entail the formation of project-specific “common cause” coalitions with community organizations in order to leverage local benefits, living wages, and union rights from private developers and growth-oriented local governments.The labor studies literature on community unionism understands these strategies through the analytical frame of social movement theory, and closely associates them with labor movement renewal. In approaching the question from the perspective of critical human geography, this article highlights a contradiction that emerges in labor’s land-use campaigns in cases where redevelopment entails the transformation of working-class neighborhoods into spaces of production and luxury consumption. The article argues that a strategy of negotiating distributional shares out of prospective increases in land values in such cases encourages union-community coalitions to prioritize workplace over residential demands, in turn reproducing structural divisions between labor and community. The argument is sustained through a discussion of the involvement of the New York City hotel workers union, UNITE-HERE Local 6, in a labor-community coalition formed to contest the terms of the redevelopment of Coney Island. The case study casts some doubt on whether labor-community land use strategies of this type are consistent with labor movement renewal. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]