The Civil Rights Movement – The Role of Trade Unions

Whenever we think of the civil rights movement we instantly remind ourselves of individuals such as Martin Luther king, Malcolm X and Rosa Parks, and events such as the infamous “I have a dream speech” and the Montgomery bus boycott, along with other protests such as sit-ins and freedom rides.

However, these protests movements didn’t just come out of the blue, and black people didn’t suddenly just decide they had had enough and decided to protest. The civil rights movement had been developing decades before the famous events in the 1960s, and the role of the trade unions did fantastic jobs in organising and educating workers, allowing the platform that individuals such as king had to propel the movement forward.

Black workers in the old confederacy or “the south” were terribly oppressed back in the 1920s and 30s. It had been 60 years since black slaves were freed as a result of the civil war, yet they were at the bottom of society. They were always given the lowest paid jobs, their labour was exploited, and working conditions were horrendous. Many black workers in the south worked as sharecroppers on the farmland, where white employers provided land, seed and tool and black workers the labour. White landlords would then take most of the crop to sell, and black people would be left with barely enough to live on. Because of the rural nature of the south, it was difficult for black workers to organise, and it was easy for white supremacists to intimidate them, keeping them oppressed. Lynching also took place during this time, so it was almost impossible for black workers to revolt. As well as this, the south was operating under Jim Crow laws, which brought de jure segregation; this is where by law black and white people were segregated. This ensured that black people had the worst education, limiting economic opportunities. It made sure black workers were paid less than white workers, facilities such as water fountains were segregated and black people received the worst services. Police and law courts also discriminated against black people; there were no black police and jurors in courts were always white.

Circumstances in the north for black workers were better, however far from ideal. Although segregation wasn’t enshrined in the law like in the south, black northerners suffered from de facto segregation, where job discrimination took place, for example blacks were the last to be hired and first to be fired. Black workers were given the lowest paid jobs and had limited opportunities to better themselves; there were hardly any black higher education institutions.

Trade unions played a vital role in raising black awareness of potential black political and economic power. Under pressure from the economic depression, trade union memberships rocketed. New unions were set up such as the Food, Tobacco, agricultural and allied workers union. These unions were grassroots unions, and played a role in promoting mass meetings that discussed voter registration and citizenship. These discussions were fundamental; blacks in the north did have the vote, however because of apathy many blacks didn’t use their vote to try and better themselves. In the south, federal pressure forced the states to allow blacks to vote, however they didn’t stop states having literacy tests that determined whether people could vote. Black peoples poor education meant they inevitably failed these tests so couldn’t register to vote. For whites who failed the tests, there were grandfather clauses where if they could prove someone in their ancestry had voted before, then they could register. At this time, only 3% of black people could vote in the south.

Asa Phillip Randolph was an important figure in the black trade union movement. In his youth he had set up grassroots trade unions, such as the union of elevator operators and the National Brotherhood of Workers of America, a union which organised amongst African-American shipyard and dock workers in the Tidewater region of Virginia. The union dissolved in 1921, under pressure from the American Federation of Labour, to which white employers had complained to.

He then went on to set up the first all black labour unions, the brotherhood of sleeping car porters in 1925. At the unions peak in the 1940s the union had 15,000 members. Its head quarters in New York were described as “the political headquarters of black America, where young black leaders met.” The unionisation of black workers contributed to assertiveness, it boosted their morale and gave them a class consciousness. The brotherhood of sleeping car porters broke down barriers to worker exploitation where because of high union memberships and change to federal law the Pullman Company finally began to negotiate with the Brotherhood in 1935, and agreed to a contract with them in 1937. This gained employees $2,000,000 in pay increases, a shorter workweek, and overtime pay.

As a trade unionist A Phillip Randolph applied pressure to federal government to force through change for more equal opportunities for black workers. He threatened that if the then president Roosevelt that he would organise a march on Washington in protest. Because of the might of the union threat Randolph represented and Roosevelt’s failure to dissuade Randolph, Roosevelt set up The Fair Employment Practices Committee. This was an organisation that ensured fair job opportunities for federal employment. This shows how trade union membership can help achieve a better deal for workers.

Randolph also organised bus boycotts, and although they failed, they went on to inspire the famous Montgomery bus boycott in Alabama, which many people see as the start of the civil rights movement. The confronting but non violent actions of trade unions went on to inspire black leaders such as Martin Luther King.

Unfortunately, in the 1930s most black workers were not unionised. Reasons for this include the rural nature of the south meant isolated black communities didn’t have a broad large scale union to join. The violent actions of the white supremacists and hostility of the white population intimidated blacks into accomodationism, where black people just conformed and didn’t do anything to try and better themselves such as join of union because they feared a hostile reaction. The low economic and educational status of black people was low, so unions were poorly funded and leaders struggled to make their voices heard. I believe that if the majority of black workers were unionised, then because of high organisation solidarity a lot of the barriers that were broken down during the 60s would have been broken down quicker and more effectively.

In summary, the trade union movement helped to increase solidarity, which was vital during the struggles in the 60s where workers faced many hardships. Trade unions increased activism and encouraged protest actions, which contributed to the mass movements in the 60s. Trade unions also raised black awareness of potential black political and economic power. For example unions organised economic boycotts, where black people would boycott buying from shops that refused to employ black workers. They promoted meetings to discuss equality where workers were educated on how to successfully and effectively initiate protests.

Overall, trade union movements gave the platform for the civil rights movement, and we can learn lessons from it today in our fight against the inequalities of capitalism.

How far was Churchill personably responsible for maintaining national morale?

When Churchill took over from Neville Chamberlin it was at a time when national morale was low, particularly because of the Norway campaign, where although the British sent a task force to prevent invasion in Norway they were swiftly defeated by the Germans. This significantly cut national morale as the public became aware of the well disciplined and advanced nature of the German forces.

Churchill’s appointment in itself was a morale boosting act. Churchill was in political wilderness previously and had not held office in the previous national government, thus he was not associated with their failures. Throughout the 1930s Churchill had criticised appeasement and called for rearmament, this was significant to boost morale at the time of his appointment as the nation recognised he had the right ideas all along. MPs also felt a morale boost at the appointment of Churchill because most agreed that his bullish qualities and self belief meant he had the character for the job.

Churchill’s popularity with the public was a key factor in maintaining national morale. Historian Michael Lynch had found that his popularity with the public at times was as high as eighty eight percent, and even in his darkest moments never dropped below seventy eight percent. This is significant because it shows that the public were happy with Churchill as prime minister and they thought he was doing an adequate job, thus maintaining morale.

Churchill also had the ability to maintain morale by his skills in speeches. While his cabinet saw his speeches as emotional bravado, Churchill’s self confidence meant he convinced most of his cabinet and the population that it was better to fight on and hope America would be persuaded to join the war to support Britain. This was significant as rather than being a weak leader and putting doubts in people’s minds, Churchill was able to unite the country towards the war effort thus maintaining national morale.

However despite his ability to unify the nation Churchill also had his faults. Churchill has been described to be dictatorial and interfering in other governmental departments. This could be seen as morale damaging because Churchill’s nature could have led to alienation within government, leading to wider public doubts about his effectiveness as leader. This was similar with Churchill’s liaisons with army generals as he thought he knew more about tactics and strategy then the generals did. Similarly this could have alienated generals causing divisions in the army and working to damage national morale with the army such divided.

Churchill was also lucky in the composition of his cabinet in maintaining national morale. Deputy prime minister Clement Attlee was an effective organiser serving to organise the cabinet to make government efficient. Thus worked in Churchill’s favour to boost morale because it appeared Churchill had government in order, but this meant Churchill himself was not personally responsible for boosting morale.

Similarly Labour politician Ernest Bevin was responsible for maintain morale in the underlying structures of government. He fought against communist infiltration in the party and in unions. This served to keep the labour forces of the nation united and maintained national morale by keeping labour directed to the war. Historian Michael Lynch found Bevin had the enormous task of British industry to meet the demands of the war. This involved him negotiating with bosses, managers and trade unions to reach compromises that adequately rewarded workers. This served to maintain morale because as the workers felt better rewarded and paid it maintained morale.

In conclusion, on the face of government Churchill’s skill in self sufficiency, charisma and self belief served to maintain morale by providing a leadership that united and gave the nation a sense of hope and unity against foreign enemies. However it can be argued that in the underlying structures of government Churchill’s dictatorial nature threatened to tear parts of the country apart. It was also the underlying structures in Churchill’s colleagues that meant he appeared a more effective leader. Thus while Churchill appeared to maintain morale, his personable responsibility only stretched as far as his personality traits of charisma and self belief.