1 The Collective Impulse, Mobilisation and Political Economy
Introduction: The Collective Impulse and Mobilisation
The collective impulse and worker mobilisation have been examined by an array of historical literatures including studies of unions and political parties, customary/informal resistance, the history of work regulation and of female, unfree/semi-free labour. Reviewing this literature, The Origins of Worker Mobilisation made several points relevant to this book.1 First, while the industrial revolution was transformative, worker organisation long predated it and included groups overlooked in pioneering union histories by the Webbâs, John R. Commons and others. Research by RudÄ, Thompson, Rediker and Linebaugh indicated worker organisation should be viewed broadly, including informal combinations/ social networks.2 The Origins of Worker Mobilisation identified substantial informal collective action transitioning into formal organisation, more rapidly in some industries than others. Second, the state was pivotal to the development of capitalism, regulating categories of labour (free, indentured workers, convicts and slaves). Courts played a critical role subordinating labour notwithstanding ongoing struggles over terms and conditions of employment. This struggle predominantly involved individuals and small groups. Laws specifically targeting combinations were used against unions but overall unionists were at less risk of being prosecuted than those taking collective action informally.
Reframing worker mobilisation has implications for fields including industrial relations, labour law, economic and labour history.3 There are good reasons for industrial relations scholars to re-examine the history of labour law, strike waves and employer organisation, something John Kellyâs book Rethinking Industrial Relations: Mobilization, Collectivism and Long Waves initiated 20 years ago.4 Drawing on extensive literatures including Shorter and Tillyâs Strikes in France, Kellyâs portrayal of industrial relations emphasised confrontation and resistance to injustice at work as the propelling force underpinning mobilisation manifested in long waves.5 Kellyâs approach was criticised by Fairbrother as mechanistic and too reliant on a leadership approach to worker organisation. Croucher and Wood pointed to historically contingent (and therefore not comparable) features of particular mobilisations.6 This book argues resistance to inequality at work underpins worker organisation. It charts waves of mobilisation but one which incorporates âresistance from below,â collaborative networks and multiple organisational forms without gainsaying the pivotal role of unions. Inequality is preferred over injustice because it is broader, more elemental and some aspects more measurable.7
Organisation Objectives, Methods and Recruitment/Coverage
A longstanding focus for analysing worker organisation has been examining different models of organisation and recruitment/coverage. As union density plummeted from the 1980s, unions sought recruitment methods to arrest this (like young and ethnic organisers and borrowing techniques used in the more union-hostile US) but largely failed to address labour market flooding, business/labour practices and regulatory changes or give sufficient attention to mobilising issues.8 Recruitment methods and mobilisation are often used interchangeably but the former is tactical while the latter is strategic, based on organisation and long-term, issue-based campaigning. This book makes some observations about recruitment but focuses on mobilisation.
The Webbâs pioneering examination of union development identified two pivotal organisational types. First, new model craft unions originating in the early 1850s typified by the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (ASE), marked by bureaucratic governance, high membership fees, extensive friendly benefits, tight craft entry controls, unilateral regulation, insular outlook and eschewing strikes and politics. Second, the new unionism or mass mobilisation of semi- and unskilled workers typified by the London Dockers (1889) with low membership fees, no friendly benefits and embracing both strikes and politics. While a valuable heuristic device, Archer observed many unions didnât entirely conform to the criteria with ânew unionsâ of miners and dockworkers operating accident fundsâfriendly benefits.9 This book reinforces Archerâs point, identifying craft unions that embraced politics and unskilled/semi-skilled unions practicing unilateral regulation. This is not simply nuance. In Australia the shift to mass organisation began in the 1850s and accelerated after 1870 not 1880. These points apply equally to peak and political organisation. Attempts at wider organisation long predated 1850, like the Grand National Consolidated Trades Union in the UK (1834). The period 1851â1880 witnessed experiments with more broadly based organisation. In the US the National Labor Union (1866â1873) sought to bring local unions and other bodies like eight-hour leagues together. The Knights of Labor (1869â1886), a more radical body enrolling blacks and women, initially advocated cooperative production. Similar attempts can be identified in the UK, Australia and elsewhere which clearly involved borrowing ideas although there were also country-specific trajectories of development, reflecting differences in societies, their history and political economies like the aggressiveness of capital and violent repression of unions in the US.
Notwithstanding extensive research in the 120 years since the Webbâs wrote, there have been remarkably few attempts to systematically re-examine objectives/mobilising issues and methods in historical context, including the relationship between informal and formal organisation or the implications of earlier s...
