Introduction to a Special Issue on the New Labor Federalism

ILR Review ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (5) ◽  
pp. 1085-1102
Author(s):  
Janice Fine ◽  
Michael Piore ◽  

The articles in this volume grew out of a 2018 conference organized by the Rutgers School of Management and Labor Relations and Cornell University’s ILR School to address questions regarding labor regulation at lower levels of government. During the extended period that federal reform has been blocked, enormous activity has taken place at the state and local levels in terms of both the passage of new employment laws and regulations as well as their administration and enforcement. Drawn from the larger set of papers presented at that conference, these articles focus on specific dimensions of the puzzle. This introduction paints the broader picture suggested by the conference and papers taken as a whole. The move toward federalism as a strategy, particularly as an alternative to organizing through the NLRA, while promising, is so far limited because it focuses on the substance of labor regulation exclusively, in isolation from the procedures through which work regulation is promulgated and enforced. The most likely place to look for reforms that will give the new labor federalism institutional support and stability comparable to that of the New Deal collective bargaining regime at its apogee is in their implementation and enforcement.

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Kenneth White

Donald Trump’s presidency is likely to become what Stephen Skowronek once labeled as a “disjunctive presidency.”  Trump’s election in 2016 and the issue positions he has taken mark the end of the Reagan Era.  Just as Jimmy Carter’s one-term signaled the end of the New Deal era begun by Franklin D. Roosevelt, so, too, does Trump’s already troubled presidency signify the end of Reagan’s conservatism. Changing demographics have hastened the end of the Reagan era, and the next presidential contest is likely to be one that James David Barber called a “politics as conscience,” not a conflict election to which Trump was well-suited.  Trump’s victory, along with the end of the Reagan era, also signals a moment of significant danger for the Republican Party, despite the present unified GOP control of the federal government and recent gains that the party has made at the state and local levels.


1976 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 132
Author(s):  
Paul K. Conkin ◽  
John Braeman ◽  
Robert H. Bremner ◽  
David Brody

1976 ◽  
Vol 91 (1) ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Arthur M. Schlesinger ◽  
John Braeman ◽  
Robert H. Bremner ◽  
David Brody

1950 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 218
Author(s):  
George T. Starnes ◽  
Irving Bernstein

ILR Review ◽  
1951 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 605
Author(s):  
Emily Clark Brown ◽  
Irving Bernstein

ILR Review ◽  
1951 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 605-606
Author(s):  
Emily Clark Brown

1950 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Freidel ◽  
Irving Bernstein

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 1257-1282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Goldfield

Debates over the reasons for the passage of class legislation during the New Deal era have been of continuing interest to social scientists. Of special importance has been the problem of explaining the passage of the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), often considered the most significant and radical bill of the period. In this article, I examine the influence of worker insurgency and radical organization on the passage and final form of the NLRA. I argue that other analytic approaches fail to take into account the importance of this influence and the degree to which it constrained and structured the responses of key political actors. I conclude that the theories that downplay the importance of worker insurgency and radical organization are both wrong in the particulars and suspect as general theories; this applies especially to the perspective that emphasizes the autonomy of the state from societal forces.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document