Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
LABR4P21
The Unique Power of Labour-Community Coalitions
Curtis Morrison
Since the 1970s, the creeping tide of neoliberalism has incrementally weakened the rights
of labour unions and the workers they represent, reducing their membership, their collective
bargaining capabilities, and in general, their strength. Presented with forty years of incremental
attack, many groups in the labour movement have sought to alter their tactics to hold on to their
collective power; while industrial unionism was the magnum opus of the labour movement in its
early stages, opposing forms of organizing known as social unionism, social movement
unionism, and community unionism have evolved in the age of neoliberalism as alternative union
ideologies and structures. With these new forms of unionism come new tactics including the
labour-community coalition, an organization which brings together two or more groups from
across the proverbial progressive aisle to accomplish particular goals, share resources and ideas,
This paper will argue that this coalition building between labour unions and community
groups is a uniquely powerful form of organizing that enables both bodies to tackle issues they
could not effectively approach on their own. This power exists due to the complimentary tactics
and strengths that these groups utilize, their ability to do the necessary work of reaching both
workers and non-workers in the neoliberal era, and their equal collaboration structures for joint
decision-making and contributions to organizing efforts. In evaluating these three areas, this
paper will conclude by drawing upon North American case studies from previous literature,
particularly in the areas of retail, healthcare, childcare, and manual labor, to illuminate how these
Before introducing the arguments in favour of these coalitions, it is important to flesh out
the very definition of the term through the literature. Krinsky & Reese utilize a definition from
2
continuous joint activity in pursuit of shared or common goals between trade unions and other
non-labor institutions in civil society” (2006:625). Camou takes a similar tone, defining them as
(2014:624-625). Most of the definitions take similar tone to these, outlining that the coalition is
multiple organizations from across the progressive spectrum working together to achieve some
agreed-upon goal (Black 2012; Ashby 2018; Black 2018). Ashby also positions these coalitions
within the context of ‘alt-labor’, along with worker centres and other new forms of organizations
number of criteria for achieving positive results are given in the literature. Krinsky & Reese
that unions who shift towards social movement unionism have more incentive to actively
participate and encourage strong coalition-building with community groups (2006). This is likely
because community organizations can take a more radical lens than a traditional labour union,
and have a far wider focus than industrial unionism’s focus on the workplace and collective
bargaining. As Sen describes, a coalition is only worth building if it “produces more in political
action than it takes up in trouble and resources”, and coalition partners that share a number of
interests can avoid having a bland and broad coalition ideology which produces negligible
political action (Sen 2003:135). Therefore, an ideologically progressive union which embraces
social movement unionism is far more likely to seek and find common interests and goals with a
2008; Tattersall 2009). Overall, the major key to a strong coalition is starting with mutual
interests and then building upon those interests using the areas of power described in this paper’s
thesis: complimentary tactical strength, a broad reach to workers and non-workers, and a
The first benefit that these coalitions can reap together is that labour unions and
community groups often have different strengths in organizing and tactics. While critics charge
that this weakens the ability of the coalition to agree on a tactic as one group, proponents discuss
how these tactics are actually often complementary to each other, rather than adversarial,
allowing coalitions to take on adversaries through multiple different means (Ashby 2018; Black
2018). Additionally, both community organizations and labour unions can have access to
extensive social networks, which they can utilize to empower their joint actions (Camou 2014).
One example of this came from a coalition between the Illinois AFL-CIO, the Chicago
Federation of Labour, and a group of Illinois worker centres. Before the worker centres joined
the two labour bodies, the labour bodies utilized traditional lobbying techniques to attempt to
pass new worker classification laws in the state legislature, but had trouble due to distrust
between labour unions and the race-based Hispanic and African American caucuses. However,
once the heavily-racialized membership of the worker centres got involved in lobbying, they
were able to gain the trust of these caucuses and get the law passed (Avendano & Hiett 2012).
labour-community coalition can best utilize the greatest strengths of each involved group. Rather
than taking on short-term partnerships in which each organization performs a small task of
4
solidarity on their own grounds before disbanding from the collective group, a long-term
coalition allows organizations to share and spread their resources, “expertise, contacts, and
reputation to benefit more people” (Sen 2003:135). Although the prior example focuses on how a
community used its membership base to empower the tactics of a labour organization, more
often than not it is labour unions, who have access to political, financial, and organizational
situation, labour organizers within a coalition organized education workshops for community
members, utilizing Freire’s technique of critical pedagogy to show workers how their situation
and experiences are inherently political and connected to the broader societal problem (Freire
2000; Avendano & Fanning 2014). This approach would be particularly effective for
encouraging those taking a seemingly non-political class to join in on the political actions of the
Concluding upon the discussion of coalition strengths and resources, it is apparent that
unions and community groups, when working together with mutual interests and goals in a
coalition, can contribute together in complementary fashions to empower each others tactics, and
this goes against critics who believe that labour unions have nothing to gain from contributing
The second factor that grants labour-community coalitions power in the 21st century is
the neoliberal attack on unions and workers and how this necessitates broader forms of
organizing people towards political goals outside of the workplace. Labour unions can no longer
afford to stick simply to industrial union tactics, where the focus is on gaining wins for workers
through legal collective bargaining actions. Instead, they must embrace the undeniable
5
politicality of their position as the representatives of the working class, working with community
Neoliberalism has displaced the impacts of the crisis of capitalism onto the working class
since the 1970s, if not even earlier (Avendano & Hiett 2012; McKinlay 2015). Through
have demolished the middle class, the welfare state, and the ability for traditional union tactics to
give workers a voice (Avendano & Hiett 2012; Avendano & Fanning 2014). Private sector union
membership has fallen to dismal levels in both Canada and the United States, and while public
sector unions in Canada maintain somewhat strong membership, they are constantly under attack
(Krinsky & Reese 2006; Avendano & Hiett 2012; Campolieti, Gunderson, & Hebdon 2018).
Defending against this neoliberal tide, it is clear that the traditional labour unions must
take on a new tack in their organizing. Black suggests that unions “must devote resources to
long-term grassroots community organizing and coalition building” in the context of 21st century
neoliberalism and the failing industrial union (Black, cited in Ashby 2018:103). Coalition
building allows labour unions to stretch the reach of their influence beyond their own
membership, reaching into the community around the workplace. This is increasingly important
under the neoliberal symptoms of high underemployment and precarious work, as those most
impacted by neoliberal policies are those who are not sheltered by a secure job in a strong union.
6
described as the new essential goal for labour unions adjusting their tactics. Organizing their own
respective members is not enough to maintain union strength, and by forming labour-community
alliances they can reach out and engage all workers and non-workers (Avendano & Hiett 2012).
There is also a particular lens of immigration status and race that takes place here: community
groups are more likely to have racialized membership and members with immigrant status, and
these groups are often left behind by labour unions, especially those immigrants who are
undocumented; labour-community coalition which organize these groups can provide essential
benefits like education and secondary group identification to those who are undocumented
Within these coalitions, it is important to unions that they are able to maintain their
“authority over representing workers at the workplace”, meaning that community organizations
cannot threaten or challenge this (Krinsky & Reese 2006:653). This is because the main benefit
for labour unions to partake in coalition-building is the expansion of labour movement solidarity
and the eventual expansion of their formal membership; a community organization which
doesn’t recognize the end-goal of broadening labour’s base will struggle to cooperate with a
labour union to achieve mutual ends (Krinsky & Reese 2006; Simmons & Harding 2009). As this
paper will later discuss, community organizations also reap significant benefit from these
coalitions, and should refrain from compromising the benefits that labour unions seek by
overextending their position within the coalition into the union’s workplaces.
The third way in which labour-community coalitions maintain power is through an equal
structure of decision-making and contributions. This does not necessitate that all organizations
7
within a coalition contribute the same resources to the same decisions, but rather that they all
agree upon where resources are distributed regardless of the source (Sen 2003). However, this
also doesn’t mean complete segregation of resources: all associated organizations should be
responsible for bringing some membership to the table, some social networks, some financial
power, et cetera (Sen 2003). That being said, each group has its strengths: as previously
mentioned, community groups may have more informal access to unorganized workers or
militant tactics in comparison to a union, whereas a union usually has more formal power of
financial and political means (Sen 2003; Black 2018). Establishing a cooperative and transparent
decision-making apparatus within the coalition, so that the views of each organization within are
heard, is essential to effective coalition building. One example of this was the CLEAN Carwash
Initiative in South LA, a case study which will be discussed in more detail later; this initiative
has a steering committee with representatives from multiple labour bodies and community
organizations tasked with overseeing financial resource allocation and the development of the
evaluations of how the coalition is working throughout its organizing effort (Sen 2003). It is
essential that these evaluations include the views of all organizations within the coalition, even
those who have less organizational capacity to develop resources, in order to grasp where the
coalition can improve and how well it is including all members in organizing (Sen 2003). This
community group, as it allows for multiple perspectives to be heard and for organizations to
8
learn from each other and innovate new organizing tactics that cross the boundaries of the
progressive spectrum.
The process also avoids situations which Nissen terms ‘vanguard coalitions’, where a
labour union with substantial resources dominates the decision-making process of the coalition,
utilizing community groups as little more than outreach vehicles with no say in strategy or
resource allocation (Black 2012:153). While Black outlines that some community groups may
not want equal decision-making power over resources, it is still important for a dialogue to be
had within the coalition to determine which members are more intent on equal participation
(2012). Overall, a decision-making structure which stresses equal partnership and conducts
success of a coalition’s political actions, as it gives each involved organization more reason to
‘buy in’ to coalition tactics, and fosters a more collaborative progressive community.
Tying these three major arguments into real-world scenarios, this paper will utilize four
North American case studies to illustrate how complementary tactics, broader organizational
reach, and collaborative decision-making structures have aided successful coalitions in the past.
The first such case study is that of the Retail Action Project (RAP), a worker centre based in
New York City originally created by a coalition between the Retail, Wholesale, and Department
Store Union (RWDSU) of United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW), and the Good Old
Lower East Side (GOLES) community organization (Coulter 2013; Ikeler & Fullin 2018). RAP
tailors its organization to a particular sector of retail that is more likely to have young,
non-unionized, and precarious work, and used the GOLES identity to appear “spontaneous,
fashionable, and cool” to attract membership (Ikeler & Fullin 2018:177-8). This allows the
9
coalition to rely on the constructed identity of GOLES while getting financial resources from
In terms of covering a vast array of workers, not only does RAP focus on workers in
precarious situations, but it tactically maintains communication with former retail workers even
when they are between jobs: “workers can join the network to keep informed, attend events of
their choice, commit to being contributing members of RAP” (Coulter 2013:56). These workers
are encouraged to partake in political actions or take an organizing leadership role within the
coalition’s decision-making body, even if they were originally brought to RAP through a work
training course. New members are also introduced to union members at group events to translate
RAP membership into support for unionization, one of the core goals of the union in forming a
coalition (Coulter 2013:57). This has also empowered RAP to launch at least four successful
organizing efforts at workplaces, including the unionization of the Shoemania chain under
RWDSU and the reinstatement of 20 fired employees at another workplace (Coulter 2013:57;
Ikeler & Fullin 2018:180). In concluding on the RAP case study, it is clear that RAP has
combined the resources and tactics of both GOLES and RWDSU to form a strong long-term
labour-community coalition that benefits and plays to the organizing strengths of both groups, in
The second case study particularly relates to the arguments of resource allocation and
division within a coalition, and how finding mutual goals to build around is a significant boon to
coalition capacity. The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) is one of more than 400
organizations, both labour and community-focused, involved in the Ontario Health Coalition
(OHC). The OHC includes groups from across the progressive spectrum, including “seniors’
10
organizations” (Black 2012:153). CUPE, being the largest union in Canada, has taken a
significant role in contributing financial resources to the OHC’s organizing efforts (Tattersall
2009). One such organizing effort took place in 2002, where a campaign for healthcare
privatization greatly aligned the interests of CUPE, concerned with maintaining public sector
jobs, and the OHC, concerned with Ontarians receiving quality healthcare services (Tattersall
2009:499). While CUPE already considered itself a “left, nationalist, social union” at the time,
this alignment of interests meant that CUPE was more willing to dedicate substantial resources to
individual locals, allowing local bridge-builders between the union and the OHC to have more
sway over the dedication of financial resources (Tattersall 2009:498). This allowed better
collaborative strategizing and decision-making within the OHC, especially in later campaigns
against the privatization of hospital services where CUPE and the OHC’s community
organizations had already built a previous organizing relationship, because local leaders could
dedicate resources without relying on approval from the central office (Tattersall 2009:497).
The third case study returns to the United States, focusing on the Community, Labor,
Environmental Action Network (CLEAN) Carwash Initiative in southern Los Angeles, an area
considered by some organizers to be the “major research & development center for 21st-century
labour-community coalition between the AFL-CIO, the United Steelworkers (USW), and
numerous community organizations and worker centres. As it relates to this paper’s main
11
arguments, CLEAN emerged out of the neoliberal context of increasingly low-wage workplaces
Beginning in 2008, CLEAN has found success in organizing workers at multiple car
wash facilities into unions, as well as facilitating a new approach to comprehensive community
health in southern Los Angeles (Avendano & Fanning 2014:107-9). They have achieved this
through using the complementary tactics of community organizations and unions, including
& Fanning 2014:107-8). Their public education efforts are in line with Freire’s approach,
addressing the societal problems and oppressive structures that prevent these workers from
receiving healthcare, among other human rights; via this approach, car wash workers not only
look to solve their individual healthcare problems, but take a broader societal lens to these issues
and are encouraged to take political action through CLEAN to remedy them (Avendano &
Fanning 2014). Evaluating the theoretical literature and case studies of labour-community
be far more difficult without the joint contribution of union resources and community tactics.
The final case study focuses on a campaign in Toronto, Ontario, to cease the privatization
of a city-run child care centre, and greatly informs how coalition partners can take greatly
different contribution roles but still achieve success through political action. In this case, the
organizations, and child care advocates to fight against privatization (Black 2018). However,
instead of being a vocal and visible coalition partner, the union took the role as an
12
stepping back and allowing community organizers to be the face of the campaign (Black
2018:119). This was a political decision made by all members of the temporary coalition: while
unions have tenuous trust with the public at best, child care advocates and parents are seen
overwhelmingly positively and were a far better choice to act as the campaign’s public voice.
Even in their published literature and demands, the union agreed to not include any rhetoric
regarding “union jobs”; instead, messaging was focused on how privatization and cuts would
reduce spending and spaces in child care facilities, and how this would hurt parents (Black
2018:126).
members of the coalition, the group succeeded in preventing the privatization of these centres.
However, as Black explains, a similar campaign in the nearby Peel Region failed due to a
undeveloped” and fewer community allies existed to aid in coalition building (Black 2018:119).
It is important to reflect upon the criteria for labour-community coalition success as argued in
this paper by recognizing the substantial role that context can play, and by stressing that
labour-community ties in the future. This means only investing effort into coalitions with allies
who are aligned not only on one conveniently-mutual issue, but on the very basis of progressive
ideology itself.
their broad and complementary array of potential tactics, their ability for their organizing to
13
reach beyond only workers and the workplace, and the ways in which they include all
the examples of RAP, OHC, and CLEAN, as well as the public child care campaign in Toronto,
these coalitions are most effective when partners are transparent in what they can offer the
coalition, and when the coalition plays to the strengths of their members in order to build broad
support in their communities. With an eye for innovation, a focus on fairness, and a shared
ideology, labour-community coalitions are the new source of power for progressive change.
14
References
Ashby, Steven K.. 2018. ““Traditional” Labor and “Alt” Labor: Comparisons, Critiques, and
Avendano, Ana, and Charlie Fanning. 2014. “The CLEAN Carwash Initiative: Building Worker
Power and Fighting Austerity through Community and Workplace Organizing.” Labor
Avendano, Ana, and Jonathan Hiatt. 2012. “Worker Self-Organization in the New Economy: The
Black, Simon. 2018. “Community Unionism without the Community? Lessons from Labor-
Community Coalitions in the Canadian Child Care Sector.” Labor Studies Journal
43(2):118-140.
Black, Simon. 2012. “Community unionism and the Canadian labour movement.” Pp. 146-157 in
Rethinking the Politics of Labour in Canada, edited by Ross, Stephanie, and Larry
Institutions and Ideas in Building Power from Below.” Urban Affairs Review
50(5):623-647.
Campolieti, Michele, Morley Gunderson, and Robert Hebdon. “Collective Bargaining and
15
Dispute Resolution in the Public Sector.” Pp. 364-383 in The Handbook of Canadian
Public Administration (3rd ed.), edited by Dunn, Christopher. Don Mills, ON: Oxford
University Press.
Coulter, Kendra. 2013. “Raising Retail: Organizing Retail Workers in Canada and the United
Dean, Amy, and Wade Rathke. 2008. “Beyond the mutual backscratch: A New Model for
Labor–
Freire, Paulo. 2000. “Chapter 2.” Pp. 71-86 in Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY:
Ikeler, Peter, and Giovanna Fullin. 2018. “Training to empower: A decade of the Retail Action
Krinsky, John, and Ellen Reese. 2006. “Forging and Sustaining Labor–Community Coalitions:
McKinlay, Dale T.. 2015. “Labor-Community Alliances in South Africa: Reclaiming (Some of)
the Past, Inventing the Future?” The South Atlantic Quarterly 114(2):459-466.
Simmons, Louise, and Scott Harding. 2009. “Community–Labor Coalitions for Progressive
Sen, Rinku. 2003. “United We Stand.” Pp. 135-147 in Stir it up: Lessons in community
16
organizing and advocacy, edited by Sen, Rinku, and Kim Klein. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Tattersall, Amanda. 2009. “A Little Help from Our Friends: Exploring and Understanding when
34(4):485-506.