City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 6-2014 The Fight Over John Q: How Labor Won and Lost the Public in Postwar America, 1947-1959 Rachel Burstein Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/179 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] The Fight Over John Q: How Labor Won and Lost the Public in Postwar America, 1947-1959 by Rachel Burstein A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2014 © 2014 Rachel Burstein All Rights Reserved ii This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in History in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. __________________ _______________________________________ Date Joshua Freeman, Chair of Examining Committee __________________ _______________________________________ Date Helena Rosenblatt, Executive Officer Joshua Brown Thomas Kessner David Nasaw Clarence Taylor Supervisory Committee THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii Abstract The Fight Over John Q: How Labor Won and Lost the Public in Postwar America, 1947-1959 by Rachel Burstein Adviser: Joshua Freeman This study examines the infancy of large-scale, coordinated public relations by organized labor in the postwar period. Labor leaders’ outreach to diverse publics became a key feature of unions’ growing political involvement and marked a departure from the past when unions used organized workers – not the larger public – to pressure legislators. The new recognition of the liberal public as an important ally and the creation of a program for targeting it signaled larger shifts in the American labor movement: the embrace of bureaucracy akin to other major postwar institutions; the promotion of politics over collective bargaining as the defining objective of the labor movement; the prominence of a new, educated class of labor leaders; and the deradicalization of American unionism in favor of the postwar liberal consensus. The dissertation details PR approaches of the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and Congress of Industrial Organizations’ (CIO) at particular crisis points in the late 1940s and 1950s, after World War II and before the emergence of the civil rights movement and New Left. These campaigns were responsive and defensive and showed the difficulty labor leaders had in controlling the terms of debate, even as they were successful in maintaining rhetorical popular support. The case studies examined in this dissertation are: 1) the AFL and CIO’s efforts to defeat the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947; 2) the role of politics – particularly the 1948 election and the third party campaign of Henry Wallace – in forcing CIO leaders to expel communist unions from their ranks; 3) the 1955 merger of the AFL and CIO and labor’s efforts to counter the trope of iv “big labor” in a world in which large institutions and elite groups increasingly vied for control; and 4) the AFL-CIO’s efforts to redefine itself in the face of accounts of union corruption during Congressional hearings on racketeering in organized labor from 1957 to 1959. In all of these cases, labor leaders positioned themselves and the union members they represented as part of a larger public committed to the same political objectives. Ultimately, this was a losing bet; they traded relevance for acceptability. v Acknowledgements The work of the historian is often solitary. She spends many hours alone in basement archives sifting through dusty documents, or at her desk reading books and writing and rewriting manuscripts. But good history – the kind that challenges assumptions and captures some of the messiness of how and why people of the past behaved as they did and the outcomes of their decisions – emerges, at least in part, from engaging others. There is no end to the nonsense that one can think if one thinks too long in his own head. I am grateful to the many people who helped push this project forward through their critiques and encouragement, allowing me to get out of my own head and onto the page. Their contributions have made this dissertation a better product. I am grateful to my adviser, Joshua Freeman, whose fine work in labor history and the postwar period I first came to know in college. Professor Freeman’s willingness to see this project through many years and many twists and turns speaks volumes about his commitment to his students. He consistently provided timely and valuable comments. I appreciate his willingness to take me seriously as a scholar and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to work with him. Joshua Brown helped me launch this project and offered important advice about how to frame the project in the context of the media of the time. Thomas Kessner, David Nasaw and Clarence Taylor all asked pointed questions that got me thinking in new ways. In addition, Professors Freeman, Brown, Kessner, Nasaw and Taylor are all exceedingly good people, a fact that has made my work with them a pleasure. I am also grateful to the many institutions that have supported this project through grants and scholarships. The CUNY Graduate Center awarded me the Chancellor’s Fellowship, the Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. Fellowship, a University Fellowship and the Michael Braun vi Dissertation Fellowship in Labor History. The latter was especially meaningful as Michael Braun was a close colleague and friend whom I miss dearly. External funding came from the Colonial Dames of America, the Friends of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Library, the Hagley Museum and Library, the David Howe Fund for Business and Economic History at Harvard University and the Oxford Journals Business History Conference Doctoral Colloquium. Many archivists shared their expertise as I conducted research for this project. I am grateful to staff at the Catholic University of America, the George Meany Memorial Archives, the Hagley Museum and Library, the New York Public Library, the Tamiment Library and Robert F. Wagner Labor Archives, the Walter P. Reuther Library, the University of Michigan and the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. William W. LeFevre at the Reuther Library and Sarah Springer at the George Meany Memorial Archives were especially helpful. My greatest debt is to my family. My parents, Dotty and Paul Burstein continued to express interest in my graduate school career, long past the point when most people would have stopped listening. My brother, Will Burstein offered encouragement. My daughter, Ruby May Schifeling (generally) tolerated her mother’s retreat to the computer with a smile. Ruby was likely so willing to let me work because she knew that she would be in the care of my incredible husband, Jeremy Schifeling. He has been so many things to me throughout graduate school – an expert reader, researcher, proofreader and formatter, but above all, a loving, encouraging and constant presence. He is a mensch and I am grateful to him in more ways than he’ll ever know. vii Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1: “To Paint the Sky with…Slogans”: The AFL and the CIO’s Public Relations 11 Efforts against the Passage of Taft-Hartley Chapter 2: “As American as the Hot Dog” or “As American as Apple Pie”?: 68 Anticommunism and the CIO’s Image in the Age of Wallace Chapter 3: A Movement Becomes an Organization: Selling the AFL-CIO to the Public 112 Chapter 4: “Labor Still Has Clean Hands”: The AFL-CIO’s Public Relations War in the 158 Era of Landrum-Griffin Conclusion 219 Appendix 1: Tables 224 Appendix 2: Figures 229 Bibliography 260 viii List of Tables Table 2-1: Expelled Union Membership (Absolute and Percentage of CIO Membership) 224 Table 2-2: Memberships of Expelled Unions, 1949-1955 (in thousands) 225 Table 2-3: Memberships of Selected CIO Alternatives to Purged Unions, 1950-1954 (in 226 thousands) Table 3-1: Results of Rival Union Proceedings Originating from Petitions Filed with the 227 NLRB, January 1, 1951 to December 31, 1952 Table 3-2: Impact of No-Raiding Agreement 228 ix List of Figures Figure 1-1: “Measure for Measure” 229 Figure 1-2: “Wailing Wall” 230 Figure 1-3: “‘Heavy, Heavy Hangs—’” 231 Figure 1-4: “Yet the Other Boys Seem to Thrive on It” 232 Figure 1-5: “Not Half as Bad as It Sounds” 233 Figure 1-6: “A Free America cannot exist without free labor!” 234 Figure 1-7: “Industry-Wide Bargaining or Chaos?” 235 Figure 1-8: “Remember This, Buddy?” 236 Figure 1-9: “Why is my Pop worried?” 237 Figure 1-10: “Maybe I’m not a Union Member…” 238 Figure 1-11: “Who, me?” 239 Figure 1-12: “CANCELLED…by Slave Labor Legislation!” 240 Figure 1-13: “DANGER” 241 Figure 1-14: “If You Work for a Living…ACT NOW!” 242 Figure 1-15: “Is this true…Senator Taft?” 243 Figure 1-16: “Which Way America?” 244 Figure 1-17: “The price of MONOPOLY comes out of your pocket” 245 Figure 1-18: “Industry-wide Bargaining is no bargain for you” 246 Figure 2-1: “If you work for a living, it’s as simple as A B C” 247 Figure 2-2: “Belated Clean Up” 248 Figure 2-3: “Going Nowhere Fast” 249 Figure 2-4: “Boomerang!” 250 x Figure 2-5: “Dogs in the Manger” 251 Figure 4-1: “Caught in a badminton game” 252 Figure 4-2: “The war tribe” 253 Figure 4-3: “Cleanup needed” 254 Figure 4-4: “Hoffa’s tentacles” 255 Figure 4-5: “‘You Think It’s Really One of Those 2-Stage Jobs?’” 256 Figure 4-6: “The Arkansas Traveler” 257 Figure 4-7: “‘Sure you got everything under control, Jimmy?’” 258 Figure 4-8: Big labor v.