Marianne Garneau analyzes different organizing models such as trade unions and worker centers across a number of metrics
Since the 1990s, and even before, organizing strategy has broadened beyond the traditional process of winning a union election in the workplace and then bargaining with the employer. These days, all kinds of campaigns and organizations press for worker gains in some way or another.
Across these different forms, you will often see the same tactics deployed: petitions, delegations of workers marching on a target with a demand, picketing or flyering, bad publicity, etc. Therefore, it is difficult to get an appreciation for the differences between these campaigns and organizations on the basis of their tactics alone.
Moreover, the same language is applied everywhere: “worker power,” “direct action,” “solidarity unionism.”
Therefore, it’s worth making a systematic comparison of these different models on the basis of a number of metrics, like who is involved, who is calling the shots, what the main leverage is, and where the money is coming from.
These fact sheets compare trade unions, solidarity unions, worker centers, advocacy campaigns, working groups, and solidarity networks.
Trade union
| Examples | SEIU, UFCW, UAW, etc. |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | Generally yes |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | Yes |
| Main strategy | Recognition election, then formal bargaining to achieve a contract, as outlined in labor relations law (alternatively: neutrality strategy). Contracts outline bread-and-butter things like wages and benefits, and generally include a no-strike, no-lockout clause. |
| Main leverage | Disruption of work processes and profits. Explicitly or implicitly, this is the main leverage, although there is increasing reliance on corporate (pressure) campaigns and other tactics. Also lobbying / funding for political candidates |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | Union staff members (organizers, business agents) with input from workers |
| Membership | Workers in the workplace |
| Primary source of funding | Dues |
Solidarity union
| Examples | IWW |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | Generally no |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | Strives for majority presence but begins bargaining even with a minority |
| Main strategy | Worker-led direct action in and around the workplace to pressure bosses for concessions; possibly some written agreements but no umbrella contract with a no-strike pledge and management rights clause |
| Main leverage | Disruption of work processes and profits |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | Workers in the workplace |
| Membership | Workers in the workplace |
| Primary source of funding | Dues |
Worker center
| Examples | Laundry Workers Center, Restaurant Opportunities Center, Centro de Trabadores Unidos en la Lucha |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | No |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | Sometimes engages a significant number of workers from a workplace, but does not seek “presence” per se. Workers become public representatives of the fight in relation to the media and political processes |
| Main strategy | Public advocacy for workers at a given workplace or in a given industry, usually within a city, via pressuring of employers and politicians in the media or the public sphere. Sometimes workplace actions are involved, like petitions or delegations of workers presenting demands, or pickets. Some organizations incentivize businesses with training or placement programs, or a “high road to profitabilty” program, which highlights small business owners who support their work |
| Main leverage | Public condemnation (or praise) including brand targeting; pressure from politicians; sometimes partnerships with businesses |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | Executive directors, with input from staff and boards of directors |
| Membership | Voluntary membership among supporters and sometimes workers but these are not membership-based organizations (see “Funding”) and membership is not based in a workplace or even a worker base |
| Primary source of funding | Foundations form the lion’s share (more than half), including perhaps donations from board members’ organizations, followed by fundraising from individual donors, government grants, and trade union support (single-digit percentages) |
Advocacy campaign
| Examples | Rise Up Retail / United For Respect (formerly OUR Walmart), Fight For 15, One Fair Wage |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | No |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | Does not seek workplace presence per se; individual workers are engaged for actions |
| Main strategy | Legislative push, usually for an increase to the minimum wage. Workers who get involved are folded into the organization and tapped to reach out to coworkers to create a volunteer base for the campaign, like a contact list of people to rally for events pressuring elected officials |
| Main leverage | Voting: demand is advanced as a ballot initiative, or becomes a campaign issue bundled with a push for democratic candidates in local races |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | Directors |
| Membership | Not membership-based |
| Primary source of funding | Formerly unions (SEIU and UFCW), now moving more towards foundations (e.g. United for Respect receives foundation funding via the Center for Popular Democracy) |
Working group
| Examples | Tech Workers Coalition, Rideshare Drivers United |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | No |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | Activist minority within the workplace not seeking a majority presence |
| Main strategy | Activist worker group pressures employers in the public sphere, via media, with some coordinated actions (petitions, walk-outs) in the workplace. Or: activist group with union and/or corporate backing publicly triangulates between workers, the public, the employers, and government (e.g. Independent Drivers Guild) |
| Main leverage | Publicity. Sometimes: handshake partnerships |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | Activists within the workplace (usually self-selected), or else consultation between activist working group, union backer, and employer |
| Membership | Activist minority within the workplace |
| Primary source of funding | Informal, out-of-pocket funding from members, and fundraising pages. Sometimes backing by a union or by an employer group themselves (e.g. the Independent Drivers Guild is funded by Uber and the Machinists union) |
Solidarity network
| Examples | Seattle Solidarity Network |
| Pursuing election or formal recognition? | No |
| Seeking majority presence in the workplace? | No — helps individual workers (or tenants) with single issues, e.g. cases of wage theft |
| Main strategy | Deployment of activist delegation to harass and embarrass boss (or landlord) until payment |
| Main leverage | Emotional pressure / public embarrassment of small bosses and landlords |
| Who makes strategic decisions? | SolNets are built mostly of informal social networks. Core activist membership meets to decide what cases to take on and what actions to take, then calls for mobilization from among the supporters network |
| Membership | Activist volunteers who attend regular meetings; local activist supporters who are mobilized during actions |
| Primary source of funding | Individual member donations, fundraising |